Matching Items (5)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: risk
- Creators: Economics Program in CLAS
Description
This thesis takes the form of a market research report with the goal of analyzing the implications of the United Kingdom (UK) leaving the European Union (EU) (known as “Brexit”) on London’s office commercial real estate market. The ultimate goal of this report is to make a prediction, firmly grounded in quantitative and qualitative research conducted over the past several months, as to the direction of London’s commercial real estate market going forward (post-Brexit). Within the commercial real estate sector, this paper narrows its focus to the office segment of the London market.
Understanding the political landscape is crucial to formulating a reasonable prediction as to the future of the London market. Aside from research reports and articles, our main insights into the political direction of Brexit come from our recordings from meetings in March of 2017 with two high-ranking members of Parliament and one member of the House of Lords—all of whom are members of the Tory Party (the meetings being held under the condition of anonymity). The below analysis will be followed by a discussion of the economics of Brexit, primarily focusing on the economic risks and uncertainties which have emerged after the vote, and which currently exist today. Such risks include the UK losing its financial passporting rights, weakening GDP and currency value, the potential for a reduction in foreign direct investment (FDI), and the potential loss of the service sector in the city of London due to not being able to access the European Single Market.
The report will shift focus to analyzing three competing viewpoints of the direction of the London market based on recordings from interviews of stakeholders in the London real estate market. One being an executive of one of the largest REITs in the UK, another being the Global Head of Real Estate at a top asset management firm, and another being a director at a large property consulting firm. The report includes these differing “sub-theses” in order to try to make sense of the vast market uncertainties post-Brexit as well as to contrast their viewpoints with where the market is currently and with the report’s investment recommendation.
The remainder of the report will consist of the methods used for analyzing market trends including how the data was modeled in order to make the investment recommendation. The report will analyze real estate and market metrics pre-Brexit, immediately after the vote, post-Brexit, and will conclude with future projections encapsulating the investment recommendation.
Understanding the political landscape is crucial to formulating a reasonable prediction as to the future of the London market. Aside from research reports and articles, our main insights into the political direction of Brexit come from our recordings from meetings in March of 2017 with two high-ranking members of Parliament and one member of the House of Lords—all of whom are members of the Tory Party (the meetings being held under the condition of anonymity). The below analysis will be followed by a discussion of the economics of Brexit, primarily focusing on the economic risks and uncertainties which have emerged after the vote, and which currently exist today. Such risks include the UK losing its financial passporting rights, weakening GDP and currency value, the potential for a reduction in foreign direct investment (FDI), and the potential loss of the service sector in the city of London due to not being able to access the European Single Market.
The report will shift focus to analyzing three competing viewpoints of the direction of the London market based on recordings from interviews of stakeholders in the London real estate market. One being an executive of one of the largest REITs in the UK, another being the Global Head of Real Estate at a top asset management firm, and another being a director at a large property consulting firm. The report includes these differing “sub-theses” in order to try to make sense of the vast market uncertainties post-Brexit as well as to contrast their viewpoints with where the market is currently and with the report’s investment recommendation.
The remainder of the report will consist of the methods used for analyzing market trends including how the data was modeled in order to make the investment recommendation. The report will analyze real estate and market metrics pre-Brexit, immediately after the vote, post-Brexit, and will conclude with future projections encapsulating the investment recommendation.
ContributorsHorn, Jonathan (Co-author) / Sidi, Adam (Co-author) / Bonadurer, Werner (Thesis director) / McDaniel, Cara (Committee member) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-12
Description
Economists, political philosophers, and others have often characterized social preferences regarding inequality by imagining a hypothetical choice of distributions behind "a veil of ignorance". Recent behavioral economics work has shown that subjects care about equality of outcomes, and are willing to sacrifice, in experimental contexts, some amount of personal gain in order to achieve greater equality. We review some of this literature and then conduct an experiment of our own, comparing subjects' choices in two risky situations, one being a choice for a purely individualized lottery for themselves, and the other a choice among possible distributions to members of a randomly selected group. We find that choosing in the group situation makes subjects significantly more risk averse than when choosing an individual lottery. This supports the hypothesis that an additional preference for equality exists alongside ordinary risk aversion, and that in a hypothetical "veil of ignorance" scenario, such preferences may make subjects significantly more averse to unequal distributions of rewards than can be explained by risk aversion alone.
