Strawberry Fields REIT, Inc. Q3 FY2025 Earnings Call

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Strawberry Fields REIT Q3 2025 Earnings Conference Call. As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Jeff Bajtner, Chief Investment Officer. Sir, please begin.

Thank you, and welcome to Strawberry Fields REIT's Q3 2025 Earnings Call. I am the Chief Investment Officer, and joining me today on the call are Moishe Gubin, our Chairman and CEO; and Greg Flamion, our CFO. Yesterday evening, the company issued its Q3 2025 earnings results, which are available on the company's Investor Relations website. Participants should be aware that this call is being recorded, and listeners are advised that any forward-looking statements made on today's call are based on management's current expectations, assumptions and beliefs about Strawberry Fields REIT's business and the environment in which it operates. These statements may include projections regarding future financial performance, dividends, acquisitions, investments, returns, financings and may or may not reference other matters affecting the company's business or the businesses of its tenants, including factors that are beyond its control. Additionally, references will be made during this call to non-GAAP financial results. Investors are encouraged to review these non-GAAP financial measures, as well as the explanation and reconciliation of these measures to the comparable GAAP results included on the non-GAAP measure reconciliation page in our investor presentation. Now on to discussing Strawberry Fields REIT and our Q3 2025 performance. I want to start by sharing some key highlights. During the quarter, the company collected 100% of its contractual rents. As we discussed in last quarter's conference call, on July 1, 2025, the company completed the acquisition of 9 skilled nursing facilities comprised of 686 beds, located in Missouri. The acquisition was for $59 million. On August 5, 2025, the company completed the acquisition for a skilled nursing facility with 80 licensed beds near McLoud, Oklahoma. The acquisition was for $4.25 million. The company funded the acquisition utilizing working capital. The initial annual base rents are $425,000 and are subject to 3% annual rent increases. On August 29, the company completed the acquisition for a health care facility comprised of 108 skilled nursing beds and 16 assisted living beds near Poplar Bluff, Missouri. The acquisition was for $5.3 million. The company funded the acquisition utilizing working capital and the initial annual base rents are $530,000 and subject to 3% annual rent increases. A couple of other items I wanted to mention. During Q3, the Board of Directors approved increasing the dividend to $0.16 a share. This increase represented a 14% increase over previous quarters. Yesterday, the Board of Directors approved the Q4 2024 dividend, which will also be $0.16 a share and will be paid on December 30, to shareholders of record on December 16. On the acquisition front, we continue to see deals coming from around the country. As we have discussed in previous investor presentations, we are big fans of the master lease structure and currently, 89% of our facilities are in master leases. With our disciplined approach, if there is a deal in an existing state, our current operators are looking to grow, and we can simply add the new facility to an existing master lease. If we were to enter and grow in a new state, we would be looking to acquire a sizable portfolio of at least 500 beds. As a final point, I'd like to point out that Strawberry Fields REIT is currently the closest pure-play skilled nursing REIT in the market with 91.5% of our facilities being skilled nursing facilities. I would now like to have Greg Flamion, our Chief Financial Officer, discuss the quarter-end financials.

Thank you, Jeff, and welcome, everyone, to Strawberry Fields REIT Third Quarter 2025 Earnings Call. Let's begin with the balance sheet. Total assets reached $880 million, which is a 33.1% increase compared to Q3 of 2024. This growth is primarily driven by our acquisition strategy and the successful retenanting of specific leasing. On the liabilities and equity side, we saw increases aligned with our financing activities and some foreign currency exchange losses, which impacted other comprehensive income. Overall, the balance sheet reflects our continued investment in long-term growth. Turning to our income statement. Year-to-date revenue through September was $114.9 million, up $28.3 million versus September of last year. This increase is largely due to the timing and integration of properties acquired over the past year, as well as the retenanting activity that began in January. While revenue is up, we've also seen higher expenses, mostly driven by depreciation, amortization and interest. These higher expenses are a result of the acquisitions discussed earlier in the presentation. Net income year-to-date is $24.5 million or $0.44 a share compared to $19.9 million or $0.40 a share last year. Looking at our quarterly performance, the drivers are similar to our year-to-date results. Revenue increased by $10.2 million, again, due to the acquisitions and lease transitions. Expenses rose as well, driven by higher depreciation, amortization and interest from new assets. Net income for the quarter was $8.8 million or $0.16 a share, up from $6.9 million or $0.14 per share in Q3 2024. To close, I'd like to highlight some key financial metrics. Projected AFFO for 2025 is $72.7 million, a 28.2% increase over the last year with a compound annual growth rate or CAGR of 13.3% since 2020. Adjusted EBITDA is projected at $126.1 million, up 38.9% year-over-year with a 13.6% CAGR. Our net debt-to-asset ratio was 49.2%, maintaining a balanced capital structure. As of September 30, our dividend was $0.16 a share, representing a 5.2% yield. With an AFFO payout ratio of 46.8%, we're delivering strong results while preserving capital for future growth. These results reflect our disciplined execution and commitment to long-term shareholder value. With that, I'll turn it back over to Jeff Bajtner, who will walk us through the portfolio highlights.

