Good day, welcome to the AIR Communities' first quarter 2021 earnings conference call. All participants will be in listen-only mode. Should you need assistance, please signal a conference specialist by pressing the star key, followed by zero. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To ask a question, you may press star then one on any touch-tone phone. To withdraw your question, please press star then two. Please note today's event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Lisa Cohn. Please go ahead, ma'am. Thank you, and good day. During this conference call, the forward-looking statements we make are based on management's judgment, including projections related to 2021 expectations. These statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, a description of which can be found in our SEC filings. Actual results may differ materially from what may be discussed today. We will also discuss certain non-GAAP financial measures, such as funds from operations. These measures are defined and are reconciled to the most comparable GAAP measures in the supplemental information that is part of the full earnings release published on AIR's website. Prepared remarks today come from Terry Considine, our CEO, Keith Kimmel, our President in charge of Property Operations, and Paul Beldin, the Chief Financial Officer. Other members of management are present and will be available during our question and answer session, which will follow our prepared remarks. I will now turn the call to Terry Considine. Terry? Thank you, Lisa, good morning to all of you on this call. I thank you for your interest in AIR. We had a solid first quarter, more importantly, we have excellent prospects for the full-year and beyond. In our markets, fourth quarter results marked an inflection point. First quarter was much better. Second quarter to date shows further acceleration. We expect AIR to thrive in this economy. We created AIR to provide investors with the most efficient way to invest in multifamily properties for a current cash return and long-term capital appreciation. Our plan for AIR includes a number of specific objectives, which we communicated to investors. We've accomplished many already. We're working to advance others, their completion remains in the future. Here's what we've already achieved. We chose and have a business model with minimal execution risk and without complex investments. Our business is simple and highly transparent. We own a high-quality and diversified portfolio of stabilized multifamily properties. Its quality and resilience have been tested and confirmed by overcoming the challenges of the past 12 months. We are the best in property operations. We have a long record of measured customer satisfaction, flat controllable costs, and peer-leading margins. Results year to date confirm the excellence of Keith's team and are the reason for the recent increase in guidance for full-year FFO. We want our leverage at a low cost. Our cost of borrowing, aided by low market rates, was already low. Our new $1.4 billion bank credit and term loan makes it lower with an all-in cost of 1.6%. We want to be efficient with G&A as a percent of GAV, the lowest in the sector, and at 15 basis points it is. We targeted higher FFO based on lower overhead costs and elimination of lease-up drag. It's working. We believe a high quality of earnings supports an improved dividend payout ratio. Our year-to-date results have almost no non-recurring or non-cash income. We want flexibility if income tax rules change, as many now recommend. We are glad to have refreshed our tax bases. We have other objectives where we're making progress but still have work to do. We want our leverage to be low, at a level comparable to peers. We made a good start when our recent equity raise lowered leverage by almost one turn. We're on track to reach our long-term target of leverage to EBITDA 5.5 x by the end of this year, a full-year ahead of schedule. We want to increase FFO and cash dividends by their organic growth, and also the accretive acquisition of well-located, stabilized properties. In a dynamic economy where some markets struggle with stagnant demand, high taxes, and an uncertain rule of law, we are interested to reallocate capital to markets with growing populations, lower taxes, and less political risk. Our cost of equity capital is much improved. We sold unregistered shares earlier this week at a price that supports accretive investment. In a world awash with liquidity, our competitive advantage is our superior property operations. We're committed to excellence in corporate governance. We're the only publicly traded Maryland apartment REIT docked out of the MUTA provisions that permit a classified board. We're one of three to separate the role of chairman and CEO. We've received numerous recognitions for our independent, diverse, and engaged board. With four new directors in the past five years, we're committed to board refreshment, and more is forthcoming this year. We believe our work is more than a business. It's also a mission to serve others. We're noted for our numerous programs for community service and have been voted a best place to work for the past eight years. We were committed to further progress on the achievement, measurement, and reporting of our ESG goals. One theme might be promises made, promises kept. I also like the best is yet to come. I'm upbeat about 2021 and see bright prospects beyond. These good results and future opportunities are due to the hard work and respectful collaboration of my AIR teammates. I thank each of you for your hard work to give birth to AIR and to deliver on its promise. I celebrate your commitment each and every day to