Oct 2 2014

Target considers investing in startups

After Target executive vice president Jeff Jones stepped off the stage during a conference in San Francisco this week, a group of would be vendors quickly swarmed the chief marketing officer.

As a company spokeswoman warily looked on, Jones politely listened to a deluge of pitches from suitors who swore their products and services could significantly improve Target’s business. One man even dragged along a bulky cardboard cutout.

Target generates about $2 billion in net cash a year so it makes perfect sense that people would want a piece of the action. But the nation’s second largest retailer is exploring new ways to invest its resources.

In an interview, Jones said Target is thinking about purchasing equity stakes in promising young companies in the United States. Such a move would no doubt pique the interest of the cash-hungry startups of Silicon Valley and the greater Bay Area.

Jones stressed Target has not launched anything yet. But the topic is certainly on the company’s mind.

“What we haven’t yet explored is what would it look for Target to take a stake in a company,” Jones said. “That could come in all different versions of seed funding. I just know when you look at the continuum of being a partner and acquirer, somewhere in the middle could be space for Target to invest in companies, to accelerate innovation.”

Target can certainly afford to make a few investments, Jones said. Whether the startups need $200,000 or $2 million in Series A or seed funding, “the cash the startups are using to build extraordinary innovations is not significant” compared to Target’s overall balance sheet, he said.

The company has already dipped its toe in the water. Target recently graduated the first six startups from its accelerator initiative in India. Target executives regularly eye startups in prominent programs like Techstars and Y Combinator, said Aaron Alt, senior vice president for business development.

“We realized that great ideas just don’t come from Target,” Alt said. “And startups are a great source of innovation.”

When comes to deal-making, Target has historically played it safe. Until recently, the retailer avoided mergers and acquisitions, preferring to grow on its own rather than purchase talent, technology or market share from other companies.

But over the past couple of years, Target has adopted a more open mind-set. In 2012, the retailer hired Alt, a former top executive at Sara Lee, where he oversaw the food giant’s acquisitions and joint ventures.

In 2013, Target embarked on a mini spending spree, acquiring Chef’s Catalog, Cooking.com and DermStore Beauty Group.

As retailers try to integrate brick-and-mortar stores with websites, mobile apps and social media, big box chains like Target and Walmart have established offices in Silicon Valley to scope out talent and potential deals.

Target, though, has ruled out a dedicated venture fund to back startups. Instead, the company likes to explore a range of relationships with companies, that may or may not include a financial investment.

Last fall, Target invited Cosmic Cart, which developed an online service that lets shoppers make purchases from multiple retailers, to work out of the retailer’s corporate headquarters in Minneapolis. Target liked Cosmic Cart’s technology enough to purchase a stake in the startup.

“The flexibility is intentional,” Alt said. “No one startup will solve every need and problem at Target.”

Thomas Lee is a San Francisco Chronicle columnist. On Dec. 9, St. Martin’s Press will publish “Rebuilding Empires,” his book on the future of big-box retailers in the digital age. E-mail: tlee@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @ByTomLee

Oct 1 2014

5 pros and cons of investing in Alibaba

Alibaba founder Jack Ma gives a thumbs-up ahead of the companys IPO this week. Photo: Reuters

Oct 1 2014

10 Things You Need to Know About Investing in Art

Berlin played host to the third edition of ArtFi, the Fine Art and Finance Conference, on Wednesday, welcoming influential panelists and art world insiders to the Tagespiegel newspaper headquarters for a day of high-tempo exchange on the latest trends and developments in the art market. Coinciding with Berlin Art Week, the conference’s focus on art and money turned more than a few heads in the German capital, which is legendary for its extremely low concentration of collectors. But speakers such as Art Economics’ Clare McAndrew, the Armory Show’s Noah Horowitz, Art Stage Singapore’s Lorenzo Rudolf, and the Fine Art Fund’s Philip Hoffman, were greeted by a hall packed with international individuals hungry to get the inside scoop on the nexus of money and art. For those that couldn’t attend, artnet News boiled the day down to 10 must-know bits of intel for investing in art.

