Seeking Alpha
We cover over 5K calls/quarter
Profile| Send Message|
( followers)  

American Residential Properties, Inc. (NYSE:ARPI)

Q4 2013 Earnings Conference Call

March 13, 2014 11:00 am ET

Executives

Shant Koumriqian - Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer

Stephen Schmitz - Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer

Laurie Hawkes - President, Chief Operating Officer, Director

Analysts

Dennis McGill - Zelman & Associates

Haendel E. St. Juste - Morgan Stanley

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

Omotayo Okusanya - Jefferies

Operator

Welcome to the Fourth Quarter 2013 American Residential Properties Conference Call. My name is Katrina, and I will be the operator for today’s call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. Please note that this conference is being recorded.

I will now turn the call over to Mr. Shant Koumriqian. Sir, you may begin.

Shant Koumriqian

Thank you. Good morning, everyone and thank you for joining us today for American Residential Properties' fourth quarter 2013 conference call. With me this morning are two co-founders, Stephen Schmitz, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Laurie Hawkes, our President and Chief Operating Officer.

On today’s call, Steve Schmitz will provide an overview of our fourth quarter results, Laurie Hawkes will discuss our operating platform and trends in our portfolio and I will review our fourth quarter financial results. We will then open up the call up to your questions.

For your reference, the press release and financial schedules containing information we will be discussing on today’s call were filed yesterday with the SEC. You may also find this information on our website at www.americanresidentialproperties.com, in the Investor Relations section.

Before we begin, please note that today's discussion may include forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements reflect our current views regarding future events and are typically associated with the use of words such as anticipates, target, expect, estimates, believe, assume, project and should or similar words. We caution all those listening including investors not to rely on forward-looking statements. They imply risks and uncertainties and actual results may differ materially from expectations.

We encourage you to carefully consider the risks described in our filings with the SEC which may be obtained on the SEC's website. We do not undertake any obligation to update or correct any forward-looking statements if later events prove them to be inaccurate.

With that said, I would like to now turn the call over to Stephen Schmitz. Steve, please go ahead.

Stephen Schmitz

Thank you, Shant. Welcome ladies and gentlemen. We had an outstanding year in 2013, and we made tremendous progress in implementing our business strategy. I would like to focus on some of the highlights. First, we deployed $582 million to acquire 4,298 single-family homes during the year brining our total portfolio as of year-end to 6,073 single-family homes for a total investment of little over $800 million, representing an increase of 240% over 2012.

Second, we diversified our portfolio and continued to build out our presence in target markets. Third, we continue to refine and enhance our operational and management processes, systems and procedures, enabling us to restore more than 3,500 homes, sign new leases on more than 2,300 homes and renew leases on more than 700 existing homes. Fourth, we successfully accessed the equity and debt capital markets throughout the year.

In January, we secured $150 million senior secured revolving credit facility with an accordion feature of $300 million, so the bank group comprised of Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Jefferies and Raymond James. As you know, we completed the company's initial public offering in May, which produced net proceeds of $265 million.

During the fourth quarter, we increased our borrowing capacity under our senior secured revolving credit facility and to $380 million, plus an accordion feature to $500 million with the bank group that now includes most of the preeminent banking institutions in the U.S., including Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, KeyBanc, Citibank, JPMorgan, Barclays, Jefferies, Raymond James and Comerica.

As noted earlier, we believe that the success we have had in attracting major banks to our lending syndicate and increasing our overall access to capital to the strong endorsement of our business model. Finally, we issued $115 million of five-year 3.25% exchangeable senior notes in November.

Turning to our quarterly accomplishments, during the fourth quarter, we continued to execute our disciplined acquisition strategy to expand our presence in our core markets. We deployed 122 million of capital during the fourth quarter, including investing $93 million to acquire an additional 633 single-family homes. Consistent with a more moderate acquisition pace indicated on our last call.

Of the homes acquired in the fourth quarter, 91% were self-managed, underscoring our emphasis to focus on the expansion of our self-managed portfolio within core markets to continue to improve on operational efficiencies. We are very pleased with the significant home price appreciation occurring in our core stabilized markets such as Phoenix and the Inland Empire in California among others.

For example, based on the latest Housing Price Index of the Federal Housing Finance Agency or FHFA, noticed the quarterly purchase only index, specifically that non-seasonally adjusted purchase only index for the 100 largest MSAs as of December 31, 2013, which was released on February 25, 2014.

Home price appreciation for the last 12 months ended December 31, 2013, in our five largest markets defined by MSA was as follows. 17.3% up in Phoenix, 11.4% up in Houston, 8.8% up in Dallas, 11.7% up in Chicago and 27% up in the Inland Empire. These figures described above are for the market overall and not specific to our portfolio to provide insight into the appreciation that we believe has already occurred in our portfolio.

The five markets I referred to are our five largest markets as of December 31, 2013, representing 65% of our total investment as of the end of 2013, and as of December 31, 2012, representing 89% of our total investment. That's with the exception of Houston, where we began acquiring homes in late Q1 of 2013.

While there has been gross yield compression in these markets, we were able to capitalize on many attractive acquisition opportunities in our core growth markets, notably Houston, Dallas and Nashville among others. We continue to look at three components when evaluating acquisition targets. One, stabilized gross and net yields. Two, future home price appreciation potential, and three, discounts for replacement costs.

The first component going in cash yield is what will drive near-term operating results. For the 574 self-managed homes we acquired in the fourth quarter, the weighted average underwritten gross yield was in the mid-11% range and the weighted average underwritten net yield was approximately 6%. This compares to weighted average gross yield and net underwritten yields of 11% and the mid-5% range, respectively, for the third quarter self-managed acquisitions.

As to our private mortgage business, during the fourth quarter, we funded $18 million in short-term private mortgage loans for an aggregate investment of $42 million, with a weighted average interest rate of 11.8%. In addition to our solid activity, we were pleased with our overall [leased results] during the fourth quarter.

The number of our leased homes in our portfolio increased by 458 or 11% compared to the third quarter. Our resident turnover decreased to 30%, indicating our retention rate of approximately 70%. We also succeeded in negotiating average rental increases on renewals of 3.4% on 228 renewals during the quarter, with increases ranging from less than 1% up to 6.3%, depending upon the market.