our residents, our shareholders, and to each other to be the best we can be. AIR is best in class because you, my AIR colleagues, are the very best. I'm proud of you and grateful to be your teammate. With that, I'll turn the call to Keith Kimmel, head of property operations. Keith? Thanks, Terry. Given the rapid changes in business one year ago, year-over-year comparisons are both too easy and too distorting to be helpful. I'm going to break from my norm and focus my comments on sequential changes in the business. The first quarter brought clear signs that the inflection in our business is in the rear view, and a rebound is well underway. First quarter average daily occupancy increased 110 basis points from the fourth quarter. Turnover was down 42.3%. Applications accelerated up 25% quarter-over-quarter instead of the more typical flat seasonal pattern. Rental rates strengthened sequentially. Signed blended rates increased from negative 8.2% to negative 1.8% in the first quarter, with improvement in each of our eight markets. As a result, revenue growth was up 1.5%. Through it all, we maintained our customer focus and cost discipline to deliver strong operating margins. Our first quarter margin was 71.3%, up 80 basis points from our peer-leading fourth quarter mark. Even our challenged markets are recovering. Here's one example. Just last week in Philadelphia, we leased more than 50 apartment homes, the biggest week we've had in two years, at a positive rate. This past October, we had a similar number of leases for the entire month, and at a - 17% lease to lease. As I said, the rebound is well underway. Our first quarter results demonstrated the benefit of our diversified portfolio. San Diego and Miami were our strongest markets during the quarter, with sequential revenue growth of 3.3%. Average daily occupancy was 98%, up from 97% in the fourth quarter, and rents accelerated rapidly, with signed new lease rates up over 8% and asking rents now more than 10% ahead of pre-COVID peaks. We saw steady results in Denver, Washington, D.C., and Boston, where revenue was up 40 basis points sequentially. Occupancy in these markets was 96.5%, up from 95.8% in the fourth quarter, with signed blended rates of +80 basis points, an improvement from -6.7% in the fourth quarter. Asking rents have now recovered to pre-COVID levels. In Philadelphia, we're now seeing the return of students and Center City office workers. Leasing pace has been strong, about 65% ahead of the fourth quarter, well ahead of the normal seasonal acceleration. Blended rates also improved, increasing from -14% in the fourth quarter to -4% in the first quarter. Occupancy has grown from 86.9% in August to 91% in March. As we look forward, we anticipate another occupancy leap in September as the school year begins. In Los Angeles, occupancy was solid at 96.7%. Rates improved from a blend of -11% in the fourth quarter to -3% in the first quarter. With SB 91, we see a path towards resolution of the long-dated delinquencies, which represent a 5% drag on Los Angeles' revenue growth. In Northern California, we see early signs of the tech company's return, with first quarter lease pace 60% ahead of the fourth quarter, as opposed to the typical 10% increase. Occupancy is rebounding too, up 200 basis points from the fourth quarter. While rates remain pressured, we expect the gradual gains we've made to accelerate as occupancy and demand improve throughout peak season. In April, momentum continued to build. Average daily occupancy is 95.4%, with lease pace increasing another 20% from March, right on our seasonal expectations. We have already pre-leased 43% of our upcoming second quarter notices, by far the best mark of the past five years. While we expect occupancy to flatten over the next few months, and as we work through our seasonal increase in frictional vacancy, our leasing velocity gives us confidence we will exit summer with high occupancies. Rate follows occupancy, and now is also strengthening, with signed blended rates increasing from up 40 basis points in March to up 1.4% in April, with improvement in all eight markets. To show how quickly rates are accelerating, even since our press release just two weeks ago, effective asking rents have increased by an average of $25, or over 1% across the entire portfolio, and now stand above our asking rents on January 1st of 2020. This growing momentum makes me increasingly optimistic about the balance of 2021. If we were to compare a snapshot of today with one taken March 1st of last year, we'd see many similarities. Leasing pace is the same. Asking rents are the same. Renewal offers are going out at the same increases, and our offices are open and operating normally. That said, we still have much to do. We need to recover the 160 basis point occupancy gap to our pre-COVID levels. Two-thirds of our leasing activity is left this year, with much of it in the next three months. We need to cycle through leases that signed last year and restore the average rate in our rent roll that is $50 lower than a year ago. We need to be free to address delinquencies and bad debt. Our collections have been consistent, but too many financially capable residents continue to take advantage of local ordinances to live rent-free. We expect this will be corrected by year-end with special consideration for those with genuine needs. We do not control the pace at which local governments open courts and restore our access to legal remedies. We need to continue to provide world-class customer service that minimizes turnover and maximizes renewal rates. My thanks to the entire AIR team for your continued energy, innovation, and dedication to serving our residents. With that, I'll