Greetings, and welcome to Radius Global Infrastructure third quarter 2021 results conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during today's conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn this conference over to your host, Mr. Jason Harbes, Head of Investor Relations. Thank you, sir. You may begin your presentation. Thank you, operator, and welcome everyone to the Radius Global Infrastructure third quarter 2021 earnings call. On this morning's call, Bill Berkman, our CEO and Co-Chairman, will provide an overview of our third quarter results, followed by a more detailed update from Glenn Breisinger, our Chief Financial Officer. After these comments, we will open up the call for your questions. Before we begin, I would like to remind everyone that many of the comments made today are considered forward-looking statements under federal securities laws. As described in our earnings release and filings with the SEC, these statements are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that could cause future results to differ from those expressed. These statements speak as of today's date, and we undertake no obligation publicly to update or revise these forward-looking statements. In addition, on today's call, we may discuss certain non-GAAP financial information. You can find this information, together with reconciliations to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure in this morning's earnings release and the supplemental financial information available on our website at www.radiusglobal.com. Now I'd like to turn the call over to Bill. Thanks, Jason, and thank you all for joining us today for our third quarter 2021 earnings conference call. I'm pleased to report that we continued to execute on our growth strategy in the third quarter. We generated revenue growth of 54% in the quarter over the prior year period through continued acquisitions of digital infrastructure assets, which meet our underwriting criteria combined with organic growth from our existing portfolio of triple net rents. During the quarter, we deployed approximately $127 million of Acquisition CapEx, continuing the trend of accelerated capital deployment we began in the fourth quarter of 2020. This capital investment resulted in the acquisition of $9 million in additional annualized rent, increasing our total Annualized In-Place Rents to a run rate of $110 million, a year-over-year increase of 60%. We are seeing the benefits of increased scale as larger-sized acquisitions of recurring rental revenues continue to drive operational leverage against our origination platform costs, which Glenn will discuss in greater detail shortly. During the quarter, we raised approximately $265 million of capital to support our acquisition strategy. Also, we recently expanded into two new international markets, taking our current footprint up to 21 countries, as well as continuing to broaden the scope of properties we target to a wider pool of digital infrastructure assets, again, with similar attributes. As we have shared with you on our most recent earnings calls, the range of digital telecom infrastructure assets we are pursuing include triple net rents generated from distributed antenna systems and fiber aggregation points. All of the acquired assets have similar attributes and underwriting criteria. Specifically, we believe they represent long duration, low risk, triple net rent streams paid by the world's largest communications operating and infrastructure companies. With regard to the pace of originations, we remain optimistic about our ability to continue acquiring durable cash flow streams generated from Real Property Interests underlying digital infrastructure for at least the next several quarters based on our current pipeline of acquisition opportunities. Specifically, we are targeting the deployment of $400 million plus of acquisition capital expenditures during 2022, which continues the pace of approximately $100 million plus of capital deployed per quarter that we've reported for the past four quarters. I would emphasize that this is an average as there exists some variability by quarter resulting from the timing of closing larger transactions. On October 5th, we celebrated our first anniversary as a U.S. publicly traded company. I am extremely proud of what our employees have achieved, not just during the past year, but over the past decade. We continue to execute on our strategy to penetrate a massive addressable market to build a high-quality portfolio of mission-critical communication sites, which will allow us to achieve greater economies of scale and generate attractive risk-adjusted returns for our shareholders over time. Glenn will now provide an overview of our current holdings and financial results in more detail. Thanks, Bill. We continued to grow the portfolio at an elevated pace in the third quarter, taking advantage of investment opportunities across our footprint to deploy capital. As of the end of the third quarter, we own Real Property Interests in over 6,000 sites with nearly 8,000 lease streams, represented by a tenant base comprised of 38% tower companies and 62% mobile network operators, the vast majority of which are investment grade. With respect to our $110.4 million of Annualized In-Place Rents as of September 30th, 43% are denominated in euros, 19% in British pounds, 17% in U.S. dollars, and the remaining 22% in other global currencies. Approximately 80% of our portfolio has contractual rent escalators that are