Thank you, Greg. I'd now like to point out some of the Strawberry Fields REIT's portfolio highlights as of September 30. Currently, the company has 142 facilities. This is comprised of 130 skilled nursing facilities, 10 assisted living facilities and 2 long-term acute care hospitals. These facilities are in 10 states. And as you'll see later on in the presentation, we've got a map showing their locations. In these facilities, we've got 15,542 licensed beds. The company's total asset value at acquisition or its historical cost is $1.1 billion. I would like to point out that this amount reflects facilities which have been bought over the past 20 years. If you were to look at the company's fair market value of these facilities or the portfolio, it would be in excess of this amount. Currently, our portfolio has 17 consultants who advise operators. Our weighted average lease term is 7.3 years. Our tenants continue to do well, which is reflected by the EBITDARM rent coverage of 2.01x. Our net debt to adjusted EBITDA ratio is 5.7x. As I mentioned earlier, we're pleased that we continue to collect 100% of our rent. And as I mentioned earlier in my prepared remarks, the company continues to have a strong pipeline. We're seeing deals from across the country. And at this time, our acquisition pipeline is in excess of $250 million. With that, I'd like to have Moishe Gubin, our Chairman and CEO, continue with the presentation.

Thank you, Jeff, and thank you, Greg. I want to emphasize what Jeff mentioned. We have continued to grow, with nearly 15,500 assets—specifically, 15,542. We expect to keep growing. Regarding our total assets, we believe their true market value is closer to $1.6 billion. I would advise potential investors not to focus too much on our balance sheet for equity or assets as they reflect depreciation, which is vital for the surplus cash we use to acquire more assets. Moving to the next slide, I want to showcase our growth, which I am very proud of. As previously discussed, we have a growth rate of 13.3%. Just five years ago, our AFFO was $38 million, and now we are approaching nearly double that. This shows a commendable growth rate, and we aim to exceed $73 million next year. The following slide illustrates base rent growth, which we expect will continue as we keep buying. Our business revolves around purchasing and leasing, without providing options. The straight-line rent figures should remain stable or improve. It's uncommon for us to sell assets, though we did sell one in the third quarter. On Slide 8, you can see that we wrapped up the quarter within last year's range. With our increased AFFO, we should be trading significantly higher than last year. We are consistently working for our shareholders by attending events; for instance, this week we were in Arizona networking with potential tenants and exploring deals. As Jeff mentioned, we have a robust pipeline, and our target for acquisitions is between $150 million to $160 million annually. As we expand, we naturally want to increase our spending while maintaining our disciplined approach to making acquisitions that meet our criteria. On Page 9, we showcase our growth rate, helping the marketplace understand that the AFFO share growth of 11.3%, when combined with the dividend yield, translates to a steady annual return of 16% to 18%. We have kept our payout ratio below 50% and maintained consistent dividend practices, having raised our dividend five or six times. We plan to continue this approach, with this quarter's payout being 100% of our net income, leaving us with approximately $40 million from depreciation as surplus cash for purchasing additional assets, thereby funding our future growth. I appreciate Slide 10; it highlights that our stock is undervalued. Our AFFO trading multiples are the lowest by a significant margin, and I believe our profitability outshines most, if not all, of our peers. We're committed to continuing our efforts to engage with investors and manage market perceptions. We plan to conduct a capital raise in the future, which should attract more institutional investors and enhance our stock's liquidity. On Page 11, our payout ratio stands at 46.8%, while most peers are in the 70s or higher. Our dividend yield is a moderate 5.2%. As profitability increases, I anticipate growth in the dividend yield. Raising our dividend from $0.16 to $0.17 represents nearly 10% growth, which would elevate the dividend yield. Slide 12 reiterates Jeff's comments about us being the closest pure-play REIT, maintaining nearly 92%, while our peers' percentages are decreasing. This marketplace is resilient because our clientele requires care that we provide. With the aging baby boomer population, which we will discuss further, we are well-positioned since our business is funded by the government, making it less susceptible to inflation. We believe investors will appreciate our approach, and we expect positive momentum. On Slide 13, we show our 11.3% AFFO share growth over the past five years. Only two of our peers show positive growth