We ended the year with the current portfolio occupancy of 75% overall and 86% on properties owned six months or longer, in part impacted by the assumption of the management of certain preferred operating properties. In spite of our positive core growth, strong leasing activity increased operating efficiencies and apparent home price appreciation, our bottom line results were negatively impacted by the default of one of our former preferred operator relationships in the fourth quarter.

This operator which had leased 516 homes in Phoenix, Indianapolis and Las Vegas, under two separate Master Leases defaulted on their contractual obligations, including their obligation to pay property taxes terminated our Master Leases with this operator at year and began the process to assume management of the properties. Due to this termination, we incurred a number of charges in the fourth quarter that negatively impacted our funds from operations and earnings. Shant will review these charges in more detail later in the call.

Following the termination of this relationship, our preferred operator program now represents less than 10% of the total number of homes in our portfolio and less than 9% of our aggregate investment in real estate. These percentages will continue to decrease during 2014, as our self-managed portfolio grows. We currently have two preferred operators with over 94% of our investment in the program, managed by MACK Companies in Chicago, which is a highly experienced organization that is consistently performing under their Master Lease.

As far investment strategy going forward in 2014, we intend to maintain the pace of our acquisition activity at roughly the same rate we had in the fourth quarter. Our goal will be to continue to build the critical mass within our target markets, which should further enhance our operational efficiencies.

By the end of 2014, we would like to have at least 1,000 homes in four markets, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta and Phoenix, with 500 or more homes in Nashville, Charlotte, Orlando, Tampa and Chicago. We intend to continue to be opportunistic with respect to our acquisitions, utilizing our primary channels, the MLS, the auction and portfolio purchases taking advantage of the most attractive economics at any given point in time.

In addition, we recently welcome Jay Byce to our management team as our new Senior Vice President of Investments. He is already working closely with all of our established channels to source acquisitions and identify new acquisition opportunities across our core markets.

Jay has 15 years of experience in real estate financing, NPL's development, acquisition and asset management and has a well rounded perspective on the critical elements of our operation. He joins us from Colony American Homes, where he was the Managing Director responsible for establishing their acquisition strategy in five regions and across all channels. Jay is an experienced and talented addition to our team and is extremely well-suited to oversee the continued growth of our portfolio in accordance with our business strategy.

In terms of financing plans, we believe that we have access to the debt capital necessary to continue funding our acquisition strategy throughout the remainder of 2014. With the banking syndicate of nine major banks, the most recent addition of which is Deutsche Bank, we are confident that we have the financial wherewithal to quarter acquisition strategy.

In addition, we also issued $150 million in senior convertible notes, which have a five-year maturity and provide us with intermediate term financing. We recently retained Deutsche Bank to serve as our lead banker for our securitization transaction, which we were targeting to be at least $300 million. This will add medium-term debt and reduce our cost of capital.

With the current leverage ratio of 31%, that includes the convertible notes, we believe there is substantial room for additional leverage from bank lines in any future securitization. Consequently, we have no current plans to raise additional equity as we believe the market research equity is not currently favorable to the company or to our shareholders.

We are very optimistic about 2014. Our plan is to continue to aggregate intelligently in our core markets, improve occupancy, improve operating efficiencies and drive rent growth.

With that, I would now like to turn the call over to Laurie Hawkes, our Co-Founder, President and Chief Operating Officer. Laurie?

Laurie Hawkes

Thank you, Steve, and good morning everyone. I am going to discuss the integration of our latest acquisitions, our progress on achieving scale, our restoration activities, leasing and occupancy trends, re-tenancy and turnover experience and I will touch on our national purchasing program, resident retention, quality control and IT expansion.

First, we are pleased with the progress we are making building scale in our core markets. As we have consistently stated, only 300 more homes in market allows us to begin leveraging the operational efficiencies that come with critical mass. Combining our existing assets with the purchases we made in the fourth quarter, the additional acquisitions we closed and have under contract through February 28, plus the assets we managed with the Phoenix Fund, we now own or operate over 2,000 properties in Phoenix.

We are approaching 2,000 properties in Texas. We own and operate over 600 properties in North Carolina, over 500 properties in both, Indiana and Illinois, and are close to 300 properties in each of the following states, California, Georgia, Florida and Tennessee. While growing the size of our portfolio by 240% in a year, did present a unique set of challenges. We continue to refine and enhance our properties, systems and procedures as needed to effectively manage these assets.

From an operational standpoint, a number of our significant programmatic achievements during 2013, included the following. We initiated our national procurement program with two nationwide suppliers, including is like life include Pittsburgh Paints and Home Depot, and expanded that this past January to include Sears to cover appliances and serving, all of which help reduce our cost of materials and transportation logistics as well as enhancing our capability.

Next, we expanded our vendor qualification and certification program, all the efforts this time single-family rental vendor qualification certification conference last March, and again last week for over 300 contractor from all 13 states over the course of two days here in Phoenix, which when combined with our periodic regional conferences and training sessions, has significantly increased our network and the caliber of qualified contractor who understand the meaning of ARP rent-ready. They adhere to our quality assurance standards and appreciate what it takes to be on ARP team to perform restorations and maintenance of properties.

We built an internally operator resident services call center, which currently handles over 7,000 calls per month to address resident questions and concerns with a 92% service rate on the first call. We believe being responsive to our residents is a paramount importance to their satisfaction and retention. We expanded our proprietary IT system to capture information on all of our assets in residents, including the legacy assets acquired since 2008 to the fund, enabling us to develop cost analytics and operational metrics tracking based on six years of operating experience.

We implemented a lease renewal management system with 120-day lead cycle designed to increase resident retention and maximize rental increases. Finally, we opened regional management offices in Texas, Phoenix and more recently in Atlanta.

Turning to our restoration activities, as Steve noted, we restored or re-tenanted over 3,500 in 2013, with over 91% of our acquisitions coming through the single-home slow business the fourth quarter, 94% of which were purchased vacant. The efficiency of our restoration platform takes on an even greater importance. During the last quarter, our team completed the 638 restoration projects.

