Good day. Thank you for standing by. Welcome to the AFC Gamma Third Quarter 2022 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in listen-only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question and answer session. To ask a question during the session, you will need to press star one one on your telephone. You will then hear an automated message advising your hand is raised. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Gabriel Katz. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thank you all for joining AFC Gamma's earnings call for the third quarter of 2022. I am joined this morning by Leonard Tannenbaum, our Chief Executive Officer, Jonathan Kalikow, our Head of Real Estate, Robyn Tannenbaum, our Head of Originations and Investor Relations, and Brett Kaufman, our Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, I would like to note that this call is being recorded. Replay information is included in our October 20 press release and is posted on the investor relations section of afcgamma.com, along with our third quarter earnings release and investor presentation. Today's conference call includes forward-looking statements and projections that reflect the company's current views with respect to, among other things, future market developments, anticipated portfolio yield, and financial projections for 2022 and beyond. These statements are subject to the inherent uncertainties in predicting future results and conditions. Please refer to AFC Gamma's most recent periodic filings with the SEC for certain significant factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from these forward-looking statements and projections. During this call, we will refer to distributable earnings, which is a non-GAAP financial measure. Reconciliations of net income, the most comparable GAAP measure to distributable earnings, can be found in AFC Gamma's earnings release and investor presentation available on AFC Gamma's website. The format for today's call is as follows. Len will provide introductory remarks, an overview of our third quarter 2022 performance, and strategic commentary. John will discuss AFC Gamma's portfolio. Robyn will discuss the origination pipeline. Brett will summarize our financial results. We will then open the line for Q&A. With that, I will now turn the call over to our Chief Executive Officer, Leonard Tannenbaum. Thank you, Gabe. Good morning, and welcome to AFC Gamma's earnings call for the third quarter of 2022. I would like to thank our analysts and investors for joining us today to discuss our results. I am pleased to have continued to execute on our business plan during the third quarter. AFC Gamma generated distributable earnings of $0.59 per weighted average share of common stock, which does not include the earnings from our taxable REIT subsidiary. We view the core earnings power of AFC Gamma to include the earnings of our taxable REIT subsidiary. To date, none of the earnings have been recognized in our distributable earnings. The taxable REIT subsidiary earned $1 million in the September quarter and $1.6 million year to date, which are excluded from our distributable earnings until distributed up to AFC Gamma. As a reminder, distributable earnings is the primary metric that the board considers when declaring AFC Gamma's quarterly dividend. The board of directors declared a $0.56 dividend per share in the September quarter, which was paid on October 14th, 2022 to shareholders of record as of September 30th, 2022. Since going public, we have generated distributable earnings in excess of our dividend in each quarter. Since the IPO, we have paid out $2.98 in dividends per share. We currently have rollover income of approximately $6 million, or $0.29 per share outstanding. We did not increase the dividend this quarter as we believe the quarterly dividend level of $0.56 is appropriate based on the core earnings of AFC Gamma's current portfolio. Given we are halfway through the quarter, we are making the statement that we are confident that our distributable earnings will meet or exceed the current dividend level in the fourth quarter of 2022. Next, I would like to turn to the broader cannabis market from a macro perspective. As we discussed last quarter, the sector remains under pressure due to the uncertainty of regulatory change, pricing compression, and longer lead times to raise equity. In certain states, the pricing environment for wholesale has declined below the marginal cost of production, which has caused undercapitalized operators to close or suspend their cultivation and production. We believe that as wholesalers exit the market, prices may rebound above the marginal cost of production in mid 2023, benefiting the better capitalized operators. In addition, as a result of a difficult capital markets environment, many cannabis operators are Interesting. Alarm. Okay. We believe as wholesalers exit the market. Here we go. In addition, as a result of a difficult capital market environment, many cannabis operators are focused on existing operations and generating earnings versus deploying additional capital in new states. With public cannabis company stocks trading near lows, many are reluctant to raise equity capital, which may open additional opportunities for debt providers such as us to fill the void and invest in deals with enhanced yields and strong risk-adjusted returns. Given the market volatility, we are pleased with the quality of our portfolio. We believe that our focus on targeting operators in limited license states has set us up to mitigate risk and generate strong risk-adjusted returns. We