Posts Tagged ‘Illinois’

New Farmland Report Out!

Wednesday, May 26th, 2010

The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago just released the May issue of their Agricultural Letter.  This publication focuses on farmland values and agricultural credit conditions across the Midwest.  The Fed gathers their information by surveying 215 bankers across the region and while the letter does a great job of discussing general trends in the agricultural community, keep in mind that specific “micro” areas, e.g., counties, townships, etc. may differ from state averages.

So what did we learn in the May issue?  As expected, farmland values increased in the first quarter of 2010, with the “I” states (Indiana, Illinois, Iowa) leading the way.  In addition, values in these areas were up from 4 – 8% over the same period last year.  Interest rates for farm loans in the first quarter of this year were lower than anytime during the past 24 months.  And finally, the letter also had some interesting articles that discussed the Price-to-Earnings ratio for farmland, loan repayment rates, and the outlook for land prices for the second quarter (85% thought that they would remain unchanged).

 If you’re truly interested in following agricultural trends in the Corn Belt, I would suggest subscribing to this publication (or continue reading our blog in the future!).  It’s one government report that I find both interesting and informative.

Commodity Policy & Energy Policy and Their Affect on the Corn Market

Wednesday, April 28th, 2010

In the fall of 2006, corn was hovering around $3 per bushel and farmer’s cash flows were tight.  Up until that point, corn had been thought of as a commodity used primarily for feeding livestock. Suddenly, a shift in government policy encouraged the use of ethanol as a “home-grown, cleaner burning” alternative to petroleum. Corn was the natural input used to make ethanol as it was plentiful and easy to convert.   Shortly thereafter, corn prices rose to $6 per bushel and the feed versus fuel debate began.

Even though corn prices have dropped back into the $3 range, the discussion of the merits of corn-based ethanol continues.  Only now, the question is whether corn should be viewed in the context of agricultural policy or energy policy (or both!).  The University of Illinois recently published an article (Will Corn Prices Follow Energy Policies Or Commodity Policies) that addresses this issue.  In a nutshell, farmers and traders will need to determine if corn prices are more likely to follow the direction of the oil market, or the oil seeds (commodity) market.  The ability to understand the affect that both markets will have on corn demand, may be the difference in locking in a profit or a loss in the future.

Let’s be honest – in less than 4 years, corn-based ethanol has created both incredible prosperity (for grain farmers) and unmitigated disaster (for livestock farmers and ethanol producers) at the same time.  It has driven farmland prices and cash rents to record levels that may or may not be sustainable in the future. I believe that corn-based ethanol will continue to be a key component of our country’s energy policy well into the future.  How it is ultimately viewed (and manipulated?) by policy makers, is yet to be determined.

A Land Market Lesson

Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

Many would argue that farmland in today’s market is relatively expensive.  I’m sure you’ve read or heard about various sales that have surprised you by the strength in their sale price.  On a recent message board, there was much discussion about how how “crazy” it is to see $8000/acre land prices in places. 

But $8000/acre farmland pales in comparison to what has occurred in the marketplace in the collar counties around Chicago.  A recent article, As the housing boom dies out, land prices drop, by Cindy Wojdyla Cain in the Plainfield Sun, describes the current state of affairs for the land market in and around the village of Plainfield, Illinois, one of the southwest suburbs of Chicagoland – and previously one of the fastest growing areas in the United States.  To sum up the article, let me just say that land values can go down – a lot. 

The impact of the severe drop in land values in that area is far reaching.  Many developers have gone bankrupt – jobs gone.  Many banks that financed the planned developments are becoming owners of property they really never wanted – and are struggling to find new buyers.  The local municipalities are also hurting financially, as they’d become accustomed to the generous revenue streams that the previous go-go days of development had provided.  And I haven’t even mentioned the impact on the local homeowners of that area, who have seen property values suffer in the well-publicized economic downturn.  Some would say that those who are suffering deserve it.  In an ironic twist, the article also discusses some of those who are benefitting from the mess, including many local farmers who’d previously sold their land for development, but who are now buying back tillable parcels for pennies (or dimes) on the dollar.