Admittedly, the extreme weather conditions the country experienced during the winter months did present logistical challenges, but we were able to keep the days delays to a manageable level. Restoration took an average of 23-day to complete compared to 16 days in the prior quarter, but were completed at an average cost of $9,000 per project compared with $9,400 in prior quarter.

Focusing on leasing occupancy trends for 2013, we signed leases on more than 1,112 total leases during the fourth quarter, including renewals. Our properties were on the market for an average of 39 days compared with 42 days, last quarter. We define days on market as the time the house is listed for rent, post restoration and post listing, until the time that an application is approved and the lease executes.

Despite the slowdown typically seen in leasing activity around the holidays and assuming control of additional preferred operator property assets, we were still able to keep occupancy rate at a high level. The number of new leased properties in our portfolio increased by 884, and increased 100% over the third quarter.

We attained 75% occupancy on the entire portfolio, unchanged from the prior quarter, notwithstanding our decision to transition the 516 preferred operating property into our self-managed portfolio in the last week of the quarter. We secured all of these 516 properties in Phoenix, Las Vegas.

On December 27, we complete a comprehensive inspection of each property and we ensured that all rents were redirected to ARP as of January 1st. We winterized the properties as appropriate and have been successfully managing these properties as part of our self-managed portfolio, including restoring, re-tenanting and addressing deferred maintenance as appropriate. Indicative of our property management abilities, we integrating all of these additional properties into our property management system, while at the same time managing a steady stream of vacant acquisitions.

Our long-term occupancy on homes owned in the portfolio six months or longer was 86% compared to 92% in the prior quarter. The decline in both, the total occupancy and the long-term occupancy rate was primarily due to the transition of homes related to the preferred operator relationship.

Given our current trends in restoration and leasing, we expect to return to a greater than 90% long-term occupancy rate in the overall self-managed portfolio within the next two quarters.

Our revenue retention approach to managing the portfolio and our commitment to reach out to with the high-touch program to build brand loyalty among our residents continues to translate into an increasingly higher level of early renewals and meaningful increases in rental rates.

We offset approximately 746 contractual lease expiration, including month-to-month rollovers of which 222 residents vacated, resulting in a meaningful turnover ratio of approximately 30%, indicating a retention rate of 70%. Moreover, we also succeeded in negotiating rental increases for renewals of 3.4% with increases ranging from less than 1% to as much as 6.3%, dependent upon the market. This is all accomplished without pushing what we believe will soon be pricing leverage relative to [part] of our product.

We believe our future ability to aggressively increase rent will be significant, but will directly depend upon a level service and the quality and efficacy of the home available to the residents.

We continue to seek new opportunities to optimize our processes and forth closer connections with our residents. In this way, we had initiated a pilot in-house leasing program in the phoenix market, which will serve as the prototype for internalizing all of our leasing activities.

We believe in internalizing this last aspect of our property management will produce both, quantitative and qualitative benefits not only improving days on market, creating exclusive focus on our homes, but also furthering a localized sense of community in our residents. The sophistication of the systems and processes we have developed has been instrumental in building the confidence of financial institutions that now participate in our lending syndicate, our convertible note issuance and now our pending securitization as Steve mentioned.

These institutions have done extensive due diligence on our business model and asset base and they understand the attractive returns that we can generate with additional scale. We truly look forward to continuing to execute well on our core growth strategies and achieving the scale that will drive sustainable long-term value creation for our shareholders.

I would like to turn the call over to Shant, our Chief Financial Officer, who will discuss our financial results for the quarter.

Shant Koumriqian

Thank you, Laurie. I'll start by covering the changes incurred in our preferred operator portfolio, followed by a discussion of our statement of operations and then turn to our balance sheet.

As Steve mentioned, we incurred a number of charges related to default by one of our preferred operator relationships and our subsequent termination of Master Leases at the end of the fourth covering 516 properties of which 336 are located in Indianapolis, 166 are located in Phoenix and 14 are located in Las Vegas.

These charges consist of the following items. We wrote-off or reversed Master Lease rent revenue for the fourth quarter 2013, totaling $600,000 and all outstanding receivables related to this operator as of September 30th, including non-cash deferred rent receivables of approximately $300,000. This had a combined negative impact of $1.1 million on preferred operator rental revenues for the quarter.

We paid or accrued property taxes through December 31st, totaling approximately $680,000. The taxes were due in December 2013, or are due in the first half of 2014 and had not been paid by the operator. In aggregate, these items negatively impacted our Q4 results by approximately $1.8 million, or $0.06 per share.

While the majority of the financial impact from the termination of this relationship is reflected in our fourth quarter results, there will be residual integration costs related to restoration and re-tenancy as well as deferred maintenance on homes that we took over for self-management which will incurred over the next several quarters.

The Indianapolis properties represent approximately 2% of our total investment in homes as of December 31st, while the Phoenix and Las Vegas properties represent approximate 1.5% of our total investment in homes as of December 31st.

Total net book value for these 560 homes was approximately $25 million. The 180 properties located in Phoenix and Las Vegas were approximately 91% leased at December 31st, while the 336 properties located in Indianapolis were approximately 68% leased as of December 31st.

As Laurie noted, we took over management of these 516 properties in January 2014 and have begun the process of stabilizing the Indianapolis properties.

We also disclosed our last conference call that we agreed to terminate Master Lease's covering 280 properties, of which 138 were located in Florida, 131 were located in Atlanta and 11 when Charlotte. With another one of our preferred operators, these properties were integrated into our self-managed portfolio during the current quarter and were approximately 81% leased as of December 31st.

Separately, we agreed to terminate the Master Lease with our third operator covering 32 homes in Atlanta. This operator was current on their lease payments and their properties were 88% leased as of December 31st. With operational control, the assets transitioned to are subsequent to year end.

Total net book value for these 312 homes was a combined approximately $17 million as of December 31st. In total, the 828 homes that were classified as preferred operator homes as of September 30th, are now included in our self-managed portfolio statistics as of December 31st. These properties were 78% leased with an average gross yield of 16%, average investment of $57,000, average size of 1,261 square feet and an average age of 42 years.

