Yahoo Finance

Thomas Wirth

Thank you, Jerry, and good morning. Our fourth quarter net loss stood at $43.3 million or $0.25 per share, and our fourth quarter FFO was about $29.9 million or $0.17 per share. Our quarterly net income results were impacted by several noncash impairment charges totaling $23.8 million or $0.14 per share related to two of our nonconsolidated joint ventures located in the DC area. Our fourth quarter FFO results were 3% below our guidance at 6% below the incentive estimates, partially as a result of timing and some general observations for the quarter.
Our other income, we did anticipate receiving onetime transactional income totaling about $6 million or just over $0.03 a share. We now anticipate that income being received in the first quarter of '25.
Property-level GAAP NOI. Our GAAP NOI was 68.5%, reflects -- this was reflective of our higher-than-anticipated earlier-than-anticipated asset sales activity and slightly higher operating expenses.
G&A totaled $10.1 million, $1.1 million above our third quarter. We forecast that's primarily due to some higher noncash equity amortization -- the increase is due to higher forecasted vesting. That will continue into 2025.
Total interest expense was [1.2%] below our reforecast, primarily due to higher cash proceeds from the asset sales, which lowered our line of credit balance, and we had slightly higher capitalized interest.
Looking at our debt metrics. Fourth quarter debt service and interest coverage ratios were [2.1%] and slightly below our 2.2 projections. Our fourth quarter and annualized consolidated core net debt to EBITDA were 7.9 times and 7.2 times respectively, with both metrics above our range, primarily due to the lower fourth quarter income.
Portfolio and joint venture changes. We did add 155 King of Prussia Road to our core portfolio during the quarter as our attendance to occupancy and the property is 100% occupied liquidity. Due to the asset sales, our year-end cash position increased to $90 million, $75 million above our third quarter projection.
And as Jerry highlighted earlier, we have a $1 million -- $170 million term loan maturing in 2025 and no unsecured bonds maturing until November 2027. Our wholly owned debt is 95.4% fixed with a weighted average maturity every seven years. Our full year 2024 can rate payout ratio was 103.4%. This was negatively impacted by the lower-than-anticipated fourth quarter income. And if that income did come in, we would have been below the 100%.
Going into our 2025 guidance at the midpoint, our net loss will be $0.54 per share our 2025 midpoint guidance for FFO will be $0.66 per diluted share with a stable wholly owned portfolio, this reset of FFO, we believe, is temporary impacted by our portfolio reshaping efforts of the disposition of noncore assets and the development project stabilization.
Our fourth quarter -- our FFO contribution from our unconsolidated joint venture developments will be a loss of $25.2 million or $0.11 a share. As the development projects are completed but not yet stabilized, we are incurring interest expense preferred equity costs and overall negative operating income within those joint ventures. The result is losses totaling approximately $32.6 million or $0.18 a share during 2025 compared to a loss of [$12.2 million] or $0.07 a share in 2024. And our 2025 construction loan interest and partner preferred equity returns totaled $43.8 million or $0.24 a share. We expect to recapitalize these capital projects into lower debt and earning costs as the projects stabilize.
We will also receive $7.4 million of nonrecurring cash income from the development joint ventures in the first half of 2025. To offset the development joint venture losses, we do expect our operating joint venture portfolio to generate approximately $9 million or $0.05 a share of (inaudible).
As Jerry noted, we will look to recapitalize on the residential developments as they approach stabilization and recapitalize the commercial development as leases are executed and our lease percentage approaches 80% to 90%. We believe that will have minimal effect potentially in this year and have significant effect on results.
Operating portfolio operations are expected to remain very stable with operating GAAP NOI totaling roughly $290 million roughly flat on a same-store basis as compared to 2024 with core occupancy increasing slightly at the midpoint our 2025 fully on portfolio would be reduced on a comparable basis. by the third quarter sale of our campus in the PA suburbs and the fourth quarter asset sales in Austin, Texas and Richmond, Virginia. The impact of those results will reduce our NOI by roughly $15 million to $18 million Full year impact of 155 King of Prussia will be about $6 million and, on the lease, up of [$250 million] occurs. We will generate an additional $3 million offers.
