Ocean Reef Absolute Auction Results

Ocean Reef Auction . . . Really?

I don?t know how anyone gets away with calling this an ?Absolute Auction of 31 Condos? at Ocean Reef. This is the third time they have done this in Panama City Beach and I honestly don?t know how they get away with it. They auction off one or two condos, and then cancel the auction. They didn?t auction off 31 condos. The auctioned off three condos and then canceled the auction. Then they announce that you can buy condos at the price the last unit sold for. How is that an absolute auction of 31 condos?

Michael C:

Not sure where you got your information, but 35 units sold for a total of $8.84MM. The four bedroom units sold between $209.69 and $233.75/sq. ft. after including the 10% buyer premium. The two bedroom units sold at $196.77/ sq. ft. after adding the buyer premium.

IMO, these prices are attractive and I would bet you could cash flow these units while awaiting the return of better days.

Little Fish

I think his point was that "sold" does not equal "auctioned off". Based on the description of activities in this thread, it would appear that the units sold after the first few actual auctions were not placed up for sale to the highest bidder as one would expect at an absolute auction. They were simply sold at a set price (maybe a good price - I'm not arguing that).

"We started out at 500,000 for the four-bedrooms and found our way to an opening bid of $300,000 in short order. The first unit sold for $340,000 after the bidding was complete. They then announced that they would auction off one more. The bidding started again at $300,000 and sold for $305,000....

On to the two-bedrooms. The first one opened at $200,000 and may have set the world record for longest time taken to get a second bid of $205,000. The first unit officially sold and the auctioneer announced that this was the last two-bedroom condo to be auctioned and the developer would not sell for less than the $205,000....

The final results won't be known for another 45 days. There is usually some fall out of condominium buyers during the condominium documentation review period...."

As Michael C wrote, only three units were auctioned "absolute," regardless of price, and as the blogger noted, they aren't actually "sold," yet.

Yes, it is great to see that the units sold, but it would be even better if they didn't stretch the truth. The truth is that none have sold, yet. They are simply under contract, which in real estate terms would me they are "contingent" or "pending." Let's hope they stick and come up with a real "sold" later.

Ocean Reef Auction . . . Really?

gardening1970 is correct in the point I was trying to make. The Ocean Reef Condos that went under contract may have been a direct result of the auction, but were not actually auctioned off. All of the marketing material stated that 31 condos at Ocean Reef would be put up for absolute auction. They canceled the auction after the third condo was auctioned off. Then they told everyone they could buy condos for the price the units just auctioned for. That is not selling ?31 units at absolute auction?. They did the same thing at Palazzo Auction. They didn?t auction off all of those units.

spin it however you want. the bottom line is they put a lot of units under contract. that is not a bad thing in today's market. They found out what the market will pay and adjusted the selling price to the actual market.

Does anyone think the bank/owners, etc. didn't have bidders salted in the audience to garner a bottom line acceptable bid?

spin it however you want. the bottom line is they put a lot of units under contract. that is not a bad thing in today's market. They found out what the market will pay and adjusted the selling price to the actual market.

I don't think this has to do anything about "spinning" anything unless, of course, you work for the auction company. Nobody has ever said that it is a bad thing that "they put a lot of units under contract." This is not the issue. The issue is deceptive advertising and rather questionable tactics by the auction company.

The facts are (no spin): 3 units sold absolute. Period. No more, no less.

Let's look at a definition of absolute auction and see if what happened with the remaining 28 units resembles its meaning:

An Absolute Auction is one in which the property is sold to the highest bidder regardless of the amount of the winning bid.

I think not?

I'd venture a guess and say that had all these units been sold as truly absolute, the $8.84M total quoted by Little Fish would have been lower.

Please feel free to enter the spin-zone.

ER

Those seem like great prices on a brand new beach front condo in Panama City, wouldn't you say Smiling Joe?

The four bedroom link was pointing in the wrong place -

http://blog.panamabeachrealty.com/images/condos/ocean_reef/ocean_reef_auction_4_br.gif

Anybody know what the 4 bedroom corner units were going for? Was that the $233.75 price?