actively manage our portfolio, having regular dialogue with many of our borrowers, and we are comfortable with the coverage of our loans on an enterprise value basis. Two loans are ranked as category 4 under our CECL analysis, with no new additions during the quarter and no category 5 loans in our portfolio. In addition, all of our borrowers are current with their payment obligations and no loans are on non-accrual. Subsequent to quarter end, AFC Gamma, its affiliates, and Viridescent increased their commitment to Acreage Holdings by providing access to an additional $50 million, of which $13 million has been drawn. The amended credit facility now includes a floating interest rate equal to US Prime plus 5.75% per annum, with a prime floor of 5.5%, an increase from the initial fixed coupon rate of 9.75%. We have further enhanced our collateral under the facility with a cash escrow of $28.5 million by a Canopy subsidiary. Additionally, subsequent to quarter end, AFC Gamma was refinanced out of our $86.6 million position in Verano Holdings. In this volatile cannabis environment, we believe it's important to be an agent in order to have substantial control over our deals. As of November 1st, 2022, we agented 95% of our deals based on outstanding commitments. AFC Gamma did not participate in Verano's new financing, which was not fully real estate secured. Verano was among our lowest-yielding investments, and we could potentially deploy the capital in higher-yielding assets. As we have stated in the past, deals can take between three and nine months to close. Therefore, we may have a cash balance at the end of the year as we look to deploy capital into deals with strong risk-adjusted returns. This cash balance may cause us to have an under-leveraged balance sheet below our previously stated target of 0.5 to one debt-to-equity ratio, which may decrease return on equity in the medium term. Turning to the macro lending environment, there has been a substantial rise in benchmark interest rates in the broader market as well as in the cannabis market. As of November 1st, approximately 56% of our portfolio had a floating interest rate, increasing from 29% at the end of the second quarter of 2022. The weighted average yield of the portfolio was approximately 20% on November 1st, up nicely from the 18% at the end of the second quarter of 2022. We are also excited to discuss that we are exploring some attractive opportunities for the company. As John will describe, we are analyzing expanding our investment strategy utilizing our core competencies. Management and the board are also exploring potential corporate opportunities for the company, including an internalization of our external manager. As we consider what is best for the company and its shareholders, a special committee of independent and disinterested members of the board has been formed to lead the company's thinking around a potential internalization. Looking ahead, I am excited about our market positioning, portfolio composition, our opportunity set, and our available liquidity. I will now turn the call over to John. Thank you, Len. As of November 1st, 2022, AFC Gamma has 13 loans outstanding with $426.2 million in commitments and $368.6 million funded. The portfolio has a weighted average time to maturity of just under three years. In building our portfolio, we targeted borrowers with operational knowledge, cultivation experience in cannabis, and significant equity invested in their enterprise. We have remained steadfast in our underwriting criteria and will not lend money to companies that don't meet our loan standards simply because we wish to deploy capital, even if this may result in a temporary cash trap. In the current cannabis market, operators have encountered new or worsening challenges that have made deploying capital into loans with a favorable risk profile more difficult. Companies' access to equity capital has virtually ceased. Cost increases for construction and personnel has not slowed, while pricing pressure on cannabis itself continues. These factors, combined with the absence of regulatory reform, has caused a slowdown in the industry, making it more difficult to source cannabis opportunities with significant real estate coverage in limited license states. It is not surprising that we have increased our cash balances. We believe that having capital available to take advantage of the opportunities that may be coming in this volatile environment is prudent. We see the possibility of a scenario in the near future where strong companies will once again seek our capital for distressed purchases, mergers, or expansion into newly approved adult use markets. We are therefore building cash reserves from the recent repayments we have received to be best positioned to invest in deals with strong near-term risk-adjusted returns while preserving the ability to take advantage of the next wave of cannabis M&A activity and growth. I wanted to highlight another factor in our lending. As a REIT, we generally require real estate as part of the collateral pool we receive from a borrower. While this requirement has eliminated some loan candidates, it has proven a vital part to ensure our loans remain fully collateralized. We do recognize that the necessity for real estate shrinks our pool of potential cannabis borrowers. As such, we are discussing solutions to increase our pool of potential borrowers so we can continue to make the best investment decisions for our shareholders through different economic and market cycles. I will now turn the call over to Robyn. Thank you, John. Our origination platform is focused