while three are negative, highlighting their challenges in maintaining AFFO to cover dividends, forcing them to sell equity to meet cash needs. In contrast, we maintain our dividends, with double the amount available to invest in new deals, ensuring growth in AFFO per share without increasing the share count. Our EBITDARM coverage is above 2 times, which is acceptable. Although we're pleased with this, we aim to see further improvement. Because our investment strategy is structured, every new deal is priced at 1.25 times EBITDARM, which inadvertently pressures our coverage. A pause in acquisitions would boost our EBITDARM coverage, but we are committed to continued growth. We lease exclusively to seasoned operators who know their markets and can succeed, thus improving our EBITDARM coverage over time. Slide 14 reflects my previous favorite slide, although my sentiment has shifted. Our debt is below 50% leverage, distributed evenly among HUD debt, bond debt, and bank debt, with bank debt making up only 23% and being the sole variable rate. Recently, with strong demand from the Israeli public during our last raise, we were oversubscribed by two times, showcasing the interest in our company. Looking ahead, we have various options for raising debt, but would ideally like to see our stock price rise to facilitate equity sales as well. At present, debt serves as the more affordable avenue compared to equity. Slide 15 has become my favorite as it shows our diversification. We currently have no state or single tenant that accounts for more than 25%, with Indiana being our largest state at that percentage. We operate in ten states and will only expand into new states if we encounter sizable portfolios while maintaining a preference for master leases. All our tenant relationships remain strong, and we consistently collect 100% of our rent, with properties being well-maintained, allowing us to explore growth opportunities in other regions. Slide 16 provides a visual representation of our growth strategy, highlighting our interest in states like Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. Despite challenges in securing deals in these areas, we see potential growth, especially in Georgia. Ultimately, we remain a pure-play operator, as evidenced by our 91.5% SNF concentration. With that, I will hand it over to the operator for questions and comments from our analysts and attendees on the call.

Our first question or comment comes from Rob Stevenson from Janney Montgomery Scott.

Did I hear correctly that you guys sold something in the third quarter?

Yes, we had an unusual situation with one facility in Michigan that we've owned for over ten years. We effectively doubled our investment in that property from the start. However, it was an outlier, and we were unable to expand in that region. This asset has been part of our portfolio for a long time, and we never managed to transition it to a typical master lease that could have fostered growth in the area. Our experience in Michigan has not been positive, so we took the opportunity to divest this asset. The tenant there made the numbers work out since we increased rent elsewhere, allowing us to maintain a budget-neutral stance in terms of rent collection. Consequently, we reduced our portfolio from 11 states to 10, and we are pleased with this transaction. Typically, we do not sell and we don't provide options to anyone, but this was an asset that we should have divested much earlier. The operator was facing challenges, sending in a nurse consultant from Indiana and a marketing team from Illinois, but they struggled with on-the-ground operations. Although the facility provided adequate care and had satisfactory survey results, they were unable to advance the property, often just covering costs or even falling below that level. Therefore, when the chance to sell arose, both parties were content with the outcome. However, this is not a common occurrence for us, Rob.

What were the proceeds from that? How meaningful was that?

It's not significant. We sold it for around $2.6 million and arranged a note at 10% interest, which is our cap rate. They have a couple of years to pay it back with a balloon payment, and they are already performing well there. We are satisfied with this transaction.

What does your acquisition pipeline look like today? How are you guys thinking about the end of the year and into '26 at this point?

At the end of the year, we had a few promising deals that would have been ideal for closing the year. We would need to conduct a capital raise, which would have made for a great year-end conclusion. It appears that we should see good volume in the first quarter of 2026. If 2026 mirrors 2025 and 2024, we are optimistic about surpassing the $150 million to $200 million growth mark for next year.

The comments around the dividend increase, were you guys at sort of your minimum payout? And was the increase from $0.14 to $0.16 basically something that you had to do? Or is that something that the Board wanted to do at this point in time?