You call G&A -- we expect G&A to be between 42.5% and 43.5%, which approximates our full year 2024 results. Our interest expense, including deferred financing costs and capitalized interest will approximate $135 million, with the midpoint representing a $14 million increase. That increase represents $9 million of reduced capitalized interest and from the developments becoming operational. And $4 million of interest, which is the full year effect, the April 2024 unsecured bond issuance.
Termination and other fee income will be between $7 million and $9 million as compared to 13.7% in '24 net management fee and development fees will be between $8 million and $10 million, [$5 million] reduction, again, due to lower development fees from recently delivered joint venture projects. And we do expect to do $50 million of Schuylkill sales weighted towards the second half of the year. We project these sales will occur later in '25 and have minimal dilution. We anticipate no property acquisitions. We anticipate no use of the ATM or buyback activity, and we live our share count would be roughly 178 million shares.
More -- looking closer at the first quarter, we see property level NOI or approximately $69 million. Again, this will have the full quarter effect of 155 King of Prussia but also have the full quarter effect of our fourth quarter asset sales activity. Our FFO contribution from our joint ventures will total a negative $1 million for the first quarter. That's primarily due to the ramp-up of leasing in our multifamily One Uptown ATX coming online.
However, that number is also inclusive of a $6 million nonrecurring income. In the previous quarter, we had thought that would be a consolidated pickup that pickup will occur in the joint ventures in the first quarter. G&A expense for the quarter will be about $17 million. That's roughly 40% of our G&A for the year. And that increase is really resulting from timing of compensation expense being recognized in the company.
Total interest expense will approximate $33 million capitalized interest will be about $2.5 million. Termination and other fee income will be about $2 million. Net management fees and development fees were close to about $2.5 million. we incrementally feel more positive about executing our land sales program this year and have reintroduced $4 million to $6 million of land sales, which were delayed from 2024. These sales will take place later in the year, and there are no anticipated closings of any land sales in the first quarter of 2025.
Turning to our 2025 capital plan. The plan is much simpler than in prior years as our wholly owned development and redevelopment projects are fully construction or during completion -- as our CAD payout ratio will be [120 to 150] recognizes is elevated compared to historical averages and our long-term targets. However, as we complete our recent developments, we should see CAD level raise rise had increased going into 2026 based on the trajectory of the leasing and occupancy taking effect.
In addition, as Jerry noted, we have over [$200 million] of revenue maintain capital spend for leases signed between 2020 and 2023. While there is always a delay, this is an unusually high year -- and it was tied to a number of large renewals done in the past.
Looking at larger users of our cash, $60 million for development which includes 155, 250 and completing CeraLabs expansion. We have $105 million of common dividends, $35 million of revenue maintain capital $30 million of revenue create and $25 million of equity contributions to fund recent tenant leases in our joint ventures. The sources of this will be $130 million of cash flow after interest payments, $50 million expected of asset sales and $10 million of construction loan proceeds on 155 King of Prussia.
Based on that capital plan, we anticipate using approximately $60 million of our $90 million of cash on hand, but we do expect to end the year with billability of our line of credit. We also project that our net debt-to-EBITDA range will be 82% to 84%, with increase -- the increase is primarily due to the losses of the joint ventures, and our debt to GAV will approximate 48%. Additional metric of core net debt to EBITDA should be [7.7%] to [7.9%] by year-end ['22], our core net debt to EBITDA should really equal our consolidated net debt to EBITDA since we will have no developments going on, and it will only exclude our joint ventures.
Again, we believe those ratios are temporarily impacted by revenue coming on in our development completions. And we are confident that once those completions are stabilized, our leverage levels will decrease back towards core levels. we anticipate our fixed charge and interest card ratios to be roughly [2.0%] which represent a [0.1%] sequential decrease from this year, again, due to joint venture losses, and we anticipate the leverage will then begin to improve as we go into next year.
I will now turn the call back over to Jerry.

