Prologis Inc (PLD) 2023 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Greetings, and welcome to the Prologis First Quarter 2023 Earnings Conference Call. (Operator Instructions) And as a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce to you, Jill Sawyer, Vice President of Investor Relations. Thank you, Jill. You may begin.

您好，歡迎來到 Prologis 2023 年第一季度收益電話會議。 （操作員說明）作為提醒，正在錄製此會議。現在我很高興向您介紹投資者關係副總裁 Jill Sawyer。謝謝你，吉爾。你可以開始了。

Thanks, John. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to our first quarter 2023 earnings conference call. The supplemental document is available on our website at prologis.com under Investor Relations. I'd like to state that this conference call will contain forward-looking statements under federal securities laws. These statements are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about the market and the industry in which Prologis operates as well as management's beliefs and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance, and actual operating results may be affected by a variety of factors.

謝謝，約翰。大家，早安。歡迎參加我們 2023 年第一季度的收益電話會議。補充文件可在我們網站 prologis.com 的投資者關係下獲取。我想聲明，本次電話會議將包含聯邦證券法規定的前瞻性陳述。這些陳述基於當前對市場和 Prologis 經營所在行業的預期、估計和預測以及管理層的信念和假設。前瞻性陳述並非業績保證，實際經營業績可能受多種因素影響。

For a list of those factors, please refer to the forward-looking statement notice in our 10-K or other SEC filings. Additionally, our first quarter results press release and supplemental do contain financial measures such as FFO and EBITDA that are non-GAAP measures. And in accordance with Reg G, we have provided a reconciliation to those measures.

有關這些因素的列表，請參閱我們的 10-K 或其他 SEC 文件中的前瞻性聲明通知。此外，我們的第一季度業績新聞稿和補充文件確實包含非 GAAP 衡量指標，例如 FFO 和 EBITDA。根據 Reg G，我們已經對這些措施進行了調整。

I'd like to welcome Tim Arndt, our CFO, who will cover results, real-time market conditions and guidance; Hamid Moghadam, our CEO. And our entire executive team are also with us today. With that, I'll hand the call over to Tim.

我想歡迎我們的首席財務官 Tim Arndt，他將介紹結果、實時市場狀況和指導；我們的首席執行官 Hamid Moghadam。我們整個執行團隊今天也和我們在一起。有了這個，我會把電話交給蒂姆。

Thanks, Jill. Good morning, everybody, and welcome to our first quarter earnings call. We began the year with results and conditions that remain strong. Market rents have continued to grow, demand has been consistent, and we're seeing sharp declines in new construction limiting future supply. While logistics real estate is very healthy, the macroeconomic picture continues to be a concern, and we anticipate it could weigh on customer sentiment over the balance of the year, translating to some demand that could be delayed into 2024.

謝謝，吉爾。大家早上好，歡迎來到我們的第一季度財報電話會議。我們以保持強勁的結果和條件開始了這一年。市場租金持續增長，需求穩定，我們看到新建築的急劇下降限制了未來的供應。雖然物流房地產非常健康，但宏觀經濟形勢仍然令人擔憂，我們預計這可能會在今年餘下時間影響客戶情緒，轉化為可能推遲到 2024 年的一些需求。

However, this will overlap with the slowdown of new deliveries, creating a sustained dynamic for high occupancy and continued rent growth into next year. Beginning with our results, our core FFO, excluding promotes, was $1.23 per share and including promotes was $1.22 per share. Our results benefited from higher NOI in the quarter, but offset by approximately $0.02 of higher insurance expense from an unusually active storm season experiencing a year's worth of claims activity in just the first quarter.

然而，這將與新交付量的放緩重疊，為明年的高入住率和租金持續增長創造持續動力。從我們的業績開始，我們的核心 FFO（不包括促銷）為每股 1.23 美元，包括促銷在內為每股 1.22 美元。我們的業績受益於本季度較高的 NOI，但被異常活躍的風暴季節僅在第一季度經歷了一年的理賠活動而導致的保險費用增加約 0.02 美元所抵消。

In terms of our operating results, both ending and average occupancy for the quarter were 98%, holding average occupancy flat to the fourth quarter. Rent change was 69% on a net effective basis and 42% on a cash basis, each a record. And unusually widespread between the two is reflective of lower free rent and higher escalations in our new leasing. Despite the step-up of in-place rents, our lease mark-to-market expanded to 68% during the quarter as market rent growth remained strong and slightly ahead of expectations.

就我們的經營業績而言，本季度末和平均入住率均為 98%，平均入住率與第四季度持平。淨有效租金變化為 69%，現金變化為 42%，均創歷史新高。兩者之間異常普遍反映了我們新租賃中較低的免費租金和更高的升級。儘管就地租金有所上漲，但由於市場租金增長依然強勁且略高於預期，本季度我們的租賃按市值計價率擴大至 68%。

With the remaining lease term of roughly 4 years, this lease mark-to-market represents over $2.85 per share of incremental earnings as our leases roll to market, providing visibility to future income and dividend growth. These results drove record same-store growth, 9.9% on a net effective basis and 11.4% on a cash basis. During the quarter, our efforts on the balance sheet were focused on liquidity, raising over $3.6 billion in new financings for Prologis and our ventures at an interest rate of 4.6% and a term of nearly 14 years.

剩餘的租期約為 4 年，隨著我們的租約進入市場，這種按市值計價的租約代表每股超過 2.85 美元的增量收益，為未來收入和股息增長提供可見性。這些結果推動了創紀錄的同店增長，淨有效增長 9.9%，現金增長 11.4%。本季度，我們在資產負債表上的努力集中在流動性方面，以 4.6% 的利率和近 14 年的期限為 Prologis 和我們的企業籌集了超過 36 億美元的新融資。

This fundraising total does not include $1 billion of additional capacity from the recast of our global line of credit, which closed in April and brings our total borrowing potential under our lines to $6.5 billion. As mentioned, fundamentals in our markets remain strong, but we expect that a more cautious outlook will weigh on the pace of demand. This is not a new perspective as our forecast 90 days ago prepared for a weakening sentiment and held a top-down view for some occupancy loss over the year.

這筆籌款總額不包括我們全球信貸額度重鑄帶來的 10 億美元額外產能，該信貸額度於 4 月關閉，使我們的信貸額度下的總借貸潛力達到 65 億美元。如前所述，我們市場的基本面依然強勁，但我們預計更加謹慎的前景將對需求增長產生壓力。這不是一個新的觀點，因為我們 90 天前的預測為市場情緒疲軟做好了準備，並對全年的一些入住率損失持有自上而下的看法。

We haven't changed that outlook, but we also haven't upgraded it despite the quarter's outperformance. As an update on proprietary metrics, our proposal activity ticked up in absolute terms and is in line with strong market conditions as a percent of available space. Approximately 99% of the units across our 1.2 billion square feet are either leased or in negotiation.

我們沒有改變這一前景，但儘管本季度表現出色，我們也沒有對其進行升級。作為專有指標的更新，我們的提案活動在絕對值上有所上升，並且與可用空間的百分比符合強勁的市場條件。在我們 12 億平方英尺的面積中，大約 99% 的單元已出租或正在談判中。

Utilization ticked down to 85%, which is normalizing to a level that our customers view as optimal. E-commerce leasing increased during the quarter to 19% of all new leasing. We avoid drawing conclusions from a single quarter of activity on most metrics, but it's notable here that e-commerce leasing picked up meaningfully back towards its 5-year average. As we said before, we ultimately look at retention, pre-leasing and rent achievement as the best real-time metrics of portfolio health. And on that basis, our results are certainly very strong.

利用率下降到 85%，這正在正常化到我們的客戶認為最佳的水平。本季度電子商務租賃增加到所有新租賃的 19%。我們避免從大多數指標的單個季度活動中得出結論，但值得注意的是，電子商務租賃顯著回升至 5 年平均水平。正如我們之前所說，我們最終將保留率、預租和租金業績視為衡量投資組合健康狀況的最佳實時指標。在此基礎上，我們的結果肯定非常強勁。

We expect that the current 3.5% vacancy rate in our U.S. markets will build to the low 4s toward the end of the year before turning back to the mid-3s by late 2024 due to the lack of incoming supply and accounting for moderating demand. We anticipate a similar path in our European markets. And of course, even a 5% vacancy rate is historically excellent and supportive of strong rental growth. We expect this pattern to play out in our true months of supply metric, which was a very healthy 30 months in the U.S. and should decline into the 20s next year.

我們預計美國市場目前 3.5% 的空置率將在年底前降至 4s 的低位，然後由於缺乏傳入供應和需求放緩而在 2024 年底前回到 3s 中期。我們預計在我們的歐洲市場也會有類似的路徑。當然，即使是 5% 的空置率在歷史上也是非常出色的，並且支持強勁的租金增長。我們預計這種模式會在我們的真實供應月數指標中發揮作用，這在美國是非常健康的 30 個月，明年應該會下降到 20 個月。

We are launching markets that have large development pipelines such as a few in the Sunbelt in the U.S. But so far, that supply also seems manageable. In Europe, most of our focus is on the U.K., where development (inaudible) have continued even as demand has moderated, which will lift market vacancies and may pressure rents. And Japan is also a market which is expected to see larger increases in vacancy over the year, but similarly expects a slowdown in new supply due to surges in land and construction costs.

我們正在推出擁有大量開發管道的市場，例如美國陽光地帶的一些市場。但到目前為止，這種供應似乎也是可控的。在歐洲，我們的大部分注意力都集中在英國，即使需求放緩，英國的開發（聽不清）仍在繼續，這將增加市場空置率並可能對租金造成壓力。日本也是一個預計全年空置率增幅較大的市場，但同樣預計由於土地和建築成本飆升，新增供應將放緩。

Taking all of these movements into account, we are holding our market rent growth forecast for the year at 10% in the U.S. and 9% globally. In Capital Markets, transactions continue to be few and far between, but a pickup in activity suggests we will see a busier second quarter. Appraised Values in our funds declined 1% in the U.S. and 2% in Europe during the quarter and 8% and 18%, respectively, from the peak.