now turn the call over to Paul Beldin, our Chief Financial Officer. Paul. Thank you, Keith. Today, I will discuss AIR's strong balance sheet, including the benefits of the recent equity issuance. I will then discuss our expectations for the remainder of 2021 and conclude by discussing the dividend. First, AIR's balance sheet is strong and flexible. We closed a new $1.4 billion credit facility described in our earnings release. We sold 7.8 million shares of common stock, generating over $342 million of proceeds. As a new issuer, we are not yet eligible to file a shelf registration statement. Until we have 12 months of post-separation filings, the registration process will entail a longer SEC clearance process and marketing period, introducing greater uncertainty in pricing and execution. To avoid this risk, we opted to sell the shares in a private placement. We're using the proceeds from the offering to repay property debt with a weighted average interest cost of 4.6%. The repayment of this high-cost debt neutralizes any dilution from additional shares outstanding, and in doing so, reduces leverage to EBITDA by approximately nine-tenths of a turn. Looking ahead, leverage remains higher than our targeted leverage to EBITDA ratio. We expect $580 million in net proceeds from property sales, reducing leverage to EBITDA by an additional nine-tenths of a turn. We expect an additional half-turn reduction from growth in property NOI. In sum, we expect year-end 2021 leverage to EBITDA to approximate 5.5 x, consistent with the long-term leverage target we set when we announced AIR's separation from Aimco, and more than one year ahead of our original schedule. On looking ahead, we expect full-year FFO per share between $1.96 and $2.06, just as we said two weeks ago. At the midpoint, this is a $0.03 increase from the guidance we gave in February. The net $0.03 increase is a result of $0.03-$0.06 of incremental FFO from increased same-store NOI, $0.02 of lower interest expense due to completed leverage neutral refinancing activity, a $0.03 reduction in FFO from property sales, and finally, as mentioned earlier, less than a $0.005 reduction in per share FFO due to the equity issuance. The strong operating results benefit 2021. They also provide a solid foundation for 2022 as leases executed during peak leasing season are fully earned in. On April 26th, the AIR board of directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.43 per share, a 5% increase over the 2020 regular quarterly dividends paid last year by Aimco. Increased dividends reflects AIR's high quality of earnings, lower leverage, and greater predictability of cash flows. As AIR earnings continue to grow, we expect that our dividend will do the same. With that, we will now open up the call for questions. Please limit your questions to two per time in the queue. Rocco, I'll turn it over to you for the first question. Thank you, sir. As a reminder, ladies and gentlemen, if you'd like to ask a question, please press star then one. If your question has been addressed and you'd like to remove yourself, please press star then two. Today's first question comes from Haendel St. Juste with Mizuho. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning out there. Morning. Hey. Terry, hope you're well. A strong quarter here with guidance raised, reinforcements of your favorable portfolio and operational attributes. I wanted to focus on a couple other things. I guess, can you talk to us about the decision to sell equity here and the pricing involved? You previously outlined, as you said, a goal of getting to 5.5x by end of next year via organic cash flow and select asset sales. I'm curious, what's changed in your thinking and why? Was it just perhaps the stock price being up and your ability to execute fairly earnings neutral or were there other considerations? Thank you. Haendel, I think you've described it perfectly, that the stock was at a 52-week high, that we had an opportunity to reinvest the proceeds in a way that minimized or eliminated dilution from delevering, which is hard to do. It just proceeded to increase the equitization, if you will, of the company as we moved from a more levered model to one that's primarily equity. Got it. Okay. I guess the question on the AIRC stock price performance since the split last year. The stock is up with trailed peers. You still trade at a discount to the sector average. After simplifying the platform, the story, the operational results are very solid. You've improved the balance sheet, corporate governance, and have dealt with the exits from the equity. I guess I'm curious to know what you think the market might not be fully appreciating about the story here, and what other levers you can or would consider to pull to close that valuation gap? Well, I think the market has been pretty good. We're not far behind peers year to date. I think when we look at the outperformance in the last couple of weeks of 2020, you get a more complete view. I think that when we look forward, growth is going to come from really two major areas. The first is Keith will continue to produce results that are superior to peers. So that's not to be missed. The second is that the subtractions from that outcomes for G&A and overhead will be lower than among peers. The third will be the opportunity to acquire properties where, again, Keith's operating advantage creates above average returns by comparison to the properties being sold to fund it. If you think of paired trades, the typical property that we will buy will be in a market with superior growth prospects and where there's an upside due to operating advantages. It'll be funded with sales from properties in markets with lower growth