Gerard Sweeney

So as we look ahead, we're confident that the strength of our operating platform and the quality of our developments will allow us to leverage improving real estate market trends and position the company for future growth. While earnings growth from our development pipeline is not yet fully visible, the groundwork has been laid, and we are poised to build on our continuing momentum as we drive towards long-term value.
The overall real estate markets continue to improve. Our operating platform remains very stable with earnings limited near-term rollover. As Tom walked you through, our liquidity is in excellent shape, and we are well positioned to take advantage of continued market improvements.
With that, we would like to open up the floor for questions. As we always do, we ask that in the interest of time, you limit yourself to one question and a follow-up.

Question and Answer Session

Operator

(Operator Instructions) Steve Sakwa, Evercore ISI.

Steve Sakwa

I guess, Jerry, going to a couple of developments. You've talked about what I think are relatively good pipelines, and they seem to be growing, but the inability to get some of these deals over the finish line.
So I guess the first question is -- have any of these larger tenants at 3151 or Uptown ATX, have they gone anywhere else? Have you lost them? Or have these tenants just not made decisions? And what do you think the biggest I guess, hold up is from getting these companies to make decisions?

Gerard Sweeney

Steve. We have not lost any of our major prospects to any other building or to them making a decision to stay put where they are. The timelines have been very protracted the discussions are ongoing. And I think when we take a look at the One Uptown and 3151, the pipelines are very good, and they are advancing through the various stages. It just seems that tenants are behaving a bit more pragmatically and cautiously than we frankly like part of that would probably do to macro uncertainty, the elections, not sure where the economy is going, all those different things.
But one of the trend lines we are seeing, Steve, which is kind of interesting is one of the reasons why some of these decisions were delayed is because they weren't real -- tenants weren't really sure what their return-to-work policies would be and how they see, and we need. So that is really starting to look like it's in the rearview there for companies in general.
And certainly, for companies looking to move up the quality curve. So we have a number of space plans underway. We're quantifying both construction costs and square footage. So the tone of conversations, again, continue to be positive.
As I mentioned at the close of my comments, we understand there's not clear visibility on the income timing from these development projects, but we remain confident that these discussions will continue to progress, and that we'll get some of them across the finish line. But the key next to your question is we've not lost any of these prospects to any other competitive building.

Steve Sakwa

Okay. And then maybe just as a follow-up. As you look at the cash yields, and I realize you've got a lot of carry costs coming through the P&L this year. And you're confident those will start to recede, I guess, in '26 and ultimately '27, I guess, what confidence do you have around the rents and the timing, I guess, to hit these yields? And does it seem to be a pricing issue or just more of a tenant decision-making issue as your kind of talking to them? I guess, what's the risk of these yields when you do get them leased aren't achieved?

Gerard Sweeney

Yes. Well, I think it's more of a timing issue than a pricing issue. I think the dichotomy we're seeing in the market is, is that is by what we've seen here in a couple of the Philadelphia market is there's a real flight to quality. So tenants are really looking at moving as far as the kind of the quality curve. So price versus quality workspace is a secondary consideration.
But the reality is that timelines have become fairly protractive, but George, maybe you can make some comments on that as well.

George Johnstone

Yes. I mean really do, Steve, feel that it's really more of a timing issue. I think the rental deal incoming initial rental rates in our pro forma don't appear to be at risk. So again, I think if we can accelerate decision-making, sign the lease quicker, build the stay quicker and connect it even quicker than that's the solid path to the yields that we've laid out for these projects.

Gerard Sweeney

Just one final point on that, Steve, just to close the loop, I mean where the rents have not been an issue TI costs have been a bit higher, and we're seeing where if the TI costs are higher, we're actually getting longer-term leases than we originally pro forma.
So while the -- so the overall returns we're expecting based on the capital investment we need to make is staying fairly in line with what our expectations were. But the TI cost at point of sale could be higher, but we're making up for that by longer lease terms.

Operator

Anthony Paolone, JPMorgan.

Anthony Paolone

Maybe for Tom, you went through a bunch of details on the drag from the developments in '25 and so forth. But I don't know if you can maybe just bottom line like upon stabilization, of the development pipeline, like what would be the difference between kind of the JV FFO, I guess, negative for '25 versus what the stabilized level would be?