Excluding the impact of these 828 homes from our self-managed portfolio statistics as of December 31st, the remaining portfolio was 71% leased with an average monthly rent of $1,205, average gross yield of 10%, average size 1,815 square feet and an average age of 11 years. This compares to 66% leased as of September 30th, with an average monthly rent of $1,173, average gross yield of 10% and an average size of 1,781 square feet and an average age of 10 years.

All 828 homes were owned for greater than six months as of December 31st, and accordingly they are included in the six-month or longer property table, which impacted the greater than six-month statistics. Again, excluding these 828 homes from the six-month statistics, the remaining self-managed portfolio was 86% lease as of December 31st, which compares to 87% leased as of September 30th.

Now, turning to the income statement, total revenue for the fourth quarter of 2013 increased 20% to $13.2 million compared to $11.1 million for the third quarter of 2013, and was comprised of $10.7 million of self-management revenue, $926,000 of preferred operator revenue, $115,000 of management services revenue and $1.5 million of interest and other income. The sequential quarter increase in total revenue is primarily attributable to rental income generated on new leases on an additional 450 homes quarter-over-quarter. Of note, self-managed revenue increased 42% quarter-over-quarter to $7.7 million from $7.5 million.

The number of leased properties in our self-managed portfolio increased by 1,226 homes as of December 31st, comprised of the transfer of leased homes from our preferred operator portfolio as a result of leased terminations previously discussed of which 646 homes remain leased at year-end and the net new leases on an additional 580 homes quarter-over-quarter elsewhere in our self-managed portfolio or a 22% increase from last quarter.

Our preferred operator revenue declined $1 million or 52% from the prior quarter, due to the financial impact of the lease terminations previously discussed. In aggregate, the total number of homes in the preferred operator program in the fourth quarter declined by 828 homes or 56%.

Portfolio operating expenses for the quarter totaled $6.8 million, which include property, operating and maintenance expense, real estate taxes and homeowners' association fees. This compares to $4.5 million in the third quarter 2013. The $1.1 million increase in property, operating and maintenance expenses is primarily driven by the growth in the portfolio during the quarter as well as carry costs, including landscaping utilities and insurance on vacant homes that became rent-ready during the quarter.

Over the last several quarters, the portion of homes acquired vacant has significantly increased, resulting in higher carry cost compared to prior periods from the time a home is rent-ready until it is leased. We also incurred integration costs associated with the transition of 280 prefer operator homes located in Florida, Atlanta and Charlotte into our self-managed portfolio.

The $1 million increase in real estate taxes is primarily due to $680,000 in property taxes related to the 516 prefer operator homes that we took over as a result of the lease termination and the remainder of the increase is due to overall growth in the portfolio. Our self-managed portfolio increased by 1,401 homes or 34% quarter-over-quarter, while our total investment in self-managed portfolio increased by $143 million or 24% quarter-over-quarter. The increase includes the transfer of the 828 homes from the prefer operator portfolio, which had a previous total investment of $47 million and the acquisition of 574 self-managed homes for a total acquisition cost of $86 million or approximately $148,000 per home.

As a reminder, most of our current property acquisitions are vacant homes which impact the trend in our portfolio operating expenses. When we acquire vacant home, we incur carry cost until the home is leased, including real estate taxes HOA fees, insurance expense, utilities and maintenance with no corresponding offsetting revenue. For these reasons as we build our portfolio, the percentage growth in operating expenses can exceed our percent growth in revenue in any one particular quarter, but over the long-term we are making good progress on realizing leverage in our operations.

For the fourth quarter, our total revenues of $13.2 million, less portfolio operating expense of $6.8 million was a positive $6.4 million for the quarter compared with $6.6 million in the prior quarter. The decrease was directly attributable to default of the preferred operator that we previously mentioned. In addition to our portfolio operating expenses we incurred $142,000 in acquisition expenses related to properties that we acquired with existing leases in place compared to $301,000 last quarter.

Depreciation and amortization expense was $7.8 million for the quarter and included $800,000 in amortization expense for in-place lease value. This compares to $6.6 million in depreciation and amortization last quarter. We also incurred $2.9 million in interest expense during the quarter compared to $1.2 million in Q3. The increase was a result of higher average borrowings on our revolving credit facility, interest accrued on the convertible notes issued during the fourth quarter, including non-cash amortization of the discount reported to reflect the estimated fair value of the conversion option and higher deferred financing costs amortization resulting from fees and expenses associated with increasing our credit facility to $380 million from $159 million at the beginning of the quarter.

General and administrative expense for the quarter was $4 million, compared to $3.1 million last quarter, approximately $500,000 in G&A expense in the fourth quarter were one-time costs related to our change in senior Vice President of Investments. Excluding this non-recurring expense, our G&A was approximately $3.6 million, an increase of $500,000 from the prior quarter, which was comprised primarily of additional headcount to support the growth and size of our portfolio and operations and higher professional fees. General and administrative expense for the quarter also includes $530,000 in non-cash stock compensation expense.

For the quarter, our net loss attributable to common stockholders was $8.4 million or $0.26 per common share and funds from operations or FFO attributable to common stockholders was a loss of $800,000 or a negative $0.03 per share. This compares to a net loss of $4.5 million or $0.14 per common share and positive FFO of $1.9 million or $0.06 per share last quarter.

Core FFO which excludes the impact of acquisition expenses, severance charges and non-cash interest expense related to non-cash amortization of the discount recorded on exchangeable senior notes was breakeven for the quarter compared to core FFO $2.2 million for the prior quarter.

Now, turning to our balance sheet, as of December 31st, we owned 6,073 single-family homes for total investment of approximately $794 million. During the quarter, we required 633 homes of which 574 were self-managed homes and 59 were preferred operator homes acquired in Chicago and we incurred restoration and re-tenancy cost for total investment of approximately $114 million. Of the 574 self-managed homes acquired, approximately 95% were vacant with the weighted average gross underwritten yields in the mid-11% range and the weighted average underwritten net yield of 6%.

