September 29, 2026 - US Business News

Self-Storage Recovery Timelines Hinge on Submarket Supply, Not Metro Headlines

US Business News Staff on September 29, 2026

Recovery in self-storage markets depends less on which metro an investor is watching than on which submarket within that metro has reached supply equilibrium, according to Tom de Jong, Executive Vice President at Colliers.

North Las Vegas and the Value of Precise Market Labels

De Jong points to North Las Vegas as an instructive example. Rents in that corridor moved from roughly $1.80 per square foot to the 1.30 range, and de Jong says many pockets may now sit at or below $1.00. Asked whether rents could realistically return to $1.80, he was candid about the timeline: “I don’t know if they get back to that level anytime soon.”

That adjustment is not evenly distributed across a metro. When investors group Phoenix, Austin, North Las Vegas, and parts of Florida together under a single “oversupplied” label, they can miss that individual submarkets within those same metros may already be stabilizing. The distinction directly informs sharper underwriting.

Supply Pipeline as the Primary Recovery Indicator

De Jong is direct about which leading indicator matters most when evaluating a repositioning market: new supply. “The sub-markets where construction slows down or new supply stops being delivered, those sub-markets will recover first,” he says. He considers this signal more reliable than occupancy trends or absorption rates alone, because those lagging metrics confirm what the supply pipeline already predicted.

For smaller markets, the opportunity is amplified. “The smaller the market, the more impactful supply will be,” de Jong says. In a tertiary market, a single new facility can move rents and occupancy in ways that would barely register in a major metro. That asymmetry means investors underwriting secondary and tertiary deals can gain an edge by extending their supply analysis further out in time and geography than they would in a core market.

New supply also directly shapes rent growth assumptions. When additional facilities are entering a market, de Jong says buyers are best served by holding rates flat for the first three or so years while that supply is absorbed, rather than projecting rent increases.

The Three-Mile Submarket Consideration

The self-storage industry conventionally uses a three-mile radius as the standard submarket boundary. De Jong argues that in high-supply markets, a closer look pays off.

If two properties sit 3.2 miles apart, their three-mile competitive circles overlap, meaning each property draws from the same pool of potential customers, even if a standard submarket analysis would treat them as non-competing. “You have to look much more carefully and go much further out in markets where there’s new supply risk,” de Jong says. A deal that appears to sit in a clean submarket may face more competitive pressure than the standard radius suggests, and recognizing that early leads to stronger decisions.

In markets where new supply is still entering, this factor compounds. Investors who stress-test for overlapping competitive radii, rather than relying on standard three-mile analysis alone, position themselves to price risk to their projected rents and occupancy accurately.

Population Growth and Housing as the Long-Term Variable

Beyond supply pipeline analysis, de Jong points to residential housing strength as the ultimate determinant of which markets recover fastest. Self-storage demand is closely tied to household formation, moves, and life transitions, all driven by housing activity. “The biggest hurdle is the housing market,” he says. “Which market will have the best housing market recovery? That’s probably the market that does the best overall.”

Las Vegas, for example, has land available for residential growth, which de Jong sees as a promising long-term tailwind. Population growth and housing recovery build steadily, curing oversupply over time and setting the foundation for durable demand.

High-Barrier Markets and Where Capital Is Moving

Markets where new construction is difficult continue to outperform. De Jong says San Francisco is doing “extremely well,” Seattle is performing well as a high-barrier market, and Boston remains strong. Los Angeles is performing reasonably well, with recent new supply and demographic shifts shaping a measured outlook.

Chicago has been a welcome surprise. De Jong says high property taxes, particularly in the city itself, kept many investors cautious for years, and rents there are now performing well.

Meanwhile, capital that once concentrated in top-tier markets is opening opportunities for smaller investors in secondary and tertiary locations. Large institutional buyers are active in core markets like Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area. Second-tier capital has moved into secondary and tertiary markets, and smaller investors have gone further still. They are finding attractive returns in places like Cheyenne, Wyoming; Des Moines, Iowa; Boulder, Colorado; Santa Fe, New Mexico; and Tucson, Arizona, as well as markets with similar demographic profiles.

De Jong also notes growing interest in international markets. Canada has become much more active, with Public Storage making a significant push there. He sees increased activity in Brazil, Dubai, and European countries broadly. The U.S. has roughly 60,000 self-storage facilities, a mature market that makes less crowded international markets increasingly attractive to operators looking for growth.

