Good afternoon, and welcome to the Alexandria Real Estate Equities 2023 Fourth Quarter and Year-End Conference Call. All participants will be in listen-only mode. [Operator Instructions] After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. [Operator Instructions] Please note, this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Paula Schwartz, Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, and good afternoon, everyone. This conference call contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. The company's actual results might differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Additional information concerning factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements is contained in the company's periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. And now I would like to turn the call over to Joel Marcus, Executive Chairman and Founder. Please go ahead, Joel.

Thanks, Paul, and welcome, everybody. Consistent with Alexandria is building the future of life-changing innovation in medicine and at the Vanguard and the heart of the $5 trillion secularly growing industry, I want to wish everyone a safe and healthy 2024. On the cover of our press release and supplemental package, we've included the great Jim Collins quote about Alexandria, Alexandria has achieved the three outputs that define a great company: superior results, distinctive impact and lasting endurance. On superior results, we're very proud to say that we've had a very strong total shareholder return since IPO of over 1,500%, beating all of the benchmark REIT indices and also every -- almost every other health care REIT. On distinctive impact, Alexandria's tenants whom we have supported are responsible for an astounding 50% of the novel FDA approved therapies over the last decade, truly amazing. And our unique one of a kind full continuum of care 115 project in Dayton, Ohio has treated more than 7,000 patients afflicted by opioid addiction and other substance abuses and has made a dramatic positive impact on the lives of thousands of people, and we're very proud of that accomplishment. And then moving to lasting endurance want to congratulate the Alexandria family team on this significant 30-year anniversary milestone of our founding on January 5, 1994 and who would or could have imagined in 1994 that this fledgling garage startup would have created an entirely new class of real estate at the Vanguard and the heart of the life science industry, combating many of the illnesses, which afflict our family and friends. So moving on to my take on fourth quarter and year-end 2023, I'd say we have witnessed the unprecedented eight-year bull run of the life science capital markets 2014 through 2021, the longest…

Thanks, Joel. In Flagship Pioneerings 2024 Annual Letter, Founder and CEO, Noubar Afeyan, described 2023 as a polycrisis, encompassing the confluence of economic turbulence, climate change, deeply fractured politics, two global wars, threats to democracy, loss of trust in institutions, and continuing dislocations triggered by the COVID epidemic. Alexandria's solid 2023 performance within such a dismal backdrop is nothing less than extraordinary. I don't want to steal too much of Mark's thunder, but leasing close to our average volume since 2018 ex the rocket ship years and maintaining strong earnings growth, while navigating through this poly crisis is a testament to Alexandria's competitive advantage and the power of our brand that Joel and Dan eloquently articulated at Investor Day. Heading into 2024, the poly crisis remains, but so does our resiliency. Our balance sheet is as strong as ever. And in 2023, we proved that we can self-fund our investments and still maintain our lowest leverage level in history. Thus, with our unique business model, highly skilled and experienced talent impeccable execution and a healthy underlying industry poised to advance human and planetary health. We've created the fertile industrial ecosystem, Mr. Afan [ph] postulated can generate value while defending against any coming vulnerabilities, we aim to prove that thesis right. I'm going to discuss our development pipeline, leasing, supply and asset sales and hand it over to Hallie. In the Fourth Quarter, we delivered 1,228,604 square feet into our high barrier to entry submarkets bringing total deliveries for the year to 3,271,170 square feet covering 15 projects. The annual incremental NOI delivered during the year of approximately $265 million and the incremental NOI delivered during the quarter of $145 million are both the highest total in company history. The initial weighted average stabilized deal for 2023 deliveries was 7%, supported…

