Real estate developers typically assess potential projects using feasibility analyses and industry-standard heuristics, which include capital costs, return on costs, and a subjective risk measure. This study explores real estate developers’ decision-making practices in selecting hurdle rates and common feasibility analysis techniques, surveying 225 Australian and New Zealand developers. The main findings are that most developers use specific ‘go/no-go’ hurdle rate mechanisms irrespective of primary real estate type, with the majority using margin on development cost (MDC) or internal rate of return (IRR); the boundaries between traditional speculative development and real estate investment through the use of securitization methods have become blurred; many developers use both quantitative metrics, with qualitative methods and specific structural checks to manage the risks involved; and the two most frequent methods of determining site value prior to acquisition are the residual land value and discounted cash flow methods. Most place a heavy reliance on industry-accepted heuristics and do not have a predetermined process and method for altering or adapting the chosen hurdle rates and benchmarks. This research provides a contribution to property development practice from the Antipodean perspective which until now has been more focused on the UK view, enabling more generalized application internationally.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moorhead et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: