Thank you. Hello everyone, and welcome to this investor briefing and Q&A for the US Masters Residential Property Fund, which we will refer to as the Fund. I'm Stuart Robert Nisbett, Chair of the Responsible Entity. I also have Eric Magidson and Kevin McAvey from Brooksville Company LLC with me on the call. I'd like to begin by providing a short overview of the Fund's performance and activity for the half year ended 30th June 2025. During the period, we completed a full portfolio appraisal, which resulted in a 2.84% reduction in value, or approximately $9.2 million, largely driven by the New York premium segment of the portfolio. The New York market has seen a slowing in pricing, activity, and buyer sentiment following recent political developments emanating from the New York City mayoral primaries, although we continue to see good property inspections and sales by median in both New York and New Jersey. On the sales front, 86 properties were sold in the first half of the year for a total of $119 million, including 47 sales in the second quarter. As of 30 June, we had a strong pipeline of $176 million, comprised of assets under contract or in attorney review, on the market for sale, or in the short-term listing pipeline. With sales up to mid-August, total closings from the year to date exceed that achieved during the year ended 31st December 2024. While there is no guarantee that assets currently under contract will close, the Fund's target rate for 2025 remains achievable. During the half, the Fund also strengthened the balance sheet with repayments of more than $72 million being made towards the Global Atlantic, or GA, facility as a result of property sales. The GA facility has now reduced to $151 million, and with the application of the prepayment penalty ceasing in May, we now have more flexibility around loan repayments. Importantly, the amendment to the Tangible Net Worth Covenant, which was formalized in May, enabled the repatriation to Australia of over $51 million year to date. In line with our capital management strategy, distributions of $0.11 per stapled security have been paid so far this year. In addition, during the first half of the year, the Fund repurchased 2.8 million stapled securities. Overall, the Fund remains focused on executing the sale program and returning capital to security holders. I'll now hand over to Eric to take you through the sales results in more detail. Thanks, Stuart, and hello everyone. As mentioned, the sales program continued at a strong pace during the June quarter. We closed on 47 property sales for a total consideration of just under $71 million, bringing the first half total to 86 properties and $119 million. The second quarter results represent the highest quarterly sales volume since the sales program commenced, which is representative of our commitment to realizing value and returning capital to security holders. As of the end of June, our sales pipeline stood at about $176 million, which includes properties under contract, in attorney review, on the market, or about to be listed. More specifically, we had $61 million under contract, $50 million already on the market, and a further $64 million in the short-term pipeline. As Stuart mentioned at the top, not all of these transactions are guaranteed to close, with sales achieved up to mid-August, bringing closings in excess of those for 2024. We remain optimistic that they will allow us to meet our full-year sales target of $200 million- $225 million. We've also seen encouraging activity beyond the traditional on-market sales. In New York and New Jersey, we are complementing open market transactions with direct-to-ten a million deals, off-market inventory placements, and in New Jersey, workforce housing continuing to seek multi-property package sales to investors. These strategies are helping us maintain sales momentum despite a level of cooling buyer sentiment. Looking ahead, we will continue to drive properties through the pipeline and remain open to larger portfolio transactions, which could accelerate the return of funds to security holders, particularly as financing conditions improve. Over to Kevin to take you through the operational results for the half. Thanks, Eric. Starting with the portfolio valuation, as a part of our semi-annual appraisal process as of 30th June, we recognized a decrement of $9.2 million, or 2.84% across the portfolio. Most of this was in the New York premium segment, which saw a 4.4% decline, or about $7.4 million. The New Jersey workforce and New Jersey premium segments recorded smaller decreases of 1.2% and 1.1% respectively. It's worth noting that for this set of accounts, every house in the portfolio received an individual valuation, as opposed to prior periods where approximately half the portfolio was appraised, with the results of each neighborhood being extrapolated onto the remaining 50% of homes that did not receive an individual valuation. With the portfolio continuing to shrink in size, each asset was able to be either individually appraised or marked to contracted sales price or list price. As it relates to the movement recognized during the period, the softer result in New York was accompanied by a decline in buyer activity during the mid-summer months, driven in part by uncertainty in the local business and real estate communities following the nomination of Democratic Socialist Zoran Mamdani as Democratic candidate for the New York City mayoral election. Pleasingly, as we reached late summer into Labor Day, the cooling sentiment seemed to reverse somewhat, and we have seen an uptick in buyer appointments and activity across our listings. Overall, while valuations softened modestly during the period, the movement was consistent with what we saw in actual transactions on the ground. Combined with the breadth of our sales pipeline, we believe the portfolio is well positioned to continue to support the sales program through the remainder of 2025. Turning to capital management, we continue to apply proceeds from the sales program towards reducing the GA debt, funding buybacks, and returning capital to security holders. During the June quarter, we repaid just over $41 million toward the GA facility, bringing total