1. Key players are bullish on art market performance in 2014.
While Clare McAndrew was hesitant to make any specific projections on the market in 2014 in her opening remarks for the conference, she expressed confidence that this year would see continued growth across the art market, over the €47.42 billion in market value for 2013 (TEFAF Art Market Report Says 2013 Best Year on Record Since 2007, With Market Outlook Bullish). That likely means that we’ll see the market eclipse its pre-recession level of €48.07 billion from 2007 this year. McAndrew noted that some sectors of the auction market are up 20 percent over 2013, according to half-year reports, due to a strong spring auction season. Nevertheless, she cautioned that much of the market’s worth and relative performance won’t be decided until the fall sales wrap up in December. 

2. Business is best in New York, but that doesn’t mean you have to move there.
McAndrew also noted that 80 percent of sales over $10 million are occurring in New York, a city which continues to dominate the global art market, across the upper-end of the price spectrum. Aamp;F Markets’ Pierre Naquin explained in a later break-out session that much of this market dominance could be ascribed to favorable taxation terms in the United States in comparison to other major art markets. Naquin and McAndrew both agreed that the US remains one of if not the art market’s most business-friendly locales.  Thus, a not-insignificant portion of what’s calculated as the US market is in fact art that is imported to the country for sale. Naquin explained that due to art’s relative portability compared to other hard assets, collectors and dealers are increasingly exploring the most favorable sales conditions internationally—something that has accounted for a sizable downturn in the European art market’s growth—especially due to the Artist Resale Right (ARR) (UK Art Dealers Are Dodging Artist Resale Rights). McAndrew even referenced a sale in which a client determined it would be cheaper to crate and ship a work to the US rather than sell it in Europe, due to the ARR.

3. China remains a solid medium-term bet.
The Chinese market may have dropped 30 percent in 2012, but for those who take a slightly longer view, there continues to be much to win. The Chinese upper-middle class is expected to hit 55 percent for all urban populations by 2022, something which McAndrew cited as a foundation on which solid, long-term growth for the country’s art sector could be built. Art fund manager and panelist Serge Tiroche has bet big on such projections for emerging economies with Art Vantage PCC. The fund currently has managed assets in the eight-figure range and is based solely on a privately held collection of contemporary art from emerging markets.

4. You don’t have to have billions to get into the game, but it helps.
Throughout the conference, panelists continued to reference the fact that it’s the extreme upper-end of the market that is seeing the highest levels of growth. Armory Show director Noah Horowitz noted the increasing death of mid-size galleries (Are Mid-Size Galleries Disappearing, And Who’s To Blame?). And all four participants on this reporter’s panel Art as a Financial Asset—Philip Hoffman, Shirin Kranz, Naquin, and Tiroche—more or less agreed that high-end contemporary is the place to put your money right now for the highest return when investing in art. But, McAndrew also noted that only 0.5 percent of the market is located above $1 million, so there’s plenty of the room for relatively less well-heeled players to get into the game.

5. Interest in art funds continues to grow.
Fine Art Fund Group founder Philip Hoffman reported that interest in the securitized side of the art investment field continues to expand at a rapid pace. The group is in the process of closing out its latest, $200 million fund. That will bring their total managed assets upwards of $500 million. He reported that they are currently purchasing about $4 million in art per week and selling at favorable returns, with only approximately two percent of sales resulting in a loss. Perhaps surprisingly, Hoffman claimed that the greatest of those losses has been with the ever-buzzy Chinese contemporary market.

6. Put a damper on your passion for art when making purchases.
Despite Hoffman’s success with the Fine Art Fund itself, he shared a cautionary tale from the art advisory side of the group’s business: a collector who had recently spent €12 million on a group of artworks that, according to Hoffman’s experts’ calculus are worth no more than €7 million.  When passion for an artwork or artist gets in the way of strategic analysis of acceptable purchase price ranges, it can completely tip the scale from a moderate return on investment to a devastating loss.

7. But, don’t think that passionate collecting and achieving moderate returns are mutually exclusive.
That said, private collectors can afford to spend slightly more on single works of art than an art fund might. So, with a bit of discipline, the right advice, and if all else fails, a trusty companion to rip the bidding paddle out of your hand, you could find yourself a member of what collector Sylvain LÃvy said is a lucky sub-set of collectors who both get to enrich their lives with fantastic artworks and make some money in the process. Just don’t think you’ll end up the most popular collector in town. Berlin gallerist Johann König took LÃvy to task when the panel was opened up to questions from the audience, regarding the collector’s practice of selling 15 percent of his and his wife’s collection every year.

