Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining Keppel Pacific Oak US REIT full year 2025 financial results webcast. My name is Sheryl and I represent investor relations for KORE.

Joining me today are our Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Dave Snyder, and our Chief Financial Officer, Ms.

Eileen Ling. Before we begin, let me run through some housekeeping matters.

For analysts joining us via Microsoft Teams, please keep your microphones muted throughout the presentation. If you would like to ask a question, click on the raise hand button and wait for our cue before speaking.

For participants on the webcast platform, please type your questions in the chat box provided. Today's session will begin with a summary of key highlights, followed by an overview of our financial performance, portfolio updates, and market outlook.

We will then open the floor for Q&A. Without further ado, I will now hand the time over to our CEO, Dave.

Good morning, and thanks again for joining us today. Before I begin today's full year results presentation, I would like to briefly address a couple of other announcements we released this morning relating to our name change and recent developments relating to our US asset manager and a substantial unitholder.

As you may have read from the announcements, Pacific Oak Capital Advisors, or POCA, KORE's outsourced US asset manager, has had its advisory services terminated by Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT, or StraSOR, with effect from January 31st, 2026. As outlined in the announcement, we have been evaluating options for some time and are already in late-stage negotiations with a third-party US asset manager to enter into a new asset management outsourcing arrangement.

We expect a seamless handover of the asset management function during this transition as the current asset management team, headed by Jeff Raider, our head of asset management, continues to oversee the assets now and is expected to move to the new asset manager once the agreement is finalized. We also highlighted in the announcement that StraSOR holds a 6.14% stake in KORE and has disclosed its intention to pursue a plan of liquidation.

As of today, the manager is not aware of any sale of KORE units by StraSOR. StraSOR has reached out to us and we have put them in touch with a financial institution for further discussions regarding any potential sale of their units, including potentially via block trades or other structured transactions.

Any sale that crosses the relevant substantial unitholding thresholds would require the appropriate disclosures. I would like to reiterate and reassure all unitholders that the manager remains totally focused on strengthening operations, leasing space, and improving cash flow, supported by our diversified portfolio in key US growth markets and our disciplined capital management approach.

Our commitment to delivering sustainable value to our unitholders remains unchanged, and we expect to continue to have the same people and tools available to us to assist us with achieving our goals. In addition, you will have seen that we are changing our name to KORE US REIT to better reflect our operations going forward.

The new name also marks a refreshed chapter for us as we emerge from a challenging period and conclude our recapitalization plan with the early resumption of distributions. Now that I've addressed this morning's announcements, let's move to slide 2 for an overview of our 2025 performance and some key highlights of the US office market.

We are pleased to update that following our latest refinancing exercise, we have fully addressed all 2025 and 2026 term loan maturities. With these refinancings addressed, the board has recommended a distribution per unit of 0.25 US cents for the second half of 2025.

This marks the completion of our recapitalization plan ahead of the initial distribution resumption timeline, which was the first half of 2026 that was set when the plan was implemented in February of 2024. This decision was reached after carefully considering the REIT's cash flow position, capital commitments, and liquidity needs.

While modest, this early resumption reflects our confidence in the underlying fundamentals of the portfolio and marks a meaningful step towards rebuilding long-term distribution stability. We have begun with a conservative payout ratio with the aim of increasing it to a much higher but sustainable level aligned with long-term portfolio performance over time.

Our portfolio valuation remains stable at US$1.3 billion compared to a year ago, as expected. Turning to leasing, portfolio occupancy stands at 87.2%, supported by robust leasing activity, with approximately 622,000 square feet of leases signed during the year, which represents about 13% of our net lettable area.

Full year rental reversion was a positive 6.8%. I will cover leasing trends and demand drivers we're seeing later in the presentation.

In the broader US office market, recovery momentum continues to build, and I will touch on the market outlook in a subsequent section as well. Slide 3 highlights how KORE has maintained consistent operational performance over time, including throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and the structural shifts in the US office market.

Occupancy has remained consistently high and continues to outperform both the broader US market, key gateway cities, as well as our SGX-listed US office peer group. This is underpinned by sustained, robust leasing activity.

Over the past five years, we've averaged approximately 678,000 square feet of leases annually, reflecting sustained tenant demand for our well-amenitized properties and the proactive efforts of our leasing and asset management teams. Notably, adjusted NPI today is higher than it was pre-COVID and has remained stable even as the US office market continues to undergo structural shifts.

KORE's consistent performance is a testament to our focus on developing and maintaining properties that provide the amenities, space, and services that tenants desire in our markets, and continuously outperform the broader US market. Our disciplined operations and prudent financial management, all of which have enabled us to navigate both short-term disruptions and longer-term market shifts.

Moving on to slide 4, despite market volatility and ongoing structural changes in the US office sector, KORE's portfolio valuation has remained resilient. While there have been adjustments in cap rates and asset values across the market, our proactive asset management and strong leasing performance have helped to mitigate the impact.

Assets that generally saw declines in their valuations were Plaza Buildings, Westmoor Center, 105 Edgeview, and Maitland Promenade I & II. Of these, all but Maitland were expected based on occupancy.

This was offset by the increases from 125, Bellaire Park, and Westech 360. Overall, portfolio valuation remains stable year-on-year at US$1.33 billion.

After accounting for the capital expenditures and tenant improvements incurred during the 2025 year, a fair value loss of US$40.5 million was recorded. With that, I will now hand it over to Eileen to elaborate on KORE's financial performance and capital management.

Thank you, Dave. Slide 6 is a summary of KORE's financial performance for the second half of 2025 and full year 2025.

Net property income of $80.7 million for financial year 2025 was higher than 2024 by 3%. Excluding the non-cash adjustments, such as amortization of straight-line rent, lease incentives, and amortization of leasing commission, which have no impact on the income available for distribution, adjusted net property income was 0.3% higher year-on-year at $83.7 million.

This was mainly due to higher other operating income, recoveries income, and reduction in property taxes, partially offset by the lower cash rental income from higher free rents due to timing differences with leases completed for the respective period. Finance and other trust expenses of $33 million for 2025 was higher than 2024 by 6%, mainly attributable to the expiration of interest rate swaps in 2025, higher professional fees, and accrued withholding tax resulting from the suspension of distribution, partially offset by the impact of lower floating interest rates during the year.

