National Market Shares & MOnthly Economic Reports by MHI & COBA7

Blog # 390 Copyright 2016 COBA7® 27 March 2016;

Perspective: ‘Land-lease-lifestyle Communities, a.k.a. manufactured home communities and ‘mobile home parks’, comprise the real estate component of manufactured housing.’

This blog posting is the national advocacy voice, official ombudsman (press), research reporter, & online communication media for all LLLCommunities in North America!

To input this blog &/or affiliate with Community Owners (7 Part) Business Alliance®, a.k.a. COBA7®, use Official MHIndustry HOTLINE: (877) MFD-HSNG or 633-4764

COBA7® Motto: ‘U Support US & WE Serve U! & Goal of its’ print/online media – to ‘Not only inform & opine, but transform & improve MHBusiness Model Performance!’

INTRODUCTION. Part I. ‘Geesh! I hate it when we make a mistake; but here’s the correction to the Year 2015 total HUD-Code home shipment total.’

With that said, let’s move onto WHO dominates the National Market Share of new manufactured housing units delivered. Prepare to be surprised, maybe dismayed.

And Part II answers the question some blog floggers (readers) have asked: ‘Why continue to point out the ‘generally small difference’ between HUD-Code new home shipment numbers distributed monthly, for a fee, by the Institute for Building Technology & Safety (‘IBTS’) & reported similarly by HUD, MHARR, & COBA7®; unlike that published by MHI?’ The reason may astound you…



In an earlier blog posting we announced the total number of new HUD-Code manufactured homes ‘shipped’ during year 2016 – and told you not to pay attention to any other figure offered by any other national advocacy group representing our industry. Well, it turns out we picked the wrong number off the monthly tally sheets COBA7® maintains, containing # data we pay to receive from the Institute for Building Technology & Safety (‘IBTS’) – the same folk HUD, MHARR, & MHI patronize for identical data! By the way; would YOU like to be privy to new HUD-Code home shipment ‘stats’ each month? Simply contact Pam Brillhart at IBTS via (703) 481-2000, extension # 260. Yes, it’s that simple; and Now You Know…

The corrected figure? 70,544 new HUD-Code home were shipped during year 2015! This is the total we’ll soon be writing into the ‘Information Briefing Sheet’, and ‘State of the Manufactured Housing Industry & LLLCommunity Asset Class’ SSRDs (Signature Series Resource Documents) published and distributed by COBA7® throughout the year.

Unfortunately, that’s not the end of the story. While COBA7®, MHARR, & HUD generally arrive at the same annual shipment total – by simply adding IBTS 12 monthly figures together, one national advocacy body performs an added calculation each month, involving ‘destination pending’ homes, that distorts their published number relative to the MHIndustry’s official tally. So, just be aware – and beware, using anything other than 70,544 new HUD-Code housing shipments during year 2015, is INCORRECT.

And that’s not all! While in search of ‘national MH market share’ information for 2015, COBA7® came across 1) interesting (National Market Share) statistics, & 2) yet another questionable ‘total MH shipments’ number.

The first three firms listed on IBTS’ ‘Top 10 Production & Market Share by Corporation’ chart are, as one would expect, the ‘Big Three C’ companies: Clayton Homes with 32,069 new home shipments; Cavco, Inc. with 9,726; & Champion Homes with 8,674 new HUD-Code homes shipped during year 2015.

Clayton Homes’ shipment total represents 45 percent of national market share; Cavco, Inc., @ 13.7 percent; and, Champion Homes @ 12.2 percent. Taken together, the three firms garner 71 percent of the national MH market share during 2015. The remaining 29 percent of national MH market share is divided among seven other HUD-Code home manufacturers.

Now, here’s the questionable ‘total shipments’ number COBA7® uncovered: 70,664 new HUD-Code homes shipped during year 2015. What? That’s 120 more new HUD-Code homes than the 70,544 IBTS reported during the same 12 month period! And no one seems to have a ‘definitive answer’ as to the genesis of that number on the Market Share report, other than to opine it has to do with Destination Pending – labeled homes present on all monthly shipment reports. So, sorry to say, yet another mystery clouding HUD-Code manufactured housing scorekeeping. And when you get right down to it, no fewer than three different HUD-Code home shipment totals for year 2015. The only one that counts: 70,544!

Comparing national market shares, here’s an interesting, albeit inexact, juxtaposition with another business type:

Given the ‘Big Three C’ firms, during 2015, cornered 71 percent of the national manufactured housing market share; how’s that compare with national market share among mega banks in the U.S. during 2015?

According to Consumer Reports magazine, January 2017, “…four mega banks hold about 40 percent of all U.S. commercial banking assets.” The four mega banks? Bank of America, Chase, Citibank, & Wells Fargo.

So, in the manufactured housing industry, three firms control 71 percent of national market share. Among mega banking institutions, four banks control 40 percent of their national market share.



MHI @ 17 March 2016 Headline: “5,769 New HUD-Code Homes Shipped in January 2016 – Up 16.7 Percent from (4942) January 2015.”

COBA7® @ 17 March 2016 Headline: “5,862 New HUD-Code Homes Shipped in January 2016 – Up 17.9 Percent from (4969) January 2015.” (Using IBTS # data)


MHI @ 17 March 2016, opening sentence: “In January 2016, 5,769 new manufactured homes were shipped, an increase of 16.7 percent from January 2015, and (sic) an increase of 72 homes or 1.7 percent compared to December 2015.”

COBA7® @ 17 March 2016, opening sentence: “In January 2016, 5,862 new manufactured homes were shipped, an increase of 17.9 percent from January 2015, an increase of 205 homes or 3.6 percent compared to December 2015.” (Using IBTS # data)


So, there you have it, headline and line by line comparisons of quasi (‘almost’) official (‘properly authorized’ – by whom?) new HUD-Code housing shipment numbers tallied and reported, in the first instance by MHI; in the second instance by IBTS, HUD, MHARR, & COBA7®.


Bottom line? When will HUD, MHI, MHARR, & COBA7® stop confusing career & appointed Washington bureaucrats, dues-paying members of national MH advocacy entities, corporate stakeholders, legislators & regulators, as well as historians, with their inability to calculate and report the same statistical benchmarks for reference and posterity?

Leave a comment

Name .
Message .

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published