based on inflation or a similar mechanism, which provides us with meaningful protection against the impact of rising inflation. Revenues were up 54% to $27.5 million in the quarter, and gross profit or ground cash flow rose 52% to $26.9 million, resulting in a gross profit margin of approximately 98%. In the third quarter, we generated 3.8% revenue growth from escalators and other organic growth, offset by 1.3% of gross churn, resulting in net organic revenue growth of approximately 2.6% on a year-over-year basis, which compares to 2.7% net organic revenue growth in the third quarter of 2020 on a constant currency basis. As Bill mentioned earlier, we deployed $126.5 million for Acquisition CapEx in the quarter compared to $38.9 million in the year ago period, representing a 225% increase and up from $125.4 million in the second quarter. This level of deployment added $8.9 million in annual rent generated from 163 new sites across 198 new lease streams. We anticipate that these new lease streams will generate a fully burdened initial cash yield of approximately 6.4% on a net growth spend basis, with a greater proportion of rents acquired in developed markets than higher yielding emerging markets. With the continued growth of our portfolio, we are seeing the benefits of greater economies of scale from our acquisition platform reflected in a lower multiple of origination SG&A to rent acquired. Specifically, the multiple of origination SG&A to rent acquired declined to 1.4x in the third quarter versus 2.6x in the prior year period. Turning to our balance sheet and liquidity, during the quarter, we issued $264.5 million of aggregate principal amount of 2.5% senior unsecured convertible notes that mature in September 2026. The company used approximately $33 million of the net proceeds from the notes to pay the cost of capped call transactions that raise the effective conversion rate of the notes to $34.80 from $22.62, thereby reducing potential dilution. Inclusive of the convertible notes, at September 30th, Radius had $1.2 billion total gross debt outstanding and net debt of $785 million. The debt we have at the AP Wireless level carries a weighted average cash coupon of 4.1% and a weighted average term of 5.9 years. Our first scheduled maturity of $75 million is in 2023. As a result of the recently completed debt financing, the company had $415 million of liquidity available for incremental investment as of quarter end. Please refer to the supplemental materials posted to our website yesterday after the market close for additional details. Bill? Thanks, Glenn. Again, I wanna reiterate that our team has just done an incredible job, and I'm really, I think we are all really appreciative of the hard work that everybody does. That concludes our prepared remarks. Operator, please open the call for the questions. Thank you. At this time, we will be conducting a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star two to remove your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary for you to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. One moment while we pull for questions. Our first question comes from the line of Sami Badri with Credit Suisse. You may proceed with your question. Hey, Sami. Hi. Thank you. Hey, guys. First question is, when I'm looking at your asset origination SG&A at 1.4x rent acquired, could this have been lower if you did not enter the two new countries that you're messaging here today? That's my first question. The next question is, you know, I know you guys aren't really big fans of giving us kind of a forward-looking guidance or anything kinda that can really, you know, underline where we should be modeling, but how should we be thinking about next year's growth trajectory relative to 2021? Glenn, do you wanna answer the first question vis-à-vis the SG&A? Sure. Sami, the impact on the two new countries was pretty marginal on the present SG&A spend since it's not such a significant component of it. As you know, we're continuing to ramp up teams to grow our incremental revenue streams in all asset classes. We're seeing a little bit of spend in building our teams ahead of Acquisition CapEx. Yeah, hopefully we'll get more countries open besides just these two. Now as to your second question, look, I thought we were doing a great thing 'cause we gave four quarters of effective, you know, what we thought we'd be investing in terms of growth CapEx. You know, we're always loathe to get too far over our skis, and I think we joke around that if we give you perfect guidance, you know, sort of it's a non-issue. If we're under or over, it's just not really great for us. We're trying to do our best, Sami. We were pretty excited to say, fine, we've got this much confidence that our pipeline is such that for the next four quarters we can originate $400 million of growth CapEx. Got it. Glenn, one other follow-up for you, and it's about when sales teams come on and the hiring of new execs being put in place. What is the productivity velocity of these executives? Is it they basically join the company, hit the ground, begin addressing opportunities, and then there's conversions at the three to nine-month mark? Or is it more like they come on board with leads, and you guys hire them because they have leads, and it's gonna take six months no matter what, or three months or less? Like, maybe you could just give me an idea just what the productivity ratio or conversion rates look like for the new people coming in? That's a good