新西兰天维网社区

标题: 转发金松鼠总裁的文章，地产开发的心酸。 [打印本页]

作者: Squirrel212 时间: 2014-10-13 19:00:35 标题: 转发金松鼠总裁的文章，地产开发的心酸。

Over the past two and half years I’ve dabbled in property development, and are in the process of building 35 houses in Avondale.  The end result will be 35 finished houses (of which 90% have been pre-sold) in April 2015.  The project will have taken three years and the only reason we’ll come out of it ok is that we purchased the land cheaply back in 2011, early in a rising market.

  We spent $650,000 upfront on getting the resource consent which involved taking the council to the environment court twice.  It is hard to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on planners and lawyers when you’re not overly confident you’ll get the result.  We eventually got the consent and that is a story in itself.

  Our original plan was to build 27 units on a slightly smaller site.  Based on our actual costs, that would not have been feasible. The extra units are where we have made a profit.

  Scarier still we worked out our original feasibility based on a sale price of $460,000.  The sale price ended up closer to $570,000 but our profit halved due to cost increases.  Some of that was simply under-estimating costs, especially the cost of getting the resource consent.  But I also think that with costs it’s all about the incremental costs (another report here, another report there.)  The consultants spend of close to $1m is a reflection of that constant paper shuffling.

The project budget looks like this:

Development contributions $1,000,000
Consent costs $650,000
Sales commission and marketing $750,000
Finance $1,000,000
Consultants/Contractor Margin $1,650,000
Sub Total (Consultants, Funding, Sales) $5,050,000
Build cost $6,800,000
Earthworks $2,600,000
Land $1,300,000
Sub Total (Land and Build Cost) $10,700,000
GST payable $2,500,000
Total $18,250,000

The project margin is only 8% and house prices went up 25% between buying the land and selling the units off plan. In the absence of that significant lift in prices our project would have been underwater.  The thing I can’t figure out is that land is now selling for about 25% more than we paid for ours (after allowing for our higher earthworks costs.)  What does that say about the viability of land still being sold? Most people I talk to agree that land is being significantly over valued.  I blame the hype that came along with the Unitary Plan combined with the media reporting around the housing shortage.

What should be obvious from our project is that with a margin of only 8.00% it wouldn’t take a big increase in costs to sink a project (and a developer). At an 8.00% margin it is tough to get bank funding on a project. The key for us was 90% pre-sales, along with other solid income earning businesses.  Now that we’re in construction the costs are fixed, so this was more of an issue before we started.

Incidentally, the project is going well, most of the earthworks is done and the houses are now in the process of being built.

Are we capitalising our poor productivity into the value of houses?

Our 35 houses will increase council rates by $60,000 per year that can be used for roads, parks, and infrastructure. Yet, we have been charged $610,000 in development contributions and another $300,000 in Watercare contributions.  That’s close to $1m of development contributions.  Even the building consent cost of $35,000 includes about $12,000 of levies.  The frustration with these costs is that they simply increase house prices, which increases debt levels for the end buyers.  I realise that infrastructure needs to be paid for, but would argue that it can be paid for through the higher rates collected.  I don’t get how capitalising these costs into house prices (and debt levels) is good for the country.

Like the council, banks have their own way of increasing development costs.  This is more invisible but I’d imagine every developer will grumble under their breath.  My experience of banks too date has been that they insist on head contractors to de-risk a project, but head contractors are in high demand and they will typically take a 10% margin.  That’s a hefty tax right there.

It also feels like banks add a whole lot more paperwork and process than is necessary. Our finance approval had 3 pages of conditions and added at least $200,000 of extra costs.  It’s the same for any developer that relies on funding.  Even with our total lending being less than 75% of the pre-sales figure, and with us having $5m of hurt money ahead of the bank, they have still been overly conservative. We end up in debates about project bills totalling $20,000!  That’s my point-of-view anyway.

On the other side, as new developers I also recognise that them keeping a closer eye on us has been good for everyone. But with $5m of our funds at risk within the project, you’d think we’d get a bit more rope.  All of this red tape adds up.