考慮到所有這些變動，我們將今年的市場租金增長預測維持在美國 10% 和全球 9%。在資本市場，交易仍然很少，但交易活動的回升表明我們將看到第二季度更加繁忙。本季度，我們基金的評估價值在美國和歐洲分別下降了 1% 和 2%，分別較峰值下降了 8% 和 18%。

It's worth noting that our view of public market prices and NAVs that they have adjusted much more than is warranted for these levels of write-down. Redemption requests in our open-ended funds have slowed significantly, with the redemption queue nearly unchanged around 5% of net asset value. This is reflective of both, a slower pace of new redemptions as well as rescissions of prior requests. Combined with over $150 million of new commitments made, our net (inaudible) is essentially unchanged from last year.

值得注意的是，我們對公開市場價格和資產淨值的看法是，它們的調整幅度遠遠超過了這些減記水平的合理範圍。我們開放式基金的贖回請求明顯放緩，贖回隊列幾乎沒有變化，約為資產淨值的 5%。這既反映了新贖回速度放緩，也反映了先前請求的撤銷。加上超過 1.5 億美元的新承諾，我們的淨額（聽不清）與去年基本持平。

Last quarter, we described our approach to fulfilling redemption requests, which is based on an overarching objective to be consistent and fair to all investors requiring a few quarters for valuers to catch up. In that regard, as appraisal seems to be nearing fair value, we plan to redeem units in (inaudible) this quarter given the swifter response to value changes in Europe and expect to do the same in USLF next quarter. In turn, we view this as an excellent time to invest more of our capital into the vehicles, which we'll be doing over the coming quarters and some meaningful numbers.

上個季度，我們描述了我們滿足贖回請求的方法，該方法基於對所有投資者保持一致和公平的總體目標，需要幾個季度的時間讓估值師趕上進度。在這方面，由於評估似乎接近公允價值，鑑於歐洲對價值變化的反應更快，我們計劃在本季度（聽不清）贖回單位，並預計下個季度在 USLF 也這樣做。反過來，我們認為這是將更多資金投入車輛的絕佳時機，我們將在未來幾個季度和一些有意義的數字中這樣做。

Turning to guidance. We are tightening and increasing average occupancy to range between 97.25% and 97.75%, a 25 basis point increase at the midpoint. Our same-store will benefit from this increase, driving our net effective guidance to a range of 8.5% to 9.25% and cash same-store of 9% to 9.75%. We are forecasting our lead mark-to-market to end the year close to 70%, extracting the 2024 component of this suggests rent change should exceed 85% next year even without continued market rent growth, which is a clear illustration of how our exceptional rent change will not only endure but continue to grow.

轉向指導。我們正在收緊和提高平均入住率，使其介於 97.25% 和 97.75% 之間，中點增加 25 個基點。我們的同店將受益於這一增長，將我們的淨有效指導推至 8.5% 至 9.25% 的範圍內，並將同店現金推至 9% 至 9.75% 的範圍內。我們預測我們的領先市值將在年底接近 70%，提取 2024 年的組成部分錶明，即使市場租金沒有持續增長，明年的租金變化也應該超過 85%，這清楚地說明了我們如何卓越租金變化不僅會持續，而且會繼續增長。

We expect G&A to range between $380 million and $390 million and strategic capital revenues, excluding promotes, to range between $515 million and $530 million. We are maintaining our forecast for net promote income of $380 million. And given the size of USLF and the potential for small changes in value to have a meaningful impact, there is potential for upside here, and we believe we have the downside covered.

我們預計 G&A 將在 3.8 億美元至 3.9 億美元之間，戰略資本收入（不包括促銷）將在 5.15 億美元至 5.3 億美元之間。我們維持對淨促銷收入 3.8 億美元的預測。考慮到 USLF 的規模和價值的微小變化可能產生有意義的影響，這裡有上行的潛力，我們相信我們已經涵蓋了下行。

We had a few Development Starts in the quarter, a reflection of our discipline, but our pipeline is deep, and we are maintaining our guidance of $2.5 billion to $3 billion for the year. We expect the pace to remain slow in the second quarter, putting the bulk of the activity into the second half. It's noteworthy that (inaudible) a belief that construction costs may decline in the coming quarters, we now see them as likely to increase, mostly in line with inflation.

我們在本季度有幾個開發項目開始，這反映了我們的紀律，但我們的管道很深，我們將維持全年 25 億至 30 億美元的指導。我們預計第二季度的步伐將保持緩慢，將大部分活動放在下半年。值得注意的是（聽不清）建築成本可能會在未來幾個季度下降的信念，我們現在認為它們可能會增加，主要與通貨膨脹一致。

As new fundraising has become visible, we forecast contributions to be concentrated in the second half, totaling $2 billion to $3 billion when combined with forecasted dispositions. So in total, we expect GAAP earnings to range between $3.10 and $3.25 per share. We are increasing our core FFO, including promotes guidance to the range of $5.42 to $5.50 per share. And further, we are guiding core FFO, excluding promotes, to range between $5.02 and $5.10 per share, with the midpoint representing 10% growth over 2022.

隨著新籌款活動的出現，我們預測捐款將集中在下半年，加上預測的處置總額將達到 20 億至 30 億美元。因此，我們預計 GAAP 每股收益總計在 3.10 美元至 3.25 美元之間。我們正在增加我們的核心 FFO，包括將指引提升至每股 5.42 美元至 5.50 美元的範圍。此外，我們正在指導核心 FFO（不包括促銷）在每股 5.02 美元至 5.10 美元之間，中點代表比 2022 年增長 10%。

I'd like to close with a few observations that we've made about our standing in the equity markets, which we found interesting and wanted to share. Today, we sit as the 68th largest company in the S&P 500 ahead of names like GE, American Express, [Signa], Citigroup as well as Ford and GM combined. Also notice that with our planned $3.3 billion of dividends this year, we ranked 42nd in terms of total cash returned to investors. Of these top 42 dividend payers, Prologis has outgrown the group by 500 basis points per year over the last 3 years.

最後，我想談談我們對我們在股票市場上的地位所做的一些觀察，我們覺得這些觀察很有趣並想與大家分享。今天，我們在標準普爾 500 指數中排名第 68 位，領先於通用電氣、美國運通、[Signa]、花旗集團以及福特和通用汽車的總和。另請注意，憑藉我們今年計劃的 33 億美元股息，我們在返還給投資者的總現金方面排名第 42 位。在這些排名前 42 位的股息支付者中，Prologis 在過去 3 年中的增長速度每年超過該集團 500 個基點。

And in fact, since our IPO, we have paid over $15 billion in dividends at a 15% CAGR, ranking 13th on growth in the entire S&P 100. While getting bigger has never been our objective, we thought the context would be eye opening. So in closing, we feel great about the health of our business even in the face of a slowing economy. Most importantly, nothing we have seen alters the path of its underlying secular drivers for the long-term potential of our platform. In that regard, we're excited to tell you much more about that outlook and our platform later in the year.

事實上，自首次公開募股以來，我們已經以 15% 的複合年增長率支付了超過 150 億美元的股息，在整個標準普爾 100 指數中排名第 13 位。雖然做大從來不是我們的目標，但我們認為背景會令人大開眼界。因此，最後，即使面對經濟放緩，我們對業務的健康狀況也感到滿意。最重要的是，我們所看到的任何事情都無法改變其潛在長期驅動因素對我們平台長期潛力的影響。在這方面，我們很高興在今年晚些時候告訴您更多關於該前景和我們平台的信息。

Last week, we announced our upcoming Investor Day to be held at the New York Stock Exchange this December. We hope to see many of you there in person and tuned into the live webcast where we will showcase our (inaudible) of talent and the strong differentiators that define our company. More details on that to come. So with that, I'll hand it back to the operator for your questions.

上週，我們宣布即將於今年 12 月在紐約證券交易所舉行的投資者日。我們希望能親眼見到你們中的許多人，並收聽網絡直播，我們將在其中展示我們的（聽不清）人才和定義我們公司的強大差異化因素。更多細節即將到來。因此，我會把它交還給接線員以回答您的問題。

(Operator Instructions) And our first question comes from the line of Caitlin Burrows with Goldman Sachs.

（操作員說明）我們的第一個問題來自高盛的 Caitlin Burrows。

Maybe on development, Tim, you touched on it briefly, but the earnings release mentions how the build-out of your land bank is a driver of growth. And this quarter, like you mentioned, starts for only like $50 million versus recent quarters over $1 billion, and it sounds like that is expected to ramp up significantly to over $1 billion again in the second half. So just wondering what metrics or other things are you looking at to drive the Starts activity? And what makes you confident that increasing Starts so significantly later this year is kind of possible and the right thing to do?

也許在發展方面，蒂姆，你簡單地談到了它，但收益發布提到了你的土地儲備的建設是如何推動增長的。正如您提到的那樣，本季度的開局資金僅為 5000 萬美元，而最近幾個季度的開局資金超過 10 億美元，聽起來預計下半年將再次大幅增加至 10 億美元以上。所以只是想知道您正在查看哪些指標或其他內容來推動啟動活動？是什麼讓您相信今年晚些時候如此顯著地增加 Starts 是可能的，也是正確的做法？

This is Dan. I'll take a stab at that. Maybe Tim can follow on then. But first of all, let me just say, our teams are very much on the offense out there. Every day, our teams around the globe looking at new opportunities. We have over $38 billion of potential (inaudible) embedded in our land bank. And we could flip the switch tomorrow and start $10 billion if we wanted to. We're going to continue to look at these deals on a case-by-case basis. But when you see the overall volatility in the market, you see the 10-year move 50, 60 basis points on a weekly basis like we have, we're maintaining the discipline. We're disciplined, because we can be. And we're ramping up our starts towards the end of the year while we expect to see the overall marketplace ramp down.

