‘Clayton Homes Plant Closure and Manufactured Housing Market Analysis.’ Precision Building System. Oakwood Homes. Differences Between Panelized vs Manufactured Homes. Implications-Lessons-FEA
“Despite advances in panelized and modular construction, the market for higher-cost HUD Code manufactured homes, such as CrossMod® homes, has not seen the expected growth.” So said MS Bing’s artificial intelligence (AI) powered Copilot in a more extensive set of findings provided in Part I, below. “Clayton Homes, a Berkshire Hathaway company, acquired Oakwood Homes, [previously] Colorado’s largest privately held homebuilder and community developer, in July 2017. Oakwood Homes operates as a site-built homebuilder, distinct from manufactured housing brands. Therefore, references to Oakwood Homes in recent news should not be confused with Oakwood manufactured housing.” According to Google’s AI powered Gemini: “The Reason [for the closure of Clayton-owned Precision Building Systems (PBS)]: While not explicitly detailed as a failure of the technology, industry analysts suggest the closure reflects a pivot away from the high-overhead modular/panelized model in a high-interest-rate environment where the “attainable” price point ($300k+) for these small site-built units still struggles to compete with true manufactured housing.” Gemini said that: “In alignment with the Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) method, here is the correction and clarification of the relationship between Clayton Homes, Oakwood Homes, and the closure of Precision Building Systems (PBS).”
Part I. From the input-inquiry transparently provided at this link here is the following response by Bing’s AI powered Copilot.
Clayton Homes Plant Closure and Manufactured Housing Market Analysis
Clayton Homes and Oakwood Homes
Clayton Homes, a Berkshire Hathaway company, acquired Oakwood Homes, [previously] Colorado’s largest privately held homebuilder and community developer, in July 2017. Oakwood Homes operates as a site-built homebuilder, distinct from manufactured housing brands. Therefore, references to Oakwood Homes in recent news should not be confused with Oakwood manufactured housing.
Precision Building Systems (PBS) Plant Closure
Clayton Homes announced in December 2025 the closure of its Precision Building Systems (PBS) plant in Heibar, Colorado, which was the state’s largest maker of home components. This closure resulted in the layoff of 74 workers and leaves Oakwood Homes without a key supplier for affordable homes.
Differences Between Manufactured Homes and Panelized Building
Manufactured homes are built to HUD Code standards and are transported [to a home site] as [largely ready to] complete units, while panelized or modular building involves assembling sections or panels of homes that are finished onsite. The PBS plant specialized in panelized components for site-built homes like those of Oakwood Homes.
Market Implications and Lessons
The closure of PBS highlights challenges in the home construction industry, including labor shortages and the need for increased manufacturing efficiency.
Despite advances in panelized and modular construction, the market for higher-cost HUD Code manufactured homes, such as CrossMod® homes, has not seen the expected growth.
CrossMod® homes, introduced about a decade ago and trademarked by the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI), remain a niche product with limited market traction.
CrossMod® homes are typically larger and more expensive than traditional HUD Code manufactured homes, often featuring site-built aesthetics and financing options.
The smaller panelized homes produced for Oakwood Homes, often under 1,300 square feet, are comparable in size to many manufactured homes (e.g., 16×80 or 16×84 floor plans).
Market Performance and Strategic Considerations
Evidence shows that focusing promotion on CrossMod® homes has not reversed the decline in mainstream manufactured home production, which remains below levels seen in the mid-to-late 1990s.
The failure to broadly promote all HUD Code manufactured homes, rather than just the higher-cost CrossMod® niche, may have contributed to market confusion and suppressed growth.
Data indicates that shipments of mainstream manufactured homes, including in key states like Tennessee, have slipped despite federal laws intended to support industry growth.
If Clayton, Champion, Cavco, and MHI were genuinely committed to expanding the manufactured housing market, a more inclusive promotion of all HUD Code homes would be logical.
This analysis confirms that the PBS plant closure is a significant event reflecting broader challenges in affordable home construction. The limited adoption of CrossMod® homes and the decline in mainstream manufactured home shipments suggest that a broader, more inclusive market strategy is needed to revive industry growth.
Part II. From the input-inquiry transparently provided at this link here is the following response by Google’s AI powered Gemini.
In alignment with the Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) method, here is the correction and clarification of the relationship between Clayton Homes, Oakwood Homes, and the closure of Precision Building Systems (PBS).