Of the value of each house only 55% relates to the cost of the land, building and earthworks. Another 37% relates to GST, development contributions, sales commission, finance and consultants.  Whilst build costs get covered in the media, the opportunity in my mind lies with the paper shuffling and everyone clipping the ticket.

Development is hard, hard work … and risky.  I reckon that we have too many investors paying too much for land based on a poor understanding of development.  With all of this, including crazy land prices, we are capitalising our lack of productivity into house prices. Worse still, we’re borrowing to fund this madness!

作者: 一曰方茗 时间: 2014-10-13 19:50:07

原来金松鼠总裁是开发商啊

作者: Squirrel212 时间: 2014-10-13 20:37:50

这么长一篇文章，你就看出来他是开发商

作者: 一曰方茗 时间: 2014-10-13 21:25:10

本帖最后由一曰方茗于 2014-10-13 21:34 编辑

Squirrel212 发表于 2014-10-13 20:37
这么长一篇文章，你就看出来他是开发商

你out了这篇文章前几天在另一个帖子里已经讨论过了

http://bbs.skykiwi.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=2751311

顺便求解惑, 金松鼠老总去银行贷款是不是有VIP服务啊

作者: 陌生的香港人 时间: 2014-10-13 23:08:30

本帖最后由陌生的香港人于 2014-10-13 23:15 编辑

前段說到 Resource Consent 間接/直接令成本和時間大增還有什麼Development Contribution, Watercare contributions...... 而華人新移民/新投資者一般來說是不太懂得這些的在你們那個什麼房地產講座是不是也應該至少提到這些Council的要求和其對發展項目可能存在的風險呢？

可在你們的講座簡介中我可看不到有涉及這方面的內容啊

作者: kitty108 时间: 2014-10-14 22:29:23

陌生的香港人发表于 2014-10-13 23:08
前段說到 Resource Consent 間接/直接令成本和時間大增還有什麼Development Contribution, Watercare cont ...

说得好，正反两面都要了解

作者: DoubleX 时间: 2014-10-14 22:44:24

陌生的香港人发表于 2014-10-13 23:08
前段說到 Resource Consent 間接/直接令成本和時間大增還有什麼Development Contribution, Watercare cont ...

你有空的话，开个贴讲解下RESOURCE CONSENT吧！：）

作者: NewLynnHse 时间: 2014-10-15 07:10:52

陌生的香港人发表于 2014-10-13 23:08
前段說到 Resource Consent 間接/直接令成本和時間大增還有什麼Development Contribution, Watercare cont ...

免费讲座主要是要招生意的吧？怎么可能教那么多东西？

作者: adsl2 时间: 2014-10-15 09:05:23

NewLynnHse 发表于 2014-10-15 07:10
免费讲座主要是要招生意的吧？怎么可能教那么多东西？

肯定的，风险都告诉你了，那不傻吗，呵呵。。。。。。。。。。。

作者: 西瓜情人 时间: 2014-10-15 09:18:48

就在论坛写点common sense入门级的东西当广告打了吧

作者: 陌生的香港人 时间: 2014-10-15 19:23:10

本帖最后由陌生的香港人于 2014-10-15 20:03 编辑

NewLynnHse 发表于 2014-10-15 07:10
免费讲座主要是要招生意的吧？怎么可能教那么多东西？

這又是 Council 的要求和他們的業務其實沒有什麼關係不過如果他們有心真的要搞一個比較全面的有關華人房地產講座完全不提Council 的各方面要求好像說不過去

同時我就看到他們的講座內容甚至好像說會提到’土地分割‘ 那就根本不能不提到Council 的要求了至少你要告訴人真正的 "有分割潛力"是什麼意思申請程序又是什麼樣啊

最後如果真的可以對這裡的發展法例要求不聞不問奇怪是樓主又何苦要發這篇文章呢？

不過算了印像中樓主這家公司通常好像只會自說自話賣廣告對意見好像沒有什麼反應的嗯.... 就算我多事好了

作者: NewLynnHse 时间: 2014-10-15 20:01:05

陌生的香港人发表于 2014-10-15 19:23
這又是 Council 的要求和他們的業務其實沒有什麼關係不過如果他們有心真的要搞一個比較全面的有關華人房 ...

欢迎光临新西兰天维网社区 (http://bbs.skykiwi.com/)