這是丹。我會嘗試一下。也許 Tim 可以接著說。但首先，我只想說，我們的球隊非常注重進攻。每一天，我們在全球的團隊都在尋找新的機會。我們的土地儲備中蘊藏著超過 380 億美元的潛力（聽不清）。如果我們願意，我們明天就可以啟動 100 億美元的開關。我們將繼續逐案研究這些交易。但是當你看到市場的整體波動時，你會看到 10 年期每週波動 50、60 個基點，就像我們一樣，我們正在保持紀律。我們紀律嚴明，因為我們可以。我們將在年底前加快開工，同時我們預計會看到整體市場下滑。

And our next question comes from the line of Ki Bin Kim with Truist.

我們的下一個問題來自 Ki Bin Kim 與 Truist 的對話。

So net absorption across the U.S. and in the first quarter was a little bit lighter than what we've seen in recent memory. So I was just curious, what kind of risk do you see to occupancy or rent growth as the sector tries to, in the near term, absorb the new supply coming through?

因此，美國和第一季度的淨吸納量比我們最近記憶中看到的要輕一些。所以我很好奇，當該行業試圖在短期內吸收新的供應時，您認為入住率或租金增長會面臨什麼樣的風險？

This is Hamid. There's always a risk in this environment. I mean there's so many [novel,] but we've gotten spoiled to 350 million square feet of demand in the last couple of years. Let's just put this in a context. I mean, in the past, we would have been very happy with even these lower levels of absorption, particularly when you consider that Starts are way down and they're going to -- deliveries are going to really slow down as we go into 2024. So it's normalizing. That's the best way I can describe it. But I wouldn't even be surprised if it falls further. Given all the stuff that we read in the papers, the CEOs that are making big CapEx decisions basically push their people to see if they can start the week -- a quarter later or two quarters later. But that's all borrowed demand -- if you will, that is future demand that is getting deferred. So we're not that excited by it one way or another.

這是哈米德。在這種環境中總是存在風險。我的意思是有很多[新穎的]，但在過去幾年裡我們已經被寵壞了 3.5 億平方英尺的需求。讓我們把它放在一個上下文中。我的意思是，在過去，即使是這些較低的吸收水平，我們也會非常高興，特別是當你考慮到開工率正在下降並且他們將會 - 隨著我們進入 2024 年，交付將真正放緩. 所以它正在正常化。這是我能描述的最好的方式。但如果它進一步下跌，我什至不會感到驚訝。考慮到我們在報紙上讀到的所有內容，做出重大資本支出決策的 CEO 基本上會敦促他們的員工看看他們是否可以在一周後開始——一個季度或兩個季度後。但這都是藉來的需求——如果你願意的話，那就是被推遲的未來需求。所以我們對它並不那麼興奮。

And just to finish the previous question that Dan started, our view -- we don't have a forecast for Development Starts. We only have one because you guys ask us for. We don't internally have one. We have planned. We have entitlements on much of that land, about 80% of that land. We can start it at any time. And we don't just look at our data at the end of the quarter. We see it every day as we lease 1 million square feet a day. So we can meter that development into the marketplace as we see fit and make those adjustments. Well, we're ready to go if we need to do more or less either way. At the end of the day, our company's story is about organic growth. And that's the high-value form of growth, and that's the one that we pay the most attention to. And actually, that's easier to figure out in this environment, given the very big mark-to-market, which I've never seen in this business before. So in a way, our job is actually easier in terms of predictability of earnings and growth.

為了完成 Dan 開始的前一個問題，我們的觀點是——我們沒有對開發開始的預測。我們只有一個，因為你們要我們。我們內部沒有。我們已經計劃好了。我們對其中大部分土地享有權利，大約 80%。我們可以隨時啟動它。而且我們不只是在本季度末查看我們的數據。當我們每天租用 100 萬平方英尺時，我們每天都會看到它。因此，我們可以在我們認為合適的時候將這種發展納入市場並進行調整。好吧，無論哪種方式我們需要做更多或更少的事情，我們都準備好了。歸根結底，我們公司的故事是關於有機增長的。這是高價值的增長形式，也是我們最關注的增長形式。實際上，考慮到非常大的按市值計價，這在這種環境下更容易理解，這是我以前從未在這個行業見過的。因此，在某種程度上，就收益和增長的可預測性而言，我們的工作實際上更容易。

And our next question comes from the line of Steve Sakwa with Evercore.

我們的下一個問題來自 Steve Sakwa 與 Evercore 的對話。

I just wanted to focus a little bit on the acquisitions, which is not a very large number in there, Hamid. But I'm just wondering what you're seeing from a distressed opportunity set and then maybe tie into the comments Tim made about the funds. And you sound like you'd be putting more money into the funds as you redeemed some of the partners. So just trying to tie those two, I guess, capital uses together.

哈米德，我只是想稍微關註一下收購，這不是一個很大的數字。但我只是想知道你從一個令人沮喪的機會集中看到了什麼，然後可能與蒂姆對這些基金的評論聯繫起來。當你贖回一些合作夥伴時，你聽起來像是在向基金投入更多資金。所以我想只是想把這兩個聯繫起來，資本使用在一起。

Sure. I think there's very little distress in the marketplace. Industrial real estate has done really well. I assume other people have significant mark-to-market, although I doubt if it's quite the same level as ours. But there's protection in terms of that mark-to-market and other portfolios. And there are no (inaudible) sellers because leverage in the industry is pretty low. So we're not looking for distressed opportunities, but we are looking for opportunities that reflect the increasing cost of capital compared to, call it, 1 year, 1.5 year ago. And you should know, we look at every deal that anybody does (inaudible) not hard to figure out that if you want to sell something, you call Prologis.

當然。我認為市場上幾乎沒有什麼困擾。工業地產做得非常好。我假設其他人有明顯的按市值計價，儘管我懷疑它是否與我們的水平完全相同。但在按市值計價和其他投資組合方面存在保護。而且沒有（聽不清）賣家，因為該行業的槓桿率非常低。因此，我們不是在尋找陷入困境的機會，而是在尋找能夠反映與 1 年、1.5 年前相比資本成本增加的機會。你應該知道，我們會查看任何人所做的每一筆交易（聽不清），不難發現如果你想賣東西，你可以打電話給 Prologis。

So our feeling is people are still stuck on the old values, and buyers are expecting a substantial discount for those values. I suspect that both of those numbers will move closer together in the next couple of quarters and the market will start transacting. The funds have always been a place where we either take capital out or put capital in depending on the cycle of the marketplace. Back even in the global financial crisis, when AMB was much smaller and the balance sheet was weaker, we stepped in and put a couple of hundred million dollars in our funds when I thought -- when we thought that the time was right. So we continue to do the same thing. I don't think it's a big deal one way or another, but it's a great place to buy high-quality real estate that we know and we like. So that's the way we think about it.

所以我們的感覺是人們仍然堅持舊的價值觀，買家期待這些價值觀的大幅折扣。我懷疑這兩個數字將在接下來的幾個季度內更加接近，市場將開始交易。基金一直是我們根據市場週期取出或投入資金的地方。甚至在全球金融危機期間，當 AMB 規模小得多，資產負債表也較弱時，當我認為時機成熟時，我們介入並向我們的基金投入了幾億美元。所以我們繼續做同樣的事情。我不認為這有什麼大不了的，但它是購買我們了解和喜歡的優質房地產的好地方。這就是我們的思考方式。

And our next question comes from the line of Blaine Heck with Wells Fargo.

我們的下一個問題來自 Blaine Heck 與 Wells Fargo 的對話。

Can you talk about demand related to near-shoring or on-shoring? Which markets are seeing an outsized impact related to that trend? And maybe, how Prologis is positioned to benefit from it?

您能談談與近岸外包或在岸外包相關的需求嗎？哪些市場正在看到與該趨勢相關的巨大影響？也許，Prologis 如何從中受益？

Sure. Let me start, and I'll pitch it over to Chris. The biggest impact is on Northern Mexico. Those markets along the border are literally on fire. There is no vacancy, and we're seeing a lot of near shoring happening there as sort of a diversification move. We're also seeing some of the China manufacturing lead out to the rest of Southeast Asia, but we're not really active in those smaller markets, but we do see that. And it's moving [less] than China, and it's moving to other areas in Southeast Asia. But Mexico is the big story here. The onshoring part, I mean, honestly, other than what I read in the papers and the chip business, which is real, the rest of it is wishful thinking mostly. So they're very isolated examples. When you look at the numbers and they're not that significant. Chris, do you want to add to that?

當然。讓我開始吧，我會把它交給克里斯。影響最大的是北墨西哥。邊境沿線的那些市場簡直著火了。沒有職位空缺，我們看到那裡發生了很多近距離支撐，這是一種多元化舉措。我們還看到一些中國製造業被引向東南亞其他地區，但我們在那些較小的市場並不真正活躍，但我們確實看到了這一點。而且它的移動[少於]中國，而且它正在移動到東南亞的其他地區。但墨西哥是這裡的大故事。外包部分，我的意思是，老實說，除了我在報紙上讀到的和芯片業務，這是真實的，其餘部分大多是一廂情願的想法。所以它們是非常孤立的例子。當您查看這些數字時，它們並不那麼重要。克里斯，你想補充嗎？

Sure. I think that's really well described. Blaine, I'd say there isn't great data on this, but that which we see is that it is a building trend in Northern Mexico. So it takes time for those supply chains to relocate instead of the ecosystems they need to really function properly and resiliently, and that is happening and will continue to happen. So I would expect it to grow in the coming years as well.