8. Proliferation of art lending set to add further liquidity to European market.
Art lending has become increasingly commonplace in the US thanks to less regulation on how the collateralized piece of art is held. Would-be European art loan providers have to take physical possession of the artworks being lent against, which provides increased challenges and transaction costs. But that hasn’t stopped Berlin’s PrivatBank from being Germany’s first to enter the field. The bank’s Shirin Kranz, formerly of Phillips, said that the recently-opened sector allows galleries, collectors, and even artists to pull some liquidity out of their holdings without selling the works, whether as a bridge loan ahead of a sale or on a more long-term credit line basis. Considering the slump in the European market, it’s liquidity that could help bolster the market’s future.

9. Art exchanges and derivatized art investment products are coming but remain a distant prospect.
But what about taking art as an asset class to the next level? Can funds or other financial services firms create compelling collateralized investment products out of art? According to Pierre Naquin, yes, but we’re in the very early days. Naquin started the Art Exchange in 2011, which allowed investors to purchase and trade shares of various artworks. Naquin says the exchange never really took off. But he was optimistic about the ways in which art analytics indices could be derivatized in the medium-term as banks and private investors alike become increasingly comfortable with art as a part of their portfolios.

10. Greater transparency in the art world is going to benefit everyone.
It’s no secret that the art world is incredibly opaque—particularly on the primary market. In ArtFi’s final panel, the Wall Street Journal‘s Mary Lane referenced a recent article in which she unpacked the rise of millennial artists like Hugh Scott-Douglas, Parker Ito, and David Ostrowski and just how thick a stone wall was placed in front of her when attempting to speak to some of the artists’ dealers about their market values. But greater transparency in the art market is urgently needed. Transparency and knowledge is only going to benefit everyone, artnet’s own Cornell DeWitt quipped later in the panel. It’s either us in the art media or it’s going to be the Feds.

Follow @AlexanderForbes on Twitter.

Sep 30 2014

3 Trends Could Affect These Real Estate Investments

Real estate investment trusts, or REITs, have been around for more than half of a century, but
given fundamental changes in the national economy, you have to wonder if REITs
can evolve and catch the latest trends.

REITs were first
authorized under the Cigar Excise Tax Extension of 1960. In basic terms, there are equity REITs, which own large properties such as malls, office
towers and apartment projects and get their money largely from rent, and mortgage REITs, which hold mortgages and
mortgage-backed securities. Most REITs are equity REITs.

REITs are shareholder-owned. As with any investment, share
values can rise and fall. Unlike listed companies, however, special rules apply
to REITs. According to the National Association of Real Estate Investment
Trusts, “at least 75 percent of a REIT’s total assets must be invested in real
estate; and at least 75 percent of gross income must be derived from real
estate sources, such as rents from real property, interest from mortgages on
real property or sales of real estate investments. REITs also must be widely
held, with more than 100 shareholders and no fewer than five individuals owning
more than 50 percent of their stock.”

What REITs really do is give small investors the chance to
own big real estate properties, properties with economies-of-scale normally
off limits to all but the rich and famous. The catch is that the traditional
assumptions which power such investments are now in flux and so one has to ask:
Can REITs evolve with the times?

Shopping Malls.Depending on who you ask, shopping malls are either on the
way out or on the verge of a massive rebirth. In either case there will be
fewer of them. According toJeff
Macke, host of Yahoo! Finances Breakout, and a former hedge fund manager, “a decade ago there were more than
1,100 enclosed shopping malls in the US Since then, more than 400 have either been repurposed or closed outright.” Macke estimates that in 20 years the number
of shopping malls will be halved.

For REITs, the challenge is obvious: If malls are closed and
abandoned, then where are the rents? Or, are malls closures a good thing, a chance
to create new revenue streams by building town centers, community colleges,
mixed-use properties and other hubs?

Online shopping. Today, online revenues represent about 6.5 percent of all
retail sales, and for an example, its hard to miss Amazon, a company which racked up nearly $75 billion in online sales in 2013. In theory, its money that may have once have gone to malls and strip centers, money those malls certainly could have used. However, blaming the demise of shopping malls on online shopping alone is not right.

First, the real issue represented by online retailers is
choice. You can go to the mall today, see and touch whatever you want, then
check prices with a cell phone (a practice known as showrooming) and have items delivered to your front door – often
with no charges for shipping or taxes. Or, you can simply skip the mall, save gas and avoid parking hassles by shopping online.