repayments for the half year to more than $72 million. As a result, the facility balance stood at $150.8 million as of 30th June. Importantly, with the conclusion of the prepayment penalty period in May, the group now has the flexibility to make additional loan repayments at its discretion without incurring penalties. During the period, we also successfully negotiated an amendment to the GA facility Tangible Net Worth Covenant, which allowed us to repatriate $44.2 million from the U.S. to Australia in June and a further $7 million in July. These supported the $0.10 distribution paid on 1st August, bringing total distributions for the year so far to $0.11 per stapled security. The group also repurchased 2.8 million stapled securities during the half for $1.1 million. As of June 30th, the group held cash at $116.6 million, of which $85.4 million was available after working capital and other reserves. The group expects to continue to direct available cash toward distributions and buybacks. Looking at operating performance, on a same-home basis, net operating income rose 8% to $4.9 million over the 12 months to June 30th, driven largely by rental growth on renewal leases. General and administrative expenses were $5.6 million, or $5.35 million on a normalized basis, which is broadly consistent with the second half of 2024 following the internalization of the responsible entity. Finally, as expected, given the scale of the sales program, the group reported a funds from operations loss of $19.7 million for the half year, or an adjusted loss of $4.6 million after excluding one-off expenses and disposal costs. This reflects both the holding and associated sales costs of properties in the sales pipeline and reduced rental income from properties that were vacated or sold. While we expect FFO to remain negative as the portfolio continues to reduce, we are focused on maximizing revenue from the properties we hold and managing costs carefully. With that, I'll now hand back to Stuart to open the line for questions. Thanks, Kevin and Eric. I'll now hand over to the moderator to facilitate any questions we may have online. Thank you. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. We will now pause momentarily to allow questions to be registered. Thank you. Your first question comes from Fred Woollard with Samuel Terry. Please go ahead. Hi there. Good morning everyone. I'm interested to hear how we went in August in terms of sales, where our cash and debt position looks at the present time, and any material changes to the pipeline. Thanks, Fred. Kevin, you want to respond to that in terms of August sales by release? Yeah, Stuart, I'm free to disclose. Obviously, I know the June-July results have been published, and presumably this is fine to state the results. Yeah, this is an investor presentation, so it is being provided to all security holders. It's information that will be publicly available. Perfect, perfect. Okay. Yeah, Fred, how are you, Fred? The August month was pretty strong. It was actually our second largest closing month of the year. We closed about $28.5 million. July was around just over $16 million and then coming off the back of that $28.5 million in August. That took us up to roughly $164 million sales year to date through the end of August. As you would have seen in the June report, the second quarterly, we had that, it's roughly $60 million of under contract and we've continued to see those contracts come into closings. We're obviously pushing to get every closing done as quickly as possible, knowing that every individual deal has a different timeline. As I mentioned in my prepared remarks, we had sort of a mid-summer months activity a little bit lighter, but following into Labor Day, the end of summer, we actually saw a nice uptick, particularly in New York, which had been a little bit slower, as I mentioned, following the sort of Mamdani winning the primary. In terms of closings, August was strong and I think we've been pleasantly surprised of late with how activity has been doing as well. Thank you. Any questions on that? Can you tell us a bit about what the rental market looks like in our three segments? Yeah, I would say we're almost not, it's funny, we're almost not an active market participant in the fact that, you know, we are issuing renewal increases, right? We're not taking anything to new leases. We're not actively, you know, releasing apartments. Anytime we get a move out, that house is automatically going to sale. The only rental sort of experience we have is on renewals where we are proactively sending very strong, you know, renewal requests, which is largely in an effort to drive vacancy and get assets back so we can put them through the sales pipeline. The renewal rates that we're seeing are well in excess of what I would assume the market is. That's kind of our benchmark. We're obviously sending renewals well in excess of what we think, you know, the active market is. Fortunately, we've had lower renewal rates and, like I said, the renewals we are seeing are well above market increases because we're sort of actively trying to drive vacancy. Okay, great. Thank you for that. Finally, can you talk to us, perhaps as a question for Stuart, about your feeling about how to allocate this wonderful cash that you're bringing in from the sales between debt repayment, distributions, and buybacks of more units? Yeah. Thanks, Fred. I'll have you answer the question. Obviously, as people are aware, the Global Atlantic facility matures in the middle of May 2026, and we are obviously meeting our repayment requirements in accordance with the facility. One of the requirements is when we have to be at a certain point in terms of the facility level, as at the end of each quarter. To date, our repayments have meant that we have more than met those particular facility requirements. As we track at the moment, there is certainly the possibility of meeting the final repayments by May through sales and sale proceeds being paid into the facility in accordance with the facility agreement. That will continue. There may be instances where we're required to top up the facility repayment, but to date, we haven't had to do that. That means that we can look to