on both expanding loans with a variety of our existing borrowers and continually sourcing new borrowers. From January 2020 through November 1st, 2022, we have sourced over $17 billion of transactions, which represents over 660 potential deals. As of November 1st, for the same time period, our selectivity ratio was approximately 4.4%. We have an active pipeline of $368 million, down from higher levels in the previous few quarters due to market factors that both John and Len described. Additionally, it remains difficult to predict both the timing of converting and closing those deals. At AFC Gamma, we are being prudent with our capital commitments and exhibiting a higher degree of selectivity as the market environment has been challenged. During the third quarter, we closed on new commitments of $19 million and had gross fundings of $24.8 million. We continue to remain disciplined in our approach to lending and implement stringent underwriting criteria to make prudent investment decisions. AFC Gamma has substantial liquidity and capacity to complete additional transactions that meet our lending criteria and have strong risk-adjusted returns. Before turning the call over to Brett, as President of AFC Foundation, I'm excited to highlight another deserving organization that AFC Foundation donated to, Corners Outreach. Based in Atlanta, Georgia, Corners Outreach is a nonprofit organization that strives to equip metro Atlanta's underserved students of color and their families with the tools needed to lead full lives through educational development and economic opportunities. AFC Foundation was pleased to make this donation as Corners Outreach continues to improve its nearby communities and invest in students to enact social change. I will now turn it over to Brett to review our financials. Thank you, Robyn. We are pleased to report another quarter of solid financial performance, driven by strong growth in income during the quarter due to the growth in the loan portfolio versus the prior year comparable quarter. For the quarter ended September 30th, 2022, we recorded GAAP net income of $11.5 million, or earnings of $0.57 per basic weighted average common share, an increase to net income of 45% as compared to the third quarter of 2021, where we had GAAP net income of $7.9 million, or earnings of $0.48 per basic weighted average common share. For the third quarter of 2022, we generated net interest income of $18.1 million, an increase of 71% as compared to the third quarter of 2021, where we had interest income of $10.6 million. For the same time period, we generated distributable earnings of $11.8 million, or $0.59 per basic weighted average common share, an increase to distributable earnings of 64% as compared to distributable earnings of $7.2 million, or $0.44 per basic weighted average common share for the third quarter of 2021. As of September 30th, 2022, our total assets were $471.3 million as compared to $303.9 million on September 30th, 2021. As of November 1st, 2022, AFC Gamma's portfolio consisted of $426.2 million of current commitments, with $368.6 million funded across 13 loans. As of November 1st, 2022, year-to-date, we have closed on new commitments of $203.8 million, where we repaid on $152.4 million from five investments, and we sold $25 million from two investments. The weighted average portfolio yield to maturity, which is measured for each loan over the life of such loan, was approximately 20% as of November 1st, 2022, as compared to 18% as of June 30th, 2022. As previously mentioned, we believe providing distributable earnings is helpful to stockholders in assessing the overall performance of AFC Gamma's business. Distributable earnings represents the net income computed in accordance with GAAP, excluding non-cash items such as equity compensation expense, any unrealized gains or losses, provision for current expected credit losses, also known as CECL, taxable REIT subsidiary income or loss, or other non-cash items recorded in net income or loss for the period. As of September 30th, 2022, the CECL reserve of our loans at carrying value represents approximately 1.8%, compared to approximately 1.76% at June 30th, 2022. On October 14th, 2022, AFC Gamma paid a dividend of $0.56 per common share for the third quarter to shareholders of record as of September 30th, 2022. Year-to-date, we have paid out dividends of approximately 90% of our distributable earnings. As a reminder, on an annual basis, our dividend policy is to pay between 85%-100% of distributable earnings over the year. Next, let's take a look at our balance sheet, which remains strong. I am pleased to report that Egan-Jones during the quarter affirmed our BBB+ investment-grade corporate and senior notes rating Our $100 million senior notes, which have a 5.75% fixed rate, remain outstanding and are due in May 2027. Our leverage, as measured by debt to equity, was 0.29 times to one as of September 30th, 2022, and currently, there is no net leverage. In addition to the substantial cash and liquidity partially provided by the Verano loan repayment, we have an undrawn $60 million revolving credit facility. As of September 30th, 2022, our total stockholders' equity was $347.4 million, and our book value per share was $17.06 as compared to $16.61 as of December 31st, 2021, an increase of 3%. With that, I will now turn it back over to the operator to start the Q&A. Operator? Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star one one. Once again, to ask a question, please press star one one. