If you come back to who are counterparty with that as is Atlas SP, that with our counterparty, the old Credit Suisse securitized products team six or seven years ago, as I just mentioned. So it’s a group we’ve worked with for a number of occasions, a group we’ve done a number of deals with, and it’s someone we have a lot of great deal trust in. As part of our process for that commitment, we identified those 40 assets. We’ve already gone through underwriting with them. So yes, that pool has been identified. Yes, the lender has worked through that. If you recall, there’s also a kind of effectively a go-shop provision as part of that commitment where we can take that to market and go in a different path, or we can continue to work with Atlas or Apollo.
So the ultimate financials or ultimate economics, I should say, of that transaction are to be determined. To David’s point, I think from Craig earlier, we’ll provide more details as we get closer. But there’s a world where we use a much smaller facility based off asset sales. There’s even a — even more aggressive world. We don’t have any borrowings at time to spend if the transaction market really remains robust. So Again, we’ll provide more details as we get closer to spin, but it’s a market — it’s fair to assume it’s a market rate CMBS deal. And again, we’ll provide updates as we progress through 2024.
Floris Van Dijkum: Hey, thanks, Conor. And maybe…
Conor Fennerty: Go ahead, sorry.
Floris Van Dijkum: No, no, you fire away.
Conor Fennerty: I was going to say, let me know if I mentioned anything for your question here.
Floris Van Dijkum: No, no. I think that answers that part of the question, I think. The other question I had was in relation to your curve portfolio. There’s one other — as far as I’m aware, there’s one other sizable portfolio out there that’s somewhat similar to yours, which is the core [ph] portfolio. You must have looked at that closely. Maybe could you give a couple of potential differentiating factors you — for your portfolio versus that portfolio? Or and how people should think about what’s your — what percentage of your NOI, the $76 million of NOI that you have for the Curb portfolio, how much of that was carve-outs from your existing assets versus actual convenience assets that you’ve acquired separately as standalone assets? Two-part question. I apologize.
David Lukes : I’ll let Conor take Part B, which is the carve-out details. But on Part A, there’s so much inventory in the U.S. in convenience. There are a number of smaller and midsized portfolios out there. I’d hate to get into a comparison between different portfolios just because you have imperfect information. I will say that we did hand select this portfolio. I mean we chose what to carve out. We chose what to leave behind. We chose what to buy in the last five years. So we’re very happy with the credit quality, the growth quality, the submarkets, the locations, the daily traffic, the cell phone data that we’ve been tracking for years, as you know. So we’re really happy with the portfolio we have. I hate to just start comparing it to other portfolios that we just don’t have perfect information on.
Conor Fennerty: And to David’s point, I think it’s a really important aspect of this. We built this from a ground up literally asset by asset. So every in here, we feel really good about the overall metrics on Page 15, Floris, which makes the comparisons, I guess, difficult to your point or David’s point. The carve outs are about 25%, maybe marginally more than that of the overall portfolio in terms of ABR, but that’s coming down every day, right, as we buy assets. And you think about, to Samir’s question on the balance sheet, if we’re $1.2 billion-ish of GAV today, and we cave outs are $300 million, $400 million of that as we deployed $2 billion to $3 billion, the carve-outs dropped to a fairly insignificant amount. So again, we feel really good about each of those carve-outs. We’re happy to own them, and we hand-selected each of them. But that kind of subset of the portfolio will shrink over time as we lever operate at least deploy the cash.
Floris Van Dijkum: Thanks guys.
Operator: The next question comes from Ki Bin Kim with Truist. Please go ahead.
Ki Bin Kim: Thanks. Just a couple of housekeeping items here. When you quote cap rates on your dispositions, can you just talk about what definition that is? And if you’re including a property management charge and things like that?
Conor Fennerty: Hey, Ki Bin, good morning. It’s Conor. In our mind, there’s only one definition of the cap rate, which is a 4 and 12-month NOI, including a management fee.
Ki Bin Kim: Okay. And on your $255 million NOI projection for the SITE Centers portfolio, I’m assuming that’s as of a 12-31-2023 portfolio? And if you can provide just high level, like what does that translate to from a same-store NOI standpoint?
