Revenue Manager Q & A: AMLI’s Rich Hughes, Part 1

Archstone’s Donald Davidoff is widely viewed as the leading pioneer of revenue management in the multifamily industry. But he’s also helped bring up a generation of revenue managers who now apply the science – and art – of revenue management across the apartment industry. Among them is Rich Hughes, revenue manager at Chicago-based AMLI Residential. While working with Davidoff at Archstone, Hughes helped fine tune what is now the Rainmaker Group’s LRO pricing solution.

To kick off our regular series of Revenue Manager Q & A interviews, we chatted with Hughes about the revenue management career path within multifamily, the adoption of yield management in the current environment and how revenue management principles are slowly but surely changing key metrics for the apartment industry. Check back for Part 2 of our interview, coming soon.

MultifamilyRevenue.com: Thanks for joining us, Rich. You worked in the hospitality industry before coming to revenue management in multifamily. Is that a typical career path? How do you become a revenue manager in multifamily today?

Rich Hughes: Typically, there are two paths. One is sort of the hospitality background, which is the side I come from, and the other is for the very “quant” heavy folks. They tend to come from operational research and industrial engineering. I’ve done a bit of that as well in a former life.

When I went to grad school at Cornell, I was looking at all the different paths in finance. I enjoy revenue management because it is fairly new as a science. It’s also applicable in lots of places, but has not yet been deployed on a widespread basis. And finally, revenue management is about making money, which of course gets us all excited.

MFR.com: How did you get involved in LRO?

Hughes: I was very fortunate to get to work with Donald Davidoff, who for my money is the pioneer of revenue management in the multifamily space.

What became LRO was initially a Manugistics’ product, and Donald worked there, specializing in the heavy quant models for different industries. When Archstone engaged Manugistics, and eventually bought the product from them, Donald came with it. I was fresh out of school, and had some ideas about revenue management and apartments, but had never really gotten to play with live wires.

We spent a lot of time in the later stages of development working on the nuances of the application. I was very fortunate to work with Donald and his team, and I learned a lot. I’m very thankful.

MFR.com: What revenue management solution do you use today?

We employ a proprietary solution that’s been developed in-house, known as Rent Cheque.

MFR.com: There’s been a lot of focus on how revenue management has behaved in the current environment. What are you seeing at AMLI?

Hughes: In general, we’ve seen good results.

But one of the bigger hurdles is the cultural side. You need buy-in from your people. They have to believe that the technology works.

That can be a challenge, especially in times like these. When people have been beaten up by low occupancy and low rent expectations for a couple years, it’s important to remind them that we’ve seen rents higher than this four years ago, and that we can get back there.

When you haven’t had strong occupancy for a while, and your occupancy finally starts coming back, people can become  fearful that their occupancy will fall away again if they start pushing rents and revenue growth to the bottom line. But that’s what the model is recommending. Sometimes, it just takes faith to follow it. It’s about being as bold on the upside as you were on the downside.

MFR.com: Let’s talk about occupancy in the multifamily industry. It’s possible to have 90 percent occupancy with strong rents that are right on the edge of sustainability, as well as 100 percent occupancy with lower rents that leave money on the table. Given the adoption of revenue management in the multifamily industry, and our ability to move the rent needle in a targeted way, is occupancy still the right metric to look at to gauge a property’s performance?

Hughes: Occupancy is a legacy metric.

In days of yore, I think occupancy was a fairly good proxy for how well you were doing. If you’re 20 percent full, you don’t have your prices right. And I think we would all agree that if you’re 100 percent full, you’re leaving money on the table.

It’s really just a question of how much you’ve missed by. In the airline business, they like their planes to take off with one empty seat, because then they know there was one customer that wouldn’t quite pay that amount. It lets them know they were on the verge of being just the right amount of expensive.

From our standpoint, occupancy is still much more powerful than straight rent, though, for an important reason. When a unit goes from empty to full, you’ve got that instant — and often very large — revenue lift. You don’t get that with incremental tactical pricing changes, as the airlines do.

However, for the long-term sustainability of your business, you also cannot grow occupancy to 130 percent, so the future of your business and revenue growth has to come from your rates. It’s really about finding the balance between the two.

MFR.com: In the hospitality industry, occupancy has become less important, and yield per available room has taken on more prominence as a leading metric. Will occupancy become less important in multifamily, as we get more mature with revenue management?

Hughes: Although we are certainly revenue manageable, there are some nuances to our situation that are different from other industries. The big one for us is the slow inventory cycle. You sign a lease for 12 months. The advantage to that is we don’t have the price volatility that you see in the hotel business, where you can go from full to empty in three days.

The apartment business is much more incremental and marginal. I think occupancy will always be a high-level metric that C-level executives look at. If you’re at 70 percent, you’ve got problems. Even if you’re getting huge premiums at that occupancy, you’ll never convince me that the marginal dollars you’re making on one or two leases will make up for 30 percent vacancy. The math will never work that way.

I would say that at low occupancy regimes, you know what your problem is. The interesting thing is when you get to the submarket average, or what you might deem a strong occupancy position, whether that be 92 percent, 93 percent, or higher. Then it’s a question of what incremental dollars we can make on our available leases, versus the opportunity cost of people not leasing those units. And that, of course, is the very exciting question that revenue management attempts to address.

MFR.com: Even though we’ve seen concrete results in the multifamily industry from the use of revenue management technology, in terms of adoption, we’re still in the high single or low double digits.  Why do we still have relatively low revenue management penetration in our industry, even though we’ve seen results at this point?

Hughes: First of all, we are a traditional industry. We are probably not the quickest to embrace change. There are a few reasons for that.

We can embed a rent roll, and be fairly stable in terms of operations. We don’t have very high transaction density, as you might see in retail or banking. So the utility of this technology – and this kind of thinking, frankly – may be less relevant for us than it is for other industries.

With regard to adoption, let’s not forget that there is an expense to having revenue management. There’s a cultural expense, a salary/payroll expense, and an expense for actually using and deploying the technology.

For the big players, the REITs primarily, that’s an expense that you can bear over lots of units. But our industry is massively fragmented. By far the biggest leaser is mom-and-pop. They own more than 80 percent of the rentable space, but with just a few units each. For them, the cost-benefit analysis may not make sense. It might be a “nice to have it” right now, but given the current economic environment, I’m probably not going to spend the money for something that I may not fully understand, and certainly don’t fully believe in, in terms of the faith I have in the technology.

If only 8 or 9 percent are using it, I’m fine with that, because that 8 or 9 percent are going to do very, very well.

Look for Part 2 of our Revenue Manager Q & A with AMLI’s Rich Hughes next week.