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Our first question will come from Gaurav Mehta from EF Hutton. Your line is open. Thanks. Good morning. Good morning. First question on your comments on internalization. I was hoping if you could provide some more color on what factors you're going to consider. I know, I think in the past you had talked about considering internalization when equity equals a billion dollars or more. Is that still a target or is there any change in that at all? We're still relatively early in the discovery that the board is doing, and the committee was just formed, as I said. There's not much to talk about. Of course, you can go back and see in the proxy it was very detailed out, as you point out, that a billion dollars, there's a certain formula and thought process around it. It will differ from that, but I think that's at least a good starting point, to understand what we're talking about. Yes, the board is considering doing it earlier, they're asking us to do it earlier than the billion dollars where they have the right to internalize the manager. They're asking the manager, in this case, "Would we consider doing it earlier?" Yet the discussions are very preliminary. Okay. Second question on your repayments, your comments on substantial repayments in 4Q. I'm sorry if you maybe talked about this, was it sort of expected or was it a surprise, the increase in repayments that you guys saw in 4Q? No, it was expected. In fact, I think I talked about it on previous calls that a large borrower could repay and that Verano happened to be our lowest yielding loan, et cetera. We did expect it. It was actually due the following May, so they had to refinance certainly by then. We received some additional income because of that, because of the early repayment. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. One moment for our next question, please. Our next question will come from Harrison Zivot from Cowen and Company. Your line is open. Great. Thanks so much for taking my questions. Len, just wanted to start maybe taking a step back and looking at the broader economic environment. Understanding you've talked about and sort of studied rate cycles in the past, would appreciate your perspective on where you think we are in the current rate cycle. Do you think your borrowers in your pipeline have the flexibility to wait for rates to soften before executing on new loans? I think that we're going to find out in the CPI print this week, but I think most estimates are that inflation will stay persistent. The interest rates will stay high for a period of time. We found it really important to migrate a lot of our portfolio to floating rates from fixed, which we were very successful moving it to 56%. We hope to move it higher, obviously, but 56% up from 20-somewhat percent, Robyn? Twenty-nine. 29%. We're going to benefit as rates continue to rise. The Fed indicate a slower rate of rise. The borrowers are already paying quite a bit, in terms of interest. I'm not sure 100 or 200 basis points is going to tilt the apple cart one way or another. Much more important is the supply-demand equation in the macro environment in cannabis, which could get better by mid-next year because of people coming out of the market, the weaker players. At least we hope that. At least we hope for some price stabilization. It certainly has compressed margins across the board. As for the country's macro environment, I think everyone realizes it's slowing across the board. It's a question of what the pace of how fast it'll slow and where it bottoms out. Okay. Makes sense. Thank you. Shifting to guidance you previously offered. The expectation has been for $300 million to $500 million in gross originations. You're at around $200 million as of November 1st. Do you kind of expect to still land somewhere within that gross origination target? On the repayment front, you're sort of at the midpoint of your guide, curious to hear what you're thinking about gross originations. The problem is it's very difficult to time originations, my guess is if we do hit the $300 million to $500 million, it'll be the low end at best. It's going to be challenging to hit that range. The same thing for next year. I think I made some forward-looking comments regarding leverage. I think it'll be difficult to get to our previously stated 0.5x lever target next year. We're going to be under-leveraged for the medium term, I'm not sure what the medium term means in terms of months, a lot of people are anticipating us taking leverage. By the way, I'm not quite sure it's prudent to take leverage in this volatile environment either. We do want to see things bottom in cannabis before we're more aggressive in terms of loans. We're pretty happy about having such a nice liquidity position. For sure. Makes sense. Last one from me. Would love some more color on the public company M deal. How long did that deal take to complete? Given you acquired that loan, do you think acquiring loans will become a bigger part of the capital deployment strategy? You want to answer? Oh. The $10 million one? Yes. Yeah, that's the $10 million loan acquired during the quarter. Yeah. You're whispering it to me, but now you're saying it on the call. That's not very smart, but it's okay. Look, I think that was a deal with a company that actually we're working on another deal with that's in the pipeline. It's one of the better operators in the space. We don't name it. This one is not an agented deal. I said 90 What percent? 95%. 