For REITs, the question is where the new opportunities
created by online commerce can be found, an area sure to grow. For instance, if
REITs can own malls then why not fulfillment centers and server farms? Maybe
the property mix should be changed to include more strip centers, places where
people can pick up both milk and online orders. Or perhaps the highest and
best use of todays shopping centers is not as a mall at all, but as a
something different, such as a mixed-use development.

Second, a bigger problem than eCommerce is the changing
retail mix. Over time, many department stores have disappeared – think of
Filenes, Bullocks, Thalhimers, Strawbridges, Hechts, Woodward amp;
Lothrop, I Magnin, Wanamaker, Jordan March, Marshall Fields, Daytons, Sterns,
Garfinklels and J.M Fields. These stores had enormous footprints and were
crucial anchors for many malls but as they have merged or gone out of business, the necessity for such vast spaces has declined.

Even on a smaller level, the squeeze is on. Office Depot and
Office Max have merged. Radio Shack is closing more than 1,000 outlets and
Staples has announced plans to close 225 stores.

Mall foot traffic is down nearly 15 percent during last years holiday shopping season, according to the research firm ShopperTrak, and you can see the results in food courts: Sbarro, the pizza
chain, is closing 155 outlets while Hot Dog on a Stick filed for bankruptcy in
February and was sold for $12.2 million in August. Translation: If stores close, theres less reason to go to a mall, and with less foot traffic, food courts feel
the impact.

For REITs, online shopping presents a host of unknowns. Its here,
it has wallop and yet it also represents potential opportunities. How can local
retail outlets best harness the Internet? We dont know yet, in part because
the retail arena remains in flux.

Telecommuting. There was a space for “work” and a space
for “home,” but now the two are increasingly intertwined. More employees bring their work home while remote homeworkers may never see the inside of an office tower. In both cases, the idea of
a 9-to-5 workday has become both quaint and outmoded: curiosities from a
vanishing era.

What we know about telecommuting is that the use of
traditional workspace is eroding. The United States Census Bureau tell us that
in 1997, 9.2 million people out of 132 million in the workforce labored from
home at least one day a week. By 2010, we had 142 million people in the
workforce and 13.4 million worked from home at least some of the time.

In other words, over a period of 13 years, the workforce
increased by 10 million people. Of this increase, 42 percent are
not going to an office park or downtown tower on a daily basis, if at all. In
fact, its increasingly routine for remote workers to have never met co-workers
or visited company offices, people and places who may be thousands of miles
away.

Todays office space has a valuation of roughly $1.25
trillion nationwide, so even small changes can represent big dollar shifts. According toTim Wang, director and head of investment research for Clarion Partners, an investment firm,in article for CoStar Group, a producer of real estate research, the ideal amount of space set aside per employee has gone from 250
square feet to 195 square feet. The implications are enormous.

First, fewer
office workers also mean fewer commuters and less road wear, which is positive for many metro areas and something local governments have reason to
encourage. Second, with shared space and remote workers, companies need less
commercial footage.

What are office-owning REITs to do in the face of such
trends? Should they transform existing structures with good locations into residential
properties? Should they upgrade office spaces for greater efficiency? Could they sell off office
assets and invest funds elsewhere? Theres no one answer and certainly theres
no universally “right” response.

In the end, REITs are tied to big real estate and big real
estate is in a period of transition. Its a moment of opportunity, but what is
the opportunity? Time will tell.

Peter Miller is a
nationally-syndicated real estate columnist and the author of six books
published originally by Harper amp; Row. He blogs regularly at OurBroker.com. He is also a contributor to Auction.com.

Sep 30 2014

Out-of-town buyers shocked by local real estate practices

In the Houston area, real estate is developed differently than other places. As a consequence, when people move from other areas of the country, they are often shocked by the effects of unregulated construction.

To be a smart buyer in Montgomery County, just north of Houston, you need to become familiar with a few terms and the way they affect your purchase.

Glossary of Terms

o Unrestricted Property: Many newcomers get excited about escaping the regulations of their old hometown. The idea of having virtually complete control over how they use their property sounds exciting freedom. What they must keep in mind is all the people surrounding you have the same freedoms. You may not like how your neighbor maintains or decorates their property.