Personally, I believe this is an economic cycle that every economy – local, regional, national, global – will go through.  This is a “cleansing” of the marketplace, of sorts, that happens from time to time.  Is this downturn larger and more painful than most?  Without a doubt.  And I personally hate to see anyone suffer – economically or otherwise.  But this situation can teach us lessons.

  • Every market can go down – stocks, bonds, condominiums, and yes, rural farmland.  It seems like history always repeats itself, just in slightly different ways.  The turmoil around Plainfield reminds many observers of a microcosm of what happened to too many folks in the farm community during the 1970’s and 1980’s.  So use others mistakes and recognize what can happen in the rural land market.

 

  • You’ve heard this one – never bite off more than you can chew.  Leverage can be a great thing when it’s working for you – but it can provide equally painful results when it works against you.  And I’ve never heard of a foreclosure happening to someone who doesn’t borrow money.

 

  • Timing is everything.  You’ve heard about the 3 most important things in real estate – location, location, location.  But a close runner-up is to location is timing.  Some very smart and savvy people have been financially destroyed by bad timing.  Keep that in mind in your business.

 

  • Decisions have consequences.  I concede it may be somewhat hard to see the validity of this point when we consider the state of our “bailout nation”.  But when the politicians eventually get out of the way, the market will again get back to proper functioning – with the reality that all decisions have consequences.

 

The darkest situations for some often offer the best opportunities for others.  And if you’ve been damaged in some way by this economic downturn, always remember that failure is not permanent.  Just make sure you don’t miss out on the chance to learn from your mistakes, and the mistakes of others.

Why Don’t We All Own Some Farmland?

Wednesday, March 24th, 2010

Last week I discussed the investment performance of Illinois Farmland, when compared to other asset classes and investment indices since 1970.  The research I sourced for the post was completed by Bruce Sherrick, Ph.D., from the University of Illinois.  The bottom line of Dr. Sherrick’s research showed that Illinois farmland performed very favorably when measured against nearly every other investment type, whether stocks, government or corporate bonds, real estate investment trusts (REITS), commercial paper, or emerging markets.  Which all begs the question, why don’t we all own some farmland?  I believe there are several reasons for why normal, everyday investors choose to bypass including some farmland holdings in their respective investments portfolios. 

The first may involve a lesser degree of liquidity.  All real estate – whether a farm, home, or commercial building – is generally less liquid than that of a stock or bond.  I can always login to a TD Ameritrade or e-Trade account, and almost instantly sell my stock holdings.  Real estate purchases and sales are usually more involved, taking more time and often at a higher cost, than that for stock or bond investments.  This creates a barrier for some potential land investors. 

Second, investing in farmland normally involves a larger initial investment.  Unlike an investment in stock mutual funds for my Roth IRA, it can be difficult – if not impossible – to purchase $5000 worth of farmland.  An 80-acre tract of land in central-Illinois can command as much at $8000 per acre, or $640k total, which can make entry into farmland ownership somewhat difficult for many individuals.  While there are obviously smaller tracts of land that can be purchased, an 80-acre tract is not “large” by today’s operational farmland standards – and this fact can create a real barrier to entry for many potential landowners.

Third, normal stock and bond investing involves more clear and efficient information.  If you want to learn about a particular company, you can jump on the Internet and do oodles of research on individual stock holdings through Yahoo or Google.  And new information for these markets is available every minute of every trading day.  By contrast, the farmland market can be less clear and efficient, and has a somewhat higher learning curve.  If you didn’t grow up on a farm, where you learned the true ins-and-outs of agriculture, learning about farmland ownership and operation can be challenging.  In addition, as an individual with little or no farm experience, figuring out who you can trust can be equally challenging. 