Income available for distribution for 2025 was $43 million. On the back of our successful early refinancing efforts, the manager is pleased to declare a distribution of 0.25 US cents.

Slide 7 is a snapshot of our balance sheet. As at end December 2025, total assets remain stable at approximately $1.39 billion.

NAV also held steady at 68 US cents per unit. Moving on to slide 8, which outlines our debt-related metrics as at 31st December 2025, aggregate leverage stood at 44.1%, and all-in average cost of debt was 4.66% per annum or 4.53% per annum excluding the amortization of the upfront debt financing cost.

Our interest coverage ratio remained healthy at 2.5 times, and both sensitivity scenarios shows the ICR staying above the regulatory requirements of 1.5 times. The weighted average term to maturity of KORE's debt stands at 1.5 years, and 64.4% of our loans were hedged.

A 50 bps increase in SOFR translates to approximately $1.22 million increase in income available for distribution per annum. Slide 9 provides an update on our refinancing efforts.

KORE addressed all 2025 and 2026 term loan maturities following execution of term loan facilities of $115 million and $37.5 million in December and January respectively. The chart on the bottom left reflects the updated debt maturity profile post-refinancing.

Assuming the loan was refinanced as at 31st December 2025, KORE's weighted average term to maturity would be 2.1 years. We continue to engage with prospective lenders to commence early refinancing of loans maturing in 2027.

Slide 10 provides an overview of our distribution details. Unitholders can expect to receive their distribution on 30th 30th March.

We would like to remind non-US unitholders to ensure that their W-8BEN form is valid and up to date to avoid the 30% US withholding tax on distributions. We would like to also thank our unitholders for their patience and continued support as we work to strengthen KORE's capital position during the recapitalization period.

I will now pass the time back to Dave to provide updates on KORE's operational performance.

Thank you, Eileen. Moving on to slide 12, in the fourth quarter of 2025, we continue to see healthy leasing momentum across the portfolio.

New and expansion leases made up 59% of the space signed in the fourth quarter. The majority of demand was largely driven by tenants from both the professional and the medical and healthcare sectors.

Rental reversion for the full year was 6.8%, largely driven by a government lease renewal at 125 in Dallas in the third quarter of 2025. Meanwhile, rental reversion for the fourth quarter was -0.6%, mainly due to a new lease, also at 125, that immediately replaced an expiring tenant.

However, the new lease was without any tenant improvements or free rent, which actually make it a very good lease from an overall economic perspective. KORE's built-in average annual rental escalation of 2.6% continues to provide a steady base for organic growth.

In 2026, we have 14% of the NLA expiring. Of this space, known vacates make up about 4.1% of portfolio NLA, with the largest space at 124,000 square feet, or 2.6% of portfolio NLA, coming back from Meta at West Park, as has been previously announced.

We're actively working on backfilling these spaces, and investors can take comfort from our historical leasing track record. We remain confident of ending the year with occupancy in the mid-80s or higher.

Fiscal 2025 saw a substantial amount of known vacates amounting to around 311,000 square feet, or 6.5% of the portfolio, including several large blocks. Despite this, the team remained focused and proactive in driving leasing activity, and we will continue building on this momentum.

I will now walk you through key occupancy movements across our assets for the quarter. At the Plaza Buildings, a known vacate returned approximately 43,000 square feet, and asset enhancement and repositioning works for the building are underway.

At Great Hills Plaza, we had a known vacate of approximately 23,000 square feet, of which 13,000 square feet has already been backfilled. At Westmoor Center, an existing aerospace tenant expanded by approximately 24,000 square feet, reflecting sustained sector-driven demand in Denver, a major US hub for aerospace innovation and talent.

Other key occupancy movements included a known vacate by a tenant of approximately 14,000 square feet at Maitland, while at Iron Point, we secured two tenants who collectively took up about 22,000 square feet of space. Slide 14 highlights how active we are on the asset enhancement front to support leasing and occupancy.

Completed works for the year included a spec suite floor with shared amenity space at the Greenhouse at 10900 of the Plaza Buildings, and lobby upgrades at Bellaire Park and at building 5 of Westmoor Center. Additional amenities introduced were an on-site coffee and pastry bar in a newly constructed tenant lounge in West Park, pickleball court at the Plaza Buildings, a new cafe operator at Westmoor Center, and an expanded cafe area at Maitland Promenade I & II.

In addition, several enhancement projects are underway: first-floor renovation and building of a full-floor spec suite at 10800 of the Plaza Buildings, the refresh of the outdoor spaces at Great Hills Plaza, Westech 360, and Iron Point, as well as upgrading of tenant and amenity spaces at Westech 360 and Bridge Crossing. These initiatives underscore KORE's continued focus on maintaining high-quality, well-amenitized assets that attract and retain tenants.

A key part of our active leasing strategy is our spec suites program. These move-in-ready spaces give tenants two major benefits: speed and a clear, modern workplace vision.

For us, they lease faster, require less rent-free time, and most importantly, lower our long-term capital requirements. Most spec suites are under 7,500 square feet, but in many cases, they can be combined to meet larger tenant needs.

We've already delivered full-floor spec suites at Iron Point, 1800 West Loop, and the 10900 building at the Plaza Buildings, and are now building out The Post at the 10800 building at the Plaza Buildings as well. Individual spec suites in appropriate sizes will continue to be planned and built at selected properties where we anticipate demand, ensuring we stay ahead of tenant requirements.

On slide 16, we illustrate how our active enhancement and spec suite strategy plays out in practice with a case study at 1150 Iron Point. After a long-term tenant vacated a full building in mid-2023, we launched an asset enhancement and spec suite program to reposition the property.

We identified suites under 3,000 square feet as the optimal size for smaller tenants seeking flexibility and collaborative environments. The project was completed at the very end of 2024.

As part of the upgrade, we introduced 25% more open spaces and refreshed amenities, including multi-room conference areas, cardio and training studios, and self-service snack and convenience spaces, all designed to support modern workplace needs. To date, we've successfully leased all four of the spec suites built, clear evidence of strong demand for move-in-ready spaces.