providing more of our available cash to the buyback and also to distribution to security holders. In relation to the buyback, as people, I think, are aware, we set a matchman buyback price, which we advise a broker on a weekly basis, so it's reviewed weekly. To date, with the prevailing market price, we have not been active in the buyback market because of that. The available cash that we have is really primarily there for any additional payments required under the GA facility and to distribution to security holders. That all sounds very sensible. Your next question comes from Rodney Prior with Nord Lease Investments. Please go ahead. Morning, James. Thanks for taking my questions. I was just hoping we could go through each of the three submarkets a little bit more in terms of what you're seeing there and what's been observed in the first half and into the future. Maybe looking at New Jersey workforce first, it seems to have been the best performer. You sold at 3.6% premium to book in the first half, but then when it came to the valuations, you were down 1.22%. Is that just a change with what you're saying post-Liberation Day and the mayoral race, that the market sentiment has changed so much between the first three months and some of those results and the more recent position? Your thoughts there? Rodney, just before I ask Kevin and Eric to respond, we just have to be careful here. We can probably provide a general response, but in terms of specifics and forecasts, that's something that we're not in a position to be able to do. We can comment on the respective submarkets. I'll pass the question over to Eric and Kevin. Yeah, sure, Stuart. This is Kevin. No, I would say, particularly in the New Jersey workforce and New Jersey premium segments, the demand has been pretty consistent. I think probably the six-month result and selling at a slight premium to book value, and this is a result of probably a handful of bidding wars where we had good activity. I think we're continuing to see that, notwithstanding the appraisal result, which, this different pool of assets and what have you, I would say sort of that delta, which is effectively, I guess, a 4% delta, is sort of within the range of difference of opinions on certain appraisers and what we're seeing in the market. Just from a general market commentary, I would say on both those two segments, both the New Jersey segments, it's been pretty consistent. That was why we tried to speak to it in the comments. It was really that New York premium segment specifically that saw that brief cooldown. I'm obviously quick to tie it to the timing of the Mamdani win, but it could very well just have been a seasonal dynamic and summer and what have you. Like I said, we were pleased to see that late summer into Labor Day, that kind of reversed a bit, particularly in terms of just buyer activity, number of showings, and sort of our contracted pace or offers we were entertaining on various houses. I would say, throughout the year thus far, there hasn't been any sort of meaningful change on the two New Jersey segments, and that was why we highlighted those comments in New York specifically. Like I said, it's been nice to see that following into that Labor Day period and of late, it seems to have sort of reversed a bit from what was kind of a couple of week to month stretch there of lighter activity, lighter showing volumes across not just our listings, but New York City listings in general, based on the brokerage data I saw. Okay, that's good. Obviously, noting Stuart's comments on not being too forward-looking. If we just go to the past six months, on New York premium, it looks like where you sell the assets relatively quickly, you get a pretty good result. It's pretty close to book value. If we take a couple of specific examples, Boerum Hill sold for $5.85 million, was $5.9 million as at 31st December. The three Clinton Hill ones sold for just over 1% above 31st December book value. It seems where assets sort of sit, there does seem to be quite a marked difference to book value. I guess the two Cobble Hill assets were marked 31st December $6.95 million, both now in contract waiting to settle. Valuation as at 30th June, $5.6 million, down 19.4%. Is that a fair characterization in terms of it's pretty good when they sell quickly, but if assets sit, there is quite a valuation gap, a sale gap plus valuation. As a general comment, that's obviously the case, right? Like if something's sitting, you would probably expect that you're going to be seeing some sort of discount on the transaction price relative to where it was listed or what have you. The Cobble Hill example you give specifically was kind of a very, it's driven by one very unique property. It's especially unique in this situation because Cobble Hill is a very, very premium neighborhood of Brooklyn. The other neighborhoods you mentioned, Boerum Hill, Clinton Hill, also very premium relative to some of our other neighborhoods, Bed-Stuy, Bushwick, which are a little bit farther east, they've all had great results throughout the past couple of years. Regardless of how the general market sentiment is, it's kind of like you knew if you had a primo listing in Clinton Hill, Cobble Hill, Park Slope, the like, you were going to be able to have buyers in there and they were agnostic to what was happening that day, that week, that month in the stock market. You'd be able to get a transaction at a good price. Generally, yes, to the extent you have an asset that's sitting longer on the market, yes, you would expect it to ultimately incur some level of a discount for the most part. On the specifics, the Cobble Hill in particular, this is one we talked about with the directors that was really driven by one very unique asset. I'd caution just extrapolating that anywhere further than that. To the extent you have properties that sit on market, yes, you would expect some level of discount, I guess. Okay. Just a factual one. I think that you've stated in the statutory account, the valuations and where it's listed, it's at the last list price. Can I just clarify, is that the list price as at June 30th, 2025? If you've taken a price cut subsequent to June 30th in July or August, the actual valuation