As of December 31st, we had approximately $24 million in cash and had an outstanding balance of $169 million on our senior secured revolving credit facility. Our available liquidity as of December 31st was approximately $235 million comprised of $24 million in cash and $211 million available under our line.

As of December 31st, our consolidated debt to gross assets was approximately 31%, including the exchangeable notes. Assuming 20% home price appreciation over time, this ratio decreased to 26%. Our ratio consolidated debt to gross assets were increased to 44%, assuming we fully draw upon the $380 million revolving credit facility and utilize the proceeds to purchase our homes and our ratio would increase to 49% if we were to exercising accordion feature to $500 million, again assuming the proceeds were used to purchase homes. With 20% home price appreciation over time, these ratios would naturally decrease of 37% and 42%, respectively.

Financing alternatives available to institutional single-family operators such as ARPI continues to evolve and improve as financial institutions become more comfortable with the industry and asset class. The first securitization transaction and single-family for rent sector was successfully completed late last year and continues to be well received, which is led by Deutsche Bank.

As Steve previously mentioned, we have retain Deutsche Bank as our lead banker to assist us in structuring and negotiating a securitization transaction. We have already had initial meetings with various rating agencies and are scheduled for follow-up on-site meetings with each of the agencies in Phoenix in the next several weeks.

Successfully executing securitization transaction will provide us with additional leverage on our portfolio of stabilized assets at attractive terms, lowering our cost of capital and providing an efficient source to finance or business on a longer-term basis. On a near-term basis, we expect to deploy the remaining capacity on our $380 million credit facility during the first half of 2014 and are aggressively pursuing the securitization transaction that will provide us the opportunity to increase overall leverage on a portfolio basis. We intend to use the proceeds from these financings to continue to grow our asset base during the second half of 2014, as long as attractive acquisition opportunities are present.

While we are mindful and prudent establishing long-term leverage levels, once the business stabilizes, we believe in the near-term, we have assembled a very attractive portfolio of assets that have appreciated and will de-lever further over time through both, the combination of improving cash flows as well continued home price appreciation. This provides us the option to increase leverage in the near-term should we conclude that it is prudent to do so.

All capital allocation decisions we make, including our decision to increase leverage on an interim basis are made with commitment to driving long-term shareholder value. As for our current stock price, we believe we are trading well below net asset value. We are also trading below both, net book value which was $18.28 per share as of December 31st and underappreciated book value which was $18.80 per share as of December 31st. We have acquired a portfolio of homes over the last 18 months in core markets that have well-publicized home price appreciation, which we believe is not properly reflected in our current stock price.

This concludes our prepared remarks. I will now turn the call over to the operator who will open the floor for questions. Operator?

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. (Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from Dennis McGill. You may begin.

Dennis McGill - Zelman & Associates

Hi. Thank you, guys. First question I guess is just on the preferred operator assets that transitioned to self-managed. The stats that you went through, Shant, are quite different than on the homes that you have been buying under the self-managed portfolio? Whether that's size or seemingly quality or age. How do you think about the homes in that portfolio sort of staying in your investment? How you think about the difference in managing those and the challenge perhaps at managing those versus the other assets that you own?

Shant Koumriqian

Good question, Dennis. They are definitely different than our core assets as I identified through the statistics that we went through in our prepared remarks. I think our current process is to focus on stabilizing those assets. Then to the extent that the yield parameters are not in line with our core portfolio, we will have the ability to recycle those assets as we get to a period of where we have owned the assets for two years. We have a lot more flexibility under the REIT rules and we will look to recycle any assets that do not fit our core market or core asset return parameters.

Dennis McGill - Zelman & Associates

Will those assets have a negative mix on sustainable margin or the operating statistics as we see them relative to the self-managed?

Shant Koumriqian

No. I think, due to the size of them. Remember, there are a lot of homes, but in terms of total investment sites are not as material or significant overall. First off, they have higher gross yields to begin with as well, so we don't anticipated that they would affect our overall market margins on a self-managed basis.

Laurie Hawkes

Dennis, I might add to that that from the perspective, we don't see there would be additional challenge to continue to manage what we normally do and we would bake that into our analysis.

Dennis McGill - Zelman & Associates

Okay. Thanks, Laurie. Second question, I guess, has to do with the six-month rate, and even when you adjust it for the properties that came on from the preferred operator program, the 86% still seems a little light maybe relative to other measures that are out there and Lorie, you talked about being able to re-have homes pretty quickly, so what do you think it is causing that number to be at 90% or better already?

Stephen Schmitz

Well, one of the drivers, if you recall, we acquired a lot of leased portfolios in the latter half of 2012. In particular, in Phoenix, and we continue to acquire portfolios through April, May, so what you are starting to see are turns on those portfolios that we acquired and we have talked about portfolios in the past there are efficient way to acquire assets. If you are happy with the assets in efficient way to scale within a market, they do tend to have deferred maintenance and credit quality issues from time-to-time, so we are working through and cycling through those turns, so that's one of the primary drivers of the deterioration in occupancy and six-month stats.

Laurie Hawkes

You know, Dennis, to your point, I think what is a perfect example of the possibilities is the fact that I am going to draw on our fund experience, and candidly for the last two years post-stabilization, where we did not buy additional assets. We have in fact experienced 92% to 95% occupancy on a stabilized basis routinely, so we do know that that number is achievable. It is one that we are capable of maintaining and besides the additional add-on of the portfolios coupled with the winter issues that we have addressed, we think that is achievable in the not too distant future.

Dennis McGill - Zelman & Associates

Would you be in that sense - I guess say could get to that 90 to 95 by the end of the year just the current seasonality?

Laurie Hawkes

For the asset all in? Yes.

Stephen Schmitz

…for stabilized assets, yes. Overall occupancy is really going to depend on our continued acquisition pace that's the source through which of the channels which can be acquired and whether…

Laurie Hawkes

Un-stabilized assets, yes.

Dennis McGill - Zelman & Associates

Okay. All right. Thank you, guys.

Our next question comes from Haendel E. St. Juste. You may begin.

Laurie Hawkes

You got to get a new surname, Haendel.