95% of our deals are agented. Public Company M is not an agented deal. It's agented by a different agent. We're part of a much larger loan. We did it, not only do we think the company's good, but we did it to build a relationship with the company, which we hope to do some more business with. Great. That's very helpful. I'll jump back in the queue. Thank you. One moment for our next question, please. Our next question will come from John Hecht from Jefferies. Your line is open. Aaron? Aaron or John? I think John's line is on mute. It was John. Oh, there he is. Hey, sorry guys. Yeah, something went wrong. Good morning, and thanks for taking my questions though. You talked about the Verano payoff. You talked about gross commitments this quarter. I'm just trying to, as best possible, think about the near term loan book for modeling perspective, understanding you're not giving any guidance there. Any other kind of meaningful payoffs we should think about that you're aware of over the next couple of months? Maybe, can you just characterize the kind of, yeah, I know things take longer. There's no certainty about closing deals. Maybe can you just characterize the opportunities you have that may kind of come to fruition by the end of the year? That's a great question. We are working on some deals that could happen by the end of the year. They could slip into early next year. It's very hard to tell. We have signed term sheets we're working on. Doesn't mean they always complete. I do think we're going to have cash drag for a bit. I do think that this is not necessarily a bad environment to have it. We are, as we've said on the prepared remarks, considering expanding our universe of things that we're looking at that are real estate secured. I think that's preliminary, too. I don't intend to have cash drag over the long term. I think having it now is not necessarily a bad thing given the uncertainty in the environment and the need for capital, as these cannabis providers start running out of capital and having to make seller notes and having to make payments on things. They certainly need debt capital. The challenge that we're facing is real estate security. A lot of these, including the Verano loan, the restated one after we got out, wasn't real estate secured. That really was very little real estate secured. That really messes up your REIT tests when you have that much money in a loan, which isn't primarily real estate secured. There's two REIT tests that are really important, as you know, which is the ICA test, Investment Company Act test, and of course, your normal income from REIT tests. You have two different considerations, and one very important one is 55% or more of our loans have to be fully real estate secured, like 100%. Of course, we aim for much higher than that. That's at a minimum to maintain a very important thing, our REIT status. We're finding cannabis challenging in terms, I think John said this, in terms of finding the appropriate real estate security, which we do view as a very important component in our overall security. I think everybody concurs that being selective and holding extra liquidity is a smart call in this environment. Maybe that does dovetail to the next question. You comment on this, Len, that the TRS had a bigger impact this quarter. What assets go into the TRS? And I guess just how do we think about that in the scheme of what gets in the P&L? That's a good question. I'm glad you mentioned it because really what I realized as I looked through our numbers and I looked through the analyst estimates for this past quarter, I'm like, "Okay, where's some of the discrepancy?" One of the things is we had to drop one of our assets. I think we said that last quarter, right, Brandon Hetzel? Yeah, we put it in No, we dropped it in this quarter. We dropped it in this quarter. Okay. July 1st. Yeah. We dropped a substantial asset into the TRS, and the way REITs work is for about a year after you do capital raising, you can match your assets against it and have it count for your REIT test. After a year, if it's not real estate secured, and this asset isn't. In fact, there's very little real estate coverage. One that you dropped in has a little bit of real estate. Yeah. It has some real estate coverage, but not enough. It has to be dropped into the taxable REIT subsidiary so that the income test is preserved. Therefore, all of the earnings of that asset, all of the interest that it pays, goes into the taxable REIT subsidiary, which is why you saw a big jump in that income. It's at our discretion to dividend that up to parent. When that dividend's up, then we have more distributable earnings, and if we leave it there, then we have less distributable earnings. I just wanted to point out that we're still earning it, and it's real cash. It's showing up in a wholly-owned subsidiary. I'm not sure when we decide to dividend it up, I did want to point out that we did earn the money. Okay. That's helpful. Is there any other assets in the near term that will either come in or go out of that, or should we think that at least for the visible future, that should be consistent in terms of the level of impact on the P&L? I think there's another asset in the medium term that may drop in, which means in the six-month-ish timeframe, that I can think of. Yeah. I don't see anything, right now, I don't see anything in the next quarter. Doesn't mean we're not going to put something in there, I don't see anything in the next quarter. Okay, that's very helpful. Thanks. Last question is, I think there are five state-level ballot initiatives today. Leonard Tannenbaum, I even think you commented maybe on one of the opportunities. Are you eyeing these? Is there any update on the outcome of these and how it may allow you to expand geographically or increase your