Transición Estructural .NET

El precio de la vivienda en venta y alquiler en Madrid supera el de la burbuja de 2007
Madrid capital cierra el mes de abril de 2024 alcanzando el precio máximo de compra con 5.188€/m², y muestra el precio más alto del alquiler con 19,91€/m²

Anaïs López · 2024.05.23

La ciudad de Madrid marca un récord en el precio de la vivienda al obtener el máximo histórico, tanto en el mercado de la compraventa como en el mercado del alquiler, según los datos del Índice Inmobiliario Fotocasa. Madrid capital cierra el mes de abril de 2024 alcanzando el precio máximo de compra con 5.188€/m², y muestra el precio más alto del alquiler con 19,91€/m². Las dos marcas superan las registradas durante la burbuja inmobiliaria de 2007, cuando de forma unánime en toda España se llegó a los precios más altos.

Comprar una vivienda de 80 m² en Madrid capital cuesta más de 415.000 euros de media

El mercado de la compraventa presenta subidas muy destacables. Este aumento tan significativo ha ocasionado que Madrid se convierta en la cuarta ciudad de España, tras Palma de Mallorca, Málaga y Las Palmas de Gran Canaria en registrar precios máximos en la compra de vivienda. En estos momentos, el precio de la vivienda madrileña de segunda mano (5.188€/m²) se encuentra por encima del precio registrado durante la burbuja inmobiliaria de 2007, cuando era de 4.523€/m². Esta cifra de abril de 2024 sitúa el precio de una vivienda tipo de 80m² en la capital en 415.040 euros.

El mercado de compraventa de vivienda de segunda mano en Madrid inició su encarecimiento coincidiendo con la primera subida de los tipos de interés en julio de 2022 y el consecuente ascenso del Euríbor. Esta tendencia de aceleración del crecimiento cumple veinticuatro meses de subidas abultadas y supone el mayor ritmo de crecimiento de la vivienda en la ciudad de los últimos 18 años.

“Nunca habíamos detectado un incremento del precio tan abultado durante un periodo tan largo. Esta subida nos devuelve a niveles de 2006, previos a la burbuja inmobiliaria cuando el coste de la vivienda sufrió un gran calentamiento. Estos incrementos tan significativos, coinciden con el cambio de política monetaria de la subida de tipos de interés por parte del BCE. Esto ha provocado el auge de la demanda extranjera y que la local se haya especializado y se focalice en muchos casos en la compra para inversión. Madrid acoge cada año a más de 40.000 vecinos y sin embargo tan solo se construyen alrededor de 15.000 viviendas, por lo que la falta de oferta es la responsable de este tensionamiento que no da signos de templanza”, comenta María Matos, directora de Estudios y Portavoz de Fotocasa.

Alquilar una vivienda de 80 m² en Madrid capital cuesta casi 1.600 euros de media

Más preocupante es quizás, la situación del mercado del alquiler que lleva marcando precios récord desde julio de 2022, también coincidiendo con el cambio en la política monetaria con la primera subida de los tipos. El coste del alquiler mensual ha pasado de los 16 euros el metro cuadrado a rozar los 20 €/m² (19,91€/m², concretamente), lo que lo sitúa en el precio máximo desde que el Índice Inmobiliario Fotocasa tiene registros.

La variación del precio también es muy significativa: lleva veintitrés meses consecutivos con fuertes subidas A partir de entonces, la transformación del alquiler ha sido muy acelerada, ya que esta situación supone el mayor encarecimiento del precio en un periodo tan corto.

El coste del alquiler se encuentra casi un 50% por encima del precio de hace 18 años, ya que se situaba en los 13,34€/m² cuando en plena burbuja inmobiliaria de 2007 el alquiler atravesaba el mayor calentamiento de la serie histórica.