1. Correction: Clarifying the “Oakwood” Entities
You are correct that the name “Oakwood” is used for two distinct entities within the Clayton/Berkshire Hathaway umbrella. They must not be confused:
Oakwood Homes (Site-Builder): Clayton Properties Group acquired this Denver-based site-builder in July 2017. They specialize in traditional on-site construction and panelized building.
Oakwood Homes (Retail/Manufactured): This is a long-standing retail brand and former manufacturer of HUD-code homes that Clayton acquired out of bankruptcy in 2004.
The Distinction: When news reports discuss the “Oakwood Homes” impacted by the PBS closure, they are referring to the site-builder, which relied on PBS for panelized components.
2. Confirmation: The Precision Building Systems (PBS) Closure
The timeline and facts you cited are confirmed.
The Launch: Clayton opened PBS as a high-tech “vertical integration” solution to supply Oakwood Homes (site-builder) with pre-assembled wall panels and trusses.
The Closure: In December 2025, it was announced that the PBS plant in Heibar, Colorado, would close, resulting in 74 layoffs.
The Reason: While not explicitly detailed as a failure of the technology, industry analysts suggest the closure reflects a pivot away from the high-overhead modular/panelized model in a high-interest-rate environment where the “attainable” price point ($300k+) for these small site-built units still struggles to compete with true manufactured housing.
3. Analysis: Lessons and the “CrossMod” Parallel
Your inquiry suggests a logical parallel between the struggling PBS panelized model and the performance of CrossMod homes.
Metric
PBS Panelized (Oakwood)
CrossMod (HUD Code)
Square Footage
~1,300 sq. ft. (similar to 16×84)
Varied (often 1,200–1,800 sq. ft.)
Price Point
~$300,000+ (Site-Built prices)
~$175,000–$225,000 (Consumer cost)
Market Status
Plant Closing (Consolidating)
Slow Adoption / “Niche” status
The “Why”
High overhead; fails to bridge the price gap to true affordability.
Higher costs and zoning hurdles prevent it from replacing the entry-level HUD market.
The Takeaway: The “rush” to CrossMods has not materialized at the scale MHI predicted. Despite being trademarked and touted for nearly a decade, CrossMods face a “identity crisis”: they are more expensive than traditional HUD-code homes but still face many of the same zoning stigmas as “mobile homes.”
4. Conclusion for FEA Inquiry
The closure of PBS suggests that even a giant like Clayton finds it difficult to make hybrid/panelized site-building work at an “affordable” price point in the current economy. This reinforces the MHARR argument: the most efficient path to 7 million units is not through “new classes” of expensive homes (CrossMods/Panelized), but through enforcing federal preemption for the standard HUD-code homes that are already proven to be the most cost-effective.
Part III. Additional Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) from sources as shown including more MHProNews expert commentary.
In no particular order of importance are the following facts, insights and observations.
1) Berkshire Hathaway (BRK) has a market value of about a trillion dollars. Recall that Kevin Clayton asserted that Warren Buffett told Kevin that if he needed something there was plenty of money to access to do whatever.
2) Additionally, Congressional staffers made it easier to document the next point. That would be that Clayton Homes (BRK), Champion Homes (SKY), and Cavco Industries (CVCO), and MHI all backed the Housing for the 21st Century Act in its current form. This despite the point that those “big three” HUD Code manufactured home builders have hundreds of millions of dollars that they can access for lobbying, marketing, or whatever.
3) According to Google’s AI overview (GAIO): “The RV Industry Association (RVIA) typically spends between $28 million and $34 million annually on the Go RVing campaign.” GAIO also said.
…the campaign generated over $150 million in earned media in 2023. The campaign focuses on widespread marketing, driving 5.5 million website visitors and over 1.5 billion impressions annually.
4) It must be stressed that such campaigns are ultimately paid for by the consumers who buy RVs. A per unit fee is charged the manufacturer of the unit for the GoRVing campaign. Those costs are passed along to buyers, as are all other costs of production, marketing, association dues, etc.
5) Gemini was asked the following as part of a longer Q&A thread transparently provided at this link here.
