Nick Wibbenmeyer: Hey, Tayo. Listen, I think it’s timing really on every, just about every line item in our outlook, we’ve delivered on a full year basis, what we anticipate delivering, but some of that timing was front loaded. Again, I’ll just reiterate in the percent rent. That’s kind of a classic first quarter issue, but it occurs largely in the first quarter. Again, over half of our percentage rents are earned then. And the balance is coming from other line items, like other income where the income streams within those line items can be nonlinear. And it just so happens that some of that was occurred in the first quarter, for example, rather than our plan, which was in the second. So some of those items are just kind of idiosyncratic, but on a full year basis, as we kind of zoom out, we are delivering on all of them at the level that we anticipated.
So it’s just not translating to the full year expectations. What you’re sensing though, in our commentary is that, the incredible quarter we have from a leasing perspective and combined with the incredible momentum we continue to generate on the development side of the business is leading to this added conviction over our future growth. And that’s what we’re trying to convey today is that that plus 100-basis-point contribution on same property NOI from redev as a 2025 event. You didn’t hear us talk about that last quarter. That that’s, I think what’s happening, the quality of Q1 is translating into our conviction over the end of 2024 and full year 2025.
Tayo Okusanya: Understood. Thank you.
Operator: [Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from the line of RJ Milligan with Raymond James. Please proceed with your question.
RJ Milligan: Hey. Good morning. First off, really appreciate the AFFO disclosure. Hopefully the rest of your peers that don’t already provide it follow your lead. But aside from the lack of disclosure from some of your peers, there’s always a lot of different bucketing of CapEx. And so I have more of a philosophical question. In your AFFO calculation, you don’t include redevelopment CapEx. And I think as an industry, some of your peers are pretty discerning as to what’s really redevelopment, i.e. growth CapEx. Well, I think some are pretty liberal and throwing a lot of re-tenting into that redevelopment bucket, which really looks a lot more like maintenance CapEx. So I’m just curious how you think about bucketing those costs to get to your AFFO calculation?
Mike Mas: I’m happy to take it. And RJ, I appreciate the question. The team did a nice job, really nice job enhancing our disclosure. So thank you for the kudos. I would encourage you to look at it on a look-through basis. That’s my simple answer to it. And I understand that redevelopments are hybrids. They are — they can be challenging to differentiate between maintenance capital and added capital. We — as we think about our bucketing, it is, we’re densifying the site. We’re adding GLA. We’re significantly repositioning the asset within the market. And when that occurs, we are designating that as a redevelopment. If it’s straight lease for lease box-for-box, refacading that space as is, that’s leasing CapEx. And we’re going to put that into the leasing bucket.
But I would encourage you as you think about Regency versus others, put it all in, call redevelopment capital. We’re happy for you to do it. And then compare us on an apples-to-apples basis and we like how we stack up.
Lisa Palmer: I think what Mike is trying to say is that whether you look at it, just the leasing only we’re at the low end and if you bump, if you throw everything together, we’re still at the low end. And it goes back again to just our intentional approach to leasing capital.
RJ Milligan: Great. Appreciate the disclosure. Thanks guys.
Operator: Our next question comes from line of Anthony Powell with Barclays. Please proceed with your question.
Anthony Powell: Hi. Good afternoon. Question on the Kroger Albertsons merger and the back and forth with FTC and that with the disposition, any concerns that that merger may be taking a bit longer to completely expect it or any impact if it’s not commenced? I’ve gotten a few questions on that from clients the past few months.
Lisa Palmer: I can appreciate that you probably are getting questions from that. But we don’t have any new information. We’re reading what you’re reading and it has not — it doesn’t, the timing of it isn’t impacting our operations whatsoever. They’re still operating as two separate companies. They’re talking with us as two separate companies. I mean — and they’re key customers of ours. So we do have really — we do have good relationships with them, but they’re not allowed to give us any inside information. We continue to feel really good about our real estate and I think you’ve heard us and you’ve heard me say this before. If the merger goes through, we believe that that will create a stronger, more well-capitalized grocer that will better be able to compete with some of their competitors and will be a really strong operator for us.
And if it does happen, the spinoff of stores that would happen certainly is the greatest area of uncertainty. But again, we feel really good about our stores and those are productive grocery locations and we would expect them to continue to be. So if the merger doesn’t happen, they’re really good operators and we’re happy to have both of them operate in our portfolio.
Anthony Powell: Okay. Thank you for that.
Operator: Thank you. Ms. Palmer, we have no further questions at this time. I would like to turn the floor back over to you for closing comments.
Lisa Palmer: Thank you all for joining us this morning. Appreciate your interest and have a great weekend. Thank you.
Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today’s teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation and have a wonderful day.