Those seem like great prices on a brand new beach front condo in Panama City, wouldn't you say Smiling Joe?

The four bedroom link was pointing in the wrong place -

http://blog.panamabeachrealty.com/images/condos/ocean_reef/ocean_reef_auction_4_br.gif

Anybody know what the 4 bedroom corner units were going for? Was that the $233.75 price?

I agree. Is there a less costly 4 bedroom, new, gulf front in the area?

Michael C:


IMO, these prices are attractive and I would bet you could cash flow these units while awaiting the return of better days.

Little Fish

Let's see your numbers to cashflow one of these units.

.

Those seem like great prices on a brand new beach front condo in Panama City, wouldn't you say Smiling Joe?

The four bedroom link was pointing in the wrong place -

http://blog.panamabeachrealty.com/images/condos/ocean_reef/ocean_reef_auction_4_br.gif


I

Anybody know what the 4 bedroom corner units were going for? Was that the $233.75 price?

The end units are all four bedroom and the interior are two bedroom. The developer is selling the four for $359,500 and the two bedroom for $259,500.

I showed these condo's a few weeks ago. Yes, the price is good for a four bedroom, new condo, however it was obvious that the developer cut a few corners on these units that I have not seen with his other projects. Even so my customer was willing to go in and make the necessary changes to bring the condo up to par. Not major changes, but out of pocket money nonetheless. I wasn't really crazy about the locale either, next to the run down Fountain Blue.

Let's see your numbers to cashflow one of these units.

.

Cashflow???? I don't know of a beach property cash flowing since the 80's unless you put a heck of lot of money down.

Cashflow???? I don't know of a beach property cash flowing since the 80's unless you put a heck of lot of money down.

A lot of folks who show positive "cashflow" using a chunk of money for down payment more likely than not fail to figure in lost opportunity costs from the "chunk."

A $300k condo-box on PCB purchased today isn't going to produce positive cashflow--period.

.

Bought lot, built house south of 30A 1998. $85k for lot $240k for house, firnishings. Cash paid for lot and furnishings, $220,000 Mortgage. $9000 negetaive cashflow until sold. Used approxamatly 45 days per year, no fee's or rent, value $9000, in personal use, not paid to others. Sold 11/2003, net $525,000, rolled into 1 back from beach, total including furninghings 1.1mm, 400k mortgage, $70k more equity out of pocket. Total carry per year, on 2005 costruction, with all current hurricane construction standards, $42k. Net rental income $52k, + 45 days personal use. So 10k positive cashflow, no income taxes, and the equivilant of 10-12k for not having to rent from another. So no matter what the value, as long as I get my equity back out, or a tatal of 575k, upon a sale, my return is equal to 22k on an out of pocket investment of 180k for 12.2% return, annualy. Even in this market I should get my equity back + the laon balance in that the propery brings in 70k+ in gross revenues per year.

So Shelly, digest these #'s, and compare to like returns in equities, mm funds, or high yield corporates, or anything for that matter.

Does anyone think the bank/owners, etc. didn't have bidders salted in the audience to garner a bottom line acceptable bid?

I seriously doubt that. One it's illegal, second the 2nd and 3rd bids only went up $5,000. That's not exactly rigged.

Bought lot, built house south of 30A 1998. $85k for lot $240k for house, firnishings. Cash paid for lot and furnishings, $220,000 Mortgage. $9000 negetaive cashflow until sold. Used approxamatly 45 days per year, no fee's or rent, value $9000, in personal use, not paid to others. Sold 11/2003, net $525,000, rolled into 1 back from beach, total including furninghings 1.1mm, 400k mortgage, $70k more equity out of pocket. Total carry per year, on 2005 costruction, with all current hurricane construction standards, $42k. Net rental income $52k, + 45 days personal use. So 10k positive cashflow, no income taxes, and the equivilant of 10-12k for not having to rent from another. So no matter what the value, as long as I get my equity back out, or a tatal of 575k, upon a sale, my return is equal to 22k on an out of pocket investment of 180k for 12.2% return, annualy. Even in this market I should get my equity back + the laon balance in that the propery brings in 70k+ in gross revenues per year.

