Methodology
on 2013 data, the Self Storage Demand Study - 2013 Edition, avail- able through the Self Storage Association on its website, offers expanded information that includes historical comparisons from previous studies.
Self Storage Association Methodology The Self Storage Association (SSA) commissioned the consulting firm, National Analysts Worldwide, to conduct the first-ever demand study of the self-storage market in 2004, which was published as the Self Storage Demand Study - 2005 Edition. The stated purpose of the study was to paint a portrait of who uses self-storage, how, and why and— most importantly—to project future demand. The study was repeated with only minor changes two years later with the results published in Self Storage Demand Study - 2007 Edition. No demand studies were conducted between 2008 and 2012. The study was conducted a third time—again, with only minor changes from the 2007 study—early in 2013. This data presents the results of the Self Storage Demand Study - 2013 Edition. A key feature of the original 2005 study was the identification of
consumer and business renter segments. Using the information that was gathered in the 2005 survey, the SSA defined these segments based on the rental behaviors and characteristics of different groups of self-storage users. Four specific segments of consumers were iden- tified: temporary storage users, long-term renters, military, and students. Additionally, the SSA identified two specific segments of business us- ers: general and premium business renters. Because these segments have different usage characteristics and requirements, they play an important role in determining future demand for various types of storage. The segments were again identified and profiled in the 2007 Self Storage Demand Study as well as in the most recent study. All three demand studies used an online survey of consumers
and businesses. The first step was to gauge the incidence self-stor- age rentals in the general household and business population. For the 2013 study, more than 22,000 households and businesses were contacted and asked if they currently or recently rented a self-stor- age unit, or planned to in the next year. Those answering yes were then administered an in-depth survey about their self-storage rental needs, uses, and future plans. The in-depth survey was adminis¬tered to 1,440 households and 459 businesses. That information was then analyzed and is presented in the most recent report. A note on statistical significance: self-storage penetration esti-
mates are based on the larger number of households and businesses screened; whereas, survey results are based on the number complet- ing the in-depth survey. Margins of error at 95 percent confidence level are as follows:
• Consumer self-storage penetration: ± 1% • Consumer self-storage survey data: ± 3% • Business self-storage penetration: ± 2% • Business self-storage survey data: ± 5%
These margins are somewhat larger for sub-analyses of segments,
regions, etc., depending on sample size. ©2013 Self Storage Association
REIS Self-Storage Methodology For decades, Reis has been providing owners, developers, lenders, and investors with trusted information about com- mercial real estate markets. Applying a “bottom-up,” facility, and property-level approach to gathering data and devel- oping market and submarket analytics, Reis develops trends and forecasts for key metrics such as rents and vacancies. With 30 years of experience covering the multifamily, office, retail, and industrial sectors of commercial real estate, in 2012 Reis initiated coverage of the Self-Storage sector. Cur- rently, Reis publishes historical trends and forecasts on 50 Metropolitan areas and 279 underlying submarkets.
All self-storage facilities are mapped into the appropriate metropolitan area and submarket by Reis based on proprietary definitions,
which take into account natural, manmade, and economic boundaries.
As a function of its surveillance of the self-storage market,
Reis has assembled an unprecedented database of informa- tion, built upon quarterly updated observations of roughly 10,000 facilities across the U.S. Reis’s Self Storage data base represents all tiers of the market, with performance data on REITs, mid-sized firms, and smaller operators. Reis gathers data via a combination of telephonic sur-
veys, direct data feeds from REIT systems, and data submis- sions from owners of 10+ facilities. Specifically, Reis per- forms telephone surveys of storage facilities in 50 primary metropolitan areas across the United States. The Reis sur- vey team collects data on a variety of data points includ- ing facility size and unit mixes, total occupancy, and rents for climate-controlled and non-climate-controlled units in each facility. This is supplemented by data sent to us directly by facilities managed by members of the Large Operators Council and some of the largest self-storage REITs in the country. All self-storage facilities are mapped into the appropriate
metropolitan area and submarket by Reis based on proprie- tary definitions, which take into account natural, manmade, and economic boundaries. The facility data is compiled in a database that is reviewed by our quality assurance staff daily, with comparative analyses performed versus histori- cal surveys, market ranges, and across unit types. During each publication run, the facility data is then
aggregated into national, regional, metro and submarket- level aggregations for the purpose of historical trend gen- eration. For our market forecasts, Reis utilizes a proprietary econometric forecasting model, which takes into account economic and demographic projections along with our re- search on the near-term pipeline of new construction proj- ects. All data that is presented in the 2015 Almanac is based upon Q2 2014 observations.
2015 Self-Storage Almanac 29
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132