Occupancy at Iron Point has also increased meaningfully, rising from 68.9% at the end of '24, and as low as 54.4% in 2025 after a known vacate, to 80.4% today. KORE's portfolio remains well-diversified across geographies and industries.

A majority of our portfolio by NPI is in growing tech hubs, such as Bellevue, Redmond, and Austin, as well as Denver, which is a major beneficiary of the expanding aerospace and advanced technologies ecosystem. We have a well-diversified tenant base across the TAMI as well as the medical and healthcare sectors, which helps to underpin income stability.

The table on slide 18 shows our top 10 tenants. With Meta vacating its space in the first quarter of 2026, it is no longer included in our top 10 tenant list.

US Homeland Security has emerged as a new top 10 tenant following it taking additional space at 125 in the fourth quarter. No single tenant accounts for more than 4% of KORE's cash rental income, underscoring our low tenant concentration risk.

Collectively, KORE's top 10 tenants contribute only approximately 29% of total cash rental income. Let's take a look at what's happening in the US office market on slide 20.

Despite some recent news of layoffs by some large companies like Amazon, we're seeing early but clear signs that the US office market is moving into the start of an expansionary cycle. Leasing activity continued to improve in the fourth quarter, reaching post-pandemic highs, with full year volumes up more than 5%.

Demand is increasingly concentrated in newer, well-amenitized buildings where tenants are consolidating and upgrading. The market saw two consecutive quarters of positive net absorption, with fourth quarter demand coming in strong.

At the same time, overall inventory continues to contract. Space currently under construction is more than 20% below the 2011 historic low, marking the tightest pipeline we've seen in over three decades.

Ongoing demolitions and conversions mean the market remains in a net-negative supply position. This trend is expected to persist beyond 2026 as redevelopment activity continues to outpace new construction.

These supply-demand dynamics are translating into gradually improving vacancy rates and healthier net absorption trends, reinforcing our optimism for a sustained recovery as we head into 2026. We're seeing similar stabilization on the capital markets side as well.

Transaction activity has strengthened for several quarters, and major refinancings of stabilized assets are being completed again, a clear signal of improving lender and investor confidence. Slide 21 frames the structural shifts we're seeing in the US office market.

These trends are directly influencing where demand is going, and more importantly, they align very well with KORE's portfolio positioning. First, office attendance is improving.

Employees are coming back more consistently, and companies are becoming far more intentional and firmer about enforcing return-to-office policies. 97% of Fortune 100 employees are now subject to hybrid or full-time office mandates, averaging around 4 days per week in the office.

Amazon isn't alone in using badge-swipe data to monitor attendance. Samsung has even created a manager-facing dashboard that shows employees' days and time in building.

Dell has told hybrid teams that on-site presence will be tracked and may influence performance reviews and compensation. Financial institutions are taking equally strong steps.

Bank of America issued warning notices to staff for non-compliance. At JPMorgan, employees have shared that senior leaders can view an internal dashboard showing the percentage of eligible days each person spends in their office.

Second, the flight to quality continues. Companies are prioritizing amenity-rich and well-located buildings that meaningfully improve employee experience, places where teams actually want to show up.

This is where leasing activity has been strongest, and where KORE's assets already have a competitive edge. Third, lifestyle markets continue to outperform.

A recent JLL report highlighted the growing outperformance of office assets in lifestyle markets. These locations continue to benefit from demand for well-located, amenity-rich workplaces in more affordable and high-quality-of-life environments.

This trend reaffirms KORE's early strategic focus on growth markets with vibrant lifestyle appeal. These submarkets have consistently outperformed the US average and traditional gateway cities, positioning our portfolio for long-term resilience and growth.

Building on the flight to quality trend we discussed earlier, slide 22 shows the resilience of highly amenitized offices since 2020. By upgrading outdoor spaces, enhancing food and beverage options, creating shared spaces, and adding experiential programming, landlords can tap into growing demand for lifestyle office.

At KORE, we've continued to be ahead of this trend. Our highly amenitized, well-located assets continue to command premium rents, strong leasing demand, and investor interest.

Move-in-ready space is another advantage. Today, 85% of our properties feature tenant lounges, conference rooms, and fitness centers.

77% offer food and beverage options, of which 39% are with full deli or food service and 38% with substantial grab-and-go markets. And 62% of our portfolio includes outdoor spaces that enhance the tenant experience.

Just this year, we introduced a new cafe provider at Westmoor, and are redoing the food and beverage options as well as building a sports court at Bridge Crossing. At 10800 of the Plaza Buildings, as part of the repositioning of the lobby, we are introducing a golf simulator.

Our amenity-rich assets position us to capture strong demand and sustain strong rents in this evolving market. The past five years have shown that traditional office models and stale CBDs are not working.

Today's workforce values experience and outcomes. They want quality, amenities, and vibrant locations.

This has fueled the rise of lifestyle office markets, which are mixed-use regions with moderate density, strong transit, diverse property types, and walkability. Slide 23 shows what is driving the trend behind these lifestyle markets.

First is demographic momentum. Pandemic-driven migration from CBDs to affordable, high-quality areas created demand.

As rates rose, renters flocked to lifestyle markets, and developers followed, with multifamily housing attracting both residents and employers. Second is post-pandemic vibrancy.

Attendance rebounded faster in these markets, which offer live, work, play ecosystems. Workplace flexibility also means employees and employers want convenience and amenities, which boosts leasing performance.

Third is crime perception. Pandemic-driven crime spikes and widespread retail closures dented the safety image of many urban cores.

Even as crime normalizes, safety concerns linger, pushing demand toward secure, vibrant locations. Now, let's talk about how these lifestyle market trends align with KORE's strategy.

This has actually been our strategy and our message for many years. Our portfolio is concentrated in 18-hour cities and other lifestyle markets that offer vibrant entertainment, outdoor recreation, great food and beverage options, and a strong sense of community.

These cities provide lower living costs and favorable tax environments compared to traditional gateways like Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, or Chicago. They're also supported by strong talent pools thanks to proximity to top universities, a hallmark of nearly all of our markets.