Haendel E. St. Juste - Morgan Stanley

Going to acquisitions for a second, looks like your acquisition pace so far in the first quarter is down a bit from 4Qs pace. Is that a function of opportunities with more that you are being a bit more prudent with your capital that you await during process securitization deal?

Stephen Schmitz

Clearly, the latter, Haendel, we continue to see opportunity and ultimately we realize this is a capital allocation game, so we are looking for those opportunities where we can get the most bang for the buck and that's what we are doing, so it's really more prudent management than anything else.

Laurie Hawkes

As you know, our pace is up, Haendel, even in this mix of the first two months of the year.

Haendel E. St. Juste - Morgan Stanley

Yes. I guess, looking at though, understand that your full year or near-term external growth is somewhat tied to your ongoing securitization. Can you talk, I guess, more broadly on the potential acquisition volume over the next year or two assuming you get securitization done, the currently contemplated sizing, 300 million, but do not issue any further equity.

If I look at your current cash and credit facility, that's about $240 million of availability plus securitization [phase] $300, $550 million of capital, but points to maybe 4,000 to 5,000 home buying opportunity over the next couple of years of the initial need to raise capital. Am I missing something here or is that fair?

Stephen Schmitz

Yes. I think that's fair. I mean a lot of it will just depend on what level of leverage we are comfortable with, but we think where we are in the cycle, where we are buying these assets at. Value that we are creating through renovating them, we think that the assets will obviously deliver over time. Also not in the REIT, but in the fund, we are starting to sell off assets, so we have seen at least the ability to sell assets within a very short period of time, which creates additional liquidity and if you obviously use that liquidity to de-lever or recycle as well. I think, part of it just depends on how much leverage we are comfortable putting on, but I think on a near-term basis, those amounts are not unreasonable.

Laurie Hawkes

Haendel, to the side, we had to tell you that that kind of granularity and the ability to actually liquidate the assets as quickly as we are doing in the fund is actually having very positive result in terms of the rating agencies' understanding of the fact this asset class is far different than the commercial asset class, which is a different issue with respect to being able to produce funds on a fairly short-term basis.

Haendel E. St. Juste - Morgan Stanley

Okay. Thanks for that color. Appreciate the color on the retention and renewal rates. Can you comment what you are seeing on the same-store expense side?

Stephen Schmitz

On the turn -

Shant Koumriqian

Same-store expenses.

Haendel E. St. Juste - Morgan Stanley

Operating expenses year-over-year same-store?

Stephen Schmitz

Year-over-year same store, if you look at last year fourth quarter, we were really ramping up, so on a year-over-year basis the numbers really aren't that meaningful at this point, Haendel.

Laurie Hawkes

There have been no surprises, Haendel, from our prior experience. It does in fact cost more if you have an addiction evolved, but otherwise our typical re-tenancy is within our range of expectations on our longer term experience.

Haendel E. St. Juste - Morgan Stanley

Okay. Then one more if I may on the POP, but I guess sequential decline. I think, it sounds like it was result of the preferred operator assets that you took over. Is there anything else there? Maybe some seasonality or something that we might not be appreciated?

Stephen Schmitz

Sequential quarter-over-quarter decline?

Shant Koumriqian

In occupancy.

Stephen Schmitz

No. I mean, again, when we back out the effect of the preferred operator on a total portfolio basis, I think, we had a 5% increase in occupancy. For the six-month stats, I think we have like 1% decrease in occupancy and like I said a major component of at are the lease portfolios that we acquired late last year earlier in the year that are just now going through their churn process as opposed to have you acquired a home vacant and leased it up you wouldn't be dealing with the first churn for at least a year, so…

Laurie Hawkes

What we do consider a positive there, Haendel, is the fact that we can - Actually, we have generated a positive increase of 3.4% across the entire portfolio, which has been as high 6.5% earlier in Texas, and we consider that to be a not only positive, but we will be able to drive that over time and we haven't focused on that. We really looking at trying to occupy the properties at this point in time.

Haendel E. St. Juste - Morgan Stanley

Great. Thank you for taking my questions.

Operator

Our next question comes from Steve Stelmach. You may begin.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

Hi. Good morning.

Laurie Hawkes

Hi, Steve.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

Just starting with the securitization, how should we think about that in terms of what you guys see at potential differences or similarities to first industry securitization went out there. I think that you would sort of prefer in terms of or structure that appear in the first securitization, or you sort of had with execution?

Laurie Hawkes

Well, we are very pleased with the execution on both, Deutsche Bank and vacated homes. We think that they accelerated the process relative to the acceptance of this asset class and the structure in the capital markets sooner than we had expected.

We do believe that the asset class can carry the leverage that is contemplated and has been executed. We are looking to emulate the same or similar structure we are evaluating whether it's a two or three-year initial term one, two or three year follow-on extensions. We expect that the both the subordination levels as well as the pricing levels would be similar.

We are trying to look at any and all attributes of the structure, which would not only emulate, but enhance the existing structure and we are looking at valuations as well as call protection and we are a very - our initial round of discussions with the rating agencies including their comments how would your line effect that we actually are addressing the issues with actual data and experience as opposed to just projections.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

Great. Is there sign there, or you guys just won't go under in terms of securitization.

Laurie Hawkes

Securitization, in terms of expenses there are some variable and there are some fixed costs, so we are evaluating that carefully and our attitude is to a chance on doing what makes sense to the company without having to repeat these fixed costs more often than we need to. We are looking to do a $300 million-plus transaction on stabilized. We would like to use the assets that in fact will produce the best results relative to both, valuation as well as stabilization.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

Okay. Then just turning to HPA commentary you guys did, Steve and Shant, you both sort of mentioned if your stock is trading at significant discount to NAV. How should we think about sizing that discount?

Stephen Schmitz

In terms of sizing the discount, we have looked at a number of different ways and we referred to the FHFA index in our prepared remarks. Within the markets that we are in. if you look at, Steve referred to some of the larger markets, but year-over-year, there has been about a 12% increase in the index within the markets that we are in.