Thank you, Peter, and good afternoon, everyone. This is Hallie Kuhn, SVP of Science and Technology and Capital Markets. Today, I will provide a recap of the life science industry in 2023 and an overview of the health and demand drivers of each of our life science tenant segments as we kick off 2024. John Templeton wisely wrote that bull markets are born on pessimism, grow on skepticism, mature on optimism and die of euphoria. While the reset of the life science industry from euphoric 2021 highs has been rocky, healthy pessimism is seeding renewed momentum, underscored by rational valuations and capital flowing to the strongest technologies and experienced management teams. Fundamentally, the staggering unmet medical need that drives the $5 trillion secularly growing life science industry has not debated, and the opportunity for companies and investors in the life science sector to positively impact human health and disease is massive. Through the ups and downs, the trajectory of the industry is positive, translating long-term, into a healthy and expanding tenant base. This sentiment is reflected in the numbers. The XBI, a weighted index of small and mid-cap biotech ended 2023, up 8%. Large biopharma performance, which had an exceptional 2022, while the rest of the market generally languished, ended flat. Two notable exceptions were Alexandria tenants, Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk both of which ended the year up over 50% as the market for their novel diabetes and obesity medicines accelerated. And as Peter mentioned, in December, we announced a significant lease with Novo Nordisk for their new US R&D headquarters on our Waltham Mega campus in Greater Boston. Another 2023 biopharma trend was M&A. Excluding mega mergers over $50 billion, 2023 set a new high watermark with $159 billion in acquisitions. These were largely sub-$10 billion deals driven…

Thank you, Hallie. This is Marc Binda here. Hello, and good afternoon, everyone. Congratulations to our entire team for outstanding execution this past year in a very challenging macroeconomic environment. I'll start with our solid financial results. Total revenues and NOI for 2023 were up 11.5% and 12.2%, respectively, over 22%, primarily driven by solid same-property performance and record high development and redevelopment projects placed into service in 2023 with an incremental annual NOI of $265 million. FFO per share diluted as adjusted was $897, up a solid 6.5% over 2022. We're very proud to report solid operating results for the year, driven by disciplined execution of our mega campus strategy. Our tenants continue to appreciate our brand collaborative mega campuses and our operational excellence by our team. We have high-quality cash flows with 52% of our annual rental revenue as of 4Q 2023 from investment-grade and publicly traded large-cap tenants, up 3% from the prior quarter. And we have one of the highest quality client rosters in the REIT industry. 75% of our annual rental revenue comes from our collaborative mega campuses, collections remained very high at 99.9%, adjusted EBITDA margins remained strong at 69% and 96% of our leases contain annual rent escalations approximating 3%. Now, solid rental rate growth and leasing volume drove same-property NOI growth in 2023, up 3.4% and 4.6% on a cash basis. These results were in line with our previous guidance and very solid results, especially considering the macro environment. As expected, our Fourth Quarter same-property results took some pressure due to some temporary vacancy and four properties spread across Boston, San Francisco and San Diego, comprising about 330,000 square feet that is 64% leased or negotiating. We expect same property results to accelerate in the second half of 2024, driven by anticipated…

So, please open it up for questions, operator.

We will now begin the question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] And our first question will come from Josh Dennerlein of Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Please go ahead.

Hey guys. Thanks for time. I just wanted to explore the occupancy uplift that you're assuming in guide. Just how much of that occupancy uplift is just driven by leases you've already signed versus leasing that you're assuming that still has to get done?

Yes. So, Marc comment?

Yes, sure. Hi Josh. So, we do have about 300,000 square feet of leases that we've already signed that have not commenced that will commence next year. So we have a good head start headed into 2024. I think to put things into perspective, we've got about $3.4 million of lease rules next year. But after you back out the space that we've anticipated, we'll go dark into redevelopment or development that only leaves you with about 1 1.8 million square feet that's not resolved. So, I think that number feels pretty manageable relative to our historical run rate on leasing.

Yes. So, when Marc says next year, we're in 2024, but the next year from 2023, which we're reporting, just so we're clear.

Appreciate that. And then it looks like supply is going to peak this year. Just kind of what's your latest thoughts on timing for net effective rents bottoming, any kind of variation across your three core markets?

Yes. So Marc, Peter, you guys want to comment?

Yes, I'll take it, Josh. Hard to predict. But certainly, the effects of 2023 supply has been seen net effective rents. We've seen TIs increase remarkably, we've talked about that before. TIs aren't going to go any further up, because they're already pretty high. I'd say, there's some pricing power to the tenant if they've got a very large requirement. But outside of that, I think things have been holding relatively well.

Okay. Appreciate that. Thank you.

Yes, thank you.

The next question comes from Anthony Paolone of JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

Yes, thanks. First question is, it's early in the year, and it seems like you're approaching the midpoint of your acquisition guide. So just curious, if these were transactions that were in process when you're setting up the guidance or if you just are seeing a lot of stuff that's attractive or you feel like it's a time to play more offense.