Footprint with cities like Austin, Nashville, Dallas, Bellevue, Redmond, Houston, and Denver sits squarely on the lifestyle map. These markets combine dynamic economies with cultural vibrancy and live-work-play ecosystems, which tenants increasingly value.

Orlando adds unique draws like Disney, Universal, lakes, and beaches, reinforcing its appeal. Sacramento, which is the state capital of California, benefits from a strong talent pool, which is attracted to the lower cost of housing as compared to the Bay Area, along with close proximity to mountains, parks, and other beautiful outdoor spaces.

KORE's unique market positioning has given us a competitive edge. These markets benefit from demographic momentum, post-pandemic vibrancy, and perceptions of safety, all driving office demand today.

They combine affordability, strong job growth, and quality of life, all critical for companies navigating hybrid work and talent retention. Slide 25 highlights estimates by JLL of where various markets are in the property clock cycle.

KORE's markets are predominantly in the early stages of the rising phase of the US office market. Denver is the only location of ours that still has some room to fall, but that may not reflect some of the positives in our submarket in the northwest, which might put it closer to the bottom.

Overall, this positioning is good news, as it signals strong future growth opportunities for our portfolio. Slide 26 outlines the key drivers that continue to support leasing demand across KORE's markets.

First, sustained demand from technology and AI companies continues to be a major engine of growth. Bellevue and Redmond remain two of the strongest tech hubs, supported by robust leasing activity from major anchors, including Microsoft and Amazon.

We're also seeing continued expansion from major tech players, such as OpenAI, TikTok, Robinhood, Snowflake, Zoom, and Meta. Next, we're seeing renewed momentum in biotech, supported by AI-enabled innovation and improving capital markets activity.

The Denver-Boulder corridor ranks among the top 20 global clusters for life sciences R&D, and remains one of the fastest growing US life science hubs. This strengthens long-term demand for flexible, innovation-oriented space in the region.

Denver is also a major beneficiary of increased federal spending for the defense sector. The region is a top-tier aerospace hub that ranks number one nationally in aerospace employment per capita.

CesiumAstro, a tenant at Westmoor Center, has tripled their space with us this year. Fourth, push toward AI and nuclear energy to power AI growth is spurring additional ecosystem activity across key Texas markets.

Austin, in particular, is projected to become the largest US data center market by 2028, supporting broader demand for R&D, office, and innovation-related space. Our tenant, TerraPower, has entered into an agreement with Meta to partner in the development of power to support new data centers.

Finally, strong healthcare and medical office ecosystems continue to support leasing in a couple of our markets. Houston is home to the world's largest medical center, while Nashville is a national hub for the healthcare industry, with more than 900 healthcare companies.

These deeply entrenched healthcare ecosystems provide long-term stability and structural demand for medical and back-office support functions. Our priorities remain unchanged.

We continue to focus on portfolio optimization and asset enhancement initiatives to maintain high occupancy and rental rates. We'll continue spec suite conversions and targeted upgrades to enhance leasing appeal and future-proof assets.

When opportunities arise in the future, we'll redeploy capital from non-core divestments into debt reduction and higher growth assets, while pursuing value-accretive investments in markets with strong fundamentals. All these initiatives are supported by prudent capital management: proactive refinancing, balance sheet discipline, and effective hedging to mitigate interest rates volatility.

In closing, I would like to reiterate what makes KORE stand out against its peers. We're strategically focused on key US growth markets, in cities that combine liveability, affordability, and access to skilled talent.

These are the very markets benefiting from labor migration and corporate relocations, which continue to fuel leasing demand. Our portfolio fundamentals remain robust.

Occupancy has consistently stayed well above 85% since our IPO listing days, outperforming the national average, gateway cities, and significantly outperforming our competitors. We're anchored by exposure to fast-growing sectors like TAMI and medical and healthcare, which adds resilience to our income streams.

Operationally, we've maintained discipline. Strategic investments and upgrades and spec suites, paired with proactive leasing, have maintained healthy cash flows and helped preserve capital values.

We are confident that as the US office market gradually recovers, KORE is well-positioned to ride the upturn. Our future-ready portfolio is aligned with structural shifts in tenant preferences.

We remain committed to delivering sustainable distributions, and the resumption this quarter is a good start. That wraps up the presentation.

Thanks, Dave. We will now take questions.

For analysts who are joining us on Teams, please click on the raise hand button if you would like to ask a question, and wait for our cue before you unmute yourself to pose your question. For the benefit of all participants on today's call, please limit yourself to two questions.

If you have more questions, please re-enter the queue. For those joining us online via the webcast platform, please type your questions under the chat box provided.

Jonathan, do you want to ask your question?

Yeah.

Hi, Cheryl.

Good morning and appreciate the resumption of distribution. First question relates to US Homeland Security.

Could you share the space contracted, and then the WALE, and then is there any rental escalation? Secondly, could you share with us what's the expectation on portfolio occupancy by end 2026, and where do you see improvement coming from?

Thank you.

All right, thanks, Jonathan. US Homeland Security took space at 125 in Dallas.

They took a full floor. They're already in the building.

This is a different division within Homeland Security, it makes things a little interesting start trying to figure out how to talk about it, because we have Homeland Security, but it's completely different divisions. In this case, it's a typical government lease.

It does not really have escalations. It's got a five-year term, I believe.

At that point, we would do some renegotiation, but from a government perspective, that's a very short term. Our other government leases tend to be longer, and then they tend to have an escalation clause in them that happens towards the middle.

In this case, it's quite short, and I'm not sure that it actually does. In terms of occupancy for the end of 2026, yeah, we expect to be in the mid-range of the 80%, so that would be 85% plus.

We would hope to be somewhere close to where we are today. We've talked a bit about already some of the known vacates that we're going to have within the portfolio, and that's going to have an impact.

As we look into 2026, known vacates as a percentage of the portfolio or a percentage of that 14% that's rolling are about pretty close to 4.5% at this point, and the biggest piece is going to be Meta, which is rolling in the first quarter. We've got a fairly significant hit to occupancy in Q1.

We expect to grow through that into Q2 and later on into the year, and hopefully get back to somewhere approximating where we are today. That would require quite a bit of leasing given those substantial known vacates.

