Rick Jones

Subscribe to Rick Jones's Posts

A few weeks ago, I wrote that it was manifest destiny that the CRE CDO would return to the commercial real estate space.  A lot of people took the time to tell me that I was delusional, at best. I thought I would take a moment to return to the topic and try to establish my bona fides as something other than a knave, a fool, or a foolish knave.

Let’s start with the question of need.  Do we really need this?  Portfolio lenders in need of yield and securitization lenders in need of warehouse capacity are in a day-in, day-out search for leverage. The problem, of course, is that almost all leverage available in the commercial market tends to be short term, creating a durational mismatch against the underlying financial assets.  That situation is bad.  That mismatch killed a lot of players last time.  The CRE CDO addresses this problem with durationally matched financing.  It is also blessedly bereft of the repo mark-to-market.

So that’s the need. It’s real.Continue Reading How I Learned to Live With the CRE CDO. And Love It! (With Apologies to Stanley Kubrick)

Near the epicenter of the late unpleasantness was that wonder of complex engineering, the CRE CDO. It has been blamed for near everything that went wrong or was wrong in the commercial real estate space. It probably is responsible for the winters of 2010 and 2011.

The CRE CDO, as it was initially designed, was an on-balance sheet term financing facility which was designed to be free of the vicissitudes of traditional bank warehousing restrictions and, of course, the dread mark to market of the repo market. The transactions were often dynamic and had substantial term, often up to 7 years. Whole loans (as well as other stuff) which met the elaborate and complex (more on this later) eligibility criteria could be financed on a rolling basis with the proceeds from the disposition of assets reinvested for a substantial portion of the term. CRE CDO paper was customarily rated. The average cost of funds was substantially lower than what could be obtained on a straight bank facility. Continue Reading The Impossible Dream: It’s Time to Bring Back the CRE CDO

2500 of my best friends and I spent three days at the MBA’s annual CREF meeting in San Diego last week. By now, it’s old news, but, indeed, the mood was very upbeat. Just like the days of yore, everyone spent every working moment in lender-mortgage banker meet and greets, exchanging braggadocio over pipelines, products and relationships. People even had the energy to return to old fights and grudges: portfolio lenders vs Wall Street squaring off after sharing a fox hole these past three years. Most heartwarming.Continue Reading Tales From The Conference Circuit: Can I Be Both Giddy and Anxious?

On January 20th, the SEC finalized its first batch of many rules to come under Dodd-Frank, requiring issuers to perform reviews of the assets underlying their ABS securities and requiring them to disclose fulfilled and unfulfilled repurchase requests for alleged breaches of representations and warranties.  These have effective dates beginning with 2012 issuance so, to a certain extent, we can kick the anxiety can down the road for a while.  Nonetheless, this is a pretty clear window into what may be a bleak regulatory future.  And that’s important now.  More on this later.

Rule 193 (release here (pdf)) requires an issuer to know something about the assets it’s securitizing.  The issuer is supposed to do diligence to understand the assets it securitizes and tell the investor about the nature of its inquiry.  Curiously, and I’m not complaining here, Rule 193 does not purport to define what disclosures need be made, just that there ought to be “robust" and "transparent” diligence behind them. Its inquiry must be “designed and effected to provide reasonable assurances” that the disclosures about the assets are correct.

Hardly shocking.  Call me silly, but that seems to be what we do in structured finance.  I guess more information about exactly what the issuer did to understand the assets it securitizes could be useful, particularly in asset classes in which the asset level data is sketchy and aggregate.  It’s just silly in CMBS when we already deliver vast quantities of granular data in every deal.Continue Reading The FinReg Sheriff Arrives in Town: Do You Feel Safer?

While perhaps akin to stories of sixteen foot gators in the New York sewer system, I have heard that there is a physiological basis for suppressing the more painful memories of childbirth which is the species’ way of ensuring that couples have more than one child. Perhaps a similar thing is affecting investors and market participants to allow animal spirits to be rekindled this January.

Oh, I think it’s fair to say that there were precious few animal spirits in January ’08 and ’09 and we were all a bit fluttery at the beginning of 2010, but I think we’ve put the worst memories of the last 3 years’ unpleasantness behind us and appear intent on enjoying the delightful frisson of booming times once again.
 Continue Reading Animal Spirits and Limits of Memory

Leading with the good news, the commercial mortgage finance market is back and growing at a brisk pace.  From a few standalones in the fourth quarter of 2009, we’ve gotten to a remarkable place.  Even during the first half of 2010, while lenders were hesitantly starting to lend, precious few lenders actually had real balance sheet availability for securitization.  That changed.  We’re back!  