prospects, and which have already had the advantages of Keith's tender loving care. Thank you for that. Can you actually clarify for me, Paul, if the recent guidance increase contemplated the equity issuance? In other words, would there have been more upside beyond the new guidance rates had you not done the equity? Yeah. Haendel, the impact of the equity issuance was really a non-event when it comes to FFO guidance. Because we're using the proceeds to pay off high-cost debt, the dilution is less than a half a cent for the year. Got it. All right. Thank you. Our next question today comes from Rich Anderson with SMBC. Please go ahead. Thanks. Good afternoon. Morning. Terry, question for you on leverage, or maybe Paul, whomever. The story of Aimco was you could have higher leverage, and I'm saying Aimco back in the day, because of the nature of the debt, the no entity risk story. You got investment grade rated, but we're not going to use that was kind of the tagline. Now, you're dropping that leverage down to comparable to your peers. I'm curious what happened for you to change your stripes on the leverage narrative for this company. Did you bump your head and suddenly have an epiphany, or what happened to make this happen? Rich, I think there are two factors. First is that for a long period of time, shareholders who appreciated the higher returns, and by the way, were supportive. Also there were other shareholders we didn't have. The opportunity cost of shareholders who were of a mind that low leverage was a better way to go. I thought in this particular case, I think we'll have a lower cost of equity capital and higher appreciation in the stock by just not fighting the tape, as they say, but by embracing what the customer, or if you will, in this case, shareholder feedback was. The second one is that there's a part of me that is concerned that prices are high, and that we are in a bit of a bubble economy, and that it's good to be cautious, and that by de-risking the company in every way that I could, it minimizes our exposure to a cyclical fluctuation. That's why we focused on both the balance sheet but also the business model. Okay. Fair enough. My second question is, the company now kind of has that new car smell to it with everything that you did to make it kind of simpler and everything. There might be an appetite for risk from investors, speaking of them, for risk if we're heading into this euphoric stage of multifamily following a terrible past year. To what degree is AIR willing to take on some risk and potentially muddy the thesis of what you're trying to accomplish here, which is simple and transparent. Will you take on stuff like Brickell or something like it, or is it off the radar screen no matter what? Richard, the short answer is it's off the screen no matter what. We've tried again and again and again to communicate that, and including in my opening remarks, just to say, Here's what we're going to do and here's what we're not going to do. I think that Brickell, as you mentioned, is one that made the market scratch its head a little bit, but it's already, I believe, on paper, has a significant unbooked gain. The case today is to provide a simple, transparent business that has low risk, and has easy to understand, and has an opportunity for growth through superior outperformance by the gentleman sitting to my immediate left. We're counting on you, Keith. Okay, thanks very much. Thank you. Our next question today comes from Alexander Kalmus with Zelman & Associates. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you for taking the question. Just going back to the equity sale. Just curious how the process came about and you said it's a real estate investment firm, so I'm just curious if there's any strategic benefits with the investment itself as well. Thank you. It came about because of conversations that I have regularly with investors in the stock. Many of the people on this call will have called in or will have spoken to them in the last 90 days, or expect to speak to them in the next 90 days. In one of those conversations, it emerged that the investor, which has been identified as Zimmer Partners, was interested in purchasing the amount of shares that they did. I thought at the price that was agreed, it would be very much to the advantage of the company. As for strategic advantages, I think I'm not aware of any. It would make them probably the fifth largest shareholder, or maybe sixth. Obviously all shareholders matter to us, and the sixth will matter importantly, but not out of range than any of the others. Actually, I would say there is an advantage that Stuart Zimmer's had a wonderful track record of making good investments, and I'm really grateful for his seeing the opportunity to invest inside AIR, and I think of it as a bit of an endorsement. Great. Thank you. On the marketing aspect for the properties up for sale, how is that proceeding? We're obviously hearing about low cap rates, so an advantageous time for sellers. If you have locations that you're looking at, obviously you've said New York as a potential one in the past, but if there's any other locations that you're thinking about disposing? Well, in general, we're moving from markets, as I said earlier, with superior growth. Moving to markets with superior growth prospects, Florida would be no secret as an example. We're selling properties in markets with lower expected growth and often with unpredictable rule of law. Blue states like California or New York and Chicago are ones that we have to keep a weather eye on what their future prospects will be. Got it. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, as a reminder, to ask a question, please press star then one. Today's next question comes from Nick Joseph at Citi. Please go ahead. Hey, it's Michael Bilerman here with Nick. Terry, I was wondering if you can provide a little bit more details around the debt repayment with the equity proceeds. I think it said you're going to pay back debt at 4.6%. Can you share with us sort of the term of that debt, the prepayment make-wholes that may be there? Obviously there's a cost to repaying that debt or maybe some of it's fully pre-payable. Maybe if we can address that, and then I had a follow-up as well. Michael, that's a great question. I could take a cut at it, but Paul knows it better than I, and I hand it off to him. Yeah. Thank you for the question, Michael. As you mentioned, we are looking to pay off debt with a weighted average cost of about 4.6%, when the market today is in the high twos, right around 2.9%. There is a make-whole provision and a prepayment penalty. When we looked at this, what we considered was the payback period as compared to our marginal cost. When we did that analysis, we have come to the conclusion that on an NPV basis, we're at a break-even point to slightly positive. That was a consideration, but it wasn't the only consideration. It's also very important to us, as we have talked earlier in this call, about our ability to restructure our balance sheet, to reduce the level of property debt. That really allows us to accelerate the progress on increasing the flexibility of our balance sheet. That's important because it makes just issuing corporate debt easier and more cost-effective. In sum, we thought it made a lot of sense to use the proceeds from that equity raise in that manner. $340 million of debt repayment, how much additional prepayment above that? $20 million? $15? Yeah. There will be an amount, and we've looked at that amount as of March 31st, but as you know, that number changes every day, that interest rates change. Yeah, just as a spot basis today. Right. As a spot basis today, when you evaluated raising the equity and paying the debt, can you just give us a sense of the underwriting and the amount? Michael, as we look at it at March 31st, so it is not quite today, but hopefully close enough for your purposes, it was about $35 million. 30 on top, or is that embedded in the 340? Yeah, embedded in the $340. Okay. Just as a second question, Terry, can you just step back, and it sounds like this came out of a conversation with Stuart, that Stuart wanted to invest capital. At that point, you now had the information that you have an investor that wants to incrementally put capital in, and they have a choice of buying in the public markets, or doing a direct deal. Once you had that information, can you sort of share with us how you thought about doing a direct deal with one investor? I recognize you didn't have a shelf, because you're a new issuer, but how you decided to issue almost 5% of the company to one shareholder. You said you look out for all shareholders, protecting those shareholders that may want to maintain their rights, and also buy the stock at a 5% discount to the closing price, the day that you announced the deal. Maybe you can talk a little bit about how you viewed NAV. I think the last time you, and over the years, over the decades, you've always put out an NAV estimate. How did this valuation compare to your view of value of the enterprise? Thank you. Michael, thank you very much. As you and I have discussed, I can see the point of view that any material offering might, in a democratic egalitarian way, may be made available to all shareholders. I know that a marketed offering isn't perfect either, because for that, we would want to have a rights offering. There's another point of view that the companies and entities separate and distinct from any one individual shareholder or shareholders, and should source capital from the broadest possible menu, including private markets for debt, joint venture equity, private placements. The view of the company, its board, and its advisors was that the alternative available to us was the two-day marketed offering, which would've resulted in a similar or greater decline in pricing and require substantial commissions and banking fees. It's important to compare apples to apples. As it transpired, what we did was good for the company and therefore its shareholders. I thought also of your question of whether some felt disadvantaged, and I just encourage you to encourage them to call me. If so, I'll work with them to give them the same opportunity. Yeah. You're going to issue another $340 million? I don't know if that's maybe what shareholders want. How does it compare to the NAV value, something you shared over the past? Well, NAVs have a wide range, as you know. I think maybe a market-based way would be to look at it that we issued at more than 20% above the consensus NAV, which I think is a pretty good premium. I think it's the way you look at things that's always helpful, right? It was the desire for the spin, selling assets, and doing all those things that the market wasn't recognizing what you believed to be the true value of your enterprise that you've cultivated over decades. That's where I'm just trying to understand in selling the equity at the price you did, how that internally viewed relative to the value you see of your assets, which you've talked about many times, right? You were one of the first ones to put out the whole presentation with all the details, which was extraordinarily helpful. You think about when you did the asset management transaction, it was clearly an uplift in that the market wasn't ascribing value for. That's where I'm just trying to get a little bit into you and the board's head. It was above