We are seeing good momentum, somewhere in that 86% or above would be the target, certainly above 85%. We're very early in the year, we'll be able to get more specific as we move through the year and have more information and data to base those projections on.

Thank you, Jonathan. We'll now move on to Vijay.

Good morning, Vijay.

Hi, morning. I see Derek.

Maybe I'll just go ahead. Morning, Dave.

First question is on the sponsor PacOak liquidation. Maybe can you walk us through what impact do you expect on this liquidation from KORE perspective, especially in terms of asset management, since the manager has been with you for quite sometime?

How will the change in asset manager impact the portfolio? Plus also on the borrowing fronts, would it need a redemption clause or status?

Also if you're going to employ a new asset manager, would the cost be similar, especially considering the cost inflation in US?

Let's see if we can try to address all of that. You've got quite a few things for me there, Vijay, but they all tie together.

Maybe we'll start with the first couple of things. One, there is no change in our sponsorship.

We continue to have the same two sponsors that we have had all along, which would be Keppel and KPA. What we're seeing here is a change in asset manager that we're expecting to see happen.

None of the loans have any provisions that would be triggered by this, because the sponsorship has not changed. In further answer to that question, as long as Keppel remains part of the sponsorship, there would be no trigger of any of the conditions in any of our loans.

Just to be clear, if there's nothing changing in sponsorship, even if there were, it wouldn't cause any defaults under any of the loan agreements that are in place. In terms of what's going on, the issues that have gone on have been related to Pacific Oak, which is our outsourced asset manager, which is a related company to KPA controlled by the same folks.

They managed for two different REITs: one, us; the other, Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT, I believe was the full name. They are no longer managing for that REIT as of January 31st.

That's all that's happened there. We know what we know via the same filings others can read, and that's where we pull the data from.

In terms of us and our outsourcing of asset management, as of today, we continue to be outsourcing asset management to Pacific Oak Capital Advisors, or POCA, as we've talked about them being called. We have our asset management team headed by Jeff Raider, with some other individuals there that handle all of our asset management.

Everything continues as status quo at the moment. Because we were aware some of this might be coming for Pacific Oak, we've been in discussions for some time with a third-party asset management group.

In the event we thought it prudent or necessary to make a move, and we're now to the point where we do believe that will be the case. We've been discussing with that group as part of the negotiations and discussions for them to take the entire asset management team as well as some of the critical accounting personnel on board, so that we could have a seamless transition and a seamless move forward on our asset management and accounting front.

Quite frankly, both are important. Asset management obviously drives the bottom line more, but we want to make sure we can continue to report and meet all those other obligations as well.

At this point, at this stage of where we are, the anticipation is we will sign an agreement with a new asset manager at some point in the not-too-distant future here. That transition would include the transition of all of our asset management and some accounting personnel, we could hit the ground running without missing a beat.

We don't expect any impact on asset management, accounting, reporting, or anything else as we move forward. We expect there will be a smooth transition as part of that once we get to the point where we're ready to sign agreements after we've finished some diligence and work through some of the rest of the process and details.

Got it. Just one clarification: if the sponsors remains the same, then the 6% stake sale which is currently possibly available in the market, is it done by the asset manager?

Is the asset manager holding the 6% stake?

No, that's a great question. I'm glad you asked it.

I addressed it earlier, but I'm sure that it is not clear to many folks out there. The sponsor, KPA, is the sponsor and is 50% owner of the REIT manager.

The units that were held by the sponsor were held via Pacific Oak Strategic Opportunity REIT. That the REIT itself is the one that owns those units that are the 6.14% stake.

That REIT, in the same filing that made the announcement about terminating their asset management with POCA, made an announcement that they were going to be liquidating their portfolio. That REIT, we expect, will be selling a substantial portion, if not all, of those units.

We don't have visibility into any of that as we're not part of that REIT, nor does anybody involved with our REIT have any visibility anymore into what Strategic Opportunity REIT is doing, since POCA is no longer the asset manager for it. They will do what they will do with those units, but we do anticipate a sale.

We do hope that they'll find some ways to do some block trades and some other things as they use that to find an orderly way to sell the units that they anticipate selling.

Got it. Just one more question.

Thank you for early resumption of dividends on second half. Looking ahead in terms of 2026, 2027, how should we look at dividend payout as?

I think the easiest way to describe it would be a steady increase over time to get to a sustainable level. I think we've talked in the past that we'd like to get to something approximating around 80% over time.

That's going to take several years. It's going to grow steadily.

We're still in a time frame where we'd like to see some future improvement in markets in the US, certainly transaction markets, refinancing markets, and the rest. We're going to be careful and cautious as we move forward, but we would expect to see a substantial increase on year-over-year growth as we move out in the future.

Thank you. That's all I have.

Thanks, Vijay.

We have Derek to ask his question.

Hi, Derek, how you doing?

Hi, morning, Dave. Can you hear me?

We can.

Hi. I just wanted to ask just a couple of questions.

Back to Vijay's questions around Pacific Oak, right? Should we take it that the sponsor will not look to sell the 50% stake in the manager, right?

That's not something that we should be looking at.

That is not something that I have had discussions with the sponsor about, I can't comment on what the sponsor may or may not choose to do at this point ahead. I don't believe, to my knowledge, they're not in discussions right now about doing that.

That's about the best I can comment is I don't have a lot of information, but currently there are no agreements or anything in place related to them changing the sponsorship.

Got it. Sorry, just to get this clear and out of the way, right?

Essentially the reason behind you changing the asset manager was because of non-performance or was because the fund is liquidating? What's the real reason behind it?

The the the reason is essentially what we announced, which is we've known for a while there were some issues with Strategic Opportunity REIT. Uh-huh.

That that could have some negative impacts for Pacific Oak. That has come to fruition with them being terminated as the manager.

That causes, a a significant reduction in the income from that entity, which primarily really had two two drivers: Strategic Opportunity REIT and KORE. In terms of, the health of the organization, they have they've let go some of their people over time, and we just have some concerns about their ability to retain the talent that is in place there that we really need for our operations.

Yep.

Were they to lose some of that with some of the other things that are going on, we had some concerns about whether they would be able to replace those people with people of, equal skill levels. To be prudent, we've been exploring for, quite some time the second half of this this year at least, this past year at least, what some options might be.