當然。我認為這描述得很好。布萊恩，我想說這方面沒有很好的數據，但我們看到這是墨西哥北部的一種建築趨勢。因此，這些供應鏈需要時間來遷移，而不是它們真正正常和有彈性地運作所需的生態系統，這種情況正在發生並將繼續發生。所以我預計它在未來幾年也會增長。

And the next question is from the line of Craig Mailman with Citi.

下一個問題來自花旗銀行的 Craig Mailman。

Maybe just a clarification and a follow-up question. Tim, I think in your prepared remarks, you said that the mark-to-market could end this year by 70% and be 85% by the end of next year in the absence of rent growth. So maybe clarify that if I misheard it. And then second question, just as you guys are seeing conditions on the ground, clearly, we saw some of the numbers you guys discussed it normalize here in the first quarter, but could you just talk about maybe how we should think about the cadence or anything incremental, what tenants are saying, so that we don't get surprised the next quarter or two with some of the fundamental numbers here coming through as supply does deliver in some of the markets that have had more in the pipeline, like L.A., Inland Empire, Dallas sort of market. So then just also, you guys maintained your 10% market rent growth. Has that shifted dramatically within markets where some may have weakened significantly while others have grown? Or is it pretty consistent across the border? I apologize, I know that was a lot at once.

也許只是一個澄清和一個後續問題。蒂姆，我想在你準備好的發言中，你說過在沒有租金增長的情況下，今年按市值計價可能會達到 70%，到明年年底會達到 85%。所以也許澄清一下，如果我聽錯了。然後是第二個問題，就像你們看到的實際情況一樣，很明顯，我們看到你們討論的一些數字在第一季度在這裡正常化，但你能不能談談我們應該如何考慮節奏或任何增量，租戶在說什麼，這樣我們就不會在接下來的一兩個季度對這裡的一些基本數據感到驚訝，因為供應確實在一些有更多管道的市場中交付，比如洛杉磯，內陸帝國，達拉斯那種市場。那麼，你們也保持了 10% 的市場租金增長。在一些市場可能大幅走弱而另一些市場增長的情況下，這種情況是否發生了巨大變化？或者它在邊界上是否非常一致？抱歉，我知道一下子說了很多。

Nice try unpacking all that in one question.

很高興嘗試在一個問題中解開所有這些問題。

I will address all three of those. So I'll start, Craig, and I'm glad you asked if there's confusion on the point. You're right that we said we will -- we believe we'll see a 70% lease mark-to-market of the entire portfolio at the end of this year after we roll leases over the course of the year, and we have some continued rent growth build. What I was trying to highlight there was that if you just take out the component of that, that is rolling in 2024 to see how the sense of how this rent change is going to endure. That slice of the 70% on its own is 85% without any more market rent growth in the next 9 months. So that just gives you very clear visibility on how the rent change is going to stay high, how it's going to translate to same-store growth. So that was the intention there.

我將解決所有這三個問題。那麼我要開始了，克雷格，我很高興你問到這一點上是否存在混淆。你說得對，我們說我們會——我們相信在今年年底滾動租賃後，我們將看到整個投資組合的 70% 以市場計價租賃，而且我們有一些持續的租金增長建立。我想強調的是，如果你只是去掉其中的一部分，那就是在 2024 年滾動，看看這種租金變化將如何持續的感覺。在未來 9 個月內市場租金沒有任何增長的情況下，這 70% 本身就是 85%。這樣一來，您就可以非常清楚地了解租金變化將如何保持高位，以及它將如何轉化為同店增長。這就是那裡的意圖。

Yes. Let me take the second part, and I'll pitch it to Chris for the third part of the question. Look, you'll be surprised if we're surprised. So -- and we really worked hard to not being surprised. And the best indicator of what's happening is the ongoing leasing and proposals and all that stuff that we're involved in, and you guys don't really see directly other than at the end of the quarter. So I would say -- I would describe market conditions as very good to excellent. They're not exceptional like they were 1.5 years or 2 years ago, but they're very good to excellent. The markets you mentioned L.A. and Inland Empire, not worried about those at all.

是的。讓我來回答第二部分，我會把它交給 Chris 來回答問題的第三部分。看，如果我們感到驚訝，你會感到驚訝。所以 - 我們真的很努力地不感到驚訝。正在發生的事情的最好指標是正在進行的租賃和提案以及我們參與的所有這些事情，除了在本季度末之外，你們並沒有真正直接看到。所以我會說 - 我會將市場條件描述為非常好到極好。他們並不像 1.5 年前或 2 年前那樣出類拔萃，但他們非常優秀。你提到的洛杉磯和內陸帝國市場，根本不擔心那些。

I mean, those markets are in the 1% ish -- 1 to 2 percentage vacancy rate. When you get to Dallas, and particularly South Dallas and some other markets like Atlanta, way down in the South, et cetera, those markets through all the cycles have been prone to over development and softening up demand when business slows down. So we're watching those very carefully, but I wouldn't characterize any of them as watch list markets now. Otherwise, we would have classified them as such. The 10% rental growth is an overall number, but there is a very wide dispersion around that 10%. And Chris, do you want to elaborate on that?

我的意思是，這些市場的空置率在 1% 左右——1 到 2 個百分點。當你到達達拉斯，特別是南達拉斯和亞特蘭大等其他一些市場時，在南部等地，這些市場在所有周期中都容易過度發展，當業務放緩時需求疲軟。所以我們正在非常仔細地觀察這些市場，但我現在不會將它們中的任何一個描述為觀察名單市場。否則，我們會將它們歸類為此類。 10% 的租金增長是一個整體數字，但圍繞這 10% 的差異非常大。克里斯，你想詳細說明一下嗎？

Indeed, there is a wide dispersion. And we've been accustomed over the years talking about outperformance on the coast and lower growth and lower barrier markets. Historically, that outperformance has averaged 250 to 500 basis points in any given year. This year, that 10% sees -- more to the lower end of that range from like 200 to 250 basis point outperformance on the coast versus the lower barrier markets. And so that is where we saw the resilience. And I would also point to other global markets outside the United States. We talked about Mexico on an earlier call. It's probably one of the hotter parts of the world from a logistics real estate perspective. We're also seeing resiliency in Toronto and Northern Europe, Germany and the Netherlands.

事實上，存在廣泛的分散性。多年來，我們一直習慣於談論沿海地區的出色表現以及較低的增長和較低的壁壘市場。從歷史上看，這種表現在任何一年平均為 250 至 500 個基點。今年，這 10% 的人認為沿海地區的表現比較低壁壘市場高出 200 到 250 個基點。這就是我們看到彈性的地方。我還要指出美國以外的其他全球市場。我們在早些時候的電話中談到了墨西哥。從物流房地產的角度來看，它可能是世界上最熱門的地區之一。我們還看到了多倫多和北歐、德國和荷蘭的彈性。

And our next question comes from the line of Derek Johnston with Deutsche Bank.

我們的下一個問題來自德意志銀行的 Derek Johnston。

The dislocation between public and private market logistic asset values, obviously, is weighing on possible M&A. But as Fed policy nears peak rates and currently projects a pause, do you see valuations converging between public and private assets, and secondly, thus, a pickup in capital recycling?

顯然，公共和私人市場物流資產價值之間的錯位正在影響可能的併購。但隨著美聯儲政策接近峰值利率並且目前預計暫停，您是否看到公共資產和私人資產之間的估值趨同，其次，因此，資本循環回升？

Yes. I definitely do see a convergence over time and private markets are always slow to adjust on the way up and on the way down, because it's all backward-looking appraisals and people look for comps and -- but we don't really view the market that way, and we view that disconnect as an opportunity because -- look, we have a very clear view of what the capital markets tell us in terms of the new cost of capital. And we're interested in deploying capital at above that new higher number and private values are not yet there. That's why we see some continued erosion on private values in the next quarter, particularly in the United States. On the other hand, I think the public values are over discounted. And we see those actually picking up as there is more evidence in the private market that the world is not falling off the cliff. So I think we'll get a conversion from both sides, and this is not at all unusual compared to past cycles.

是的。隨著時間的推移，我確實看到了趨同，私人市場在上漲和下跌的過程中總是調整緩慢，因為這都是向後看的評估，人們在尋找補償——但我們並不真正看待市場這樣，我們將這種脫節視為一個機會，因為 - 看，我們對資本市場在新的資本成本方面告訴我們的內容有非常清晰的看法。我們有興趣在新的更高數字和私人價值之上部署資本。這就是為什麼我們看到下個季度私人價值會繼續受到侵蝕，尤其是在美國。另一方面，我認為公眾價值被高估了。我們看到這些人實際上在回升，因為私人市場上有更多證據表明世界並沒有從懸崖上掉下來。所以我認為我們會從雙方那裡得到轉變，與過去的周期相比，這一點也不奇怪。

I would say every cycle gets a little better, but there's still a pretty significant disconnect. And of course, private values can be whatever you want them to be, if you hire trying to prove to the point or trying to make a statement. So we are actually -- our moat with appraisals -- appraisers that we work with is to continue to point them to the cost of capital as opposed to comps that don't exist. So we are on the other side of that argument. We're trying to get this market to get unlocked and to transact and trying to get these appraisers to be realistic about their valuations. But I can tell you, based on conversations with them, they're getting a lot of pressure the other way from a lot of other people. So they find it somewhat unusual that we want to see a more aligned set of values that will unlock markets and liquidity.