So Shelly, digest these #'s, and compare to like returns in equities, mm funds, or high yield corporates, or anything for that matter.

Read my post one more time....nothing is going to cashflow at these median prices today.

Simple "figured on a cocktail napkin" calculations don't work when valuing an investment...what about the "time value of money?"


.

Read my post one more time....nothing is going to cashflow at these median prices today.

Simple "figured on a cocktail napkin" calculations don't work when valuing an investment...what about the "time value of money?"


.

I thought this was considered "proof of income" under the old mortgage rules?

The point I was making, lets try to encourage potential buyers to look today with the idea in time it will cash flow. In the meantime the use of the property has value. Would it not be nice to try to have some postive forward thinking to the market, as I believe the opportunities are a lot more realistic for affordable beach property. This is not the bottom, I don't believe, however more people should be doing due diligence for a purchase, and when they feel comfortable with the deal, pull the trigger. People love to rent SoWal properties, and properties close to the beach will always have renatal premium.

I read your post and used it as an opprtunity to show what time can do for your beach investment. Do you not agree with anything I stated.

Shelly:

Ok, I'll take a stab at it.

Question: Is it possible to cash flow at recent auction prices?


Assumptions:

• Purchase Price $359,500 (for 4BR as stated earlier in the thread)
• 20% down with a 30 YR FXD at 6.5%
• Annual Mortgage Payment = $21,828 ($18,600 Int. + $3,228 Prin.)
• Annual Maintenance = $6,300 (HOA Fee of $400 plus additional exp.)
• 1st YR. Rents = $30,000
• 30% Marginal Bracket
• 1st YR. Depreciation Expense = $11,983 (Straight line)

The Formula:


Earnings Before Tax = Rents - (DEPR + MAINT + INT. EXP)

• EBT = $30,000 - ($11,983 + $6,300 + $18,600) = ($6,883)

Tax = 30% Marginal Bracket * EBT = .30* ($6,883) = ($2,065)

Net Earnings = Earnings Before Tax - Tax = ($6,883) - ($2,065) = ($4,818)


CASH FLOW = Net Earnings + DEPR - Principal Repayment

• ($4,818) + $11,983 - $3,228 = $3,937 A POSITIVE NUMBER

Can you believe it?

Little Fish

The point I was making, lets try to encourage potential buyers to look today with the idea in time it will cash flow. In the meantime the use of the property has value. Would it not be nice to try to have some postive forward thinking to the market, as I believe the opportunities are a lot more realistic for affordable beach property. This is not the bottom, I don't believe, however more people should be doing due diligence for a purchase, and when they feel comfortable with the deal, pull the trigger. People love to rent SoWal properties, and properties close to the beach will always have renatal premium.

I read your post and used it as an opprtunity to show what time can do for your beach investment. Do you not agree with anything I stated.

Shelly:

Ok, I'll take a stab at it.

Question: Is it possible to cash flow at recent auction prices?



Assumptions:

• Purchase Price $359,500 (for 4BR as stated earlier in the thread)
• 20% down with a 30 YR FXD at 6.5%
• Annual Mortgage Payment = $21,828 ($18,600 Int. + $3,228 Prin.)
• Annual Maintenance = $6,300 (HOA Fee of $400 plus additional exp.)
• 1st YR. Rents = $30,000
• 30% Marginal Bracket
• 1st YR. Depreciation Expense = $11,983 (Straight line)

The Formula:



Earnings Before Tax = Rents - (DEPR + MAINT + INT. EXP)

• EBT = $30,000 - ($11,983 + $6,300 + $18,600) = ($6,883)

Tax = 30% Marginal Bracket * EBT = .30* ($6,883) = ($2,065)

Net Earnings = Earnings Before Tax - Tax = ($6,883) - ($2,065) = ($4,818)



CASH FLOW = Net Earnings + DEPR - Principal Repayment

• ($4,818) + $11,983 - $3,228 = $3,937 A POSITIVE NUMBER

Can you believe it?

