Kimball Hill predicts "substantial net loss" in 2007 filing
Posted 1/3/2008 by Patrick RollensThis must be the week of bad news.
Kimball Hill Homes, the developer of both Parkside of Old Town and Park Boulevard, has delayed filing its 2007 fiscal report and expects to absorb a heavy financial hit from the weakening market, according to an article in Crain's.
Kimball Hill, the largest homebuilder based in the Chicago area, lost $75.1 million in the first nine months of the year, including $133.7 million in impairment charges. Like other big homebuilders, the company has suffered amid declining home sales in key markets such as California and Las Vegas.
Moody’s Investors Service recently cut its ratings on Kimball Hill’s debt, including $203 million in senior subordinated notes. The notes closed Wednesday at 31 cents on the dollar, up two cents from their closing price Friday. They hit a low of 24 cents in early December.
Kimball's in-city projects are deep into construction, and they both involve CHA elements. When Yo checked out Parkside of Old Town in May 2007, the development was about 75 percent sold. A month before that, we reported that the first phase of Park Boulevard was 50 percent sold.


Comments
1/3/08
Jane said:
Yet somehow the real estate cartel expects Chicago sheeple to believe that home prices cannot fall because its "different here". Just wait until banks start unloading units from those recently foreclosed condo projects.
Tracey said:
Exactly Jane. This is just the beginning of the developers/builders being in distress. There are a dozen high rises scheduled to start closing on condos this year and some are only 50% sold. How long can these developers hold on?
Joe Zekas said:
Jane and Tracey - a different breed of real estate "speculator." Speculator because, in the absence of knowledge, they speculate.
Carter said:
I'll speculate that overestimating the sucker-i-tude of Chicagoans is dangerous.
How long have we allowed ourselves to be run by a 19th century ward boss again? How many times do people vote for Daley based on his flower boxes only to then yell at alderman for things like property tax increases?
Carter said:
dagnabit, meant "underestimating the sucker-i-tude of Chicagoans is dangerous," of course.
Brian said:
So flower boxes are dampening the residential real estate industry?
I think Joe hit it on the head with the speculative buyers. That's the scary "shadow" element to all of this.
NLWFD said:
I see that Leavitt has gone belly up too. Very scary. I think a lot of these big suburban single family developers misjudged the "urban" or "city" market when they started doing big projects in central cities. My feeling is they tried applying suburban methods and decision-making to these projects where they didn't fully understand the market and construction dynamics (among other problems). They should have looked at what happened to Joe Eichler…
Glad I No Longer Work For Developers….
Joe Zekas said:
NLWFD,
Levitt (I'm guessing that's who you meant by Leavitt) wasn't building in central cities, but was building a specialized empty-nester product in the southeast US.
Kimball-Hill's 10-K may tell us whether any of its losses related to central city development. I'm guessing: not much, if any.
Only a few of the suburban builders have ventured into the center city. Chicago presents some formidable barriers for developers operating on any scale who aren't part of the insider club.
Tracey said:
Joe: Yes, I have no knowledge of the Chicago market. 50% sold at some of these buildings that are closing? That is SUCH a great market.
We'll see this year. Prices have only one way to go: down.
Joe Zekas said:
Tracey,
Tell us in some detail about your direct experience in the building business in the Chicago area and how long you've been involved in it.
Also tell us what information sources you rely on and over what period of time you've had access to those sources.
Based on a brief look at your Web site, you have no real estate expertise or background. Based on the comments you've made here, you have no historical perspective, no knowledge of the meaning of any of the numbers you so blithely cite - and no specifics to back up those numbers.
In brief, you appear to be here mainly to trawl for clients for Mom and Pop Investors LLC.
From looking at your sample newsletter on your site, you appear to know as little about stocks as you do about real estate. Lots of confident-sounding babble to impress mom and pop; no evidence that you know what you're talking about. Do you really monitor stock chat rooms and think you've learned anything from them? Good grief!
Here's a cheap shot: the stock of MasterCard is up about 50% since you said "MasterCard was trading at a very rich multiple and it was only going to take one little slip-up to push the stock down. It’s still too rich for my blood, but I’m watching it."
If I'm wrong about your knowledge, share some of it with us. Instead of pointless sarcasm, take one of those 50% sold buildings and tell us what it means to be at that level at this point in time - what's the financial impact on the developer, the lender, etc. etc.
Carter said:
"So flower boxes are dampening the residential real estate industry?
I think Joe hit it on the head with the speculative buyers. That's the scary "shadow" element to all of this."
It's not the boxes, its the property taxes that are needed to pay for them and the other hundreds of millions of TIF projects and other fiscal boondoggles - many TIF projects have residential components that appear to be have been fueled by the expectation of unrealistic returns. But while the returns can stop or slow, the taxes continue to increase far above the rate of inflation. So your taxes go to subsidize somebody else, and then you get hit again by having your taxes raised for your effort.
Certainly, speculators are an interrelated part of the problem, they are the fuel that feeds the fire.
1/4/08
Tracey said:
Joe: There are foreclosures happening all over the city now. All you need to do is look on Craigslist for desperate investors trying to dump units in buildings that haven't even closed yet (and many in those that have.)
And it's a really cheap shot by you to attack me personally. But why am I not surprised? You do it to Jane and others that don't share your views. I thought a blog was about expressing ideas. But if we all don't agree with the great Joe Zekas that the market is "normal" (despite hundreds of empty condo units around the city and hundreds of empty new single family homes by developers) then we "don't have any experience."
I have plenty of real estate experience. I can see a half empty condo building from my office window!
Ah, but that is "normal."
I like Yo because it actually tells us what is going on with new development in the city. But not all the new development is going to get built and not all developers are going to sell out their buildings. It'll be a shame if this site simply becomes a "rah-rah" cheerleading site for developers.
Joe Zekas said:
Tracey,
I noted it was a cheap shot - but one that you richly deserve. I'm singling out people who are contributing nothing here and dragging down the conversation or, worse, deliberately spreading misinformation or strutting ignorance. You'll see a number of people who disagree with me who don't receive the kind of response you do.
Tell us what your "plenty of real estate experience" amounts to. The claim itself is laughable in response to the challenge I posed to you. I asked for knowledge and information, not puffery. You're not providing any knowledge or information.
Anyone who spends any time here knows that we're not simply cheerleaders for development - and that we're not going to sit still and let ignorant anti-development cheerleaders dominate the discussion.
Google Zekas Craigslist and you'll see that I've paid quite a bit of attention to that site.