Other — already built. I don’t really care whether it’s PEMB, tilt-wall, wood frame, pole barn, or something else. My preference is to buy existing infrastructure with limited enough deferred maintenance that we can operate it on Day One. In fact, bring me the ugly, under-managed, overlooked stuff. If the infrastructure works, the zoning works, customers can use it, and we can acquire it below what it would cost to recreate today, that’s much more interesting to me than deciding how to build something new. Fixable ugly, not broken infrastructure. Bad branding, bad management, bad pricing, weeds, faded paint, crappy website, manual billing — all fine. Structural failure, major environmental problems, unusable utilities, fatal zoning, or enormous deferred CapEx — no bueno.

@Tyler Jones wow. Very cool. I’m not familiar with “Weld Up”, but you can bet I’m researching it now! (And I’m sure others here will do the same) I may come back with some questions. Thanks for sharing!

Welcome

@Shital Thakkar Everyone is asking whether seller financing still works. We just put one under contract. - Purchase Price: $860,000 - 20% down - 80% seller financing - 6.5% fixed interest - 25-year amortization - 7-year balloon That’s a great financing structure. But it’s not why we bought the deal. Our first question wasn’t, “Can we get seller financing?” It was: What would it cost to recreate this asset today? Our estimate is $1.3M+ to recreate it by the time you account for land, utilities, engineering, permits, fencing, gates, time, inflation, execution risk, and customer acquisition. On top of that, this property comes with an operating business, existing customers, and immediate cash flow. The seller financing simply reduced the capital required to close and preserved equity for the next acquisition. Structure before price. Recreation cost before comps. That’s how we look at value.

@Shital Thakkar Thanks, Shital—I appreciate it. I’d rather not post the exact address publicly while we’re under contract, but it’s in the Carolinas. What attracted us wasn’t just the real estate—it was the replacement cost and the existing infrastructure. By the time you account for land, utilities, fencing, paving, permits, engineering, and time, recreating the asset today would cost substantially more than our basis. That’s generally how we evaluate opportunities. We ask, “What would it cost to recreate this today?” and “Can we acquire an operating asset for significantly less?” Our focus is on buying existing industrial properties with infrastructure already in place, then improving operations, increasing revenue density, and adding complementary uses where appropriate. We’d much rather unlock the gates on Day One than spend years creating something from scratch. Once this transaction closes, I’ll be happy to share photos and walk through exactly why we liked the deal.

@Shital Thakkar Secondary and tertiary markets absolutely—but it depends on the asset. I’m probably the odd one in this group. I’m not interested in pulling permits and building from scratch if I can avoid it. I’d rather acquire existing infrastructure with customers, cash flow, or both, then improve the operation and increase the revenue density. Where we differ is our operating model. We don’t view contractor yards and RV & boat storage as separate asset classes—we view them as complementary businesses that can coexist on the same property. One produces steady storage demand. The other serves local contractors who need secure yards, power, parking, and operational space. That hybrid approach diversifies the rent roll, broadens the customer base, and creates multiple revenue streams from the same piece of real estate. We think of ourselves as “recyclers” or “up-cyclers” more than developers—taking underutilized properties and businesses and putting them back to work. I’d rather unlock the gate on day one and welcome existing customers than spend two years chasing permits and construction schedules. It’s a simple model that’s repeatable. We’ve proven we can replicate it, and every acquisition makes the operating system stronger.

@Shital Thakkar Great question. It’s actually a combination of all of the above, but our first priority is acquiring properties that already have an operating business, customers, or existing cash flow. We look for underutilized industrial properties where the real estate and the business can be improved together. Sometimes that means increasing occupancy. Sometimes it means reconfiguring the site. Sometimes it means adding new products that the existing customer base already needs. Our model is a little different because we combine uses. We might have RV & boat storage, contractor yards, industrial outdoor storage, container storage, fleet parking, and small support buildings operating on the same property. Each complements the others and diversifies the rent roll. We aren’t trying to create value by building more square footage. We’re trying to create value by increasing the productivity of the land and the operating business. If we can buy a property where we can unlock the gates on Day One, keep the existing customers, add additional revenue streams over time, and improve operations, that’s far more attractive to us than spending years on entitlement and construction. We think of ourselves less as developers and more as operators who recycle overlooked industrial assets into higher-performing businesses.