We've we've explored that, with the board. We've we've explored a number of options.

We put together quite a list of ways this might be handled that the board has gone through. We have at this point determined that the the best path forward is to find, another asset manager that's hopefully a a bigger organization, stronger organization, where, having one thing like this happen wouldn't put them at risk for us.

Trying to make sure that we've got an organization that's willing and able to bring our team on, that wasn't an absolute have to have, but, boy, was that a really strong thing that I wanted to see. The group that we're working with was actually thrilled, and and I'm not overstating there, thrilled to bring on our asset management team.

They know them well, and, this is a we expect going to be a very big win-win across the board for KORE, for the new asset management company once we get to that point, and for the asset management and accounting teams as well.

Got it. We are not anticipating changes in how fees are charged, or will there be some savings?

I'm curious. Or too premature to talk about it?

For the REIT, it's not going to make a difference. The REIT pays a set of fees to the REIT manager, and those fees do not change.

Yeah.

When the REIT manager negotiates a new outsourcing agreement with another provider, that is on the REIT manager's dime and has nothing to do with unitholders. Completely no effect on unitholders or the income of the REIT itself.

Okay. Got it.

Thanks. Sorry, I bring back to the numbers, right?

Could you give us an updated forecast for your CapEx requirements for 2026?

Derek, I can't believe that it took getting to you. I can't believe Jonathan didn't ask that, Vijay didn't ask that.

Took three people to get to the question I knew was coming, you win the prize. We have been looking at capital.

We get a lot of questions about this every quarter. When we were asked last year, we said, "Well, we'd love it if we saw a slight decline, but we don't know if that'll be the case."

We've completed our analysis of capital, and we're coming in basically on top of where we were in 2025. In 2025, we had $50 million for capital, coming in basically on top of that at about $51 million for capital for this year.

I do want to give a little bit more color on that, though, because I think a big reason why I think you're asking and I think the thing that a lot of people are focused on is, what is this ongoing CapEx spend at the buildings for building improvements and that sort of a thing? As a portion of this last year, that amount was about $18 million of the $50 million for building improvements, meaning all these things we're doing to rebuild out lobbies, things where we have to make major replacements for the building like putting a new roof on 1800 West Loop, all those big capital items that are periodic and happen.

We were also doing all these enhancements to amenities and everything else in the buildings, and we kept saying, "We will get a lot of this done and that will start to fall." Yeah.

While total capital didn't fall this year, it's consistent, that number last year of $18 million is fallen to $9 million for this year. By half, basically.

We have seen a substantial fall off there. What does that mean in terms of the rest?

It means there's a lot more going in in terms of leasing. What that means is for TI leasing commissions combined, that's up fairly substantially for our 2026 budget, and that's because we actually are at a lower occupancy today than we were last year, and we're budgeting to be able to get ourselves back up to the level that we'd like to see.

Now, we're trying to be realistic about where we'll actually end the year, but we wanted to budget for basically the hopeful targets that we have, and we're going with the mid-80s or higher. I'd like to be in the higher 80s, and we have a budget that should provide for leasing up to that level, whether we can achieve it or not.

It'll be interesting to find out. We're going to push ourselves really hard, and we feel like we've got the right things in the right places.

Hopefully that differentiation between building improvement and leasing commissions and TIs gives some comfort that we are moving the way we've sort of predicted we would. We're accomplishing what we wanted to, and hopefully that gives some comfort around that number staying relatively flat versus coming down, because the key piece that we anticipated would come down did.

Okay.

It's about $50 million this year, roughly?

Call it 50 $51 million is where I think we're going to end up for the year.

Okay. Out of which 9 is building improvements?

Correct. All the rest goes towards leasing.

There's a mix in there of spec suites, TIs, leasing commissions, all the regular things, but all the rest of that is what we would tend to call good news money.

Okay. Just to reconfirm, I guess if I work through the numbers, right?

Assuming that because you're doing that capital improvements and I think this is periodic in nature, it's coming off, right? If you think about it, if the majority of your capital needs going forward is largely TIs, is it right to assume that let's say assuming 15% of your leases are for renewal per year, we're looking at about $35, $40 million requirements?

It's hard to predict it exactly, because in large part it depends on in the future whether we've got renewals or new leases. Typically, on larger spaces, new leases are going to take more significant TIs.

Sometimes they might be significant if somebody really needs to revamp their space, but generally speaking, a renewal is going to be much lower TIs. It's hard to predict as we go forward what's going to happen there.

For 2026, we've got a handful of some large known vacates like I've mentioned earlier. They make up a fairly significant portion of the total space that's maturing this year, which is a little bit about 4.5%.

We'll have some others that may vacate upon expiry, but it's not going to be a massive percentage of the 14%, hopefully. We budgeted based on that for this year.

As we get closer to 2027, we'll be able to have a better feel for what we expect in '27 for renewals versus vacates, and that will dictate where we think that falls.

Got it. Sorry, just very quick two more questions.

One is on valuations. I noticed that the dip in valuations probably also aligned to those that you saw a dip in occupancy.

Was it largely driven by valuers assuming vacates and etc? That's the real driver to where valuation has moved.

Is that the right assumption?

I think that's fair. For most of the properties where we saw it fall off, the one here that really looks odd is Maitland.

Maitland's doing really well. Leasing was strong.

We feel really good about the market. The appraiser had a different view.

I'm sure if we wanted, we could have pushed on the appraiser and made some arguments and tried to convince them, but we don't do that. When we've got appraisals, we will point out errors, and we sort of live with what they're doing.

That one looks odd to us. The rest of the ones that are down really seem to track with where the occupancy is.

I think that's a good conclusion. There's also been some change in discount rates, but that's had an impact on a few buildings.

Overall, it really does, when you look at it, generally track where occupancy is and where you would expect to see it. Plaza had to come down.

There's really no choice there. Westmoor had to be coming down.

I think it was expected 1800 would come down a bit. Maitland, like I said, is a little bit odd.

Edgeview is not unexpected with some minor occupancy changes there and less term on the lease for the tenant that makes up the vast majority of that building. Most of this really seems to be in line, and you could argue things could be a little lower or a little higher for a few of these, but you've got it.