Next, for some people, farmland isn’t as exciting as other investment alternatives.  Sure, the return history and general stability of farmland as an investment are clear.  But farmland is not fancy – after all, we’re talking about dirt, here!  And to that end, some investors prefer to operate in what they perceive to be a more “sophisticated” manner (e.g., think credit default swaps).  The currently steady 3-5% annual cash returns, isn’t something you’d often brag about at a cocktail party – even though a steady 3-5% (excluding appreciation) looks tremendous when compared with the recent whipsaw in stocks. 

Finally, for many people, farmland doesn’t even hit their radar when considering investments because they are so removed from it.  Farmland is not like stocks, bonds, and many other asset classes that are actively marketed to the masses by large multi-national firms.  Sure, farmland brokerages and land auction companies work very hard to ensure that land offerings are well known.  But when you consider the likes of e-Trade, for example, which runs Super Bowl commercials featuring talking babies – and countless other investment companies with massive marketing budgets – farmland as an investment alternative doesn’t seem to be as ingrained in the psyche of the public as other investment offerings.

So while it’s clear that farmland has proven itself as a great long-term investment, there are several reasons that a limited number of people actually own farmland.  However, if you are interested in adding farmland to your investment holdings, be sure to contact a firm and/or individual that have experience in the marketplace.  Make sure you do your homework on the firm and/or individual – ask for references, specific property experience, and put a sharp pencil to the particulars of any deal.  With a little work you, too, may find that owning land can be a very worthwhile venture.

Illinois Farmland As An Investment

Thursday, March 18th, 2010

This morning I attended the annual “Land Values Conference” in Bloomington, IL, hosted by the Illinois Society of Professional Farm Managers & Rural Appraisers.  This conference was a 2-day event that featured several speakers on topics ranging from farm lease trends, to farm management decisions, to recent performance of Illinois farmland as an asset class.  One of the more interesting topics to me was presented by Bruce Sherrick, Ph.D., an agricultural finance professor from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.  (I’ve always had an interest in Bruce’s take on things, as I served as a teaching assistant for him many years ago while attending graduate school at the University of Illinois.)  Specifically, Bruce updated the attendees on the performance of Illinois farmland when compared to alternative investments.  And what he had to say was pretty remarkable.  In particular, Bruce concluded that there is no other widely recognized asset class or investment index – e.g., the S & P 500; the Dow; Aaa and Baa rated corporate bonds; government bonds; real estate investment trusts; emerging market stock index (EAFE) – that has outperformed Illinois farmland as an investment since 1970.

From 1970 through 2009, the average annual return for Illinois farmland was 10.25% – this includes both income and appreciation.  For all of the mentioned alternative asset or index investments, the closest competitors to Illinois farmland were the returns realized from “Baa” corporate bonds (9.43%) and Real Estate Investment Trusts, or REITs, which returned an average of 9% over the same period.

Bruce also evaluated the returns of the mentioned asset classes over the 1990-2009 time period, and the results for Illinois farmland are equally impressive.  While REITs do outperform Illinois farmland by .03% over the shorter time period – 10.43% vs. 10.40% – the risk involved with REITs was shown to be nearly 8 times greater than the investment risk for Illinois farmland.  For most investors, I think they’d give up 3 hundreths of a percent of return in exchange for an investment with a dramatically lower risk profile!

Which all begs the question, why don’t more people include farmland in their investment portfolio?  I’ll save some of the answers to that question for an upcoming blog post.  But what I took away from Bruce’s presentation this morning confirmed what I have long known – Illinois farmland has been an impressively performing asset that has provided a consistent annual return in the form of rental income, with an equally consistent record of asset price appreciation.  For more information on Bruce’s research and presentation, order a copy of the 2010 Illinois Farmland Values & Lease Trends report from the Illinois Society of Professional Farm Managers & Rural Appraisers website, or visit the University of Illinois’ FarmDoc website.  And if you’d like to discuss farmland as an investment, please also feel free to contact me at doug@loranda.com.