Yes, that's a great question. As the CEO, I outline our strategy during the Board meetings to ensure we remain compliant with REIT regulations, which require us to distribute 90%. We aim to maintain stability in our dividend and slightly increase our dividend yield to keep our investors satisfied. We discuss this topic thoroughly since we have the ability to distribute significantly more due to our low payout ratio. The $0.16 dividend represents exactly 100% of our net income for the quarter. By the end of the year, there will be an adjustment to account for some capital gains, which must also be distributed at 100%. Ultimately, investors will not receive a K-1 form; I can't recall the exact tax form they will use, but part of this distribution will be classified as a return of capital, which is not taxable.

1099.

It's 1099, but it's not a regular 1099, and I'm not exactly sure what the form is. Regardless, the conversation in the room is that we want to move every year because our model is steady and growing. There's no significant fluctuation; it's flat or higher. We expect to have at least one dividend increase each year. We just raised it last quarter to $0.16. We considered raising it to $0.17, but we decided to keep it at $0.16 for now. We'll see how the fourth quarter performs, and it's most likely that the next increase will happen in the first quarter of 2026. That summarizes the discussions in the boardroom. Some Board members are advocating for a higher distribution, while I argue that with our 11% to 13% growth rate of AFFO, we can reinvest and continue to grow the model. This is the main argument for keeping the dividend above the required level and ensuring it grows at least once a year. That's the overview on that topic, Rob.

Can you remind me when the Series D bond matures? I think that's by far and away, your highest cost of debt and when you basically get an opportunity there to refinance that?

We have our bond debt expiring in September 2026. While it’s not common to discuss internal issues, I like to be straightforward. One issue with the bond that we are addressing is the prepayment penalty, which lasts until the bond matures. Currently, we are hesitant to refinance because the bond is valued at a premium due to its high coupon rate, making it too expensive to do so right now. However, in September, we expect to save significantly since we anticipate being able to refinance at least three points lower, which will result in substantial savings going forward.

So at this point, you think that if you had to access the debt markets today, you're probably pricing somewhere plus or minus around the sub-6%?

Yes, absolutely. There's no doubt about that. If I were to access the money today, I believe it would be around sub-6%. It was trading approximately 5% above par today, which indicates strong interest. The actual yield on Series D is currently in the 5s. Therefore, if we were to issue a bond to replace it, the pricing would likely be slightly higher due to the 5-year term and the expectation of lower rates, prompting investors to seek a premium. While the details are important, duration does affect pricing fluctuations. The short duration today contributes to its lower rates. So, that's the situation. The market is favorable towards us, and I have a strong affinity for the market as well. I am also keen to explore financing options similar to GMRE’s approach with BMO and others. We're in discussions with our partners to see what we can achieve here, but we remain committed to maintaining a significant portion of our debt in Israel.

Our next question or comment comes from the line of Barry Oxford from Colliers International.

Just to build on Rob's question regarding the pipeline. It was at $300 million, I think you indicated last quarter, now at $250 million. Is that just more a function of how you define your pipeline, but not necessarily a commentary on what's available out there in the marketplace?

Yes, our pipeline is a moving target. I'm not sure if our competitors use the same definition for pipeline, which includes deals that are already inked and expected to close. We classify our pipeline into high, medium, and low probability levels for deals. We provide the overall total pipeline. We are very disciplined in our purchasing practices, and when we make a deal, it almost always closes. We need to consider both the letters of intent we have issued and the contracts we have in place. I'm not sure if that fully answers your question.

I want to add that our situation is constantly evolving. Each week brings new developments. We regularly attend conferences and receive inquiries from various sources. The $250 million reflects deals that align with our strategy, rather than just opportunities collecting in our inbox. The opportunities we are pursuing are those we believe we can finalize once we secure the letter of intent and lock them in for closure.

Given that your property type is doing very well, it seems to be attracting investor interest. Are you seeing more people showing up at the bidding process? And also, we've seen some REITs trying to add more to their skilled nursing?

