Michael Gamzon: Yeah. I think, akin to that comment, it’s really hard to pick a number, because it’s sort of — there’s so few deals, they just feel almost your cherry picking. I can give you an example, in Charlotte, there was a nice portfolio located near the airport. It had three and a half years of weighted average lease term. We thought the rents were kind of 25% to 30% below market, about a 600,000 square foot portfolio. We have heard that’s been awarded, went through kind of a multiple round process and so this is real time last month and we have heard it’s kind of a 4.2%, 4.3% cap rate, which I think feels pretty low. I’d say peak of the market, maybe I would have guessed that would be kind of a 3.8%. So has that moved 40 basis points, that seems pretty tight compared to where debt spreads have widened and other things.
But that’s where that’s traded. We know there’s been a closed deal in Savannah with not a lot of mark-to-market and five years of lease term that traded at a 4.25%. Again, it’s not a market we are in. We have mentioned in the past we look at it, so we track it a little bit. That feels pretty low. There is a deal kind of in the Berks County, which is kind of the Western submarket of the Lehigh Valley. We feel the core of the two eastern counties. But this is further west. So we think it’s not as good a location typically is traded wide of the Lehigh Valley and that closed, I think, two months ago at 4.25%. So it’s really hard to say exactly how much things have moved. Some things that are going to have a very, very long 15-year or 20-year single-tenant net lease with not a lot of bumps, that’s going to be typically wider, probably, 100 basis points to 125 basis points wider.
These other deals are anywhere from, call it, 25 to 75, but it’s really hard to put a pin on it.
Tom Catherwood: Got it. Really appreciate that color, Michael. Thank you. And then last one for me, Jon, on your guidance from or for NOI from continuing operations, it seems like some of that boost was from early development stabilizations in the quarter, but kind of by our back of the envelope math, it still seems like there’s $0.02 a share. So kind of higher run rate that exceeded your 2Q expectations. Is that directionally correct, and if so, kind of what’s driving this higher base run rate?
Jon Clark: That’s true. There’s a slightly higher base run rate, part of which is related to the Paragon assets that we leased, as Michael had mentioned, to an investment grade retailer. But, yeah, you are likely seeing a run rate a little higher than Q2.
Tom Catherwood: Got it. That’s it for me. Thanks, everyone.
Michael Gamzon: Great. Thanks, Tom.
Operator: The next question is from Mitch Germain with JMP Securities. Please go ahead.
Mitch Germain: Thank you very much. So the Paragon asset, did that — I know that, that’s leased is that commenced as well at this point?
Michael Gamzon: Yeah. That lease has commenced. So it’s pretty fast moving.
Mitch Germain: And how long was that in the quarter?
Ashley Pizzo: That lease commenced towards the end of the quarter. But I think in our last iteration of guidance, we had been conservative and expected that asset to stay vacant through Q4.
Mitch Germain: Okay. Got you. And I am just curious, I think, Jon’s commentary, you talked about same-store, potentially some leasing that you guys have to do next year. I am just trying to understand the cadence of occupancy, obviously, it declined from the delivery of the two Orlando properties not being fully occupied. But I am just trying to understand kind of cadence of occupancy as we kind of move forward over the next couple of quarters?