Portfolio Acquisitions as an Alternative to Development

De Jong says one trend he is watching closely is the shift from building to buying. Large developers with significant capital commitments have pivoted toward acquiring existing portfolios because, in some cases, they can buy at or below replacement cost. “It’s cheaper for them to buy right now than it is to build,” de Jong says. For investors evaluating opportunities, that dynamic reinforces the submarket-level discipline de Jong advocates: the best acquisition opportunities sit in specific corridors where supply has reached equilibrium.

About Tom de Jong: Tom de Jong is Executive Vice President at Colliers and Founding Principal of the De Jong Self Storage Team. With 19 years at Colliers, a $2B+ transaction record across 32 states, and an SIOR designation, he is one of the most recognized specialists in self-storage brokerage and investment advisory in the United States.

This article is based on information provided by the expert source cited above. It is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, or real estate advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult qualified professionals before making any real estate or financial decisions.

Global Bond Yields Rise as U.S. Treasury Rates Top 5%

US Business News Staff 2 on September 29, 2026

Global bond yields have risen sharply across major economies, with the U.S. 10-year Treasury yield moving above 5% as inflation and borrowing pressures remain elevated. The move is affecting government financing costs and broader financial conditions, giving businesses and financial professionals a fresh measure of the changing cost of capital.

Key Takeaways

Global government bond yields have risen across several major economies.
The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield moved above 5%, its highest level since 2007.
Higher energy costs and inflation expectations are contributing to pressure on yields.
Government borrowing requirements and investment demand are adding to financing pressures.
Rising sovereign yields can influence borrowing costs across the broader economy.

Global Bond Yields Rise Across Major Economies

Global government bond markets have come under renewed pressure, with yields rising across the United States, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Australia. Two-year U.S. Treasury yields have risen nearly 60 basis points during September, marking their sharpest monthly increase since early 2023.

Japan’s government bond yields have also remained near multi-decade highs. The broad move has pushed borrowing costs higher across several major developed economies and increased volatility in government debt markets.

The U.S. Treasury market remains a central part of the move. The 10-year Treasury yield rose above 5%, reaching its highest level since 2007. The increase places a widely followed benchmark for global borrowing costs at levels last seen before the global financial crisis.

The ICE BofA MOVE Index, which measures volatility in the U.S. Treasury market, has increased about 30% during September. The rise indicates that the adjustment in government bond markets has been accompanied by greater price volatility.

The increase in yields has occurred alongside higher energy prices, persistent inflation concerns and stronger economic activity linked in part to investment in artificial intelligence infrastructure.

U.S. Treasury Yields Move Above 5%

The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield is closely watched because it influences borrowing costs across financial markets. Mortgage rates, corporate financing costs and other long-term borrowing rates can move with changes in Treasury yields.

The broader effects of higher U.S. bond yields can extend across corporate financing, mortgages and federal borrowing as benchmark rates move higher.

The rise above 5% therefore extends beyond the government bond market. Higher benchmark yields can increase the cost of financing for businesses and households while also raising the interest expense associated with government borrowing.

The two-year Treasury market has also recorded a significant increase during September. Shorter-term Treasury yields are particularly sensitive to expectations for monetary policy because they reflect market assessments of the path of short-term interest rates.

The combination of rising short- and long-term yields shows that pressure has not been limited to one segment of the Treasury curve. The move has occurred as markets assess inflation, economic growth and the possibility that interest rates could remain elevated.

Inflation and Energy Costs Add Pressure to Bond Markets

Higher energy costs are contributing to renewed inflation concerns in bond markets. Rising energy prices can increase costs for businesses and households and can complicate efforts by central banks to bring inflation lower.

Persistent inflation can also affect expectations for future interest rates. When market participants anticipate that monetary policy may remain restrictive for longer, government bond yields can rise as investors adjust the rates they require to hold longer-term debt.

The Federal Reserve rate outlook remains closely connected to these expectations, as bond markets respond to inflation trends and assumptions about how long restrictive financial conditions may persist.

The current bond-market move also reflects stronger economic activity associated with artificial-intelligence investment. Investment in AI infrastructure has increased demand for capital, while technology companies have issued more debt to finance expansion.

Technology-sector bond issuance has exceeded $200 billion during 2026, adding another source of demand for financing in capital markets. Greater competition for available capital can place additional pressure on borrowing costs when government and private-sector financing needs rise at the same time.