我會說每個週期都會好一點，但仍然存在相當大的脫節。當然，私人價值觀可以是你想要的任何東西，如果你僱用試圖證明這一點或試圖發表聲明。因此，我們實際上是——我們的評估護城河——與我們合作的評估師將繼續向他們指出資本成本，而不是不存在的補償。所以我們站在那個論點的另一邊。我們正試圖讓這個市場解鎖並進行交易，並試圖讓這些評估師對他們的估值保持現實。但我可以告訴你，根據與他們的談話，他們從其他很多人那裡承受了很大的壓力。因此，他們發現我們希望看到一套更加一致的價值觀來釋放市場和流動性，這有點不尋常。

And the next question comes from the line of Vikram Malhotra with Mizuho.

下一個問題來自 Vikram Malhotra 與 Mizuho 的對話。

So just maybe going back to your comments about more unevenness or maybe just some upward pressure on vacancy across the U.S. Can you just sort of give us your latest view on -- you said not worried about SoCal, but how would you rank sort of SoCal across your other coastal markets today? And if there is a sort of additional or some softening that you may see, does the Duke acquisition sort of change the overall prospect for the PLD U.S. portfolio?

所以也許回到你關於更多不平衡的評論，或者可能只是美國各地空置率的一些上升壓力。你能不能給我們你的最新觀點 - 你說不擔心 SoCal，但你如何排名 SoCal今天在其他沿海市場？如果您可能會看到某種額外的或某種軟化，杜克的收購是否會改變 PLD 美國投資組合的整體前景？

Well, I don't know for sure how to predict the direction of markets, but I can tell you, I don't lose any sleep over SoCal at all. I think that market is extremely tight. And some of the shift in demand or softening of demand is to adjacent markets, because the space just doesn't exist in Southern California. So if we had more space, I think we would have more absorption in Southern California as well. The Duke acquisition, as we've described many times, it's very aligned with our portfolio. So it fundamentally doesn't change in any way our view on markets or desire the allocation of our capital to those markets is very much aligned with the pre-merger Prologis portfolio. So the only thing I would tell you about Duke is that generally speaking, based on the leases that we've done since we acquired the portfolio, we are kind of on the order of 4% to 5% higher than we thought we would be in terms of the performance of that portfolio.

好吧，我不確定如何預測市場的方向，但我可以告訴你，我根本不會因為 SoCal 而失眠。我認為市場非常緊張。一些需求的轉變或需求的疲軟是針對鄰近市場的，因為南加州根本不存在這個空間。所以如果我們有更多的空間，我想我們也會在南加州有更多的吸收。正如我們多次描述的那樣，對杜克的收購與我們的投資組合非常吻合。因此，它從根本上不會以任何方式改變我們對市場的看法，也不會希望我們對這些市場的資本配置與合併前的 Prologis 投資組合非常一致。所以我唯一要告訴你的關於杜克的事情是，一般來說，根據我們收購投資組合後所做的租賃，我們比我們想像的要高 4% 到 5%就該投資組合的表現而言。

And the next question comes from the line of John Kim with BMO Capital Markets.

下一個問題來自 BMO Capital Markets 的 John Kim。

Tim, you mentioned the fund redemption requests were unchanged at 5% of NAV. Do you still expect the reduction to go basically (inaudible) year, in light of the (inaudible)?

蒂姆，你提到基金贖回請求保持在資產淨值的 5% 不變。鑑於（聽不清），您是否仍然期望減少基本上（聽不清）年？

John, we've been hearing any of that. Are you on a cell phone? If you are, can you get closer to it or something because you were cutting.

約翰，我們一直在聽到這些。你在用手機嗎？如果你是，你能不能靠近它或者因為你正在切割而做些什麼。

Is that better?

那個更好嗎？

It's better, yes. Can you start all over?

更好，是的。你能重新開始嗎？

Sure. You mentioned the fund redemption requests were unchanged. But I was wondering if you expect those redemptions to go down to 0 in the back half of the year, as previously stated, in light of weakening demand that you're seeing on the tenant side?

當然。你提到基金贖回請求沒有改變。但我想知道，鑑於您在租戶方面看到的需求疲軟，您是否希望這些贖回在今年下半年下降到 0，如前所述？

I don't know. I can't really predict the portfolio decisions of well over a couple of hundred different investors making those decisions differently. I would say to the extent that there is -- there are redemptions. They are generally not because of the performance of the real estate assets that are invested with us, they either have to do with denominator issues on the other asset classes, private equity, stock bonds, et cetera, because everything has gotten hit with increased interest rates. (inaudible) bonds have not been a safe place to be either. So it's because of them getting over allocated to real estate because of the decline in the value of the other asset classes more than real estate.

我不知道。我無法真正預測超過幾百個不同的投資者做出不同的投資組合決策。我想說的是——有救贖。它們通常不是因為與我們一起投資的房地產資產的表現，它們要么與其他資產類別、私募股權、股票債券等的分母問題有關，因為一切都受到了利息增加的打擊費率。 （聽不清）債券也不是一個安全的地方。所以這是因為他們過度分配給房地產，因為其他資產類別的價值下降幅度大於房地產。

And among real estate, if you want liquidity, where are you going to go? You're going to go to industrial, you're going to go to apartments, et cetera, et cetera. You're not going to go to office buildings because you're not going to be able to get any liquidity out of those. So that's what's driving all this. It doesn't -- I wouldn't look there for learning anything about what's going on with the industrial market, because that's a reaction to a lot of different things that have nothing to do with industrial demand and supply.

而在房地產中，如果你想要流動性，你要去哪裡？你要去工業，你要去公寓，等等，等等。你不會去寫字樓，因為你無法從中獲得任何流動性。這就是推動這一切的原因。它不會——我不會在那裡尋找任何關於工業市場正在發生的事情的信息，因為這是對許多與工業需求和供應無關的不同事物的反應。

And the next question comes from the line of Vince Tibone with Green Street.

下一個問題來自 Vince Tibone 與 Green Street 的對話。

Have you seen any material changes in tenant demand or industry-wide Development Starts activity since the banking crisis? And then on the latter point, does the availability of construction loans changed significantly in the last few months?

自銀行業危機以來，您是否看到租戶需求或整個行業的開發啟動活動發生任何重大變化？然後關於後一點，在過去幾個月中，建築貸款的可用性是否發生了重大變化？

I'm sorry, the last part was the availability of loan.

對不起，最後一部分是貸款的可用性。

Constructions loan.

建設貸款。

The answer to that -- yes, the answer to that one is absolutely yes. I think there's been a significant pullback in the availability of construction loans. On the rest, I mean what do you think?

答案是——是的，答案是肯定的。我認為建築貸款的可用性出現了顯著回落。至於其他，我的意思是你怎麼看？

Yes, you were talking about customer demand. We're seeing broad-based customer demand really. Even looking at our e-commerce, we had 40 unique e-commerce users last quarter alone with Amazon actually being a small size of that, very, very small. So overall, broad-based demand, no particular pockets of softness.

是的，你在談論客戶需求。我們確實看到了廣泛的客戶需求。即使看看我們的電子商務，僅上個季度我們就有 40 個獨特的電子商務用戶，而亞馬遜實際上只是其中的一小部分，非常非常小。因此，總體而言，需求廣泛，沒有特別疲軟的地方。

I would say housing is probably the only aspect that's a little below normal. But again, if you look at the overall numbers, these -- if you sort of forget about 2021 and early '22, and you saw these numbers that we're seeing now, you would feel really good about them. It's just that in the context of those exceptional years are a little bit softer, but they're still considered to be really good markets, Chris.

我想說住房可能是唯一有點低於正常水平的方面。但是，如果你再看看總體數字，這些——如果你有點忘記 2021 年和 22 年初，而你看到了我們現在看到的這些數字，你會對它們感覺非常好。只是在那些特殊年份的背景下有點軟，但它們仍然被認為是非常好的市場，克里斯。

Vince, I think I heard in the middle of your question, what is the trend in development starts in the wake of SVB? So it's worth knowing the numbers, which is in the first quarter in the United States, Development Starts were up 40% from their peak across our markets and 45% in Europe. And based on the comment I mediated earlier around construction debt availability, these numbers are going to -- you're going to continue to see Starts to curtail in the marketplace.

文斯，我想我在你的問題中間聽到了，SVB 之後的發展趨勢是什麼？因此，值得了解這些數字，這是在美國的第一季度，開發開始比我們市場的峰值增長了 40%，在歐洲增長了 45%。根據我之前就建築債務可用性發表的評論，這些數字將——你將繼續看到市場開始縮減。

I mean, I've never seen such a fast slowdown -- such a sudden slowdown in construction volume in our business. It's just been -- and I'm not sure it's only -- it was related to Silicon Valley Bank. It was already happening before that, and SVB just made it worse.

我的意思是，我從未見過如此快速的放緩——我們業務的建築量如此突然的放緩。它只是 - 我不確定它是否只是 - 它與硅谷銀行有關。在那之前就已經發生了，而 SVB 只是讓事情變得更糟。

Our next question comes from the line of Nicholas Yulico in Scotiabank.

我們的下一個問題來自豐業銀行的 Nicholas Yulico。

I just want to go back to some of the commentary about demand may be spilling into 2024 as companies take a longer time in making financial decisions. I guess what I'm wondering is, how much is that an outlook or just broader corporations taking longer times to make financial decisions versus some of the larger categories of leasing like 3 PL, general retail, but it may be expecting consumer slowdown and perhaps not fully utilizing their space? And so that's creating some delay in taking space this year.