Yes, the former, Tony.

Okay. So there's no like anticipation that you want to pick up the [indiscernible]. And then just on the disposition side, you talked about some of the noncore stuff like having New York under contract. But like when you look at the rest of the dispositions that you're thinking about for the rest of this year, do you think you'll have better execution on noncore sales? Or do you think selling stakes in more core higher-quality stuff is where you might get either more capital or better execution at this point?

Yes. I think we're -- I think as Marc and Peter have indicated, we're focused on really noncore, noncampus assets. So we feel pretty good about that.

Okay. All right. Thanks.

Thank you.

The next question comes from Vikram Malhotra of Mizuho. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon. Thanks for taking the questions. Just wanted to get some maybe more color on the pipeline that you're kind of looking at today to deal with sort of expirations over the next 12 to 18 months, but also the developments, particularly what's delivering in sort of '25, '26, where maybe more lease-up is expected. So I don't know if you could give us some sort of wide range of like what is the pipeline square footage-wise of tenants you are at some stage of discussion with? Or if not that, at least give us a sense of the composition of these large, small by market? And any color there would be helpful, just to sort of bridge the lease-up that you have to do in terms of expirations and developments?

Yes. So I don't think we would want to talk about pipeline that I think is pretty confidential stuff, Vikram. But I think you can assume every lease is somewhat different, and every market is somewhat different. I mean, if you go back and look at the cargo therapeutic, that was a very unique lease in a very unique set of circumstances. So it isn't like -- this is not a commodity product. This is a generally a premium priced, noncommodity product. So, it's not like you have the same bunch of folks waiting for the same amount of space in the same, kind of, market type place. It's just not that kind of a business.

Okay. And then just maybe one other topic, Biogen announced sort of rationalization of its office space. And I'm wondering if in your conversations with tenants across the portfolio, can you give us a sense of the latest thoughts on how they're thinking about office versus lab or office needs whether it's remote work or just they took on too much space. Just how are the tenants thinking about office space they may have in their last portfolios?

That's always asked. Hallie, do you want to kind of comment on that?

Sure. And hi Vikram, this is Hallie. I think we need to separate out the component of non-technical space adjacent to the labs. These are desks largely for the researchers that are moving in and out of the labs through the day. And just there's no rationalization of that space. That space is needed, it's part of the workflow that scientists day in and day out are utilizing. Surely, there are larger office requirements that as companies grow, that they will lease up if it's for their clinical or sales and marketing. That's a different set of questions. That is not who we are catering by and large. So when it comes to the lab based infrastructure that space is not going to go away. And we even have examples right now where that lab to non-technical space ratio is shifting. We need more desk king, right? Like we have more scientists going in and out, people don't like to share the same space. They like their own desks. So just to make that clear, you really have to distinguish the two.

This is Peter. Just to be clear, Biogen is rationalizing their pure office space, nothing to do with their lab space.

Yeah. And remember, they're a big cap company. So like big pharma, they have, kind of, dedicated legions of people doing things in traditional office, if you will, so it's not a typical case.

That’s it. Thank you.

Yeah. Next question, operator.

The next question comes from Rich Anderson of Wedbush. Please go ahead.

Hey, thanks. Good afternoon. I just wanted to ask about the impairment and specifically, it's behind you now, but as a function of taking on what may be called a creative approach to development in a different macro environment. And I'm curious if you can -- we can expect to see more in the way of an impairment type of model in 2024 as you part ways with non-core assets? Is this something that we might see repeat itself as the year progresses?

Yes. Marc, do you want to comment on that?

Yeah. Sure. Hi, Rich. Yeah, so under the accounting rules, these -- you can -- the common way where you could have an impairment is at the point where you designate an asset as held for sale. So as we get closer to potentially committing to certain sales, it's definitely possible that we could have additional impairments. But it's really hard to say at this point as we're still refining our approach and which assets to sell. So hard to say at this point.

Okay. And then second question, on the $114 million of free rent burn that's good in the sense that you've got new cash flow coming in, but it's also free rent and it is what it is. It's not necessarily a good thing. Where does that compare if you can quantify it to the past and how much of it is a reflection of the current difficult headwinds that are facing you? And how do you expect that free rent sort of exposure to trend on a go-forward basis?