Little Fish

Once again the assumption that you're going to rent this thing year round is the key factor. Anyone going into the purchase of investment property needs to be under the assumption that it's going to COST them money not make it for them. The reason we are in our current financial crisis is due to people listening to Carlton Sheets and his ilke. If you can't afford it without rentals then you can't afford it with rentals. Is it really that hard to understand that it could be additional income and not a source of income?

Wow, way to go Little Fish, your example exemplifies that realestate at the beach, at these levels, arn't toxic waste after all. If the numbers work out like this today, just think what they will look like in 5 years. Of coarse it does appear these #'s seem to appear as napkin math once again. I think we need to feed these examples into a wallstreet super computer to get the true outcomes to the equations, you know the ones they fed the subprime, alt-a, option arms, and 100% ltv loans into to create the toxic waste that is affecting the world economy today. It was interesting to see both of the examples did envolve equity.

Again the issue boils down to the fact that one variant is completely unknown and unpredictable. Will someone book and rent the unit. You also have the unknown's of vandalism, whether accidental or intentional.

In Little Fish's math you added the entire amount of Year 1 depreciation back to After-tax earnings to get Cash Flow. The only cash flow benefit that depreciation offers is the tax benefit, or the tax savings of 30% of depreciation.

So instead of adding back the entire amount of depreciation you should have only added back the taxes saved from being able to deduct it. Had you used an accelerated depreciation method would your cash flow have increased? Yes but only because of a larger tax deduction.

Only taking the tax benefit portion of depreciation, turns the cash flow number negative. But that's not to say it's a bad investment.

Any cash flow analysis is only meaningful when you take into account two additional things:

1. The opportunity cost of the money you're investing. In this case the down payment and the principal repayments. Could you have invested that amount in an insured CD and earned more? In this case yes, because your annual flow is negative.

2. The terminal value of the investment is important. In Little Fish's case, you can't get the numbers to work unless you include in the analysis a level of appreciation in the 5% - 7% per year range to make this a viable investment accounting for taxes, transaction costs on any sale and the opportunity cost of the cash you're putting out.

So if you're thinking of investing you need to make sure you manage the property to keep it rented @ 30,000 per year (I assume that's net of any property management fees) and you can see 5-7% appreciation in the value of the house.

This is how I'm looking at investment options - if I'm mistaken I would value any knowledgeable comments.

YoungFT:

"In Little Fish's math you added the entire amount of Year 1 depreciation back to After-tax earnings to get Cash Flow. The only cash flow benefit that depreciation offers is the tax benefit, or the tax savings of 30% of depreciation."

Sorry, but this is an incorrect statement. Operating income includes the full amount of depreciation and later when calculating cash flow, it is fully added back. If you google it, I'm sure you will find this to be the case.

Also, Shelly originally challenged me on my gut feeling that it was possible to cash flow at these prices. I used an example to show that at the end of one year, you could cash flow the property that was mentioned earlier.

That said, I was not analyzing the investment relative to any alternatives, nor did I do discounted cash flow analysis to determine whether or not it is an acceptable investment over the long term.

Little Fish

1. The opportunity cost of the money you're investing. In this case the down payment and the principal repayments. Could you have invested that amount in an insured CD and earned more? In this case yes, because your annual flow is negative.

This is how I'm looking at investment options - if I'm mistaken I would value any knowledgeable comments.

Bingo! Opportunity costs are what folks tend to forget when figuring cashflow. In this case it's $71,900 (20% down) and $38,738 in principle for the first year. Over $110K is too much pocket change to "discount."

Additionally the assumption that one can keep a 4 bedroom condo in PCB rented out year-round for $2500 per month is quite a stretch.

Moreover, the illiquidity of Florida condoz is a HUGE risk. If one has a few hundred thousand dollars collecting dust in their sock drawer, this type of purchase should be considered a "hobby" at these prices, but certainly not an investment.