These in turn would logically harm the interests of manufactured home producers. Who says? MHI backer, Amy Bliss, Executive Director of the Wisconsin Housing Alliance (WHA), among others. But frankly, it is logical and obvious.
But let’s focus more for this report on manufactured home communities. Because whether he intended to do so, or not, what the George F. Allen fact-check – linked below – unmasked is the purported harm to independently owned communities, and how Allen’s behavior relates to addressing that harm to independently owned communities, or not.
Note that harm also logically impacts residents in these communities.
But back to the owners of manufactured home community owners. What might the concerns of market rigging cost the owner of a manufactured home community? Depending on the size of the property or other factors that impact value, the total harm could be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, or even into the millions of dollars. Take that times some 44,000 communities, and the figures soar into the tens of billions.
Given who would arguably be liable, it’s the type of numbers that might even make the Oracle of Omaha and his investors, wince.
Is there evidence for that economic harm caused to community owners? Yes, and it comes from a publicly traded company. That firm, in the case study below, is UMH Properties.
The data provided for this case study is taken from UMH Properties (UMH), unless otherwise noted. This information is an independent analysis, not commissioned by UMH.
A Case Study – Countryside Village
Located in Columbia, TN, 46 miles south of Nashville, TN.
Number of Sites: 349
Date of Acquisition: June 29, 2011
Purchase Price: $7,300,000
Purchase Price per Site: $21,000
Capitalization Subsequent to Acquisition (including $8.6m in rental homes): $9,196,000
Total Capital Investment ($47,300 per site): $16,496,000
At Acquisition | Today * | Increase
Occupancy Percent: 55% 97% 42%
Number of Rentals: 79 222 143
Site Rent: $302 $372 23.2%
Rental and Related Income* $953,000 | $2,315,000 | 142.9%
Net Operating Income* $497,000 | $1,477,000 | 197.2%
Value per site ** N/A | $70,500 | 49%***
Value of Community ** N/A | $24,616,700 | 49%***
*At acquisition – 2011 annualized;
Today – Year Ended December 31, 2018.
**Value calculated based on a 6% Cap Rate.
***Increase from total capital investment.
Rephrased, in this example, using UMH data as show, the seller of that property – adjusted for inflation and other factors – did not realize a gain of some $49,500 per site. For that community of 349 sites, that’s $17,275,500.
There are lots of ways to slice and dice this data. The UMH screen capture, from which the above was mined, is below.
How many billions and billions of dollars in lost property value might Berkshire Hathaway, their allies, and surrogates potentially be liable for if a suit like this was taken to court and succeeded?
Then, apply that same query to retailers, producers, suppliers, lenders, and other firms impacted.
Finally, ponder the harm done to the interests of some 22 million owners of mobile and manufactured homes. That too could total into the tens of billions of dollars. See the related reports, further below.
That’s this Friday morning edition from the #1 most-read “Industry News, Tips, and Views Pros Can Use,” © where “We Provide, You Decide.” © ## (News, analysis, and commentary.)