Marc?

Yes. Hi, Rich. So we did -- yes, we had $114 million of free rent that will be burning off. I guess just to put that into perspective, we delivered $265 million of NOI this year, that's annual NOI. And a lot of those leases are very long-term in nature. So it's not a direct correlation one for one, but if you just do the simple math there, it's less than less than half a year on what is generally on average, those types of leases are 10 years and longer. So I don't think it's something that we're super concerned with. But to be fair, free rent has trickled up a little bit as we've seen.

But – just not glaringly higher or anything like that. over the past few years. Is that correct?

I mean we published our free rent statistics, Rich. And I think it was about months 3 – 0.3 months per year of rent at the end of last year. And I think we're at 0.6, so it's ticked up a little bit this year, but still relatively modest compared to the length of leases.

Fair enough. Thank you.

Yes. Hi, Rich. It's Peter. The great financial crisis, it was more like one. So we're -- it's still pretty healthy considering the market dynamics.

Great. Thanks, Peter. Thanks, everyone.

Thank you, Rich.

The next question comes from Michael Griffin of Citi. Please go ahead.

Great. Thanks. I want to go back to the Cargo Therapeutics lease at 835 Industrial. Joel, I know you mentioned that it was something specific driving that, but was wondering if you can give any more color on what drove the decline in rents? Was it a function of cargo willing to take occupancy pretty quickly? Or are there more worries about supply and where rental rates are going?

Well, I think the key is -- and it's a good question, it's one of those situations where you're trying to find the right key to fit the right lock. You know, an exact amount of space that comes vacant that one would not have wanted to be vacant due to Atreca and finding the exact user of that space with literally very little downtime. And as I think Marc said, we had no TIs. So you don't want to just let that kind of a tenant go into the market and choose from some assorted number of spaces that might be available now or in the future. And so you try to make the deal because it's the perfect lock fitting -- the perfect key fitting the right lock. And so that's kind of the story.

Got you. That's helpful. And then I was wondering if you could provide any additional color on the recent asset sales, the ones in Greater Boston and San Diego. It seems like they're aggregated in the supplemental and given there -- it seems like they're kind of lowly occupied. I'd be curious if you can kind of give us pricing, particularly on the asset in Cambridge, maybe what a yield would be on a stabilized basis?

Yes. So Peter, do you want to give some commentary?

Yes. I mean that speculating on what the Cambridge asset would be on a stabilized basis, I'd just kind of point to where we've seen stabilized things in Boston trade ourselves in the low to mid-5s. With the Necco transaction we had a couple of quarters ago, Boston Properties last quarter did something in the high 5s, but it's about two or three years from cash flowing. So I pointed to, in my commentary, a 5.3% cap rate in Torrey Pines for a building that's fully leased long-term to a credit tenant but that tenant has decided not to move in. So I've said it before, we speculate that good, well-located assets with good credit and good lease term are going to be in the low 5s, the sub-5 cap rates are no longer with us due to rates. Hopefully, that's helpful.

Yes. That's it for me. I appreciate the time.

Yes. Thank you.

The next question comes from Jim Kammert of Evercore ISI. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Good afternoon. Thematically, in Alexandria's experience, Hallie mentioned a lot of this positive M&A activity. Has that historically in your experience translated to a net incremental space demand across your portfolio? Meaning or is it more of a credit upgrade. I'm just trying to understand if the acquirers really tend to over time expand their lab footprint or they already have kind of underutilized space.

Yes. Hey, Jim, the way to think about that is every case is different. If it's a smaller company with a specific product, it's sometimes just bolted on and the space isn't necessarily utilized and maybe subleased or terminated. But oftentimes, you find a strategic acquisition, and they could be on the larger medium or even smaller side, where companies, I can think of the Bristol-Myers, Juno in Seattle back a number of years ago, where BMS wanted really to get into the cell therapy issue and that led not only to the acquisition but a fairly big expansion. So if they're buying, if it's a strategic technology platform with multiple product shots on goal, usually, those end up with very, very good expansion results. If it's a smaller bolt-on, sometimes those don't. But everyone is honestly different.