is the list price as at June 30th, 2025? Yes, that would be correct mechanically. Yeah. Yeah, Rodney, the accounting standard requires us to value it at market or cost, whichever is the lower. If the list price is reduced up to June 30th, 2025, the valuation reflects that new list price. Yeah, if you've taken a price list cut in August, that's not reflected as a 30th June account. No, no, it's up to and including 30th Jun. Okay, that's fine. Just last ones for me, I'll let someone else have a turn after. You just mentioned, I think, a couple of times and more recently that not all sales are guaranteed to complete. From an external following view, we've seen that with some relistings of New Jersey workforce houses that have been in contract and then relisted. Is it confined to that submarket? I haven't really observed it too much from what I can see in the New York premium. Just interested in your comments on that. Yeah, it would extend to New Jersey premium as well. It's mostly a New Jersey dynamic because the way the contract process works in New York, it's very straightforward. The buyer is doing their inspection effectively while the contract is out, so it's happening concurrently. By the time you actually sign a contract, they've already had their home inspector through, their expert, where they're saying, "Hey, this dishwasher doesn't work," and we're agreeing to fix it up front or otherwise we're rejecting all requests, whatever. You've got the totality of the agreement by the time the contract is signed. It's very straightforward in New York. Once you have a deal in New York, barring the buyer walking away or something of low probability, that deal is likely to close. In New Jersey, the way it actually works is everyone signs a form contract. That contract is then "rejected" by the lawyers. You come up with an individual rider, which applies to your transaction. You sign that rider, it effectively becomes binding. The transaction becomes binding on the seller, but the buyer then completes their home inspection while the deal is under contract. That can take two weeks. Usually, they have two weeks as the maximum. Sometimes it comes back quicker, but that can be a two-week process. To the extent the buyer wanted to find a way out of the deal or they were having cold feet or what have you, they could come back with this massive inspection list. I say all that to say in New York, you've got a deal when the contract is signed. In New Jersey, it's kind of like you've got a deal, but it's a half deal and you have to go through an inspection subsequent. It's typical you'd see transactions in the "under contract" phase fall over in New Jersey. Fortunately, there are a number of deals we have to work through and with workforce property, where a lot of times people are more in an investor mindset, you tend to see attempts at retrading in the inspection phase. Just the dynamic of how it works between the two states, that's why you see contracts fall apart more often in New Jersey. It's just a function of that kind of process. Okay. Fiona, squeak in one quick last one and then I'll pass it on. Obviously, we've talked about it before on previous calls, sort of Harlem, Hamilton Heights, probably your toughest sort of submarket in the whole portfolio. Managed to get another two properties away, but we've still got 14 left. Started with 18 when we started this process two and a half years ago. The transaction activity in that $2 million+ Harlem, Hamilton Heights is reasonably thin. Just your thought on where things are and I guess how we don't get left with a number of properties there and not much else towards the end. Yeah, we've had the conversation. I would say it still remains the most challenging submarket, but fortunately, we've had kind of a flurry late summer, early fall into that, like I said, that pickup in activity. We've actually been able to place a couple of contracts for the on-market inventory. We're working on another contract. We've got two more on the market and two more coming soon. Of those 14 houses, that's working through a handful right there. It definitely remains the most challenging submarket. I say that now sitting here today as a function of, you know, I feel pretty good about all the other submarkets. It's still the toughest, but it's been nice to see over the last couple of weeks some solid activity. Like I said, we've placed a couple of contracts there just recently. Again, like I said, relative to everything else, it remains the challenging submarket. I sort of look at the progress we've made and the future pipeline relative to the 14 asset count, and I don't think it's this massive concern that we need to sit here and worry about personally. Rodney, if I can just round out on Eric, I'm sorry, on Kevin's response. We weren't very close here in Brooksville over the long period in terms of each of the neighborhoods where we hold properties, and we're very conscious of trying to avoid a rub at the end. In terms of those markets or submarkets where we see some weakness or where sales are not keeping up with other submarkets, we look very closely at what strategies we adopt to push sales in those areas. We are very conscious of the issues you've raised and working very closely with Brooksville to make sure we don't run into a situation where we have properties right at the end that we just can't sell. Okay, that's great. Thanks for taking my questions. I'll hand it on. Thank you very much. I do find these forums useful, and it's an opportunity for us unit holders to get some more detail and ask the managers. Thanks for your time and making yourselves available. Thanks, Rodney. Thank you. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. We'll now pause momentarily for any final questions to register. There are no further phone questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Nisbett for closing remarks. Thanks very much. Thank you to everybody who called in and those who provided questions. We look forward to continuing with the progress we've achieved to date, and we look forward to further webinars and discussions with investors going forward. Thank you very much. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.