question, Sami. I think it depends on the groups, and it depends on the countries. As you know, or as we've talked about before, on the origination platform, there are two elements of this. One is to generate the leads and to tee them up to close, and the second element is to close the leads, which takes some time from an underwriting and legal standpoint. You know, it's hard to say on average across the company and across the countries, but I would say you're in a six to nine to 12-month period of maturation of the pipelines. I would just add that it's different by every country, not to beg off the question. It's just there's not one uniform approach to all of this. The other thing is it's terrific when we can grab someone who brings their own leads to the table. Most of the time, we're assigning the leads to them based on all of our proprietary databases and past people that we have contacted or new leads. I think, you know, like with any new person joining a team, there's always gonna be a lead time to train them and to get them up to speed. Got it. Thank you very much. Sure. Thanks, Sami. Our next question comes from the line of Ric Prentiss with Raymond James. You may proceed with your question. Hey, Ric. Thanks. Good morning. Hey, good morning, everyone. A couple questions to follow up on Sami's one. Yeah, we actually were thankful to get that, the pipeline guidance out there. Obviously, that begs the other question, though, is what's the level of competition for these assets? What are you thinking as far as the pricing cap rates that you can pull that pacing off at, as we should assume there's maybe some blended targets that you're going for? Yeah. No, great questions. I think from a competition point of view, nothing's really changed in what we've discussed in the last couple quarters. You know, in certain countries, we're gonna see some competition. Typically, it's for only a select number of assets because the market is so large that sure, we'll see it on some assets where someone else may be a competitive bidder. 99% of the time, it's typically a tower company. In a lot of cases, we just, you know, won't see them. So, sorry, I can't give you any more scientific of an answer than that, but. Then in the new countries we're there, you know, we try to select places where, of course, rule of law and all the macro dynamics are what we're looking for in our underwriting process. One factor, of course, is it competitive in the market or not? Do we see a tower company, you know, coming into the market? Our hope is we keep adding new countries as well as mining this really so huge total addressable market. We think about cap rates, should we be thinking kind of all in, Acquisition CapEx plus the origination SG&A? Should we be thinking here in the kind of low-to-mid 6% range? Are we thinking more like in the 7% range? You know, it's funny. It's hard to just give you any of that precisely for two reasons. One is we have seen some FX variability, specifically with the U.K. most recently because the pound has weakened more than anybody suspected. The second thing is that I'd rather just keep us in a, I guess, worst case 6%. I won't say worst case, but 6%-7% is a good range, Ric. You just can't predict it because our mix, country to country, is different, and each country has its own different sort of weighted average yield that we're buying at. Believe it or not, Germany is different than Spain. Spain is different than France. France is certainly different than Brazil. You know what I'm saying? When we look at our overall weightings, it's hard to have a same store sales yield because it really depends on where we're mining in a particular quarter, mining meaning acquiring the assets. Probably which asset category they're in, too, not just the country. Okay. Another question for me, or two other questions quickly for me. We're hearing more and more from different tower companies that they're putting ROFRs, right of first refusals, into some of their land leases. Mm-hmm. How is that affecting you guys when ROFRs are coming in? Well, I think that you're gonna laugh when I say this. I'm trying to thread the needle so I don't say too much to our competitors. I think there's a lot of different approaches. Structured finance such that we- Let me say it this way, we are hopeful that they won't be a problem for us. Got you. Okay. I understand. If I say too much more, then, of course, my competitor will try to figure out and change around that, too. Right. I would say to you, Ric, one other thing, you know, we are always experimenting with new offers, and those new offers can take many forms. Let's just say that when you focus only on what we do every day versus a tower company focusing on being and operating the steel and with their tenants, we think we can stay ahead of the curve and be, I'd like to think, more creative in how we make offers to our customers, our tenants, our landlords. One more final one for me, if I could. On the organic side of things, the base business, not the acquisition flywheel, but the base business. Lease-up has been trending down the last couple of quarters. I think 1Q was 1%, 1.0%, then 0.9%, then 0.6% this quarter. Obviously, there's some decimal places in there, too. How should we think about what's causing that to kind of tail down? What is a good run rate going forward? Were there any one-timers in some of these periods? Just help us understand that trend line on the lease-up path. I'm gonna let Glenn give you the more