All right. Fair enough. And then a technical question, I'm sorry. You note that the fourth quarter sort of same-store progression in the first half of this year will be a little depressed by the vacancy associated with four properties what would have to happen at those properties from a leasing perspective from where they are today to get to 3% same-store NOI guide at the bottom end of your range. I mean, does anything have to happen? Or I'm just trying to understand the order of magnitude might in terms of incremental leasing for that portfolio to bench in your range?

Yes. So Marc?

Yes. So we gave the leased/negotiating stats. I think it was about half of that 64% was leased and the other half was negotiation. And that stuff is expected to benefit the last half of the year. We do need to continue to make progress on that. But then we do have a significant amount of free rent that's contractual that has already been leased. It will also contribute to the numbers in the back half of the year.

Fair enough. Thank you.

The next question comes from Tom Catherwood of BTIG. Please go ahead.

Thanks and good afternoon, everyone. Peter, you commented in past quarters on tenant space planning trending towards more just-in-time leasing. Is that still a fair characterization across your portfolio? Or are you seeing some markets where tenants are getting ahead of their expirations to lock in space?

Yes. Decision-making has been slow. And I mean, I guess what I've talked about is that and tenants not wanting to invest in space. So the preference has been to go into available build space, things that are vacant or rolling or subleased rather than plan ahead and move in 12 months later into a development project. A lot of that has to do with a lot of the requirements over the past year and a half have been small, versus a larger requirement that you might not be easy to find and you need to put into a newer building. But that I don't think anybody is waiting to the last minute. It's really a function of the size of the company. If you're under 15,000 square feet or even under 20,000 square feet, you probably have options. If you're above that, you definitely need to plan ahead, because there's a lot less inventory in those sizes.

Yes. I think the other way to think about that is the just-in-time inventory issue is really focused on, primarily biotech companies clinical stage that hit a milestone, and they need to move pretty rapidly the scale because of that milestone, which also yields funding, and that's where you get probably the most kick on the just-in-time space.

Appreciate that. And that actually kind of leads into the second question, which is, Peter, you had mentioned elevated concessions, and we hear about that kind of across the market, yet if we look at your second-generation leasing costs in 2023, they were a good bit lower than in 2022, especially if we do it on a kind of per year average basis. So can you speak maybe about how concessions are trending for new and renewal leases at existing properties as compared to leases at new developments and maybe where the economics are different on that side?

Yes. I mean, the increase in the large increase in tenant improvement concessions has really been almost exclusively in new development space where you would traditionally give somebody $200 a foot plus or minus, depending on the market. With their rental rate and then expect them to invest into the rest of the space that, as we've talked about, has gone to $300 a square foot. If you look at the operating portfolio, and you pointed out that the numbers prove this, that concession isn't needed, because that is already built out. And one of the beautiful things about our business is how the tenants or how the TIs are recyclable. So we build something out first generation. It's very rare that we have to put a material amount of money into it the next time around. And given that it's probably got a large investment from a tenant, the first-generation tenant. We don't have to bump the rents much to make up for that additional investment, right, because we didn't make it. So it becomes a very valuable thing to a tenant to be able to move into something that's already built out. And so they aren't seeking the type of concessions that they are for new space. Now, it ties to what I said before, if you're in the -- a smaller set of space needs 25,000 square feet or less, you might have some options to find. But once you get above that, it becomes tougher to find existing space. So you might end up going more towards new development where you would see the concessions of higher TIs, but you're also paying higher rents.

Appreciate the color. Thanks everyone.

Yeah. Thank you, Tom.

The next question comes from Jamie Feldman of Wells Fargo. Please go ahead.

Great. Thanks for taking my question. So, if you look at your 2024 exploration schedule, the amount of expirations moving into redevelopment declined 13% in the supplemental from 41% when you initially gave guidance? Do you think that's a number that's going to continue to trend lower as the year moves on? Or is that more driven by dispositions? Maybe just talk about what changed and what may change going forward?

Yeah. Marc, do you want to comment on that?

Yeah, sure. I think last quarter we -- or at least as of Investor Day, we did have the 219 East 42nd Street asset in there as something that we thought that we would redevelop or develop turned out that we've decided to sell that asset. Aside from that, it's been pretty consistent from the last quarter. I think a lot of those redevelopment assets are in great locations in places that we'd like to be. But certainly, as we go through our process to look at non-core assets. It's always possible that we find things in there that could potentially be sold.