The combination of energy costs, inflation concerns, economic activity and financing demand has therefore contributed to the increase in sovereign yields across several major economies.

Government Borrowing Raises Financing Costs

Higher government bond yields directly affect the cost of issuing new public debt. Governments refinancing maturing obligations or funding new borrowing must pay market rates when issuing bonds.

The increase in yields therefore has implications for public-sector financing requirements. Higher interest costs can increase the amount governments spend servicing debt, particularly when elevated yields persist over longer periods.

The effect also extends to private borrowers because government securities provide reference rates for many other forms of credit. Banks and other lenders use market interest rates when determining the cost of mortgages, corporate loans and other financing.

Businesses that depend on debt financing can therefore face higher costs when benchmark government yields increase. Higher financing expenses can affect decisions involving capital spending, expansion and refinancing.

Households can also face higher borrowing costs. Mortgage rates are particularly sensitive to longer-term Treasury yields, making changes in the 10-year Treasury market relevant to housing finance.

The relationship means that the bond-market adjustment can feed into economic activity through several channels rather than remaining confined to government securities.

Higher Yields Reshape Broader Financial Conditions

The rise in sovereign yields has changed financial conditions across major economies. Higher borrowing costs affect governments, companies and households while also influencing the pricing of financial assets.

For financial professionals, the Treasury market provides information about expectations for inflation, economic activity and monetary policy. Changes in short-term and long-term yields can offer different signals about how markets assess the path of interest rates.

The increase in bond-market volatility adds another consideration. A roughly 30% rise in the ICE BofA MOVE Index during September indicates that the adjustment has involved larger changes in Treasury prices as well as higher yields.

Upcoming U.S. employment and inflation data will provide additional information for assessing economic conditions and monetary policy. Government bond issuance and fiscal developments in major economies will also affect the supply of debt entering global markets.

For businesses, the level of government bond yields remains directly relevant to financing decisions. Higher benchmark rates can increase the cost of borrowing, refinancing and investment funding.

For consumers, longer-term yields remain relevant to mortgage and other credit costs. For governments, sustained higher yields increase the cost of servicing and refinancing public debt.

The current bond-market move therefore affects several parts of the financial system simultaneously, with the U.S. Treasury market remaining a key reference point for global borrowing conditions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are global bond yields?

Global bond yields are the interest rates investors receive from government bonds issued by countries around the world. They vary according to factors including inflation expectations, monetary policy, economic conditions and government borrowing needs.

Why have global bond yields risen?

Recent increases have been associated with higher energy costs, persistent inflation concerns, stronger economic activity and increased borrowing demand. These factors can affect expectations for future interest rates and the compensation investors require for holding government debt.

What does a 5% U.S. 10-year Treasury yield mean?

A 5% yield means the market rate on the benchmark 10-year U.S. government security has moved to that level. The rate is important because it serves as a reference point for many longer-term borrowing costs across the economy.

How do higher bond yields affect borrowing costs?

Higher government bond yields can raise benchmark rates used to price mortgages, corporate debt and other loans. The effect can increase financing costs for businesses, households and governments.

Which factors are contributing to higher government bond yields?

Energy prices, inflation expectations, economic activity, government borrowing requirements and private-sector financing demand are among the factors contributing to higher yields. Monetary-policy expectations also affect shorter- and longer-term government bond rates.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Bond yields, interest rates, and market conditions can change rapidly, and readers should conduct their own research or consult a qualified professional before making financial decisions.

AI Is About to Do the Work Young Consultants Learned From. A 30-Year Industry Veteran Says That’s Fixable.

US Business News Staff on September 29, 2026

By: Michael Arden

Professional services careers were built on years of research decks and first drafts, the same work AI now finishes in seconds. Daniel Cohen-Dumani argues the apprenticeship isn’t dying. It’s about to accelerate.

For generations, a professional services career began the same way: years of grunt work. Research memos nobody read twice. First drafts rewritten by someone senior. Long nights assembling briefing decks. The work was tedious by design, and it was also the apprenticeship, the way judgment got built one unglamorous task at a time. That work is now precisely what AI does in seconds, which raises a question the industry has barely started to answer. If the machine does the learning material, how does anyone learn the job?

“I think AI will do 80 percent of the work,” says Daniel Cohen-Dumani, who spent 30 years in the industry, built and sold a consultancy, and now runs an AI company serving the firms he came from. “But the other 20 percent is the whole job. Judgment. The relationship. Empathy in a hard conversation. That stays human.”