detail. My guess is it's FX. Well, Ric, it's a good question. There is a bit of variability in that, and it's, you know, look, it's country by country and asset by asset specific. You know, behind the scenes, you have, you know, a significant portion of these lease streams escalate annually versus on a term. There's all kind of things behind it. Our general thought process and expectation of, you know, 0.5%-1.5% over time has been pretty consistent. That's how Yeah, but specifically to the organic, Ric. Yeah. Again, I think a little more of it's FX. I wouldn't read into it that there's a trend line down. I don't think that's the case at all. If anything, we hope to do better because we dedicate more people to the effort. At the end of the day, when we look back three or four years ago, we didn't dedicate enough people, and we saw what happened. We made the investment to effectively increase lease-up. Great. Makes sense. Stay well, guys. Appreciate the questions. Thanks, Ric. Yep. Our next question comes from the line of Simon Flannery with Morgan Stanley. You may proceed with your question. Great. Thank you. Good morning. Bill, thanks for the- Hey, Simon. Guide on your investment next year and the pipeline. Has something changed that gives you more confidence in the outlook for the longer period of time? Maybe just characterize that, or is it more that as we kind of approach year-end, you felt like it was something that you wanted to share with us, but you know, the visibility's been similar to what it was. Then on the countries, you probably don't wanna name them, but perhaps just, you talked about some more coming, just take us through your kind of screening process and what you're looking for. You know, is this gonna be material to the kind of opportunity pool, or are these more kind of tuck-in type additions? No, both are really good questions. Let's start with the countries first. Rule of law is just critical to us, making sure that we can enforce our rights within a court system. That's absolutely one of our first tests. I think the second test is where are the big tower companies which have what we view to be terrific credit? It's not that we don't love the underlying credit of the MNO. We like that as well. You know, when you have the towers, there's just one more layer because there's sort of a sandwich in between us and the MNO. That's another big threshold test for us. Macroeconomics of a country, also a big threshold test, which currency they're in. It's really easy for us to add a country that is already in euros, so that you would imagine is attractive to us to do. Trying to think what else has the actual MNO market already either consolidated, where they spun off their towers or four carriers merged to three. We take that into consideration. I think those would be the basic attributes. You know, I don't like to look at any country as just a, you know, a little single. I always feel like if we're gonna go in, we should be able to really do our job. Actually, it's not like going into Luxembourg, where there's very few sites. We try to go to a place and make the investment where it's meaningful enough for a good return on the startup investment required to get a new country open. You know, our hope is to get even a bunch more there. We haven't really hit Asia. It's not the easiest nut to crack, but you know, that is certainly an opportunity for us. Now, of course, I forgot your first question. Do you wanna remind me? Yeah. It was on the pipeline, and, you know, what's changed to give the visibility? Ah. Yeah. Well, I think our team basically persuaded me that, okay, we should give a little more quarters of guidance because I'm always under promise, over deliver. You know, it's you get into a rhythm there. You're gonna expect four quarters going into the future. As they said to me, we've had our sea legs in place long enough, and now we can actually walk properly. We do have visibility, and we felt comfortable with it, to actually put that down in writing and stand behind it. Of course, if we don't meet it, then I'm the one against black and blue, but so be it. No, we're really optimistic, and a lot of it's just because we really do have the pipeline, and we can actually see it, and we're in the glide path, hopefully, for closing over the next four quarters, five quarters. Great. Thanks a lot. Mm-hmm. Sure. Our next question comes from the line of Jon Petersen with Jefferies. You may proceed with your question. Hey, Jon. Great. Thanks. Hey, how's it going? Good, thanks. Good. Sorry if I missed this, but on the acquisitions you did this quarter, I mean, have you broken out how much of that was tower land, DASs and fiber aggregation sites? Can you just give us a sense of what the mix is? No, we really haven't. I think the purposeful reason, and I've said this on past calls, is that we truly think of these as there's just no different in the asset class. Rather than people saying, "Oh, they only bought this much of this asset class and that of this, of the other class," we just view it as one and the same thing. I'd say the only real difference between the construct would be that typically it's a longer property right when we buy, whether it's an aggregation point, that's fiber aggregation point or a distributed antenna system rent. Long-winded way of saying we just don't break it out. Okay. All right. I think it's just simpler too. Right. Simple is good. I think the, you know, the majority of your rents are indexed to inflation, I