TIMBER · L1

pending approval

timber-16-5a10906e · seed timber-16 · LinkedIn: TEXT_ONLY · Instagram: CAROUSEL

Instagram 1080×1350 · CAROUSEL · 5 frames

LinkedIn text only

Text-only post. No card ships on LinkedIn.

Facebook 1080×1080 · CAROUSEL · 5 frames

Status history

Generated · batch 5a10906eOct 12, 6:10 AM

LinkedIn caption

Mass timber isn't a construction method right now.
It is a financing category, and private capital hasn't agreed to treat it like one yet.

Here is what most developers don't ask until it's too late:
Is this deal viable because the project is good, or because a public program is carrying the lender's risk?

Those are two completely different businesses.

The mass timber pipeline looks healthy from the outside.
Government-backed housing. Public institutions. Grant-supported civic work.
Real projects. Real momentum.

Pull back the capital stack and a quieter truth shows up:
purely private mass timber deals still struggle to get conventional financing closed.

Lenders who will happily underwrite a steel or concrete pro forma will pause, re-trade terms, or simply pass when timber shows up on the cover sheet.
Not because the building performs worse.
Because their credit committees haven't built a comp set yet.

Mass timber is not a structural system. It is a lender-education problem dressed in beautiful wood.

The invisible mistake: entering pre-development on a private deal, spending on design and permitting, and only discovering the capital markets gap when the loan application lands on a desk.

That gap is not unbridgeable. But it takes a different conversation, earlier, with different people.

Which is a harder financing gap to close in 2025: the lender who won't touch mass timber at all, or the lender who says yes in term sheet and re-trades at commitment?

#MassTimber #ConstructionFinance #RealEstateDevelopment

Facebook captionInstagram caption

Most private mass timber deals hit a wall at the lender's desk, not the permit counter.

The pipeline looks strong from the outside. Lots of projects. Lots of square footage. But a huge slice of it is riding public financing, housing programs, or institutional support.

Take that away and conventional private capital still treats timber differently than steel or concrete. Not because the building is riskier. Because lenders don't have a comp set yet and their credit committees want precedent before they commit.

The developer who assumes private money is ready for timber the same way it's ready for a concrete podium is going to find out the hard way, usually after spending real money on design and permitting.

Know which market your deal is actually in before you get to that desk.

Is the harder lender problem in 2025 the one who won't touch timber at all, or the one who says yes on a term sheet and re-trades at commitment?

#MassTimber #ConstructionFinance #TimberDevelopment #RealEstateDevelopment

Regenerate

status: pending approval