Okay. Thanks for that. And then the $95 million to $125 million of investment gains that you plan to include in earnings, you said you took an impairment recently. I mean, what gives you conviction that you can hit those numbers? And do you think you'll see more impairments netting that out?

Yeah. We did have some impairments during the quarter here, Jamie. But I think when we look back over three years, we've averaged like $96 million over the last three years per year. And so over a longer period, when we look back, the impairments have been pretty modest relative to the size of those gains. So I think we're thinking about the things that Hallie mentioned upfront, just with some renewed excitement around M&A that we feel pretty comfortable with that number headed into next year.

So do you mean that you think you'll see some increase in values and take gains on that? Or based on where values are today, you still can deliver that $95 million to $125 million?

Yes. Hard to say where values go. Yes. No, I think we're talking about the values today. I think if you look on balance sheet, we've got something like north of $300 million of unrealized gains that we could tap. And part of it too, to be fair, a lot of it is outside of our control, whether it's an M&A event or an acquisition by big pharma or so forth. So some of it, it's hard to predict because these things kind of happen when they happen.

But the fact that we've reiterated guidance here, I think Jamie should give you comfort that we think we can hit those numbers pretty comfortably. Otherwise, we wouldn't stick with it.

Okay. That make sense. Thank you.

The next question comes from Michael Carroll of RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Yes, thanks. I believe you touched on this earlier, but I wanted to see if I can ask it a different way just regarding overall leasing activity. I know that some tenants have been delaying decisions just given the uncertain environment. I mean are there any examples of this starting to loosen up just given the prospect of interest rates that could continue to drop? I mean, is that activity or urgency for attendance? Is that starting to pick up here?

Well, I think, again, if you go back to Hallie's comments and think about the different sectors, each sector is kind of driven by different issues when it comes to, say, big pharma or big cap bio, those are dependent upon their needs and not on the vicissitudes of the capital markets today or whatever. But then you contrast those to clinical stage biotech who are waiting to hit a clinical milestone or not, than those -- that's where -- and Peter has reemphasized this a number of times, boards want to be really careful not to get ahead of their skis. So it really depends on the sector that you're looking at. It's not a one-size shoe fits all, if you will.

Okay. And then on the five projects that are scheduled to be stabilized in 2025, I mean, how are the leasing prospects on those specific buildings? And I know that we're still a year out from the expected stabilization. But when should we start to see leases getting signed those projects that are going to be done here in the next few quarters? Is that a good way to think about it?

Yes. So maybe let's do this since we're doing fourth quarter and year-end 2023, let us and Peter Macken [ph] noted this, will specifically address that on our first quarter call, if you don't mind.

Okay, great. Thanks, Joel.

Okay. Thank you.

Our last question comes from Dylan Burzinski of Green Street. Please go ahead.

Hi guys. Thanks for taking the question. Peter, I just wanted to go back to one of the comments you made regarding one of the questions asked a little bit earlier on $200 a square foot for new development leases for TIs being the norm last year versus $300 a square foot today. Do you -- would you attribute that to solely the imbalance between supply and demand today? Or do you expect that to sort of be the new normal moving forward?

I think it's the new normal going forward? I mean it's driven certainly by more competition in the market, but it's also driven by the higher cost to build out space that's been a considerable increase in construction costs as you guys all know, and I used to comment on. So that alone, I mean, the availability numbers will eventually resolve themselves, but the costs are what they are and the tenants are willing to invest in the space, but only to a certain degree. So, I think that, that that number is here to stay?

Yes. And again, I think you have to distinguish different sectors have different tolerances for investing in space and they can be pretty dramatically different. And as Peter said, the structural inflation that we have brought on ourselves over the last number of years as a country and really as a world is pretty much here to stay. So -- and that's true across all real estate classes.

Okay. I appreciate the details on that. And then one more on sort of the dispositions. You mentioned focusing on noncore noncampus like assets. Can you just talk about sort of typical buyer profile on who's in bidding tense when you go to market with those types of assets?

Yes. I think we'd rather not get into that issue and just let it be at this moment. I don't think we want to discuss that on an earnings call. Sorry.

Okay. That’s all I had. Thanks, guys.

This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Joel Marcus for any closing remarks.

Thank you, everybody, and I look forward to our call for first quarter and again, safe and healthy new year.

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation and you may now disconnect.