Steve referred to some of the larger markets, but year-over-year, there has been about 12% increase in the index within the markets that we are in. We believe, we are somewhere between zero and that number if we just follow the index at that assumes that you get no credit for buying well and renovating well, and we think we are doing as well.

Shant Koumriqian

That's a key point, because as investment managers obviously, we use as an index, because it's well-publicized, but our mission is to make sure we beat that index, so when we look at given market, obviously we are not buying in that whole market. We are very choosy as to what parts of that market we buy, so typically we would expect to be those indices.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

Right. Also, you are buying presumably at discounts to market based off of market price, right?

Stephen Schmitz

Right.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

Yes, so you have implied any of these much higher than what would be implied by the index, I would assume? Is that correct?

Stephen Schmitz

We believe that.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

Yes. Right. Last thing on the preferred operator and the property tax, I think you guys said that you sort of pay up on the '12 and '13 property tax on that. Was there any terms [charge] associated with those properties when you acquired them?

Stephen Schmitz

What? I don't know we hear the question, Steve.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

I am sorry. Was there any tailor insurance associated with those acquisitions, the preferred operator program?

Stephen Schmitz

Yes.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

So, there would be a potential recovery on some of those - on those properties…

Stephen Schmitz

Most of those taxes, the way in a lot of these jurisdictions, you pay taxes a year or so after they are actually due, so the majority of these would be our obligation as the owner.

Steve Stelmach - FBR Capital Markets

Got it. Okay. Great. Thanks, guys.

Operator

Our next question comes from [Paul Poirier]. You may begin.

Unidentified Analyst

Thanks. It's Poirier, but pretty close. Stephen, a question for you. Given that you have already achieved scale, is there any reason to continue this POP program at this point?

Stephen Schmitz

That's a great question, because we launched it in order to get into various markets quickly and obviously all operators are not equal and so we spent the last couple years really building out our self-managed capability and I know you guys know this from the following us and so we think that the generally we can earn better returns and have better control of the situation if focus on our self-managed aspect of our business, so that's the goal.

Unidentified Analyst

What's the average restoration cost on the property that you are taking back?

Paul, we are still in the process. I mean, we just started integrating the assets and we are in the process of going through that exercise to determine what the average restoration costs are going to be. Obviously, there are homes that are vacant. There are some that have tenants in place, so it's a combination of looking at the entire portfolio and I think we can provide you more feedback on our next call.

Laurie Hawkes

…what I would say is, our average restoration as you know has gone down from third to the fourth quarter and that includes some early on. We do expect there will be a range clearly in terms of the properties not only that are still leased, but need some deferred maintenance issues and then the others that are total restorations, but we don't expect any surprises, but still we are in the auction process. It's something we are accustomed to handling and we will do so accordingly.

Unidentified Analyst

Your are kind of mixed on whether or not you want these properties back. Is that correct?

Shant Koumriqian

No. I mean. We won the properties and we have taken them back, so the real broader question as I highlighted these are a difference type of asset. They tend to be smaller size, lower dollar value, so I think the longer-term question is, do we hold on to those assets as part of our core portfolio or do we recycle.

Stephen Schmitz

Often times, that's a function of what is our total investment as compared to the rent and as compared to market values in that area and in that neighborhood, so on to the extent that we could find ourselves in a property very inexpensively, the fact that there is more restoration dollars. I think really the question is, how much are we in the whole thing for and what is the rent in relation to that, and those are the kind of ratios we would look at when we are going down the path that Shant had mentioned, whether to hang onto or recycling that capital.

Unidentified Analyst

Yes. Okay. Thank you.

Operator

Our next question comes from Omotayo Okusanya. You may begin.

Unidentified Analyst

Yes. Hi. This is George [Hoagland] on for Omotayo. Just a couple of questions. One, just staying on the on the POP program, can you just talk about what led to the default and the terminations?

Shant Koumriqian

Yes. In terms of the latest round, occupancy declined particularly in Indianapolis, re-tenancy costs as well that made it difficult for the preferred operator to continue to meet their rights obligation, so ultimately they defaulted and we determined that it was in our best interest to take those assets back.

Unidentified Analyst

Okay. Then also in terms of retention ratios, can you talk about that in terms of sort of what trends you are seeing now that you are starting see like those portfolios role and is there any difference geographically?

Shant Koumriqian

Yes. What we have seen in terms of retention for the last four quarters was as low as 29%, one of the quarters was 39%. I think was somewhere in between the latest quarter, turnover was 30%, so on average you are looking at 33% and that includes higher returns from portfolio, so our expectation has always been that about a third of our tenants would leave, so far with portfolios that's what we are experiencing which gives us optimism that maybe we can push that number down over time, but for the last four quarters it's been in the kind of one-third range on average.

Laurie Hawkes

I think what you have to notice is really what's going on in the underlying economics in the various markets we are in and using the fund as an example, we first started here at 14.8% unemployment into market is now below 6%. As a result, the occupancy turnover in our fund has actually gotten closer a 31%, 32% and declining and I would expect that you would see similar pattern as the portfolio is stabilized and as the underlying economic fundamentals of each one of these markets improves, you will find an increasing stickiness, which we don't think you'll find in multi-family, but family indeed would prefer to stay in their homes barring the loss of a job or some sort of underlying family change of circumstances.

Unidentified Analyst

Okay. Then just one last one. In terms of those securitization, can you give us a sense on what's the potential timing of that. Then also on the accordion feature on the line of credit, assuming that's based on your guys as option were there any certain covenants or if they need to meet to exercise that option?

Laurie Hawkes

I'll answer. First in terms of timing, we are looking second quarter execution on the securitization. Shant?

Shant Koumriqian

Yes. In terms of the accordion, yes, there are a number corporate covenants that we would have to meet and we would also have to go out and fill the line and fill the commitments. Obviously, we look to our existing bank group. We have nine national banks that are part of the bank group that we would go to look to fill out that commitment.

Unidentified Analyst

Okay. Thanks, guys.

Operator

Our next question comes from Nick (Inaudible). You may begin.

Unidentified Analyst

Hey, guys, thanks for taking the question. Back on the securitization, can you talk about the expected cost of capital, including fees from the securitization versus the net yield on the portfolio? Thanks.