我只想回到一些關於需求可能會蔓延到 2024 年的評論，因為公司需要更長的時間來做出財務決策。我想我想知道的是，與 3 PL、一般零售等一些較大類別的租賃相比，前景或更廣泛的公司需要更長的時間來做出財務決策有多少，但它可能預計消費者放緩，也許沒有充分利用他們的空間？因此，這造成了今年佔用空間的一些延遲。

The utilization rate peaked all time at 87%. And today, it's at 85%. And there is a couple of points of margin error on those numbers anyway. But -- so I would say utilization is really high. If it were -- if utilization were in the high 70s, I would tell you there's a lot of shadow space and people are going to wait to grow into that space or put it on the market for sub leasing, but we're not seeing that. So I don't think there's a lot of excess slack in the system. And even if you look at the well over publicized Amazon stories that a lot of people waste a lot of time on. I mean, they basically haven't given anything space back, maybe 7 million or 8 million square feet. Yet it's taken half the airtime on all these costs for the last year. It just has not been material. I mean, we're looking for something that just doesn't exist. Will it exist? I don't know. I'm not quite (inaudible). But so far, it doesn't appear that customers are giving back material amounts of space or anything like that. It's totally within the normal band of how our business works across the cycle.

利用率達到歷史最高點 87%。而今天，它是 85%。無論如何，這些數字有幾個邊際誤差點。但是——所以我想說利用率真的很高。如果是 - 如果利用率處於 70 年代的高位，我會告訴你有很多影子空間，人們會等待成長到那個空間或將其投放市場進行轉租，但我們沒有看到那。所以我不認為系統中有很多多餘的鬆弛。即使你看一下很多人浪費大量時間在亞馬遜上過度宣傳的故事。我的意思是，他們基本上沒有回饋任何空間，可能是 700 萬或 800 萬平方英尺。然而，去年所有這些費用的通話時間卻減少了一半。它只是不重要。我的意思是，我們正在尋找一些根本不存在的東西。它會存在嗎？我不知道。我不太（聽不清）。但到目前為止，客戶似乎並沒有回饋大量空間或類似的東西。這完全在我們業務在整個週期內運作的正常範圍內。

And the next question comes from the line of Michael Goldsmith with UBS.

下一個問題來自瑞銀集團的 Michael Goldsmith。

My question is on your view for the balance of the year. And what has changed, if anything, on a qualitative and quantitative basis? So you provided some commentary on your cautious outlook on demand and that wasn't new, but at the same time, you took up the same-store NOI guidance, maintained your (inaudible) forecast. Just trying to understand if there's been an evolution, we were thinking on how the rest of the year plays out?

我的問題是你對今年餘下時間的看法。在定性和定量的基礎上發生了什麼變化（如果有的話）？因此，您對謹慎的需求前景發表了一些評論，這並不是什麼新鮮事，但與此同時，您採用了同店 NOI 指導，維持了您的（聽不清）預測。只是想了解是否發生了變化，我們正在考慮今年餘下時間的表現如何？

Michael, it's Tim. No, look, I think you heard our comments correctly, and I like that you pointed out, they're relatively unchanged. The same-store move is largely a function of an occupancy move. We just retained a decent amount of occupancy in the first quarter. We think that's going to extend throughout the year. So that's 2/3 of our increase in our same-store guide. The remainder of it is, frankly, some outperformance in the first quarter that's more onetime in nature, deals with seasonal expenses. We had very low bad debt in the quarter, out of interest, but we don't forecast that to continue. So that's some of the onetime items. But that combination is what is impacting same-store from here.

邁克爾，我是蒂姆。不，你看，我認為你正確地聽到了我們的意見，我喜歡你指出的，它們相對沒有變化。同店變動主要是入駐變動的結果。我們剛剛在第一季度保留了可觀的入住率。我們認為這將延續到全年。所以這是我們同店指南增長的 2/3。坦率地說，它的其餘部分是第一季度的一些表現更好，本質上是一次性的，涉及季節性支出。由於利息，我們本季度的壞賬非常低，但我們預計這種情況不會持續下去。這就是一些一次性物品。但這種組合正在影響這裡的同店。

And the next question comes from the line of Nick (inaudible) with Robert W. Baird.

下一個問題來自 Nick（聽不清）和 Robert W. Baird 的對話。

Retention remains pretty elevated here, but had 80%, but maybe on the tenants that don't resign, what's like the primary reason for not resigning? Is it them outgrowing their current footprint or a case of them just getting priced out of the market, trying to tie that really to your occupancy in the sub-100,000 square foot area has been a little bit lighter than the rest of the leasing categories.

這裡的保留率仍然很高，但有 80%，但也許對於不辭職的租戶，不辭職的主要原因是什麼？是他們超出了他們目前的足跡，還是他們只是被定價退出市場，試圖將其真正與您在 100,000 平方英尺以下區域的入住率聯繫起來，這比其他租賃類別要輕一些。

So the reason for nonrenewal are either good reasons or bad reasons. The bad reason is that the company goes broke, or the company -- so the neutral reasons are the company decides to go somewhere else, out of one market into another market. The bad reasons are -- sorry, the good reasons are that we just don't have a space that fits the growing need of that customer to be accommodated or the shrinking need of that customer to be accommodated. So they have to go somewhere else. We do track the reason for nonrenewal of every single lease that doesn't renew.

因此，不續約的原因要么是好的原因，要么是壞的原因。壞的原因是公司破產了，或者公司 - 所以中立的原因是公司決定去其他地方，從一個市場進入另一個市場。不好的原因是 - 抱歉，好的原因是我們只是沒有空間來滿足該客戶日益增長的住宿需求或該客戶不斷縮小的住宿需求。所以他們必須去別的地方。我們會跟踪每一個不續約的租約的不續約原因。

And one of the things that we track very closely is that we lose the space to a competitor because of pricing. And that statistic is like in the 2%, 3%, 4% range, and I think it's too low because it means that we're not pushing rents hard enough. So it's -- we're not losing tenants because of rent. We're losing tenants because we just can't accommodate them, whether they go broke or they move somewhere else. And those have been the reasons for the last 40 years I've been doing this.

我們密切跟踪的一件事是，由於定價，我們將空間輸給了競爭對手。這個統計數據大約在 2%、3%、4% 的範圍內，我認為它太低了，因為這意味著我們沒有足夠努力地推動租金。所以它是 - 我們不會因為租金而失去租戶。我們正在失去租戶，因為我們無法容納他們，無論他們破產還是搬到其他地方。這些就是過去 40 年來我一直這樣做的原因。

And the next question comes from the line of [Camil Bonnell] with Bank of America.

下一個問題來自美國銀行的 [Camil Bonnell]。

Following up on an earlier comment about the vacancy in Southern California region being below 2%. I think the growing concern is actually on the availability rate or how much sublease activity has picked up which is something we really haven't seen in the past. So I understand, at least within the Southern California region, the supply seems manageable given how difficult it is to build in this market, but could you share your thoughts on how you think this might evolve in upcoming months? And whether or not this is a potential risk you're tracking closely?

跟進早先關於南加州地區空置率低於 2% 的評論。我認為越來越多的擔憂實際上是可用率或轉租活動的增加，這是我們過去從未見過的。所以我知道，至少在南加州地區，考慮到在這個市場上建設有多麼困難，供應似乎是可控的，但你能分享一下你認為這在未來幾個月內會如何演變的想法嗎？這是否是您正在密切跟踪的潛在風險？

So two ways to approach that. First, I'll give you the specifics. Chris, by the way, [Camil]. First is the sublease data, and the second is our two months of supply data. So sublease nationally in the United States is on an availability rate basis, 60 basis points in the first quarter. The 10-year average, 60 basis points. The recent low indeed was 40 basis points, so it's moved up 20 basis points. Now the pre-COVID average or the pre-COVID low was 50 basis points and the peak in the global financial crisis was 1.1%.

所以有兩種方法可以解決這個問題。首先，我會告訴你具體情況。克里斯，順便說一句，[卡米爾]。首先是轉租數據，其次是我們兩個月的供應數據。因此，在美國全國范圍內的轉租是基於可用率，第一季度為 60 個基點。 10 年平均值，60 個基點。最近的低點確實是 40 個基點，所以它已經上漲了 20 個基點。現在 COVID 之前的平均值或 COVID 之前的低點是 50 個基點，全球金融危機的峰值是 1.1%。

If you just summarize all that, first off, I'd offer that it's not a lot of availability. And the second is we're at the low end or at a normal level in sublease. And then I'd also point you to our views on true months of supply that Tim described in our earnings transcript, which said that at 30 months today, we have a very good market environment, consistent with 10% market rent growth. And as supply decelerates and slows, we think that will go back down into the 20s, improving the market landscape.

如果您只是總結所有這些，首先，我認為它的可用性並不高。第二個是我們在轉租方面處於低端或正常水平。然後我還要向您指出我們對蒂姆在我們的收益記錄中描述的真實供應月份的看法，該記錄說，在今天的 30 個月裡，我們有一個非常好的市場環境，與 10% 的市場租金增長一致。隨著供應減速和放緩，我們認為這將回到 20 年代，改善市場格局。

The next question comes from the line of Ronald Kamdem with Morgan Stanley.

下一個問題來自 Ronald Kamdem 與摩根士丹利的對話。

Great. Just one quick one and -- so on the expected vacancy rate, you talked about 3.5 currently rising throughout the year and then going back down by the end of '24. I was just wondering if you could provide a little bit more color on the supply and the demand assumptions that are going into that. How much is sort of demand normalizing, how much supply normalizing to get back to that 3.5? And the corollary to that would be, if you're expecting 10% market rent growth this year, historically, if you find yourself at that vacancy level at the end of '24, what sort of the market rent growth experience that we should have? And then the other quick one, sorry, is on the 85% mark-to-market -- GAAP mark-to-market for '24, can you talk about what that number is for '23?