First of all, I'm not sure I agree with you, Barry. The REITs, as I discussed with David Sedgwick on Tuesday, are not buying as many skilled nursing facility portfolios today. It appears that the assisted living product remains the preferred choice for many of our peers. Personally, I don't favor that direction. However, the competition remains the same as before. For us, what matters is that people are still willing to negotiate with us because they trust we will close a deal. This is likely true for our competitors as well. The notable difference is that our competitors do not pursue smaller deals like we do; we focus on both large and small transactions. In large deals, firms like CareTrust and Omega typically outperform us on pricing, as they can manage to operate with cap rates of 8% or 8.5%, while we maintain a 10% cap rate. For smaller deals, we've previously mentioned how some owner-operators tend to overpay because they have personal stakes in the operations, like family connections at the facility. This sometimes leads them to accept lower returns, viewing the investments as family or legacy assets. In contrast, we consider our shareholders and adhere to our investment strategy. Our ideal range for deals is typically between $20 million and $50 million, which gives us a strong chance of securing those transactions. Additionally, we often receive offers for smaller deals directly, without any brokers involved. The recent deals we've completed are examples of this; sellers approached us directly, presenting opportunities they believed aligned with our interests. This includes several transactions in Oklahoma and Texas, and with these sellers, we anticipate future acquisitions. They appreciate how we conduct our business and are eager to engage with us again.

Perfect. Then just kind of switching gears real quick. The G&A was lower by about $500,000 or $600,000, which is a good thing. But is that a good run rate? Or will we see it move back up closer to the $2 million level?

Greg, do you know the answer to that? I think he's on mute.

I haven't really examined the run rate for next quarter. To be honest, for Q4, I expect it to increase a bit more. So if I had to answer now, I would say we'll likely be closer to the $2 million mark. However, I can provide a more accurate answer after the call if you’d like.

We haven't added a new employee since the first quarter when we hired an asset manager. We did bring in a new lawyer to replace one who left after 14 years, and that change was relatively budget neutral. My personal compensation has remained the same, and Board fees have not increased in three to four years, which is a positive aspect for us. The only potential G&A increase could come from legal costs related to deals and financing, which might cause some fluctuations from time to time. We've refrained from using the ATM due to the stock price not being favorable, but there are still associated costs like comfort letters and professional fees for the ATM. Overall, we expect expenses to remain flat quarter-over-quarter, with minor variations possible. Payroll can differ from quarter to quarter, as some may have an extra payroll, but that should clarify the situation.

Our next question or comment comes from Mark Smith from Lake Street.

You've talked a bit about kind of liquidity and ability to finance additional acquisitions. I'm curious kind of your ability or thoughts around using stock more in future deals?

I appreciate this question. One aspect that often gets overlooked by investors is that when we issue a bond series in Israel, we actually have the capacity for several hundred million dollars more than the amount we've closed. So if we ever require cash, there’s an impression that we might struggle to secure it. However, since we have an approved bond series well above our current bonds, we do have access to funds at the original trading price, not just at the coupon price. In theory, if the bonds are trading higher, we can issue more bond debt under an existing series at a better rate. Regarding equity, I would be eager to sell more shares and enhance liquidity in our stock. I want to enable institutions to trade larger volumes. We have completed several deals, including the recent Missouri deal, where they accepted $2 million to $3 million in stock and have expressed satisfaction with it. While I’m not sure if they are acquiring more shares now, they are content holding onto what they have. We need our stock to move, and I’m uncertain what could trigger that. Perhaps landing a significant deal followed by a roadshow could create the momentum we need to increase trading volume. Currently, our AFFO is projected to be around $1.30 to $1.40 for the year, and with an average AFFO multiple of 13% to 14%, our stock is trading at a substantial discount, roughly 40%. I don’t want to issue more stock and dilute our shareholders. Our NAV is likely in line with the current stock price, and I am mindful of ensuring that my shareholders are not diluted. This may be a concern that I shouldn’t have, but I prioritize protecting our shareholders. Many of my peers may not share this concern, which is reflected in their negative AFFO growth from having to sell equities to sustain dividends, ultimately hurting their shareholders. I hope I addressed your question, Mark. I would be thrilled if our stock could reach a more favorable range, allowing us to conduct an offering that benefits both our investment banks and our ability to attract institutions so we can grow from there. That’s what I am hoping for in the near future.

I did also want to ask just if there's any impact on you or your operators here with the government shutdown.