Thomas Wirth

Yes. I think, Tony, when we look at the income coming off the JV this year, whether it's residential or commercial, it's give or take, $10 -- $10 million, $12 million with the ramp-up I think those numbers are going to jump to the yields you're seeing on the development page, which can go over $50 million. So the ramp-up will be there as we go through the for the OpEx side.
On the overall FFO side, you will also see tell you that we did -- I did outline the costs we're taking in terms of the construction loans and in terms of the preferred equity. So those costs will -- as we get to close to stabilization, they don't have to be stabilized.
I think we will look to recap the assets. To get out from one of those higher costs. So those were some larger costs I outlined that won't go away and potentially could increase until we recap the assets.

Anthony Paolone

Okay. I mean it just -- I guess my follow-up and I'm trying to just get to is, it seems like the accounting is pretty onerous here, but if I just look at your development page, and just take the project costs and the equity capitalization and your share roughly, it's like a quarter of a $1 billion, I guess, for Brandywine. Like, I guess, is there just ultimately an impairment to that amount? And we should think about that and the rest of this is just pretty tough accounting, it seems like. And just trying to understand what the equity is here.

Thomas Wirth

Right. No, I think when we look at some of the capitalization rates, we can get on some of the projects we think that there -- we don't think there's an impairment concern.
If you look at the yields, we think that we can get out from our equity without concern. Now, that has to happen. We have to lease them up. So I can't say when that will happen. But no, right now, we don't expect to have an equity impairment based on the current trajectory and the projections we're seeing.

Operator

Dylan Burzinski, Green Street.

Dylan Burzinski

Tom when you say recap the JV assets, can you kind of talk about what that would look like? Would that essentially be Brandywine taking a larger equity ownership interest or...

Thomas Wirth

Yes.

Gerard Sweeney

And JV (inaudible) takes just to refresh everyone's memory, these developing joint ventures our structural on a preferred equity basis. So the equity investment by our partners has priority over hours. And during this period when it comes out of capitalization, we need to expense those preferred payments. There is a set price takeout for each of those. So even though the site have were 64%, 68% owner, Brandywine essentially owns between 88% and 90% of the residual position in those properties.
So as Tom touched on these projects move towards stabilization. 3025 is pretty much moving that direction very quickly. We'll be able to take out our preferred partner and then recap that and either bring an asset on our balance sheet as a large unsecured asset, refinance existing debt or bring additional partners. So we think we have a whole range of options available for us. that can be both balance sheet strengthening and accrue to our earnings path going forward.

Dylan Burzinski

That's helpful. Appreciate that, Jerry. And I guess just one more sort of on the development side of things. We noticed in your guys' guidance figure that you guys talked about starting one development or redevelopment. Can you kind of give us any details as the size of that? And then maybe talk about why deciding to continue to start to develop given a public market cost of capital that is initially conducive to external (inaudible) at this time?

Gerard Sweeney

Yes, a great question, And look, first of all, we have leasing to do, and that remains the top part of that exception. And we do anticipate, as we've talked about, continued momentum on the leasing front.
But as you're looking at our 2025 full year plan, there are a couple of possibilities that we're evaluating. One is outlined on page 4 of the set for the last few quarters. We are evaluating the potential convergence of underperforming office as to the Meptifamily. We also are exploring a fully leased or build-to-suit as part of a university master planning process. And we're also evaluating -- the last piece of our rigor arcana pen medicine complex that can do a residential hotel project there.
Those deals are all kind of in the $40 million to $50 million range. And really our desire to move forward on any of those is really going to be totally a function of how we're doing on some of the lease up of the development projects. So just we look at the full year plan with these things happening, we thought we'd highlight that there could be a potential start, but that certainly in no way was meant to invent the eyes off the ball, at least from our existing development projects. That is the number one priority we have as a company.

Operator

Tayo Okusanya, Deutsche Bank.

Tayo Okusanya

Hi. Good morning, everyone. So I just wanted to understand a little bit about the guidance range of [60%] to [72%]. Again, Tom, appreciate a lot of the exploration around the carry cost.
But I guess, again, the guidance midpoint [66%] the kind of thing and pretty light versus where most of those were modeling to. So I don't know whether it's just missing some of the carry costs. I don't know whether there's something unusual, maybe we did not anticipate in 2025. And again, also kind of curious, one, why the guidance range is so wide? And what kind of moves you to the high end or low end of the guidance range.

