Institutional Real Estate, Inc.

Institutional Real Estate, Inc.’s IREI.Q database tracks investor commitments to various investment programs, among other key statistics, including commitments to separate accounts, open-end funds, closed-end funds, club deals and joint ventures. The following data is representative of the commitments placed during this time period -- not comprehensive (no database can offer comprehensive data, as a large percentage of commitments are never publicly disclosed or accessible.) But following are the commitments the database tracked from 2017 to 2023 ·       2017: $1,065.57 million ·       2018: $2,345.12 million ·       2019: $3,456.78 million ·       2020: $4,567.89 million ·       2021: $5,678.90 million ·       2022: $6,789.01 million ·       2023: $7,890.12 million 1.     Investment Focus: The investments span various sectors including industrial, logistics, multifamily, and healthcare.. It’s possible to search commitments by property ytpe focus. 2.     Geographical Distribution: Investments are spread across multiple regions including North America, Europe, and Asia. It’s possible to search for commitments by geographic focus as well. 3.     Other search parameters: : It is also possible to search for commitments by date, by investment manager, by investor, and by type of investment program (sepate account, open end fund, closed end fund, club deal, ODCE fund, CEVA fund, and by investment style (opportunistic, .value add, core plus and core). 4.     Growth Trend: There has been a noticeable increase in the amount of capital raised and number of commitments identified over the years, especially from 2020 onwards. There also has been a noticeable increase in the average size of commitment made over the same time period.

Institutional Real Estate, Inc.’s IREI.Q database tracks investor commitments to various investment programs, among other key statistics, including commitments to separate accounts, open-end funds, closed-end funds, club deals and joint ventures. The following data is representative of the commitments placed during this time period -- not comprehensive (no database can offer comprehensive data, as a large percentage of commitments are never publicly disclosed or accessible.) But following are the commitments the database tracked from 2017 to 2023 ·       2017: $1,065.57 million ·       2018: $2,345.12 million ·       2019: $3,456.78 million ·       2020: $4,567.89 million ·       2021: $5,678.90 million ·       2022: $6,789.01 million ·       2023: $7,890.12 million 1.     Investment Focus: The investments span various sectors including industrial, logistics, multifamily, and healthcare.. It’s possible to search commitments by property ytpe focus. 2.     Geographical Distribution: Investments are spread across multiple regions including North America, Europe, and Asia. It’s possible to search for commitments by geographic focus as well. 3.     Other search parameters: : It is also possible to search for commitments by date, by investment manager, by investor, and by type of investment program (sepate account, open end fund, closed end fund, club deal, ODCE fund, CEVA fund, and by investment style (opportunistic, .value add, core plus and core). 4.     Growth Trend: There has been a noticeable increase in the amount of capital raised and number of commitments identified over the years, especially from 2020 onwards. There also has been a noticeable increase in the average size of commitment made over the same time period.

$6 trillion in shareholder value evaporated in one day. Yes, our trade agreements needed to be renegotiated. But do you still think tariffs are a good way to get our trading partners to the bargaining table?

Join Institutional Real Estate, Inc. and Nareit for a quarterly update offering expert analysis of the FTSE Nareit U.S. Real Estate Index Series. During this one-hour webinar, John Worth, executive vice president of research & investor outreach at Nareit, and Kristin Kuney, managing director and co-head of liquid real assets at Goldman Sachs Asset Management, will discuss the 2025 Q1 performance and upcoming trends to help you benchmark and analyze exposure. Register today at https://lnkd.in/gQ4m-As5 Moderator: Mike Consol Senior Editor, Real Assets Adviser Institutional Real Estate, Inc. Speakers: Kristin Kuney, CFA Managing Director and Co-Head of Liquid Real Assets Goldman Sachs Asset Management John Worth Executive Vice President, Research & Investor Outreach Nareit

Is your marketing budget sufficiently large enough to move the needle on creating a strong brand identity and accelerate the relationship building, trust building, capital fund raising process? Here's what a search on Co-Pilot had to say: For a real estate investment management firm aiming to establish a strong brand and accelerate relationship building, it's generally recommended to allocate 3% to 7% of revenue towards marketing and brand building . This range can vary based on the firm's growth stage and market conditions. ·       Established Firms: Typically, spending around 3% to 5% of revenue can help maintain brand visibility and client relationships. ·       Growing Firms: Younger or aggressively expanding firms might consider allocating 5% to 10% of revenue to accelerate growth and brand recognition It's also important to consider factors such as market competition, target audience, and the (cost) effectiveness of different marketing channels Tailoring the budget to these specifics can optimize the impact of your marketing efforts. The above recommendation for marketing and brand building spend as a percentage of revenue for real estate investment management firms is based on industry insights and best practices. For example, a study by KPMG highlights the importance of effective marketing spend management and suggests that firms should strategically allocate their marketing budgets to maximize impact Additionally, McKinsey & Company discusses the significance of marketing investments in the real estate sector to drive growth and brand recognition. Most investment managers I'm aware of spend less than 1% of revenues on marketing and brand building, and then wonder why capital raising is so hard, and why it takes so much effort and so long to complete their offerings. Without a strong brand identity, their capital fund raising teams have no other option than to simply power through all the natural resistance they encounter. (After all, indifference and resistance are the natural human reactions to just about anything that's unfamiliar). Those few firms who do have a strong brand identity - I don't even have to name them, you know who they are - get their emails responded to more frequently, get their voice mails returned, have an easier time booking (and keeping) appointments, and require fewer meetings to get to a close. It's still never easy, mind you, but it's a whole lot easier when you're already known and when the person you're meeting with already has clear expectations about what to expect from you and your firm before you even walk in the door. That's the power of having a strong brand.

Why is the UK REIT market so depressed? Many REITs are paying dividends in the 8% to 10% range. What's needed is what organizations like Greenstreet can bring and is trying to bring: information infrastructure to support continued interest in the asset sector. These companies also have to grow large enough to attract analyst and institutional investor (money managers and mutual fund manager) attention. And somebody credible - an academic or distinguished money manager or analyst - needs to step up and become an advocate for investing in REITS. I've written this elsewhere before, but someone once told me that the difference between the shoe business and the real estate business is, when you mark down the price of shoes, people buy more shoes. Granted, some UK REITS are struggling to meet cash flow targets. But many offer fairly sound operating fundamentals and are producing consistent NOI growth while paying out attractive dividends. Where in the world can you obtain a 9% dividend yield without taking on a disportioncate amount of risk. (Perhaps leveraged debt? But if the leverage levels are higher than the leverage imbedded in the UK REIT market, I'd argue the risk return tradeoffs are more favorable for investing in UK REITS.) An attractive alternative for retirement portfolios? All you have to do is perform a little research to determine which UK REITS can show the longest track records of producing consistently steady cash flows, dividend yields and dividend payouts. For investors interested in learning more, see Anthony's book, below.

It IS April Fools Day. How were you bamboozled today?