consensus, above our NAV, which we've said in our publication. Great. I'm just trying to get a sense of how the company sort of viewed it. It was $7 or $10 above your NAV, Michael. The point of it from the company point of view was that in terms of a going concern, in terms of providing a better access to corporate debt, in terms of a better share price going forward, that this was the right thing to do. Thank you. Our next question today comes from John Pawlowski with Green Street. Please go ahead. Hey, thank you for the time. Paul or Terry, could you share a bit more thoughts on the expected pricing of the upcoming dispositions? John, it'll vary by property. It's fair to say that the market is strong, that pricing is high. There's probably a bell curve way of thinking about this, that we'll have the lowest cap rates where we sell either in a joint venture position as we did in California a year ago, which we might do again. If we sell in a market, such as in New York City, which is very discounted current earnings, but therefore, we'll have an apparently low cap rate. If we sell in some of our less favored locations, where we might have higher Cap rates. In both cases, we're looking through what the long-term expected value of those assets being sold compared to the benefits of lower leverage, in this case. Understood. The pricing on a, just in terms of total value, is it consistent with your internal NAV estimate, above or below? I think property prices today are more bullish even than the stock market. Okay. Last one from me, Terry. I don't have a good sense for what the team under John Bezzant and more recently Conor looked like. What share of the headcount is now with Aimco versus AIRC? More importantly, how are markets and properties going to be underwritten over the coming quarters? What that transaction process looks like with the CIO team and the broader organization, just the organizational chart being in transition. Could you spend a few minutes talking about how the CIO world's run is going to be run these next few years or months? John, I think that's worth the $20 that Conor would have paid his old colleague to ask about what a big hole he's going to leave, because he will. He's been a terrific colleague, has been very influential in our thinking, and we'll miss him. I don't want to minimize that at all. I would say that there is a team, there is a process, and that there are people who work on it. I would also say that in the end, it's all subject to approval by an independent board. We have a lot of people in place, a lot of opportunities we're researching even now, and we will do the best we can, and we'll fill that void left by our dear friend leaving. We'll take our time and make sure we get it right. Okay. Thank you for the time. Our next question today comes from John Kim with BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Thanks. Good morning. Just to follow up on the capital raise. I guess I want to understand why, as far as timing, why you decided to sell at this time. I realize you pre-announced positive first quarter results, but you still sold the stake ahead of a recovery in fundamentals in many of your markets. If you could just provide some clarity on the timing and also whether or not Zimmer's stake is subject to any lockup. Just to take that question in reverse, as unregistered shares, it can't be transferred without our approval. It'll be registered soon. At that point, it will be freely disposable by him and/or his companies and whatever their decision-making process might be. The first question as to timing was that it's not that I would be able to pick a particular time over the course of the year that would be absolutely the best, but I thought it was a time that was good enough. We were at a 52-week high. We had a lot of momentum. We had a lot of interest in the stock. I thought, let's just take a couple of chips off the table and make a step forward in our announced plan to delever. By delevering, is it your view that that would help the share price? It would both help the share price and also fulfill a promise made. Right. Then also on the external growth opportunities, can you just remind us what the value that's been predetermined when you acquired the development and redevelopment projects back from Aimco, like what that predetermined value is or when you make that, just given how much cap rates have compressed in the markets recently? It's all based on fair market value. I cannot tell you what that will be because some of those are three and four years away from completion. At that time, we have an option, not an obligation, and we have an option to buy at a discount to fair market value. As those things emerge, we'll look at it, and we'll make what we hope will be good decisions comparing our opportunity to invest in these properties, which we know well, to the sale of other properties we know well. We'll try and put our capital where it'll have the highest return. It's the fair market value at time of completion. At a 5% discount to the value creation during the time of the lease. Okay. Thank you. You bet. Thanks. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the question- and- answer session. I'd like to turn the conference back over to the management team for any final remarks. Well, Rocco, we thank you for choreographing yet one more of our meetings, and we thank everyone on the call for their interest in Aimco, or AIR rather. I look forward to when we're together next and wish you all a great weekend. Thank you. And thank you, sir. This concludes today's conference call. We thank you all for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect your lines and have a wonderful day.