Conor Fennerty: Yes, you’re right. So it includes the two assets that were sold as of in January or February to date. And so you need to adjust for those. So effectively, we gave you the balance sheet and the NOI of 12-31. So it’s a good point to call out. In terms of same-store NOI, we didn’t provide a projection for SITE Centers for a couple of reasons. And the biggest reason, and this is something Dave and I both alluded to in our prepared remarks, is it’s just losing relevance. So we sold $1 billion of real estate effectively in the fourth quarter. None of those assets had a Bed Bath & Beyond. If we included those in 2024, our same-store would be higher not because it’s better real estate or worse real estate, but simply because of whether or not Bed Bath & Beyond in there or not.
In the same vein, if we sell a number of our Bed Bath assets, which we expect to in the first half of the year, our same-store will start to go up. Does that mean things are getting better for that portfolio? No. It’s just the volatility around operating metrics for SITE Centers is really going to grow and as a result, it’s dropped in terms of relatives. Now if you think about some guideposts and how you should think about same-store for site over the course of the year, it’s fair to assume in a static portfolio growth would be — look similar to the fourth quarter and the first half of the year as we comp through Bad Bath. And then you start to see a pretty dramatic acceleration in the back half of the year as the SMO pipeline and also some of those Bed Bath backfills come into place.
And that gets you to a level that I think is pretty consistent with what we did in 2023 in the back half, and what some of our peers are reporting for their guidance for ’24. But I would just give you, again, that caveat that the relevance we think of the metric is pretty low and the volatility of same-store be so dramatic over the course of ’24 based off asset sales that we just don’t think it’s a relevant number or to provide at this time.
Ki Bin Kim: Okay. Thank you, guys.
Operator: The next question comes from Dori Kesten with Wells Fargo. Please go ahead.
Dori Kesten : Thanks, good morning. Would you call October or rather firm time line for the spin at this point? Or could material incremental sales move that forward?
Conor Fennerty: Hey, Dori, good morning. It’s Conor. It’s a great question. At this time, we think October 1 is a great placeholder. You’re absolutely right. If you saw some dramatic change in transactions positively or negatively, we might move up or move back that date. All that said, remember, we don’t need to sell another asset to get this transaction done, right? That was the financing is effectively that bridge. So everything from here to David’s point or response from earlier is purely upside to both SITE and Curb stakeholders, which is the same stakeholder today. So it’s a great question. We’ll update you go along. As of today, it’s our best guess. It feels like transactions are probably — transactions remain the biggest variable to whether that date moves forward or back a month or so.
Dori Kesten: Okay. And what — I guess, what level of asset sales from this point on would remove the preferred equity stake from the transaction?
Conor Fennerty: It’s probably a pretty close story to a dollar for dollar. I mean, if we sold an additional $300 million here, the preferred would go away. I think to David’s point around the level of activity we’re seeing, we feel pretty good that the likely Curb is just cash and no press. That said, again, like the financing, we have everything in place. We don’t need to sell additional assets today, but it does feel likely based off the volume of activity we’ve got going on that it’s likely that Curb is simply cash.
Dori Kesten: Okay. Thank you.
Operator: The next question comes from Paulina Rojas with Green Street. Please go ahead.
Paulina Rojas: Good morning. And my question is about the in-place ABR for Curb. And I say it’s 36-foot, which is towards the high end of what I see for your peers for small shop. So I was wondering where do you see the market rent for your space today?
David Lukes : Yes, it’s a good question, Paulina. The reality is that shop rents can vary dramatically in a larger property. In other words, the shops that are along the Curbline up in the front of the property tend to have higher rents. The properties that we refer to as B shops, they’re in the back of a property adjacent to a grocery store, adjacent to a larger format retailer tend to have lower rents. So it’s not surprising that the outparcel buildings or multi-tenant pads that are along the high-traffic intersection tend to generate the higher rents. The mark-to-market is a really good question. And I don’t have a succinct answer on that. Part of the reason is that market rents for shops have been growing, specifically coming out of the pandemic with a lot of the suburban migration.
The cell phone data, which is telling us that a hybrid workforce is pretty entrenched. You’re just seeing a lot more tenant demand. And so a lot of the rents are growing at a pace that we’re not really sure we don’t have great data, but the mark-to-market is certainly present.
