Tabulated 12 quarters of repurchase requests against actual fulfillments before the first wire

Your 3.8% cumulative NAV gain came from appraisals, so the honest read is that it's an opinion of value that hasn't been tested by a sale. Fine, that's what the vehicle is. The question I'd put to your table is what the appraisal cadence was during the two prorated quarters. If values were being updated on a lag while requests spiked, the people who got filled at 100% redeemed at a stale price and you paid for it as a remaining holder. That's the transfer nobody discloses cleanly.

The repurchase plan almost certainly says the board may amend, suspend or terminate it at any time in its discretion, and in most of these it doesn't even require a triggering event. Your twelve quarters of history is evidence of behavior. It isn't an obligation and it doesn't bind the next board. I'd also check whether the plan has a separate hard cap on repurchases funded from anything other than reinvestment proceeds, because some do and that's where the real ceiling sits.

Who's actually running the buildings? On the vehicles I've looked at, third party property management fees sit at the property level and never show up in the fund's expense ratio, so the fee table understates what's coming out of your rent. Worth knowing whether the manager is an affiliate of the sponsor too.

I'd want the advisory agreement more than the fill table. Term, renewal, what triggers termination, and what the sponsor gets paid if it is terminated. Also whether there's an operating partnership underneath with units held by the sponsor and the property contributors, because those holders sometimes have redemption or exchange rights that sit ahead of yours in practice. meridian, did you look at that layer?

The channel and class thing surprised me. So the same portfolio can cost me 0.85% a year more depending on who sells it to me, and the only difference is how the intermediary gets compensated? That reframes how I think about the licensing side of this entirely.

An appraisal on a building I haven't stood in means very little to me. I've been in twenty year old buildings that appraise beautifully and need a roof and four rooftop units inside eighteen months. Somebody pays for that and it's whoever holds the shares when the reserve runs short.

Two things I don't know. What's the reinvestment plan, and why does 42% participation matter so much to meridian's decision? I understand it means people aren't taking cash, I don't understand why that's load bearing.

Let me put numbers on it. 120k in, average 5.15% distributions is roughly 6,180 a year, three years is about 18,500. NAV up 3.8% on 120k is 4,560 of paper gain. Call it 23,000 over three years on 120k, so around 6.1% annualized, before whatever the underlying management fee and performance participation already took out of NAV, which are inside the 3.8% rather than on top of it. If a share of those distributions was return of capital, part of that 18,500 is basis coming home and the annualized figure overstates the economics. girder, what's wrong with that?

The channel detail is the part I'll remember. Six weeks and one signature for a thousand a year, and most people wouldn't bother. meridian, did anyone in the first channel tell you the cheaper class existed, or did you find it yourself?