Got it. Sorry, last one for me, right?

I think the last one is on your debt refinancing. I think Eileen really did a great job.

I hope I could have delivered you the 50 million, but I couldn't. Just looking at the 2027

Hey, don't make you stop asking. When

you look at the 2027 debt, right? I'm sure discussions are underway, but I'm looking at your increase in cost of debt.

I'm assuming that your credit spreads have increased, should we be imputing in increased interest cost going forward as you roll off some of this debt in 2027? I just wondering what's the base case we should be putting in.

Let me just probably give you some numbers. Assuming that the SOFR remains as it is now, right, you'll probably see all-in interest rate of about 5% at the end of 2026.

Right? For 2027, assuming similar SOFR, it will go up to about 5.4%, 5.5%.

This is also mainly because we have a number of IRS that will probably drop off in 2027 as well. Yes, to your question, you will see an increase in the interest, although probably we will expect further rate cuts.

Because of all the IRS that will be dropping off, you will see an increase in the rates.

Okay. No problem.

Obviously, Derek, you could get DBS to give us some loans with no margin, no costs, and things like that, and we could actually bring it down.

Then we'll drink more champagne, huh? Yeah.

All right. Hey, thanks.

That's all for me. Thank you.

Thanks, Derek.

I'd like to take the questions from Paul.

Hi. Thanks, Dave.

Morning. Thanks for the presentation.

Just some questions on the refi that you did. Were there any change in terms compared to the previous facility?

There are no change in terms.

Margins or anything?

Margin actually dropped a bit. Yeah.

It's good news for us cuz the margins actually dropped a bit.

Can you touch a bit on the sentiment of the bankers? Obviously, they did the refi for you, they're positive, but just some sensing of what makes them more positive and also they drop your margins, yeah?

Thanks.

They are actually the same banks that did our refinancing. Basically, they're the banks that know us.

Part of the relationship banks that we have. Although I would say that they are still a bit more cautious.

Some banks are still a bit more cautious obviously because of Manulife's issue, and some of the banks were burned by that. Also, they're also looking at the US market.

I think some of the banks are looking to see a full recovery market rather than recovering market. All in all, the banks that did our refinancing are largely our relationship banks.

It was quite good for us.

Thanks. Just one last one: on the IRS that is dropping off, what were the rates then, and what were the rates now?

Thanks.

Are you referring to the 2025 IRS that dropped off?

Yes, yes. That's causing your rates to rise.

Yes, okay. The IRS that dropped off in 2025, it was about 26% of our IRS, and we did it at a very, very low rate, one of the lowest rate that we have for all our IRS.

It's below 1%.

Oh, okay.

That's why you see a huge increase.

Okay. If you creep up to '26, '27, then it probably just creeps up to 1.

1 point something, then 2 point something. Is that how to understand your IRS maybe?

No. At that point in time when we locked in the loan, the 26% of this IRS, it was at below 1%.

Now, at the current market, if we want to enter into a new IRS, I think the current rate for a three-year IRS will be about 3.5%, which is pretty high. Yeah.

Oh, okay. Okay.

Got it. Hey, thanks so much, Eileen, for taking my questions.

Now we'll answer some questions from the webcast. First question posed is, how do you expect occupancy to move on the Plaza Buildings through the year?

Thank you to whoever brought that question to our attention. Plaza at this point has obviously had some significant occupancy reduction, which we had forecast for 2025.

It happened a little bit later than we anticipated, which was good in terms of income and revenue throughout the year, but the tenants that were going to vacate have now all vacated. We have some tenancy expiring in 2026, about 10% of Plaza Buildings I believe is expiring during the year.

I don't have any large tenants of that on my known vacate list, not anticipating major changes there. We have two buildings at Plaza.

We're changing the names as we move forward to 10800 and 10900, which are their addresses. We have historically referred to them as Plaza and US Bank.

For sake of ease for those that are here that probably heard them by those names, the US Bank building, we are doing a complete renovation, gut renovation, of the lobby of that. It used to be a US Bank branch for the vast majority of the space, and we are completely redoing that, putting in some really nice tenant amenities.

That's where we're going to do the golf simulator. We'll have some meeting rooms, some very cool other spaces, seating areas, putting in some ground floor office space as well.

Redoing the whole look and feel. It did not use to feel like a great lobby.

It was basically a weird little space and an elevator, and that was it. It's now going to feel like a really attractive lobby, and that coincides with getting back all this space.

We wanted to be able to start leasing it. We also are taking a full floor in that building that we have gotten back over the last year, and we are going to convert that to a full floor of spec suites much like we did in the other Plaza building.

The other building was called the Greenhouse, and this building, it's going to be called The Post. That will have a number of spec suites built out.

They'll have their own set of amenities, a little bit smaller amenities than we built into the Greenhouse in the other building. This building has a smaller floor plate, and so we're trying to be wise with the space.

We anticipate getting that built out and fully leased up in 2026. I would expect occupancy is going up at Plaza Buildings over 2026 if only for that point.

We have also started to see it was a really strong fourth quarter in the city of Bellevue. There were several fairly big, I would say exciting for the market, leases that were signed.

I think Bellevue in general is going to be seeing some occupancy trending significantly the right direction. Hopefully, we'll be the beneficiary of some of that as we're looking to fill a number of full floor spaces, and maybe one of those would even be potentially a two-floor sort of a tenant.

We've got a number of full floors, which requires some larger tenancies, call it like the 15 to 25,000-ish sort of a range between the two buildings. They have different floor plate sizes.

We'll be looking for that, and if we're not finding tenants in that size during the year, we will likely target another floor and do another full-floor spec suite because those have multiple advantages for us. Number one, it has an upfront cost that's a bit higher to build out spec suites, cuz it's just got much higher end finishes, but it is long-term work in the sense that we build smaller spaces that we know are going to meet the needs of multiple tenant types.

While we may spend a bit more upfront, our re-tenanting costs are really minimal. To the tune of carpet and paint, and because in most cases we've got polished concrete floors, there's not a lot of carpet, and there's not a lot of paint.