“El precio del alquiler en la ciudad de Madrid, al igual que en la comunidad y en prácticamente toda España, alcanza su nivel máximo histórico una vez más, con una tendencia alcista. Desde la recuperación de la crisis financiera, en 2015, Madrid sigue la misma tendencia de la media española, pero de una forma más acentuada e intensa y presentando incrementos mucho más acusados. Aunque 2024 marca un hito en la evolución de este mercado con escasa oferta de vivienda en renta disponible, por lo que cada vez la brecha entre oferta y demanda es más considerable. La facilidad en la venta, los índices de inflación y la intervención en el mercado han causado la fuga de las viviendas de alquiler de larga duración a los regímenes temporales, turísticos o de habitaciones que han ocasionado que el stock esté en mínimos históricos”, explica María Matos, directora de Estudios y Portavoz de Fotocasa.

Phase 2 of the Office Revolution is Here; What Tenants Need to Know

Ruth Colp-Haber · 2024.05.23

Ruth Colp-Haber

Since the onset of the pandemic, there has been a revolution in office work as technology allowed people to work from home. As I have discussed at length in many commentaries there are pluses and minuses to this approach.

However, one thing is certain. Any predictions that employees would be returning to the office in droves at the behest of management have been well and truly debunked. Over four years into Covid, the metrics show that roughly half of office employees come to the office both in New York City and the entire country. Further, a recent employer survey by Flex Index has found that as of the second quarter of 2024, 69% of companies with U.S. headquarters offer some degree of work location flexibility, and just 31% require their employees to be full-time in the office. This is a significant increase from the first quarter of 2023, when just 51% of employers offered workplace flexibility, As a corollary, the largest plurality of employees work on a “structured hybrid” basis, which only requires them to be in the office certain days as opposed to a full-time work requirement.

Accordingly, as remote work has now become normalized, we can confidently declare that phase 1 of the office revolution is over.

Sadly, this particular form of urban carnage is just beginning. Work from home has been a slow-moving time bomb as leases which used to be 5+ years in duration come off the books and many tenants take less space when they make their next move. Some new developments like Hudson Yards have prospered, but only at the expense of older buildings whose tenants they cannibalized. Four years on from the start of Covid, work from home is now solidly entrenched in the business landscape and is here to stay. Except for the top buildings most landlords can’t cope with a major long-term vacancy and haven’t found alternative uses for the space. Conversions to residential use are fine but are relatively rare because they are expensive and most office buildings don’t have suitable floorplans allowing for the change of use.

We are now in phase 2 of the office revolution, which is effectively the finance phase. We take no pleasure in pointing this out, but many landlords are struggling due to the triple whammy of reduced rent rolls, higher operating costs, and limited financing options.

Values are plummeting in most buildings and borrowing costs are significantly higher. Even if the Federal Reserve cuts rates at some point, most economic observers believe that the days of easy money are in the rear-view mirror and we can expect a higher neutral rate of interest. One good piece of news is that these wise men and women believe there’s no long-term threat to the financial system here. The big banks are very well capitalized and can handle the bad loans. Of course, that is not to say that other debacles like Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank are not in the cards.

This new phase also has an impact on tenants. Traditionally, it is the landlord who requests the financial statements of its prospective tenants to assess if they will be able to pay the rent during the lease term. However, that paradigm has now been turned on its head. For the first time in history, tenants need to become familiar with the financial condition of their landlord. That is because so many buildings are in default, or even facing foreclosure, and that number will only increase.

There are many recent examples of this distressing trend. During just the past week or so, there was news that the commercial backed security loan collateralized by Bloomberg Tower at 731 Lexington Avenue is going to special servicing (even though Bloomberg just signed a new lease to remain there until 2040), an action to foreclose upon 750 Lexington Avenue was filed, and a Financial Times article reported on the difficulties being experienced by RFR, the half-owner of the Chrysler Building and the trophy Seagram building which has only been able to get a one-year loan extension.  And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

What all these landlord defaults also mean is that tenants need to protect themselves in negotiating certain lease provisions. Most importantly, tenants should demand that the funds for any future work that needs to be done by the landlord be placed in escrow to ensure completion. Similarly, tenants should ensure that all commissions be put in escrow so that they are not liable for any of these expenses.