There is no significant impact at Strawberry. We have some items stuck in the HUD queue that are not being processed. This has led to a bit of uncertainty regarding certain matters, but from a financial standpoint, business is performing well. We are collecting all our rents and fulfilling our obligations, so the overall effect is minimal. However, we do have several unresolved issues that need to be addressed for peace of mind. This primarily affects my tenants. I hear some concern about surveys, as the lack of payment for those means no one can conduct them. We faced similar issues years ago, which resulted in significant problems because regulators are required to follow up on complaints, leading to delayed inspections and potential fines for past issues rather than current ones. Despite this, I believe our experienced operators are equipped to handle these challenges. They are aware that fluctuations are part of the business, especially in nursing homes, and they understand that there will be ups and downs. If any negative outcomes arise from this situation, we will manage it.

Our next question or comment comes from the line of Viacheslav Obodnikov from Freedom Broker.

Can you hear me clearly?

Yes.

Great. And yes, my question is on capital allocation strategy in the context of the current market. As you said, there is a very huge discount, implying about 16% to 18% annually. And maybe could you walk us through how the Board weighs the immediate and certain accretion from a share buyback against the returns from a new property acquisition? And at what point does the valuation gap become so compelling that maybe buybacks would take precedence over even a good acquisition?

That's a really good question. We acknowledge the need for more shares in the marketplace, not fewer, although we can buy back shares at a discount, which we have done when the stock was significantly undervalued at $10 a share. We have implemented our buyback program to support the stock, but it has been limited in scope. We believe that if we continue our current strategy without focusing too much on the stock price and maintain our collective AFFO growth along with a dividend yield resulting in a 17% return, the market will eventually recognize this value. Our approach is to invest the cash we generate back into growth while ensuring we maintain a disciplined strategy that produces high double-digit returns and builds a sustainable portfolio without burdening our tenants, like some others in the industry. We understand that taking risks in this business is necessary, and we consider a 10% return to be fair for the risks involved. Your question raises a valid concern, as while we could focus on boosting the stock price through buybacks, having fewer shareholders could reduce liquidity, leading to potential downward pressure on the stock if there were to be any sales. Ultimately, if our model becomes ineffective and the stock is not well-regarded, we may need to consider other options, though I cannot say for certain what those would be.

Just a quick follow-up about the last call. There was a discussion about Illinois remains a laggard from a reimbursement perspective. Could you please kind of contrast the regulatory and reimbursement environments in kind of newer states where you're starting to invest much more against the legacy markets?

Yes, to reiterate what we've mentioned before, there are two main types of Medicaid reimbursement in the country: price-based and cost-based. In cost-based states, you get reimbursed for your actual expenses, which typically tend to be in red states. In these states, you don't face labor issues because you can pay your staff more, and the government refunds you nearly every dollar spent on nurses or CNAs. Therefore, it's easier to take care of your employees since you have the funds. In contrast, Illinois operates on a price-based system, where the government provides a fixed allowance, requiring you to manage within that budget. This creates a situation where, although you want to increase employee wages due to rising costs, the state doesn’t provide additional funds, leading to a standstill. Our portfolio in Illinois is performing well overall, with some assets excelling, particularly in terms of rent coverage, which is positive across the board. However, there are underperformers. Notably, the largest tenant in Illinois, which comprises nearly half of our portfolio, is something I have a personal stake in. We have indicated that if the opportunity arises, we will begin divesting from this tenant because smaller, local operators can often manage these properties more effectively without the burden of corporate overhead. As a landlord in Illinois, we are receiving our rent and the coverage is more than adequate, though the state's reimbursement rates are still lagging. Illinois is the most significant laggard due to the state needing to adjust to rising costs, which they inevitably will. The unions in Illinois also play a crucial role, recognizing the need for increased funding from the government to support the wages of their members. In summary, Illinois stands out as a laggard because it relies on legislative action to increase reimbursement rates rather than having a system that automatically adjusts based on spending, as seen in other states. This legislative approval is necessary for nursing homes to receive the increased funding required to cover their expenses.

I'm showing no additional questions in the queue at this time. I'd like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Jeff Bajtner for any closing remarks.

Thank you so much, and I'd like to thank everybody for joining us today. On behalf of myself, Greg and Moishe and the team here, we continue to work hard on behalf of our shareholders, making disciplined acquisitions and ultimately working on getting our stock price up. So if you have any questions on all our presentations in the back, there's both my e-mail address and Moishe's e-mail address, we're always available while connecting with our shareholders and investors. Have a great weekend. Thank you.

Thank you, everybody.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's conference. This concludes the program. You may now disconnect. Everyone, have a wonderful day.