appetite to expand or any comment about national legislation as well? Look, I've been saying SAFE Act passes in lame duck. I'm less excited about it today because I think, depending what happens today on the elections, if the Republicans take both Houses, I don't think they have the stomach to push SAFE Act plus through. I think Schumer has messed this up entirely. I think that he's telegraphed it days ago, which created a rally, which he did it for political purposes. They should have pushed harder earlier. They should have cleared this out of Senate committee earlier. This is a very important thing for the industry. I think if it's not done soon, it's not going to be done anytime soon. I'm not looking for any national legislation, I think this whole idea of decriminalization is ridiculous because it needs to be accompanied with major legislative action in order to do things like that if you're going to deschedule cannabis. We're talking about 6-8 years from now, maybe, with a Republican-led House and Senate, very unlikely that you're going to get the legislative support. As to the states, same Republican states are approving legal cannabis, which is kind of interesting. I think we're very optimistic that Maryland approves, and we're looking at a deal in Maryland. We're very optimistic that Missouri approves it, and we have a lot of exposure in Missouri. We consciously took a disproportionate amount of exposure in Missouri, given that dynamic. There's some other states that we're not really into, which is Arkansas, North Dakota, South Dakota. What I'm continuing to be excited about from a build-out standpoint, you're hearing some of the big MSOs slowing their building, slowing their CapEx, and that's true. I think everybody's being more cash conserving. They also have a bunch of seller notes that they have to pay off, the larger MSOs. If you think about states with the most potential that still are getting reconciled, is Georgia. Georgia is going to be amazing, not in the next year, but in three. I think it's another Florida-type state. It's about two-thirds the size of the state of Florida. There's only going to be six or so operators. The top two licenses got cleared, the bottom four haven't. We're actively looking at partnering with those builders in Georgia. Great, guys. Thanks very much for the update. Thank you. One moment for our next question, please. Our next question will come from Aaron Hecht from JMP Securities. Your line is open. Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. When you talked about investment requirements to maintain REIT status, the Verano loan, obviously the largest in your portfolio, I think you said it had limited real estate coverage. This is one of those major requirements. I would think that would give you significant runway to invest in non-real estate secured loans, given that was your biggest loan. You also made the comment about expanding the investment strategy to other core competencies. Does that imply that you're looking to invest to a level where you'd change the structure of the organization? Or just walk me through those dynamics. I think we got it backwards. The Verano loan, when we did the loan, was real estate secured. The Verano loan refinanced was not real estate secured. In fact, it had a little bit of real estate coverage, but less than 30% of the loan was real estate secured, if that. It became not REIT eligible. In order to maintain even our B bucket, that was what they call an A bucket loan, as you know. That would have become a B bucket loan, but we need A bucket loans to meet our ICA test and have our B bucket. That's the problem, is even if we wanted to go back in the loan, and we also chose not to because we weren't agenting a very large loan that we believe that you should have agent and control over your investments. We wasn't really real estate eligible, and ultimately those types of things, even if we did a small piece, would have to be dropped into the taxable REIT subsidiary. That's the problem. We do need to think about how do we do more real estate loans, and that's what we're thinking about, is really making sure that we have the real estate coverage for REIT. Okay. When you define core competencies, does that mean that you stay in the cannabis realm? For non-real estate loans, if you're doing some more of those, what does the return profile look like versus a secured loan? Just the opportunity set, how much bigger does your world get with this non-real estate secured type of loan? I think, again, we're backwards. We're looking for real estate secured loans. Okay, got you. Not non-real estate secured loans. Okay. We want to stay with real estate secured loans. We've built in-house expertise in construction. We've built in-house expertise in industrial underwriting, industrial property underwriting. We've become very good at it. Martin does a good job leading those teams, but also helping in the building, but also understanding all the hurdles when you want to build out a cultivation, when you want to build out dispensaries. I'll point out even a big peer, internally managed REIT peer, is going to lease their property to a non-cannabis provider. There are a lot of tangential expertises in our core competencies that we could explore while still really maintaining what we're really good at. By the way, we have 100% of our deals in cannabis today, and right now we have nothing to talk about besides that. We do need to continue to find real estate secured loans, and I think that's our primary focus. Okay. Thanks for that clarification. Then on potential internalization, what changed