偉大的。只是一個快速的 - 所以關於預期的空缺率，你談到目前全年上升 3.5，然後在 24 年底回落。我只是想知道你是否可以提供更多關於供應和需求假設的顏色。有多少需求正常化，有多少供應正常化以回到 3.5？其推論是，如果你預計今年市場租金增長 10%，從歷史上看，如果你發現自己在 24 年底處於那個空置水平，我們應該擁有什麼樣的市場租金增長經驗？然後另一個快速的，抱歉，是按 85% 市值計價——'24 的 GAAP 按市值計價，你能談談'23 的這個數字是多少嗎？

Thanks for the question, Ronald. So thank you for the opportunity to clarify our market statistics. I want to be very clear. So let's talk about net absorption in the 30 markets where Prologis operates in the United States. Last year, net absorption was 375 million square feet. We call that at 275 [million square feet] this year, and we expect a similar or perhaps higher numbers of macro environment clarifies and some of the decisions that get delayed this year land into '24. So that will be on the demand side. We have a bit of a clearer view as we look out to '24. But starting with 2022, 375 million square feet of supply as well, that's deliveries. We expect 445 million square feet of deliveries this year as the supply pipeline empties, and that will fall sharply, perhaps by half or more into 2024. And so when you put these numbers together, you'll see the vacancy rising from low 3s last year to 4 or a bit higher later this year and then back into the mid-3s.

謝謝你的問題，羅納德。因此，感謝您有機會澄清我們的市場統計數據。我想說得很清楚。因此，讓我們談談 Prologis 在美國開展業務的 30 個市場的淨吸納量。去年，淨吸納量為 3.75 億平方英尺。我們稱今年為 275 [百萬平方英尺]，我們預計宏觀環境會出現類似或更高的數字，並且今年推遲的一些決定將進入 24 年。所以這將是在需求方面。當我們展望 24 世紀時，我們有一個更清晰的觀點。但從 2022 年開始，還有 3.75 億平方英尺的供應，這就是交付量。我們預計今年的交付量為 4.45 億平方英尺，因為供應管道空了，而且這個數字將急劇下降，到 2024 年可能會下降一半或更多。所以當你把這些數字放在一起時，你會看到空置率從去年的低 3 上升今年晚些時候達到 4 或更高一點，然後回到 3 年代中期。

The way to think about it is that demand is normalized from exceptionally high levels and the supply response has been in excess of that normalization of demand because of banking crisis and sort of macro constraints. So I think the supply response has been much more dramatic than the effects on demand. And that's why the market is going to tighten up again, of course absence at calamity or something like that.

思考它的方式是，需求從異常高的水平正常化，而由於銀行業危機和某種宏觀約束，供應反應已經超過需求正常化。所以我認為供應的反應比對需求的影響要劇烈得多。這就是市場將再次收緊的原因，當然是在災難或類似情況下缺席。

One important point to keep in mind is what is a normal vacancy rate, because we have been years away from a normal vacancy rate. The historical range for our business is 5% to 10%, with pricing power occurring in the 6% to 7% market vacancy rate. So we're talking about 3.5% to 4% market vacancies, half of what is typically seen as a way to see pricing power. .

要記住的重要一點是什麼是正常空置率，因為我們距離正常空置率已經有好幾年了。我們業務的歷史範圍是 5% 到 10%，定價權發生在 6% 到 7% 的市場空置率。所以我們談論的是 3.5% 到 4% 的市場空置率，這是通常被視為查看定價能力的方式的一半。 .

And I would just pile on your third question there on the '24 component of our lease mark-to-market. This year, the same metric is in the low 80s. I think I intimated that last quarter on the call, just as a measure of what we expected our rent change would be this year. Those are -- I'm really talking about the same thing in that context. So roughly in the low 80s for '23.

我只想把你的第三個問題放在我們租賃按市值計價的 '24 部分。今年，同樣的指標處於 80 年代的低位。我想我在上個季度的電話會議上暗示了這一點，就像衡量我們對今年租金變化的預期一樣。這些是——我在那種情況下真的在談論同樣的事情。所以大致在 23 世紀 80 年代的低點。

And our next question comes from the line of Mike Mueller with JPMorgan.

我們的下一個問題來自摩根大通的 Mike Mueller。

I dropped for a minute, so I apologize if this was asked. Can you talk about the full year Development Start yield expectation as compared to the high 7-plus percent yield at the first quarter?

我停了一分鐘，所以如果有人問到這個問題，我深表歉意。與第一季度 7% 以上的高收益率相比，您能否談談全年 Development Start 收益率預期？

Yes. Mike, this is Dan. The yield that you saw in the first quarter was a couple of build-to-suits, really small volume. And what I would say is I would just look to last year and doing better than last year's yield on our Starts this year.

是的。邁克，這是丹。你在第一季度看到的收益是幾個定制的，非常小的數量。我要說的是，我只想看看去年，今年開始的收益會比去年好。

I think the vast majority of the starts are in the 6s. And I would say the cap rates are up 75 basis points. So margins have gone from 30%, 40% to 20%, 30%, something like that. I mean, those are some rough numbers.

我認為絕大多數開始是在 6s。我會說上限利率上升了 75 個基點。所以利潤率從 30%、40% 上升到 20%、30%，差不多這樣。我的意思是，這些是一些粗略的數字。

The next question comes from the line of Tom Catherwood with BTIG.

下一個問題來自 BTIG 的 Tom Catherwood。

I want to touch on tenant health for a bit. Obviously, we talked about higher cost of capital and less availability of debt when it comes to real estate, but it's also impacting operating industries across the board. With your expectation of slower economic activity this year, are there any industries where you would be concerned about increasing your exposure at this point in time?

我想稍微談談租戶的健康狀況。顯然，在談到房地產時，我們談到了更高的資本成本和更少的可用債務，但這也影響了整個運營行業。鑑於您預計今年經濟活動將放緩，您是否會擔心在這個時間點增加風險敞口的任何行業？

Let's talk about credit loss as a measure of customer stability, bad debt ratio and all that. It's historically, in our business has been in the tens of basis points. Even when you had the collapse in demand in the immediate aftermath of COVID, that number got to 60 basis points. So -- and Chris, what would you guess our number is going to get to in the cycle when it's all over in terms of bad debt?

讓我們談談信用損失作為衡量客戶穩定性、壞賬率等的指標。從歷史上看，我們的業務一直處於數十個基點。即使你在 COVID 之後立即出現需求崩潰，這個數字也達到了 60 個基點。那麼 - 克里斯，當壞賬全部結束時，你猜我們的數字會在周期中達到多少？

I'd say 20 -- I'm jumping in here. I think 20 will be on average.

我會說 20 - 我正在跳進這裡。我認為平均為 20 個。

Yes. So I mean, we don't see it in the numbers. And the number of bankruptcies, et cetera, et cetera, that we're monitoring and working on are really not an unusual. In fact, I would say, they're somewhat unusual. I was expecting more of them than we're seeing in this point in the cycle. And honestly, we would like to see more of them because, frankly, there's so much mark-to-market in those leases that those kinds of tenant departures are actually an upside. So if anybody sort of has problems with their business or is looking to downsize, we look at that as an opportunity to do a buyout and actually be able to extract higher rents in the marketplace. So really not a concern. And that number -- those numbers that I talked about are out there, you can go look at them and plot the curve. They've been coming down substantially as opposed to -- from very low levels, but they're still coming down.

是的。所以我的意思是，我們沒有在數字中看到它。我們正在監控和處理的破產等事件的數量確實並不罕見。事實上，我會說，它們有些不同尋常。我期望他們比我們在周期的這一點上看到的更多。老實說，我們希望看到更多這樣的租約，因為坦率地說，這些租約中有太多按市值計算的租戶離職實際上是一個好處。因此，如果任何人的業務出現問題或正在尋求縮小規模，我們會將其視為進行收購併實際上能夠在市場上獲得更高租金的機會。所以真的不用擔心。那個數字——我談到的那些數字就在那裡，你可以去看看它們並繪製曲線。它們一直在大幅下降，而不是 - 從非常低的水平下降，但它們仍在下降。

I might add on to that one final thought, which is I think the 20 that I'm throwing out is a reflection of some mix shift on credit, I think, in the last 5 years with that the market's this tight, we've not only been able to push rents, keep the portfolio occupied, but we've been greatly enhancing the credit profile of our rent roll, and we think we've got a really strong customer base.

我可能會加上最後一個想法，我認為我拋出的 20 個反映了信貸的一些混合轉變，我認為，在過去的 5 年裡，市場如此緊張，我們已經不僅能夠推高租金，保持投資組合的佔用，而且我們一直在大大提高租金的信用狀況，我們認為我們擁有非常強大的客戶群。

Yes. One final statistic that you guys don't have visibility to, but I'm reading up my sheet of stats here. Historical average of credit watch tenants for us, long-term historical average has been 4.9%. We just watch them. By the way, the average actual default has been 0.15%. So we worry about a lot more things than we should. That credit watch number today is at 3.35%. So it's down substantially and so is the actual bad debt ratio. So we worry about a lot of things, but most of them don't actually happen and the numbers are actually quite healthy, not just -- not even adjusting for the cycle and the fact that it's a softening cycle, but just even in the best of markets, these statistics would show up as very good.

是的。你們看不到的最後一個統計數據，但我正在閱讀我的統計數據表。我們的信用觀察租戶的歷史平均水平，長期歷史平均水平為 4.9%。我們只是看著他們。順便說一下，平均實際違約率為 0.15%。所以我們擔心的事情比我們應該擔心的要多得多。今天的信用觀察數字為 3.35%。所以它大幅下降，實際壞賬率也是如此。所以我們擔心很多事情，但其中大多數實際上並沒有發生，而且這些數字實際上非常健康，不僅 - 甚至沒有針對周期和它是一個軟化週期的事實進行調整，但即使在最好的市場，這些統計數據將顯示為非常好。

The next question comes from the line of Todd Thomas with KeyBanc.