Although a property is without restrictions, there are still regulations set out by the county that include water wells, septic systems and general development. You will want to contact the permitting department of the county before making any major changes to your property. www.co.Montgomery.tx.us

o Municipal Utility Districts: The state of Texas authorizes the creation of utility districts to provide water, sewer, drainage and other services within the boundaries of a MUD. Payment for those services is generally based on the property value and they perform largely like other property taxes. Sometimes a MUD will be involved in conservation, firefighting, solid waste collection and disposal, among other things. The MUD rates vary greatly from one community to the next. Always no your total tax rate – including the MUD rate when you compare properties.

o Independent School Districts: Most school districts in the greater Houston area are considered “Independent.” What that means is the school operations, taxes and controls are not in the hands of any municipality. Just because a home is located in a city, it does not necessarily mean the school district boundaries follow the same parameters. For example, most (not all) of The Woodlands is in the Conroe ISD. Some portions are either in the Magnolia ISD or Tomball ISD. Since both taxes and school administration varies from one district to the next, you will want to be familiar with the ones in areas you consider.

Who is in Control of Development?

Zoning, as it is known in other areas, is nonexistent in our community. Instead, each municipality and subdivision has the ability to set guidelines and controls concerning land use.

Although they have no zoning ordinance, the city of Conroe has adopted a plan for residential and commercial developments. You can find more information on their website: www.CityofConroe.org. Look for the public works department to find more information or call the city planner office at 936-522-3098.

The Woodlands is highly regulated by deed restrictions. As a master-planned community, it is important to the residents of The Woodlands to live in a carefully designed neighborhood. You can learn more about those controls on the township website: www.TheWoodlandsTownship-tx.gov or call 281-210-3800.

Sep 30 2014

Allston sale highlights hot city housing market

In the latest measure of Bostons white hot real estate market, a cluster of apartment buildings in Allston is being sold for one of the highest prices ever for a multifamily property in the city.

Three buildings in the Green District off Commonwealth Avenue are being purchased by National Development of Newton for nearly $150 million. The seller is The Mount Vernon Co., a Boston developer that built the complex over the last several years.

Continue reading below

Sep 29 2014

Sochi Investment Forum: U.S., Japan and France investing in Sverdlovsk Region …

The Sverdlovsk Region is attracting investors thanks to its special economic zones. One of these, Titanovaya Dolina, is relatively young: It was founded only in 2012. Now the project is being actively developed, and it has attracted its first American investors, with more from Japan and France also ready to join. Titanovaya Dolinas General Director Artemy Kyzlasov told RBTH how the US and EU sanctions have affected the project.

Sep 29 2014

Iowa’s Top Workplaces: REMAX Real Estate Concepts

Agents with REMAX Real Estate Concepts pay a flat annual fee to the brokerage rather than paying a portion of the sales commissions, as many real estate companies would have them do.

The arrangement gives agents an independence that makes the Des Moines-area real estate company one of Iowas top workplaces.

Here, you really have the freedom to be your own CEO, said Matt Mauro, a broker who has been with the company for eight years.

Robb Spearman founded REMAX Real Estate Concepts in 2000. Today, the company has seven offices with 105 agents and 8 staff members.

The company sells 18 percent of the homes in Des Moines and 11 percent of those in central Iowa, according to the Des Moines Area Association of Realtors.

While its not the largest real estate brokerage in central Iowa, Spearman said REMAX Real Estate Concepts punches above its weight class. He said agents in the Des Moines Area Association of Realtors sell an average of six homes a year, and agents in REMAXs nationwide brokerage sell an average of 17 homes. Agents with REMAX Real Estate Concepts, meanwhile, sell an average of 26 homes per year, he said.

Whats the secret?

Our agents are not coming into real estate as just a job, Spearman said. They are each building their own business.

While agents are given independence to be their own boss, the company also fosters a sense of teamwork, employees said.

This is probably the only place Ive worked where no one has a Whats in it for me? attitude, said Marcy Ashley, a transaction coordinator in the companys West Des Moines office. Its a whats in it for us attitude. That makes it easy to get up in the morning and come to work.

Spearman said its important to build a positive environment for agents and employees to succeed. The company holds monthly breakfasts as well as training sessions. Agents can use any of the companys offices around the metro as their own.

What Spearman looks for in an agent is an entrepreneurial spirit.

They have control over their business, he said. Theyre go-getters, self-starters.

Agents with the company said it doesnt hurt to have the backing of REMAXs national brand. The company, which uses a franchise system, says it has more than 90,000 agents in 90 countries.