think about 2/3 or some form of it. I mean, are there any caps there? I mean, if we are seeing inflation of, you know, 5%, 6%, 7%, like, does it cap out at 4% or something? Anything like that? Nope We need to be aware of? No. Actually, that's one of the things we always like the most, which is I think it's around 77%, if you look at our supplemental materials, is what is linked to inflation. There are no caps. Unlike if you look at Cellnex or some of the tower companies, I'd say a big piece of their contracts are inflation-linked but are capped. Sometimes they're capped at 3%, sometimes it's 4%, sometimes at 2%. Right. Just to clarify, right? Just so it's some form of inflation. In the U.K., it's the RPI, right? In a lot of countries, it's whatever they're using for CPI. In Brazil, it's the IGPM and the INPC. It depends on what the country is, but it's generally their guide on inflation and to confirm what Bill said, there are no caps. Okay. Is there a lag on that? Like, could we go through, like, a year of really high inflation, and then it would be, like, the next year that it kicks in? Or is it more? That's a good question. -more real-time than that? That is a good observation, right? I think you're gonna see this with all businesses in the space because the majority of the rent streams are paid in advance, right? You have a high percentage that escalate on a term, right? Probably 70% escalate annually. The remaining escalate on some form of a term, a three-year or a five-year escalator. Depending on where you are in that cycle, there will be a little bit of a lag with respect to the inflation. Okay. All right. We do escalate with a smaller proportion quarterly and otherwise. As you can imagine, there's no one-size-fits-all for the lease- Right In the way it's done and implemented globally. Okay. All right. That's helpful. Thank you. Sure. Our next question comes from the line of David Barden with Bank of America. You may proceed with your question. Hey, David. Hey, guys. Thanks for taking the questions. I guess I have a similar question to Simon's question on countries, but this is with respect to kind of asset portfolios and targets. You kind of highlighted that you're diversifying, you know, into the DAS and the fiber aggregation points. I'm interested if, you know, for instance, data centers and other types of kind of just generic digital infrastructure is kind of in your crosshairs. And if so, how would you evaluate that and when? I think the second question would be, you know, congrats on the $265 million financing. You did it in a kind of interesting structure with the capped call hedge on the conversion price. A couple questions on that. One, could you tell me what you think the all-in cost of funds for that transaction was, why you did it the way you did it, and is the hedge duration matched with the 2025 maturity? Thanks. Right. You know, I'll take that one, Glenn. We did it because first and foremost, it could be done really quickly, where it wouldn't have that much management distraction. We wanted to be the first one out of the gates immediately after Labor Day, and we were. I think execution between Morgan Stanley and Goldman, they did a terrific job for us. Specifically on the capped call, just to remind you, we are effectively buying back any dilution that the convert otherwise would have had on us. I won't go through all the mechanics, but suffice to say that we do take dilution above $34 a share. That was what we bought with having the capped call. The actual all-in cost can be looked at in different ways 'cause one has to value the actual option. You know, volatility is just a hard measure to come up with, as you well know. I think from our mind, this is not a science. If the coupon's 2.5%, you know, we figured because of the capped call that we're buying back that dilution, we were getting to probably, and this is an approximate, please don't hold me to it, probably around 4% in that neighborhood all in. The way we look at that is there's also, if the capped call never gets exercised, we get effectively a nice tax deduction benefit. As you get to know us, we're pretty tax nutty, and we always think about what is our after-tax return. The good news is even approaching 4% on the cost, we have really no covenants. This is unsecured debt at the Radius holdco level, and we thought that flexibility was pretty terrific. Your last question on the timing of it, the capped call is coterminous with the debt, so we're protected for the entire duration. You should also know that not only can we sell the capped call if we ever wanted to, depending on where volatility is, it should ever really spike, but we also can prepay, I forget the timing. Maybe it's after two years we could prepay the convert should we want to. Yeah. After three, under certain conditions. Thank you. Obviously liquidity is one of them. It is all matched up at the time- Yeah -on the capped calls to run to the end of the period. David, on the data center question, the answer is yes. We already do buy data centers. We haven't broken them out. We've tried to sort of say that they're fiber optic aggregation points. You know, you well know, when we buy a fiber aggregation point, it oftentimes or many times can have a cell site on the roof. Sometimes it can also be used as a data center. We've tried hard to frame it as one thing, 'cause if we start slicing and dicing, this one does that. We thought it would just get too complicated, so we've made it sort of this