ContributorsTheisen, Alexander Scott (Co-author) / McMullin, Caitlin (Co-author) / Li, Marilyn (Co-author) / DeSerpa, Allan (Thesis director) / Schlee, Edward (Committee member) / Baldwin, Marjorie (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
Over the course of the next two years, the United Kingdom and the European Union will be participating in Brexit negotiations over the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union. This paper discusses in-depth the expected economic effects of Brexit. To satisfy the desires of those who voted to leave the European Union, the United Kingdom will leave the European Single Market, creating barriers to trade. In exchange, the long-term effects for the United Kingdom and the European Union are expected to be negative. Despite this, it appears that negative effects on British direct foreign investment have been overstated and the European Union may be able to benefit from a well-handled relocation of financial services inside the European Union. The paper also makes a few suggestions regarding Brexit negotiations, advising the United Kingdom to make concessions to European Union in areas such as contributions to the European Union budget for increased goodwill and greater access to European markets.
ContributorsBennett, Luke Andrew (Author) / Hill, John K. (Thesis director) / Mendez, Jose (Committee member) / W. P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
This paper examines the qualitative and quantitative effects of the 2008 financial crisis on the current landscape of the investment banking industry. We begin by reviewing what occurred during the financial crisis, including which banks took TARP money, which banks became bank holding companies, and significant mergers and acquisitions. We then examine the new regulations that were created in reaction to the crisis, including the Dodd-Frank Act. In particular, we focus on the Volcker Rule, which is a section of the act that prohibits proprietary trading and other risky activities at banks. Then we shift into a quantitative analysis of the changes that banks made from the years 2005-2016. To do this, we chose four banks to be representative of the industry: Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan, and Bank of America. We then analyze four metrics for each bank: revenue mix, value at risk, tangible common equity ratio, and debt to equity ratio. These provide methods for analyzing how banks have shifted their revenue centers to accommodate new regulations, as well as how these shifts have affected banks' risk levels and leverage. Our data show that all four banks that we observed shifted their revenue centers to flatter revenue areas, such as investment management, wealth management, and consumer banking operations. This was paired with fairly flat investment banking revenues across the board when controlling for overall market changes in the investment banking sector. Additionally, trading-focused banks significantly shifted their operations away from proprietary trading and higher risk activities. These changes resulted in lower value at risk measures for Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley with very minor increases for J.P. Morgan and Bank of America, although these two banks had low levels of absolute value at risk when compared to Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. All banks' tangible common equity ratios increased and debt to equity ratios decreased, indicating a safer investment for shareholders and lower leverage. We conclude by offering a forecast of our expectations for the future, particularly in light of a Trump presidency. We expect less regulation going forward and the potential reversal of the Volcker Rule. We believe that these changes would result in more revenue coming from trading and riskier strategies, increasing value at risk, decreasing tangible common equity ratios, and increasing debt to equity ratios. While we do expect less regulation and higher risk, we do not expect these banks to reach pre-crisis levels due to the significant amount of regulations that would be particularly difficult for the Trump administration to reverse.
ContributorsPatel, Aashay (Co-author) / Goulder, Gregory (Co-author) / Simonson, Mark (Thesis director) / Hertzel, Michael (Committee member) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
This paper examines infrastructure spending in a model economy. Infrastructure is subdivided into two types: one that makes future production more efficient, and another that decreases the risk of devastation to the future economy. We call the first type base infrastructure, and the second type risk-reducing infrastructure. Our model assumes that a single representative individual makes all the decisions within a society and optimizes their own total utility over the present and future. We then calibrate an aggregate economic, two-period model to identify the optimal allocation of today’s output into consumption, base infrastructure, and risk-reducing infrastructure. This model finds that many governments can make substantive improvements to the happiness of their citizens by investing significantly more into risk-reducing infrastructure.
ContributorsFink, Justin (Co-author) / Fuller, John "Jack" (Co-author) / Prescott, Edward (Thesis director) / Millington, Matthew (Committee member) / School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (Contributor, Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05