Dan Booth: So, the LaVie assets were sold, right. So, we just put a cap rate on those sold assets and then turn around and obviously, reinvest those proceeds. We are still working through the restructuring will be, so we haven’t determined exactly what the actual rent will be when that’s all shaped out. So, that’s kind of the TBD.
Bob Stephenson: Hey Juan. On Page 18 of the supplemental, we show – we list how much we booked in the fourth quarter around what was disposed of and you could say it’s 244,000, its very immaterial.
Juan Sanabria: It’s helpful. And how about what should we be assuming for the ‘24 guidance in terms of dispose?
Bob Stephenson: Adding – bidding held-for-sale assets that they are held for sale assets, we booked 788,000 in the fourth quarter related to those.
Juan Sanabria: Okay. And then just on Guardian, so what’s the status there? Do you have an operator offset? It’s just a question of getting the state approvals, or if you could just give us a little color on the process from here and where you stand?
Taylor Pickett: Yes. Dan and the team have identified likely transition partner and they are working through the process. Again, the timing is I am hopeful that by the time we have our second quarter call, we can tell you where it landed, but we all know right now.
Juan Sanabria: And then just last one for me. You gave the adjusted FFO guidance, but how should we think about that as it relates to that adjusted FFO, and any commentary you can give on when you would expect the dividend to be covered?
Bob Stephenson: Juan, so based on the assumptions in the forecast, I would assume that that’s going to run anywhere from $0.02 to $0.04 less per quarter based on the AFFO guidance. And there is a possibility based on given the range and what we see, but really timing to know that we could, on a run rate basis cover the dividend in the links that it would. But again, timing is the key there.
Juan Sanabria: Thank you very much.
Operator: Our next question is from the line of Michael Carroll with RBC. Please proceed with your question.
Michael Carroll: Yes. Thanks. Now, with regard to your investment outlook, should we assume that Omega was mainly targeting individual deals to achieve that 10% yield target? I know there are big or a few bigger portfolios out there. Is that something that you guys are going to kind of stay away from just given your current cost of capital?
Taylor Pickett: It’s – I think that’s a fair statement. Your bread-and-butter tends to be the singles and doubles. There are some relative – there are some more sizable transactions in the UK that are hitting the pipeline. So, you might see some stuff there. That’s all 10%. If you want to call us back and tell us the sizable ones we are not aware of here in the states we wanted here…
Michael Carroll: And then with regard to Guardian, how long does it take for the approval process to go through. So, if the tenant that you are talking to decides that they want to take the assets, how long does it take to get the regulatory approval before they can get in there?
Dan Booth: In the statement we are talking about 30 days to 60 days, from the time that you filed.
Michael Carroll: Okay. And then as Guardian kind of winds down, is there any chance that you can get a true up rent payment as the transition is completed and that operator kind of move away?
Dan Booth: Not likely.
Michael Carroll: Okay. And then just last one. I believe in your prepared remarks when you were talking about guidance, you kind of implied that you think your guidance implies that Maplewood eventually return back to full contractual rents. Was that a comment that, that could occur in 2024, or was that just a general comment that, that will occur sometime in the future?
Taylor Pickett: We are not – we haven’t finalized with the Maplewood team, their cash budgets for ‘24. But I think they are aspirational that by the end of the year they can reach that target, but is definitely going into ‘25 will be there. Assuming nothing else happens – unusual happens.
Michael Carroll: Great. Understood. Thank you.
Operator: Our next question is from the line of Nick Yulico with Scotiabank. Please proceed with your question.
Nick Yulico: Thanks. Maybe a question for Bob, I was hoping to just get a kind of a walk on the balance sheet based on some of the activity you are assuming on asset sales. I wasn’t sure if there is any more HUD repayment associated with those. And then you have sort of the cash that’s earmarked, it sounds like a lot for the bond maturity. Just trying to understand like from a point in time where you guys are at from a cash available to invest into new acquisitions based on all of that? And then how are you thinking about funding additional acquisitions, whether it’s equity or debt?
Bob Stephenson: Yes. There are a lot of questions within that one. So, let me try to address them all. So, I will start saying that, we today, we are sitting with $440 plus million in cash on the balance sheet. And yes, it’s earmarked for the April 1st maturity of $400 million. However, if an acquisition comes up, use that. And as I have stated in my prepared remarks, we have over $1.4 billion in credit facility capacity to handle a combination either the debt repayment and/or future acquisitions. We are also, as I have stated in the assumptions that we are assuming that we will dispose the $94 million of assets held for sale. So, that’s additional cash to help us handle that a maturity/acquisitions. Again, it’s really – it’s going to be dependent on the pipeline from a capital funding standpoint, but I think we are well positioned just where the balance sheet sits today.
Nick Yulico: Okay. Thanks. And then I guess second question is on some of the recent loan investments, whether it was the $50 million term loan or other loans. Were any of those – is there a non-cash interest portion of any of those recent loans? And maybe if you could also just break out on Page 3 of the sup, you guys do give all the buckets on the different loans. If there is any non-cash interest income associated with any of those different loan investments you have.
Dan Booth: Certainly not on the new deals that we just did. I don’t think there is a confirmed [ph] in Page 3, but…
Taylor Pickett: Yes. All the – Nick, all the numbers that we are quoting for yields are all cash. There are a couple of loan deals where we have some upside opportunity if there is a refi for excess proceeds, but we don’t include any of that in our yield calculation.
Nick Yulico: Okay. Thanks. And then so just on Page 3 then all the interest income associated with the various loans you are saying is like 100% cash. I wasn’t sure if there was any like pick component of any of these loans.
Bob Stephenson: Yes. As you know, we have a few contracts out there, a few loans out there that has an okay component that you and I walked through in the past, they are still in place.
Nick Yulico: Okay. I will follow-up. Thanks.
Operator: Our next question is from the line of Wes Golladay with Baird. Please proceed with your question.
Wes Golladay: Hey. Good morning everyone. I just have a quick question on the New York assets for Maplewood. Do you see that assets stabilizing by the end of next year? And then if you haven’t handy, do you know how much EBITDA upside is that the asset?
Taylor Pickett: Well, as I have mentioned, we are still working through with the Maplewood management team, a revision of the cash flows there. But yes, I would think if you are talking about end of next year, end of ‘25, I think that’s absolutely fair to assume it will be fully leased up. And the cash flow number is substantial, but they haven’t finished their plans. So, we are not prepared to talk about that today.