Another concern is what will happen to building services in the event of a default or foreclosure. The best answer is hopefully nothing if the bank, special servicing agent or trustee is maintaining the building properly. For example, the venerable Helmsley Building at 230 Park Avenue has been in special servicing for over six months. To my experienced eyes, there is no difference whatsoever at 230 Park since it went to special servicing.

However, that may not always be the case. While I don’t expect that landlords will be turning off the heat in February, a new manager might look to reduce expenses in less visible ways, such as skimping on security and cutting maintenance staff. We haven’t seen this yet, and the focus has all been put on improving services to attract tenants, but when push comes to shove it is possible that services in buildings under pressure could deteriorate. Remember that the tenant leases are the most important asset a landlord has so any owner will want to keep up the appearances of a building and not lose more tenants. Nevertheless, it is important to assess the future financial viability of a building by understanding the tenant rent roll and the landlord’s financing profile.

To be fair, any building can be sold at any time. Even in the best of times and in the best buildings, the quality of a new owner can be problematic.

However, the bottom line is this. Almost every major landlord must deal with a significant drop in demand for its inventory which is now baked in the cake. Danger lies ahead in the form of more building defaults, foreclosures and bankruptcies in the second phase of the office revolution. Hopefully, I am wrong but by all appearances phase 2 is just getting started. Let’s just hope it stays under control.

If you need assistance navigating this new phase of the office market or just have questions, please contact us at Wharton Property Advisors. We always represent our clients with creativity, integrity, diligence and independence.

Thank you,

Ruth Colp-Haber

Hopes For Sustainable Jet Fuel Not Realistic, Report Finds
Posted by BeauHD on Wednesday May 22, 2024 @11:30PM from the magical-thinking dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian:

Citar

Hopes that replacement fuels for airplanes will slash carbon pollution are misguided and support for these alternatives could even worsen the climate crisis, a new report has warned. There is currently "no realistic or scalable alternative" to standard kerosene-based jet fuels, and touted "sustainable aviation fuels" are well off track to replace them in a timeframe needed to avert dangerous climate change, despite public subsidies, the report by the Institute for Policy Studies, a progressive thinktank, found. "While there are kernels of possibility, we should bring a high level of skepticism to the claims that alternative fuels will be a timely substitute for kerosene-based jet fuels," the report said. [...]

In the U.S., Joe Biden's administration has set a goal for 3 billion gallons of sustainable aviation fuel, which is made from non-petroleum sources such as food waste, woody biomass and other feedstocks, to be produced by 2030, which it said will cut aviation's planet-heating emissions by 20%. [...] Burning sustainable aviation fuels still emits some carbon dioxide, while the land use changes needed to produce the fuels can also lead to increased pollution. Ethanol biofuel, made from corn, is used in these fuels, and meeting the Biden administration's production goal, the report found, would require 114m acres of corn in the U.S., about a 20% increase in current land area given over to to the crop. In the UK, meanwhile, 50% of all agricultural land will have to be given up to sustain current flight passenger levels if jet fuel was entirely replaced. "Agricultural land use changes could threaten global food security as well as nature-based carbon sequestration solutions such as the preservation of forests and wetlands," the report states. "As such, SAF production may actively undermine the Paris agreement goal of achieving greatly reduced emissions by 2050."

Chuck Collins, co-author of the report, said: "To bring these fuels to the scale needed would require massive subsidies, the trade-offs would be unacceptable and would take resources aware from more urgent decarbonization priorities."

"It's a huge greenwashing exercise by the aviation industry. It's magical thinking that they will be able to do this."

Phil Ansell, director of the Center for Sustainable Aviation at the University of Illinois, added: "There's an underappreciation of how big the energy problem is for aviation. We are still many years away from zero pollution flights. But it's true that the industry has been slow to pick things up. We are now trying to find solutions, but we are working at this problem and realizing it's a lot harder than we thought. We are late to the game. We are in the dark ages in terms of sustainability, compared to other sectors."