Ryan Rivera, a broker with the companys Grimes office, said REMAX has embraced technology like paperless offices and the ability to sign paperwork on tablets, or smartphones that make doing business more convenient.

The leadership, the management, theyre forward-thinking and are in the trenches every day, so they know whats going on.

Lance Hanson, a broker who oversees agents at the companys Altoona office, explained the companys success in simple terms.

We have great agents — thats the secret, he said.

REMAX Real Estate Concepts

Location: West Des Moines

Founded: 2000

Ownership: Private

Real estate agents: 105

Employees: 8

Top executive: Robb Spearman, broker/owner

Qamp;A with Robb Spearman, owner/broker of REMAX Real Estate Concepts:

Q. Whats one benefit or perk you offer that makes your workplace stand out?

A. Were always trying to innovate. We also have monthly breakfasts for our employees and individualized training and coaching.

Q. Whats your biggest challenge in attracting qualified candidates?

A. For agents, the biggest challenge is finding someone who is fully engaged, a self-starter and entrepreneur who really wants to grow and do this professionally.

As far as staff, its finding employees who really have a helping attitude and want to go above and beyond for our agents.

Q. How do you show employees they are part of something meaningful?

A. When a person buys or sells a home, its typically the largest financial decision theyll ever make. Our agents really care about our clients and want to make sure they make the right decision.

Q. How do you show employees that this workplace is going in the right direction?

A. We make it fun. We make it vibrant. We dont attract people who are very negative or who arent team players. Drama and negative attitudes, we stay away from all that. In the end, people really just have to enjoy what theyre doing.

Sep 29 2014

American real estate’s future: Older, poorer, and more diverse

Over the past 10 years, we have witnessed an unprecedented rise in real estate prices, a housing crash, the near-total freeze of lending for residential real estate, and a recovery in housing prices that occurred almost as quickly as the preceding crash.

But the real real estate revolution has yet to happen. At the Bipartisan Policy Committees Housing Summit in Washington this week, everyone from policy makers, to home builders, to academics are concerned about one thing: Americas coming demographic transformation and how it will change housing in the coming years. Here are three major factors that will fundamentally reshape American real estate:

1. The single largest group of Americans is 23 years old: This should be great news for the economy and the housing industry. After all, these folks are just getting their careers started and, in a couple years, most will settle down and start families. In years past, this impending demographic wave would have home builders and real estate agents salivating for all the business that it would stir up.

But this generation of 23-year-olds is different than any weve seen since World War II. While these young adults still want to own a home, there is little certainty that they can afford it. As Andrew Jennings, chief analytics officer at FICO, pointed out, 3 in 10 people with student loans end up defaulting on a loan, be it credit card, a mortgage, or some other liability. While the media may overstate the magnitude of the student debt problem, this fact shows why banks are wary of giving out mortgages to todays 20-somethings, and why the real estate market might suffer for it.

2. This group of young Americans is more diverse than any previous generation: Not only is the generation now coming of age more in debt than those that preceded it, but other factors make it less likely that they will be as inclined to own a home as their parents, according to demographer Dowell Myers of the University of Southern California.

Myers argues that foreign born Americans are less likely to be homeowners than the native born, and when they do buy they tend to buy at an older age. The Millennial generation is far more diverse and more likely to be foreign born than any previous generation. On top of that, Millennials are growing up in an age of increasing income inequality in which many members of the generation can expect stagnant wages. Myers argues will put a damper on homeownership rates over the next 20 years.

3. The second biggest age group in America is 54 years old. But the housing market wont be shaped by youth alone. The US is aging, with baby boomers making up a slightly smaller share of the population than their Millennial children. Over the next 20 years, baby boomers will turn into the largest and wealthiest generation of senior citizens the nation has ever seen. What sort of housing they demand and can afford will have a powerful effect on the housing market.

Already, were seeing an explosion in the number of age-restricted developments. According to the National Association of Homebuilders, the number of these developments under construction doubled between 2012 and 2013. As seniors look for smaller homes in communities with people similar to them, and as their children move towards more urban and walkable areas, that could have a big effect on more traditional suburbs, and the value of suburban homes.

Sep 28 2014

Personal Finance: Use 401(k) to pay down mortgage?

Personal Finance: Use 401(k) to pay down mortgage?

Veteran personal finance journalist Robert Powell answers your questions for USA WEEKEND