blanket fiber aggregation point label. Yes, we do buy data centers, and we'll continue. Look, if we can find larger opportunities that we think don't have much operational responsibility, of course, long-term contracts where we get to own the property, the structure, you know, that's right in our sweet spot of what we think, you know, our mission should be, which is sort of triple net or double net. Perfect. Thanks for the help, guys. Yes, sure. Our last question comes from the line of Walter Piecyk with LightShed. You may proceed with your question. Hey, Walt, how'd we do on timing for our recording? I'll have to get back to you on that one with the final results. I like the word tax nutty. I think I'm gonna try and work that into my vocabulary as well. I'm kinda tax nutty myself. You know our history and who's taught us that, so. 100%. You've been doing on CapEx, like 120, whatever, 130, on the kind of Acquisition CapEx. The $400 million is down from that. Are you just kind of setting the bar and there's opportunity for upside? Or why would that be, why should that be lower than- I said $400 million plus. I tried to emphasize the plus. Okay. Okay. You know what? I just. [crosstalk] Awesome. That's like when, who was the Sprint CFO? He's like, something or more, like, with their EBITDA. Yeah. Okay. Got you. On the- [crosstalk] You know, the thing is that I want to underpromise. We want to underpromise and overdeliver. Okay. You know, what can I say? Just the second question on that, which kind of goes the opposite way, which is, you know, if you forecast that out, then, you know, if you use that, I think you got $165 left on the facility. You'd probably have to come back to the capital markets, you know, in the fourth quarter of next year, assuming that the $100 or higher continues to pace at that. I mean, some people would look at inflation data and get concerned about the 10-year, and say, like, "Okay, why not lock in more capital now rather than take that risk and deal with it next year?" Then just getting back to Barden's question, you know, when you look at future financings, should we think about it in terms of what you just did and convertible type things, or is it more debt? Just kind of interested in your thought process around timing and structure? Yeah. -of future financings as you progress through. Yeah, I think, look, you should be on our team 'cause you're raising all the good points, and I'm happy to say that everything you discussed is really in motion. You know, we expect to do a slew of debt financings. Some will probably close by year-end, if we're lucky. Others will be, you know, first or second quarter of next year. You'll be very happy when you see both the proceeds. You know, we're always mindful of not having to raise equity, but we are an acquisition machine, but we think we're gonna have good execution. The execution fee should be different, depending on where in the world we're borrowing than what you saw in the convert. I think in the convert, we were willing to have it be slightly higher because of just the extraordinary flexibility of it from covenant and it being unsecured. yes, you're right on the money, and we hope to deliver what I think you would like to see. Okay. Thanks. Can I just add to clarify, Walt? I thought you were suggesting the availability on our capital structure. With respect to our combined AP Wireless debt structure, as of today, between the DAC and the APW working capital debt facility, the availability, uncommitted of course, and we're not paying a commitment fee, is $950 million. Okay. under those platforms today. We did specifically say, with respect to in our earnings script, that the first scheduled maturity is $75 million in 2023. I think you can imply that. Yeah, I'm less concerned about. We're always mindful of the structure. Yep. You know, actually, Walter I was less concerned about the, you know, the maturities, more of just kind of lining it up. Yeah. Maybe we missed some other stuff you can draw down upon. It sounds like you got- Well, you know what happened? I was gonna say, the rents are naturally de-leveraging because of the escalator and organic growth. We try to then refinance and bring it back up to 8x, 8.25x internationally, and we can go as high as 10x for the U.S. When you factor in a refinance of the U.S., a tack-on to, Glenn refers to it as the DAC, that is really our international facility. You have another facility that we're working on that we will disclose more when we get it done. You know, it gives us a fair amount of powder. It's just the timing of when we get them finished, we're really optimistic on them. Got it. Thank you. Sure. Ladies and gentlemen, we have reached the end of today's question-and-answer session. I would like to turn this call back over to Mr. Bill Berkman for closing remarks. Thanks, operator. And thanks everybody for joining us today. Look, we're really proud of the results and continue to be excited about the opportunity in front of us, both in all of our different asset classes that you've asked questions about today, as well as doing our job, trying to peer around corners to find new asset classes or new variants of what we're doing that have long-term durable cash flows from terrific credit quality tenants. Hope everybody has a good day. We look forward to catching up with a lot of you individually. Thanks, operator. Thank you for joining us today. This concludes today's conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time.