Primary reason is that it's not economical to building in today's market compared to a larger industrial building with only 1-2 tenants to manage instead of 30 smaller ones.

Hey @Connor Amato Both Buckeye & San Tan Valley are great up-and-coming cities/economic hubs.

It's just that those potential movements will be based on other considerations (chiefly, incoming economic reports) and NOT on the Fed's rate cut.To make matters more confusing, it's important to remember that Fed policy still has a tremendous impact on rates, but that impact stems from the Fed's words and quarterly projections.

C" tenants are not all bad people, economically they may not have a bunch of money but they are not all bad people.

I lean toward the latter—this is more about economic conditions and the lingering post-COVID effects.

The City of Chicago has recently streamlined its financial incentive programs for economic development within city limits.

It's not a mind-boggling salary, but it's enough, and the economical decision would be to move into a LCOL area and thrive.

Taking that money out and anything that leads to more people using the equity from their homes and reduces the friction to that process is not good in the long run.As a NPL buyer who buys 1st position mortgages, we do watch stuff like this carefully as the moment these borrowers get high CLTV's any drop in pricing and change in economic conditions will lead to more foreclosures versus bankruptcies.

Look at population growth, job opportunities, and other economic factors that will drive rental demand.

Also, i would say smaller funds can be economically more difficult with a high expense ratio under say 5-10M AUM (assets under management).