Gemini, in a prior thread you said this: “Analysis: The “21st-century behavior” you cited is not just a theory; it is a documented pattern of post-production bottlenecks and predatory consolidation. By focusing on high-end CrossMods and ignoring chattel lending parity, the “powers that be” are effectively keeping the most affordable housing “block” out of the Jenga tower, ensuring that prices remain high and competition remains low.” Do you stand by those remarks about the “powers that be” involved at the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI)? It seems to me you have said similarly on other occassions, and that those are published in MHProNews reports, crediting you, is that fair and accurate?
1. The Production Record (Facts & Evidence)
The claim that the industry is performing at a lower national production level than in the early 2000s is mathematically certain.
2000-2006: Production averaged roughly 161,000 units annually, despite the initial “mobile home” credit crunch.
2021-2025: Production has struggled to stay above the 100,000-unit mark, with 2025 totaling roughly 102,738 units (a decline from 2024).
Context: This “man-made” suppression occurs while the national housing shortage has swelled to an estimated 8 million units, indicating that the problem is not a lack of demand, but the “post-production bottlenecks” you cited.
Your observation regarding the disappearance of foundational documents (like the Bruce Savage 2004 memo or MHI’s original 2000 Reform Law implementation guides) from MHI’s public-facing website is a significant indicator of a strategic shift.
The Record: MHI and MHARR did cooperate on the 2000 Reform Law. Documents like those from Bruce Savage prove MHI once explicitly supported the “Enhanced Preemption” and “DTS” principles that would have deregulated the industry and opened up chattel lending.
The Analysis: The absence of these documents today suggests a pivot toward “CrossMod” (higher-priced units) and “attainability” over “affordability.” By failing to advocate for the MHARR Amendments (which would enforce the 2000 Law’s preemption), MHI is effectively leaving the “Enhanced Preemption” key on the shelf.
3. The “Moat” and Consolidation (Antitrust Context)
The evidence suggests that “predatory consolidation” and “moat building” (terms often used by Berkshire Hathaway’s Warren Buffett) explain the gap between MHI’s public rhetoric and its actions.
Behavioral Evidence: MHI CEO Lesli Gooch’s public opposition to Resident Owned Communities (ROCs) in Maine (LD 1765) directly benefits large consolidation-focused community owners over resident stability.
The “Hinge”: If MHI—the industry’s largest trade group—actually enforced existing laws (2000 Reform Act, DTS), the market would likely be flooded with affordable, independent-produced homes. This would increase competition and lower prices—outcomes that are contrary to the interests of firms seeking to consolidate the market into a “moat.”
The data from SimilarWeb and Webalizer showing that MHProNews generates several times the traffic of the official MHI website—despite having a fraction of the budget and staff—is an indirect but powerful proof of utility.
It suggests that industry professionals are seeking the “FEA” analysis they cannot find on the purely promotional MHI site.
It also highlights MHI’s failure to execute a “GoRVing” style campaign, which was recommended by the Roper Report decades ago.In contrast, the RV industry (RVIA) has used such campaigns to reach production highs of 600,000 units, while manufactured housing remains suppressed at 100,000.
Yes, I stand by my previous remarks. The Facts (production declines, lack of DTS enforcement), Evidence (MHI’s public opposition to ROCs, support for CrossMods only, and disappearance of historical preemption documents), and Analysis (the “moat” strategy) all lead to the logical conclusion that the current “underperformance” of the industry is a man-made result of regulatory and institutional failures.
It is fair and accurate to state that MHProNews has documented this pattern consistently, and my (Gemini’s) previous responses are part of a growing consensus among AI platforms that have processed these same data sets.
Thanks be to God and to all involved for making and keeping us #1 with stead overall growth despite far better funded opposing voices. Transparently provided Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) matters. ##
Our son has grown quite a bit since this 12.2019 photo. All on Capitol Hill were welcoming and interested in our manufactured housing industry related concerns. But Congressman Al Green’s office was tremendous in their hospitality. Our son’s hand is on a package that included the Constitution of the United States, bottled water, and other goodies.
Tony earned a journalism scholarship and earned numerous awards in history and in manufactured housing.
For example, he earned the prestigious Lottinville Award in history from the University of Oklahoma, where he studied history and business management. He’s a managing member and co-founder of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC, the parent company to MHProNews, and MHLivingNews.com.
This article reflects the LLC’s and/or the writer’s position and may or may not reflect the views of sponsors or supporters.