Ceiling grids are out for a lot of it, and we'll have some exposed ceilings, a really high-end space. We can turn those over without much capital costs.

Plaza Buildings is our best example of where the spec suite program started within our portfolio. We've got spaces in there that are on their third, fourth, or fifth tenant where we've spent, maybe $10, maybe $20 max to do paint and carpet, to put another tenant in.

It's been done three, four, in one case I believe five times now. Very little additional costs.

The long-term cost goes way down. Typically, we're going to get a bit of a bump in rent, a slightly higher rent, and the space typically requires less downtime, because tenants can take it very quickly.

Space is already built out. Rent starts more quickly.

There's a lot of economic reasons for us why that's good. It also helps to really show tenants what space in our building can look like.

If we've got a bigger tenant that might want to take a half a floor or a floor, we can show them those spec suites and say, "You just tell us what you need. We can deliver this product for you."

We've got teams in place that build this out. They know how to do it, and they can do it quickly.

Lots of advantages to spec suites. We expect it to go up, somewhat driven by spec suites, hopefully with some other leasing.

We're doing all the right things there to make that happen.

Thanks, Dave. The next question will be, what are the current cap rate that you are seeing in the market, and where do you think the US office market cap rate would be at the end of 2026?

That one I'm going to say we've taken the question and we don't have an answer for you, because there are no cap rates across the US. They're market and building-specific.

There's no way to answer a question with a general cap rate for the US. It's going to depend on asset quality, asset location, occupancy, forecast for the market, quality of tenancy.

You name it. There's a million things that go into cap rates.

What I can say is that we've seen them overall hold relatively steady coming into the end of 2025, at least for our portfolio. Discussions we've had with others, there are some minor changes, but we did not see some of the major upticks in cap rates that I think we're all familiar with in a couple of the prior years.

That I think is probably a thing of the past. I think the answer that's the helpful thing, for if we generalize the question a little bit differently, is what's happening with cap rates?

I think the answer is they seem to have stabilized. If we do see treasury rates come down during the year, I think we could see cap rates compress a little bit.

The Fed rate setting doesn't necessarily change what happens with treasuries. The long-term rates are not driven by the Fed.

They're doing the Fed funds rate, and that's a very near-term, short-term rate. We have seen at times where long-term rates come down when they lower.

We've seen long-term rates go up when they lower. It's hard to really predict what's going to happen with, say, your 10-year treasury, which is typically your base rate for a cap rate, but certainly seems to be steady at this point.

We take the next question. Is management able to share the rough range of expiring rents for Meta?

The Meta rents that are expiring are basically right around $23, which is fairly similar to what we've got in place at West Park, which is around $22 a foot. The interesting thing for West Park is it is one of our locations where we have a lot of tenants that use first floor space for production, testing, could be lab, could just be typical industrial, and then they'll have office above that.

The mix of space that a tenant is utilizing and how they're doing that is going to make rents be a little bit different, because we charge an industrial rate and we charge an office rate. The mix of space that somebody takes there can cause some significant differences.

That's the blend rate that we have for Meta in the portfolio. It's pretty close to the average in-place asking rates on average are somewhere in that $21, $22-ish sort of a range, but it really is going to fluctuate based on how much space is of an industrial purpose versus office.

Meta has some interesting lab space that they have that is purpose-built, some of it's some really high-end lab space. Their space is certainly built out a bit differently than average within West Park, certainly higher end in some ways.

Depending on the tenancy that we find, they may or may not be at those sorts of rates. If there's folks looking to utilize some of that, we may find some tenants that are willing to pay what Meta was or higher.

We may be slightly below. It really is going to depend on usage, but it shouldn't be too far off from what Meta is paying.

I'm asking the second half of what I figure was a two-part question here, but I just didn't see the follow-up, or didn't hear it in what was just read to me, but I figured I'd give you the complete answer.

Thank you, Dave. We have one last question.

How have net effective rents for our assets moved since first half 2025, and where do we see them moving over 2026?

It's an interesting question. I think most people are concerned about effective rents because they're concerned about what they have at least heard that has occurred in the US marketplace during COVID through potentially last year, which would be people giving outsized free rent periods to try to attract tenants into their space, and people giving outsized TI, or tenant improvement allowances, to try to attract people to the space.

The good news is in our portfolio, even during COVID, we did not do that or participate in that. Our TIs have remained consistent.

We're not utilizing those as a way to try to buy tenants into our space, we're giving the same TI allowances in the same ranges that we had pre-COVID, except we had significant run-up in costs due to inflation during COVID, where inflation was a bit out of control for a few years. If you were to take our pre-COVID costs or TIs that we were giving and add about 25% for that COVID run-up and then just normal inflation adjust that since the last couple of years, we've been doing the same TIs with no real change.

Our free rents have remained at one month per year of lease, typically. We have one blended market of Bellevue-Redmond and the buildings up there where it's between one half and one month of free rent per year of lease, actually even less.

In terms of what we've done, we haven't done anything that's affecting net effective rent or driving it down. When we talk about our face rates, we feel comfortable just talking about those, cuz we're not making changes to free rent and TIs that would affect that.

We do occasionally talk about some leases that we sign where there was incredibly low TIs and we accepted a lower rent rate, but we usually call those out on these calls most of the time when that's something of effect. For now, those have remained relatively flat.

Rents in general have started in some markets to increase slowly. We anticipate seeing a bit more of an increase, maybe a percent or two of an increase as we move into 2026.

I think we saw net effective rents pretty flat in 2025. We expect a minor increase going into 2026 with the hope, as the market continues to recover, as we continue to hopefully see discipline, maybe bank-imposed discipline on builders, we should hopefully not see massive increases to the availability in the markets.

There will be some space that continues to be taken out, both for conversion to office, which there's only a limited amount of space that can work for, as well as just being removed because it's no longer viable space. Hopefully, we'll see some pressure going in the right direction.

Some markets have seen it. We've certainly seen rent growth at some of our properties like West Park through COVID and beyond.

We hope to continue to see 2026 moving in the right direction, hopefully that answers that question.

Thanks, Dave. We have no further questions, we shall now end our webcast session here.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you so much for your time and joining us, and have a pleasant day ahead.

Thanks very much, everybody.