Almost as soon as these markets began to function again, complaints about the quality of the loans began to bubble up.  OK, LTVs remain modest and, broadly, we’re not  underwriting pro forma income, but structural rigor and simplicity did not long endure.  Give me a break.  The joke has always been that our business had a seven year cycle and five year memories so that once in every cycle we’d recapitulate the errors of the last.  But five months?Continue Reading Seven Year Cycles and Five Month Memories

 With Thanksgiving upon us and the holiday season in full swing, we here at CrunchedCredit.com would like to present our “Golden Turkeys”, noting certain special contributions to the ongoing resurrection of the Commercial Real Estate Finance industry.

The Golden Turkey for the Best Self-Inflicted Wound: FASB

Hands down, this goes to the Financial Accounting Standards Board. We don’t know whether to give top honors to FAS 166 and 167 dealing with the transfer of financial assets or the new Fair Value Accounting Rules. But in any event, in a series of changes which certainly must have made more sense to academic accounting communities and to the financial markets and investors for which these little regulatory gems were designed, for reasons which remain curious even now, they’ve imported enormous financial volatility and burdened the balance sheets of financial institutions with assets they don’t own and liabilities for which they have no contractual liability in the middle of the greatest financial correction in modern memory. At least we changed the rules of the game, we drop a giant pro-cyclical engine into the balance sheet, stir in a little FinReg, and, Viola! — chaos. We could have hoped someone with regulatory gravitas could have stood up and said, "What are you thinkin’?" And now for a second heaping of goodness, FASB is considering expanding Fair Value to all financial assets, which will produce even more volatility onto the balance sheets of financial institutions. Oh, and have we mentioned Lease Accounting? If FASB has their way, all leases will be treated as capital leases. we can’t even begin to tell you how bad that is. FASB, the winner in this category, hands down.

The Golden Turkey Award for Best Regulatory Knifefight: FDIC

This award goes to the FDIC. This late, lamented Congress began spinning the tale that the absence of skin in the game caused the capital meltdown over the past three years, and, in large measure, through sheer undisputed resolution, it has become received wisdom. (There must be a Golden Turkey for that itself, isn’t there?) So the SEC begins a regulatory initiative to impose skin in the game requirements for use of a shelf in a publicly registered transaction. Good enough, and then the Congressional locomotive comes through and skin in the game becomes a part of Dodd-Frank. Under Dodd-Frank, all the relevant banking regulatory agencies and the SEC are directed to engage in joint rulemaking on skin in the game. In the middle of all this, the FDIC publishes its new securitization Safe Harbor, which contains a completely freestanding and independent skin in the game provision. Oh, sure, the Reg which is in final form is applicable as of January 1, 2011, has an auto-conform provision that the Dodd-Frank skin in the game provisions won’t be law for two years, so we have, irrespective of the FDIC imposing its own set of conflicts rules on a certain sector of the securitization market, face a specific direction to engage in joint rulemaking. What the banking regulatory community thinks about this one can make the other members of the bank regulatory community and the Federal Reserve think about this one can only imagine. We suspect the SEC might be a bit pouty too.Continue Reading Commercial Real Estate 2010 Recap: And the Golden Turkey Award Goes To…

CREFC and MBA. MBA and CREFC. Tied at the hip. Danny Kaye and Bing Crosby? (For those of an age or inclination to have watched White Christmas recently). After a period of open and somewhat notorious and perhaps a little embarrassing competition, these two trade organizations have to settle down and get along for the benefit of the industry which they both serve. The good news is that the early indicators are positive.Continue Reading Can’t We Just Get Along

Somehow, particularly this year, the fact that election eve and All Hallow’s Eve arrive but three days apart seems so compellingly appropriate.  Both are scary and both involve an awful lot of people pretending to be something they’re not.  But elections are supposed to have consequences while Halloween does not.  So let’s test that.  Does this election matter for CRE finance?  Or, how many treats and tricks did this election cycle have to offer?

As I write, the election is in the history books.   A resounding Republican victory in the House, while the Ds held on to the Senate by a smidge.  We hear the term game changer tossed around a lot, but will this indeed be a game changer for CRE finance?Continue Reading Elections, Halloween and the Credit Market