下一個問題來自 Todd Thomas 與 KeyBanc 的對話。

I wanted to follow up on the demand environment and your comments about a more challenging macro in relation to development starts. I guess, how much visibility do you actually have on Starts in the second half of the year as it pertains to the full year target of $2.5 billion to $3 billion. How quickly can that ramp up? And then development yields for what's under construction, they were higher by 20 basis points versus last quarter on the '23 and '24 under construction pipeline. Is that due to improved economics around rents or moderating construction costs, which I think you mentioned or really a combination of the two? And do you expect to see further improvements in development yields as you look out in the future?

我想跟進需求環境以及您對與開發啟動相關的更具挑戰性的宏的評論。我想，你對今年下半年的 Starts 有多少能見度，因為它與 25 億至 30 億美元的全年目標有關。這能以多快的速度上升？然後是在建項目的開發收益率，與上一季度相比，'23 和 '24 在建項目的收益率高出 20 個基點。這是由於圍繞租金或緩和建築成本的經濟改善，我想你提到過還是兩者的結合？您是否期望在未來看到開發收益的進一步提高？

Yes. Most of our land is entitled and entitlement is a pretty broad definition. I mean, fully entitled means that you pulled the building permit on the specific building that you can start, but you might have entitlements and you haven't pulled the specific building permit, because you don't exactly know how big a building you're going to build or in what configuration. But 80% of our land is entitled in terms of discretionary entitlements, and about 20% to 30% of our land is really good to go with building permits pulled. So that is not a limiter on our ability to start development. So we can start whatever development we want to as we monitor the marketplace. The reason for development yields going on -- going up is that rent growth has been higher than we forecast.

是的。我們的大部分土地都享有權利，而權利是一個非常寬泛的定義。我的意思是，完全有資格意味著你取消了你可以開始的特定建築的建築許可證，但你可能有權利但你沒有取消特定的建築許可證，因為你不完全知道你的建築有多大'重新構建或以什麼配置。但我們 80% 的土地都享有可自由支配的權利，而我們約有 20% 至 30% 的土地在取消建築許可的情況下非常適合使用。因此，這不會限制我們開始開發的能力。因此，我們可以在監控市場時開始任何我們想要的開發。開發收益率持續上升的原因是租金增長高於我們的預期。

And the costs are essentially the same, because we've locked in some of those construction values on the buildings that are starting today. The comment about construction cost has nothing to do with what you're seeing on the Starts today. It will affect yield on Starts down the road. Our view has changed. That's one area where our view has changed materially. We thought there would be some softening of construction costs to the tune of 5% to 10%, and because of IRA and all this new fiscal stimulus going into the construction industry, I mean, it uses the same labor, same materials and everything. Contractors still have pretty good pricing power. So that -- what we thought was going to be a 5% to 10% decline, it's going to be inflationary increase. So the swing is actually pretty material. Having said all of that, the rental growth more than makes up for it. So I think our yields are trending up.

而且成本基本上是相同的，因為我們已經鎖定了今天開始的建築物的一些建築價值。關於建築成本的評論與您今天在 Starts 上看到的內容無關。這將影響未來啟動的產量。我們的看法變了。這是我們的觀點發生重大變化的一個領域。我們認為建築成本會有所下降 5% 到 10%，而且由於 IRA 和所有這些新的財政刺激措施都進入了建築行業，我的意思是，它使用相同的勞動力、相同的材料和一切。承包商仍然擁有相當不錯的定價權。所以——我們認為會下降 5% 到 10%，這將是通貨膨脹的增加。所以鞦韆實際上很重要。綜上所述，租金增長足以彌補這一不足。所以我認為我們的收益率正在上升。

And the next question comes from the line of Anthony Powell with Barclays.

下一個問題來自巴克萊銀行的安東尼鮑威爾。

Quick one for me, I guess, any change in the tenor of conversations with your lending partners or underwriters after the SIVB collapse? Or are you seeing just increased confidence from your partners that you seek to do financing in the future?

我想，對我來說，在 SIVB 倒閉後，與您的貸款合作夥伴或承銷商的談話基調是否有任何變化？或者您是否看到合作夥伴對您在未來尋求融資的信心增強？

They're asking us a lot of money. No, it's not really. I mean where -- that balance sheet is bulletproof. I mean, frankly, we have better balance sheet than most of our banks, so no. And we're not really a bank borrower per se, we tap into the capital markets all the time.

他們向我們要了很多錢。不，不是真的。我的意思是在哪裡 - 資產負債表是防彈的。我的意思是，坦率地說，我們的資產負債表比大多數銀行都好，所以沒有。我們本身並不是真正的銀行借款人，我們一直在進入資本市場。

And the next question comes from the line of Michael Carroll with RBC.

下一個問題來自 RBC 的 Michael Carroll。

I just wanted to follow up on your planner potential willingness to invest into the property funds. And can you quantify how much you would like, or are you willing to invest in those funds? And are there any particular ones that you would want to invest in, like USLF or (inaudible)? Or is that still a TBD right now?

我只是想跟進您的規劃師投資房地產基金的潛在意願。你能量化你想要多少，或者你願意投資這些基金嗎？是否有任何您想要投資的特定項目，例如 USLF 或（聽不清）？或者現在仍然是 TBD？

Well, we're going to invest in (inaudible) sooner than USLF because we think the value adjustments in Europe have been quicker than they have been in the U.S. But I suspect we're only a quarter or so away from even the U.S. adjusting to a normalized value, at least we hope. So look, it's $140 billion balance sheet. So even if we just wanted to allocate 1% of it -- and I'm not saying we're going to allocate 1%, I'm just trying to size the issue for you, that could be $1.5 billion. We're probably not going to invest $1.5 billion, but it's got to be like a small portion of our overall balance sheet. But we love that stuff because we know it, we like it. It's exactly the kind of property we want to have. And redemptions give us a really good opportunity to do that without affecting the strategy of the fund.

好吧，我們將比 USLF 更早投資（聽不清），因為我們認為歐洲的價值調整比美國更快，但我懷疑我們距離美國調整隻有四分之一左右到標準化值，至少我們希望如此。所以看，這是 1400 億美元的資產負債表。因此，即使我們只想分配其中的 1%——我並不是說我們要分配 1%，我只是想為你確定問題的大小，這可能是 15 億美元。我們可能不會投資 15 億美元，但它必須只占我們整體資產負債表的一小部分。但我們喜歡那些東西，因為我們知道它，我們喜歡它。這正是我們想要的那種財產。贖回為我們提供了一個非常好的機會，可以在不影響基金戰略的情況下做到這一點。

And the next question comes from the line of Jamie Feldman with Wells Fargo.

下一個問題來自 Jamie Feldman 與 Wells Fargo 的對話。

I thought your commentary on credit was pretty interesting in terms of how low it is. I guess you have such a wide view of what's going on in the world. Can you just talk through maybe across your regions, some of the data points you're seeing that either give you some confidence in where the economy is heading or give you some concern about where the economy is heading and how that factors into where you want to put capital to work?

我認為你對信貸的評論很有趣，因為它有多低。我想你對世界上正在發生的事情有如此廣泛的看法。你能不能談談你所在地區的一些數據點，這些數據點要么讓你對經濟的發展方向有信心，要么讓你對經濟的發展方向以及這些因素如何影響你想要的方向感到擔憂讓資本發揮作用？

I'll just say two things. This is more a global comment than US comment. Japan is having more supply than it normally has, but demand is actually still pretty strong. I'm a little worried about vacancy rates in Japan going up into the mid-teens. So that's one place we're seeing it. Then U.K. has actually been pretty surprisingly good on the industrial side. If you look at the headlines for the U.K., you would expect more trouble than what we're seeing in the industrial market. In the U.S., it's -- I can't think of a trend that it's worth talking about that. The markets are generally pretty good. I mean can you guys think of anything?

我只說兩件事。與美國評論相比，這更像是全球評論。日本的供應量比平時多，但需求實際上仍然相當強勁。我有點擔心日本的空缺率會上升到十幾歲。所以這是我們看到的一個地方。然後英國在工業方面實際上出奇地好。如果你看看英國的頭條新聞，你會發現比我們在工業市場上看到的麻煩更多。在美國，我想不出有什麼值得談論的趨勢。市場總體來說還不錯。我的意思是你們能想到什麼嗎？

Jamie, it's Chris Caton. There's been a lot of economic news over the last few weeks, and I think there are probably three takeaways. The first is consumers are stable, notwithstanding all the noise in that. And it seems to be treading towards perhaps GDP growth of 2%, if not a bit higher. Second, I think quite clearly, e-commerce is reaccelerating with online shopping, now back on trend to taking 100 basis points of share from in-store. And the third is, indeed, inventories are rising, but they have not yet risen to pre-COVID level, let alone a higher level for resilience.

傑米，我是克里斯·卡頓。過去幾周有很多經濟新聞，我認為可能有三點要點。首先是消費者是穩定的，儘管其中有很多噪音。它似乎正朝著 2% 的 GDP 增長邁進，如果不是更高一點的話。其次，我認為很清楚，電子商務正在通過網上購物重新加速，現在又回到了從店內拿走 100 個基點份額的趨勢。第三是庫存確實在上升，但還沒有上升到 COVID 之前的水平，更不用說更高的彈性水平了。

With Jamie's question, that's the last one in the queue. I wanted to thank all of you for participating in our call. We're excited over here because it's our 40th anniversary that we'll be celebrating in June. And there are going to be lots of opportunities between the investor meeting later on in the year and also [Grand] breakers where we will be speaking to you. So I look forward to seeing all of you and take care.

對於 Jamie 的問題，這是隊列中的最後一個。我想感謝大家參與我們的電話會議。我們在這裡很興奮，因為我們將在 6 月慶祝我們成立 40 週年。在今年晚些時候的投資者會議和我們將與您交談的 [Grand] breaker 之間會有很多機會。所以我期待著見到你們所有人並保重。

That concludes today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation and have a great day.

今天的電話會議到此結束。此時您可以斷開線路。感謝您的參與，祝您有美好的一天。