from your perspective for the board to consider an early internalization? You do have some extra liquidity right now. Will you be holding on to liquidity until that process is figured out to give yourselves options for anything that may come up? I think we've lots of liquidity. We have an undrawn credit line, and I think we're sitting in a net debt equal position today. So, in my mind, that's much more liquidity than any internalization would require. As for why the board's considering early, we're just in the preliminary discussions of it. I think part of it's cost of capital. I think as we've spoken to even our bankers in your firm and others, there are a number of investors that don't invest in externally managed companies. The external manager has different cost structures than the internal manager, and we want our stock to continue to trade well. We're trading around book, but we want it to trade very well, and we look at IIPR as an internally managed entity and see how well it trades, or at least the board does. This is still very preliminary. As soon as we have more, we're definitely going to talk about it. I think there's a lot of considerations around it, and ultimately it's up to our shareholders, because any internalization, to me, would require a shareholder vote. Appreciate the thoughts. Thank you. One moment for our next question, please. Our next question will come from Mark Smith from Lake Street. Your line is open. Hi, guys. First one for me, just broadly as we look at the industry and weakness out there, have you seen any changes in the states where you are operating in some of these limited license states? Any of this weakness kind of expanding into some of those states? You mean the weakness that's in the unlimited license states expanding into the limited license states? I think a good example of that is Arizona. Arizona is a great limited license state, but you want to be on the dispensary side. It's unlimited license from a cultivation standpoint. In Arizona, cultivation prices have crashed and wholesale price is down to $350-ish dollars. It's one of the states that you can easily say is below marginal cost of production, for greenhouse product especially. It's really unfortunate. It's the worst I've seen it in Arizona. Colorado I view it as an unlimited license state, so we don't do business there, but that price has crashed there for sure. Look, it is spilling. You're seeing a price compression in Pennsylvania. You're seeing price compression in Massachusetts. Pretty much across the board, because as much as they don't want cannabis to spill across borders, magically it does. It's a little bit of a flow, especially with greenhouse products spilling across borders and outdoor grow spilling across borders. The one bright light, I would say, in general, is high-end. The high-end premium product and brands have held up and held up well. We do have one company in Michigan, which is an extremely tough state, and greenhouse crashed, but the indoor product that they're selling really has held up to nice prices. That's a good example of a premium provider still doing okay in this environment. Okay. And then Robyn talked a little bit, I don't want to mischaracterize it, but it sounded like kind of a squeezed pipeline. Is that the big leading indicator and then, a few months to get these deals over the finish line once they come into the pipeline? Any insight into what you're seeing as you're out there in the early stages looking for deals? Have we seen any capitulation yet and people that look like they're getting ready to start dumping capital and investing more? How we view the active pipeline is just as it sounds, opportunities that are actionable, either term sheets issued, heading towards a term sheet issued, or farther down the diligence process to make a decision on whether or not we want to issue a term sheet. I think from that standpoint, it's definitely come down, as Len and John talked about, the environment for cannabis in general is making us more selective in terms of the deals that we're looking at, in terms of opportunities that we're willing to invest in. There is still definitely a need for capital from operators and providers. Some of the larger MSOs, aside from the Verano refinancing, as we discussed, they've really focused on their existing operations and generating cash flow versus the expansion that we saw last year. The expansion of those large MSOs and those bigger tickets are really what drove the pipeline up. Focusing more on the mid-tier and mid-size operators is part of what's driven it down, along with a lack of real estate collateral that's been tough to find. Okay. In the same vein, as you're looking at and need that real estate collateral, as you look to move more towards floating, do you feel like there's pushback on the switch over the floating rate loans, or is that not as big of an issue? Go for it. All the new things we're looking at are floating, just by standard. When we have the opportunity in a renegotiation to modify a loan from fixed to floating, we're taking advantage of that because we clearly believe that floating with a good floor is the way to go in this increasing interest rate environment. Thank you, guys. Thank you. I am showing no further questions from our phone lines. I'd now like to turn the conference back over to Len Tannenbaum for any closing remarks. Look, thank you all for listening. We look forward to reporting another quarter next year. If we don't talk to you, have a great rest of the year. Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect. Everyone, have a wonderful day.