The paradox is that the 20 percent has always been learned by doing the 80. Take away the research and the first drafts, skeptics argue, and you take away the ladder. Cohen-Dumani’s answer is counterintuitive. The apprenticeship does not disappear; it accelerates, but only in firms that treat their own knowledge differently.

His company, Experio, builds what it calls organizational memory: an intelligence layer, IQ1, that makes a firm’s decades of engagements, precedents, and hard-won lessons reachable in seconds, with every answer cited to its source. In that world, he argues, a first-year associate arrives with the firm’s memory attached. “A first-year associate can know what the partner knew, the moment they need it.” The basics stop consuming the first five years, and juniors get into real client rooms earlier, where the 20 percent is actually taught.

The obstacle, he says, is rarely the technology. It is a culture where knowledge is power hoarded one career at a time. Every firm has the veteran who answers questions the way an oracle does, and whose value has always been in being the only one who knows. “Hoarding used to be job security,” he says. “In the AI era, shared knowledge is the moat. Hoarded knowledge is the risk.” Senior partners, he adds, also carry a quieter burden under the old model. They are the firm’s only search engine, fielding the same questions for the hundredth time in their careers.

The excuse he hears most often for waiting is data readiness, the plan to start once the files are cleaned up. He translates that plan bluntly: never. Thirty years of shared drives, inboxes, and documents named for their fourth final version will never be tidy, he says, and that is what real work looks like, not a failure of the firm. The old generation of knowledge systems demanded pristine inputs because the machines were limited. The current generation is precisely good at reading through mess, connecting scattered context, and finding the needle without anyone alphabetizing the haystack first. Firms waiting for clean data, he warns, are waiting for a day that does not come, while the mess keeps growing.

Leadership has its own reckoning coming. When work that billed eight hours takes seconds, firms that price by the hour face what Cohen-Dumani calls an existential question rather than a productivity upgrade. Become more efficient and make less money, or change what you sell. The firms that get ahead of it, he argues, will redeploy junior time toward outcomes and client exposure rather than protecting the timesheet.

He has little patience for what passes as preparation at many firms. Buying licenses is not an AI strategy, he says, and neither is a task force, a policy memo, or a pilot that never ends. His test is simple. If a firm removed every AI tool tomorrow, would anything about its business model, pricing, or staffing plan need to change back? If the answer is no, the strategy was theater.

For the young professionals themselves, his advice draws on his own first job, as a junior consultant in Switzerland with a fresh computer science degree. Everything durable he learned in those two years was about people, not technology. Listening before solving. Earning trust before advising. Choosing useful over impressive. The tools of his trade have turned over five or six times since, he notes, and every technical skill eventually expired. The human ones never did.

He pairs that with a warning about the machines doing the other 80 percent. Verify everything. “An answer without a source is a guess wearing a suit,” he says. In work where an error becomes a liability, he argues, the winning firms will be the ones that made verification effortless, not the ones that trusted the software most.

His skepticism extends to the loudest promises in the field. Cohen-Dumani is publicly doubtful that general intelligence is imminent, having, as he puts it, looked under the hood of the latest models and found extraordinary pattern machines rather than minds. That assessment shapes his workforce advice. Leaders who believe the machine will eventually figure out their industry on its own tend to wait, while the specific, unglamorous work of making AI reliable inside a real business goes undone. He also does not expect the frontier laboratories to do that work for anyone. Some problems live so deep inside one industry, he says, that a general-purpose model never reaches them. Someone who knows the terrain has to go build there.

By 2030, Cohen-Dumani expects the shape of the industry to look plainly different, with smaller teams doing what larger ones did, juniors operating with veteran memory from their first week, pricing tied to outcomes, and expertise held as a permanent firm asset instead of walking out the door with each retirement. None of it strikes him as radical. Every piece, he says, is already underway in firms that moved early.

The retirement problem, in particular, is one he thinks the industry consistently underprices. When a forty-year partner leaves, nobody remembers why the firm structured an engagement the way it did, or what went wrong on a similar deal a decade ago, or which approach quietly saved a client millions. The knowledge is not lost in a file, he says. It is lost in a person. Firms that make their memory permanent, he argues, stop paying twice for the same lessons, and stop losing their most expensive asset one send-off party at a time.

His closing advice works for a managing partner or a new graduate equally well. The tools will keep changing. Bet your career, and your firm, on the parts that don’t.

US BUSINESS NEWS