Shant Koumriqian

Yes. Sure. In terms of the securitization and just looking at the one that was done by Invitation Homes, their borrowing costs was LIBOR plus a blended rate of 165, 75% loan-to-value, close to 88% loan-to-cost, so that would be in your cash rate.

All-in costs, you are probably looking at somewhere between assuming a $300 million securitization, 2.5% to 3% in terms of your all-in cost that you would amortized over two to five years depending on how long you have this securitization outstanding and that does not include the cost of our hedge, so you are looking at, at least today somewhere potentially in a 2% to sub-2% cash rate. The way to think about it on a long-term basis is I think you can swap at a five-year rate at about 1.7%, so floating under two with those expenses, if you are doing a longer term through potential hedge, you are looking at may be a cash rate of somewhere in 3.5% to 4% range, plus those expenses.

Unidentified Analyst

Okay. The net yield on the portfolio?

Shant Koumriqian

The net yields on the portfolio depending on the assets can be 5.5% to 6.5% depending on the assets and I will just point to our current quarter. You know, we did about 11.5% gross yield underwritten and a 6% net yield and that's net of CapEx as well.

Unidentified Analyst

Okay. One more, just how much leverage are you willing to take on as you grow the portfolio ahead of potentially accessing the equity markets again?

Shant Koumriqian

Good question, when you look at just our current line capacity, if we were to take our line to $500 million and again you can swap some of that out with a securitization. You would be at about 49% loan to cost. Again, we believe these assets have appreciated and will continue to de-lever over time.

On a near-term basis, we think that you can potentially go higher than that, but what I would say is, our current intention is to deploy that level of capital over the next several quarters and then we will continue to reassess what level of leverage we are comfortable putting on.

Where we sit today, we are at 31% loan to cost. Again, that will be lower on the long-term market basis and that includes exchangeable notes that we are counting debt in that number.

Unidentified Analyst

Okay. Great Thanks, guys.

Operator

Our next question comes from Jana Galan.

Unidentified Analyst

Hi. Yes. This is Jane on behalf of Jana. I am sorry if I missed this, but what other potential charges could we see and in 1Q with the POP default and the terminations?

Shant Koumriqian

I don't think you will see charges, but we will have integration costs and as we re-tenant the portfolio to the extent that there is any deferred maintenance, we will see that coming through quite frankly over the next several quarters potentially into the latter half of 2014 as we stabilize the assets, but in terms of charges we took what we believe to be all charges in the fourth quarter.

Unidentified Analyst

Okay. I guess, I think you might have touched on this is a little bit before, but what is the future for the remaining POP homes? What the remaining lease term and would you guys look to transition these, the self-managed portfolio before the lease term expired?

Shant Koumriqian

That is not our plan. There is a overwhelming with MACK Companies in Chicago, they have been in business 16 years and have a very good reputations as operator and they consistently performed as agreed. Those leases with them are five years in nature. We are probably a year into the first one, so that would have four years remaining and so our intent is to let those leases run.

Stephen Schmitz

Jane, just to put some numbers around that, as of December 31st, we had $70 million in investment preferred operator, $65 million is with that one operator in Chicago. That's effectively the majority of it. We have one other operator in Indianapolis, 99 homes $4.6 million in total investments, so not a very significant amount.

Unidentified Analyst

Great. Thank you. Back to the leverage, you talked about where it could potentially go, but on a longer-term basis where do you want the leverage to be at on a stabilized basis?

Shant Koumriqian

I think, we are a long way away from stabilization. I mean, the asset class is evolving very quickly, the financing options are evolving very quickly as well, so I think we would want to maintain some flexibility. I think, once you get to scale and the question is when do you stopped buying and how of a portfolios is the right portfolio to have in place. I think in that point once the business stabilizes probably potentially similar to other existing REITs, but I think at this point we are far away from that.

We have that in mind on a near-term basis, again we are focused on acquiring assets at great prices, stabilizing them and adding additional flexibility to our capital stack.

Unidentified Analyst

Great. Thank you.

Operator

Our last question comes from Jack Micenko. You may begin.

Unidentified Analyst

Hi. This is actually (Inaudible) on Jack's team. Most of my questions were being answer by. One quick question on the mortgage loan, what are we thinking in terms of drawing that out? Are you thinking about keeping stable over the next year, growing that - I know you funded $18 million this quarter, so a little more color and that would be helpful.

Shant Koumriqian

Sure. We have always liked that business. Obviously the flow through to the bottom line is great, and since those are six-month loans, it's something that's very easily managed in terms of growing it or allowing a run off. It may be, so we would hope to see measured growth in that portfolio.

Unidentified Analyst

Got it. Great. One last question on your rental increases. I know you guys mentioned, you said there are significant possibility of rental increases, just a little bit more color and you see that having with specific markets or any other color?

Laurie Hawkes

You know, we have really have not pushed the rental increases as much as trying to get to occupancy and we think that as we get to first in Phoenix, Vegas, California and other areas that we are not continue to acquire at this point in time. We would love to continue in Vegas, but point being is that we will and do believe with increased service to the residents that the ability to push those rental rate will only increase over time.

The branding service orientation resident-centric, we think will make a difference. It matters by region in terms of how much we have in each and effectively it ranges from we have in Arizona $2.7 to as [high as] and actually we will manage and will move those rates accordingly. We do find single-family occupants are less willing to move and we think we will start to push hard relative to that activity in the next year.

I believe, we are already seeing the effects. We have 3.6 percentage remember in the third quarter and 3.4% in the fourth and we expect that will only move north overtime.

Unidentified Analyst

Great. Thanks for taking my call.

Operator

This concludes our Q&A session. I would now turn the call over to Steve Schmitz, CEO, for closing remarks.

Stephen Schmitz

Well, I would like to say thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your participation and thank you for your support. Hopefully, we have answered all your questions, so have a good day.

Operator

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This concludes today's conference. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com. Thank you!

Source: American Residential Properties' CEO Discusses Q4 2013 Results - Earnings Call Transcript
This Transcript
All Transcripts