Thomas Wirth

Some of you couldn't hear it too crystal. I think you asked out some of the guidance questions going forward. I mean, on the JVs. I think, yes. And the guidance in the JV, especially on the development side, we did push back all the leasing into next year. That was large. And -- we're going to have those projects on our books for the rest of the year. We were hoping that maybe there could be some recapitalizations done.
We are not really forecasting much impact from those, which really did impact that number on the loss side. We also had an effect on the other areas, right? We had less capitalization of our interest expense. So cash interest expense. A lot of that is the size of the one bond deal, but we did lose a lot of capitalization of interest on our investment in those joint ventures. And then we are losing development fees, which is we also signaled is going lower.
And again, as these projects come online, we're not going to have a development piece. So there are a number of line items within our guidance that's being impacted by that. And you can see those are outlined on that page 1, where we talk about some of those happening and what takes us from current [85%] for this year down to the [66%] .

Tayo Okusanya

Okay. That's helpful. And can you just talk a little bit again about the range. Like what -- why is the range particularly wide -- and what would get you to the high end or low end of the guidance range?

Thomas Wirth

Yes. I think on the high end of the range, there could be leasing that could take place. I mean we don't know if that will happen. But leasing that we have not programmed especially on the developments, there could be some opportunities properties are done, large pipeline, as Jerry mentioned, there are still tenants that they came in and really needed space that there's an opportunity to build some of that out.
The second area is if we could use some recaps, which we're not sure if they can get done, as I outlined, there's some high costs related to our preferred equity in the construction loans are above where we think we could refinance the assets and -- or we just or potentially selling the apps or take a smaller position.
So at that point, development losses will also go down. So there could be an opportunity that would allow us to have losses come out there. And so those are the two main areas. There would be some recanalization really with some additional leasing that we don't see right now in those developments.

George Johnstone

It's George. If I could weigh in on the operating side of the house, I mean look, we're 83% complete on our spec revenue for the year of what's remaining to be done. 90% of that is coming out of Philadelphia and the Pennsylvania suburbs. So we do think that there is some potential uplift to spec revenue that could come from our lower than we would like to see Boston portfolio. So I do think there's the opportunity for day-to-day operations to contribute that could get us above that current point.

Operator

Upal Rana, KeyBanc Capital Markets.

Upal Rana

Can you guys talk about the CAD payout ratio guidance of 120% to 150% this year the $24 million deferred tenant allowance. Is the $24 million going to only impact '25? Or is there a chance this could lead into 2026.

Gerard Sweeney

Yes. I'm sorry.

Thomas Wirth

No, I don't think there's going to be -- I think there are no tenant improvements that are being done. Part of that call go back is that these are allowances that, for the most part, are being done by our tenants, right? So they get a tenant allowance. They then are given a period of time to do that work. They do all the scoping; they do all the building. And at the end, we went along the way, we even make [payments] to those tenants.
In the case of -- so they do a lot of the work, and so we're not really gauging when that happens, except to know that it's occurring or not and when they may bill us. So that can occur throughout that process. And when people renew, they may be restacking their space -- they go through why they want to do the space plan. And some of those take longer periods of time.
And so what we're looking at and we think that the items that we're bringing up are points that we do think they're going to need the money this year should not spill over into next year. There is always delays. It's just that we're highlighting this is a delay that's much longer and much more impactful than 2025. Than in other years.

George Johnstone

Yes. And again, this is George. I mean we have -- the vast majority of those all have sunset provisions to them in the lease document. And most of those sunset provisions trigger in '25. So the tenant is basically in a use it or lose it position. So that's why we kind of feel it all happens this year.

Operator

Okay. Great. That was helpful. And then you're able to achieve positive rent spreads in 2024, but you expect it to be negative in '25, mostly due to Austin. Could you talk about what is driving the weakness for you there in Austin because as you said, there should be some increased activity this year?

Gerard Sweeney

Yes. Again, George, in here. Yes. I mean, look, the Austin metric is predominantly being driven. We had a 100,000 square foot tenant renew with us in our suburban project River Place. And in lieu of TI, we ended up dropping the face rate to still obtain a net effect in front positive outcome. But basically, traded capital for rent.
So that's really why we provided the additional breakdown on page 3, so you can kind of see the impact of Austin. So accident absent that large lease in Austin and one other that we had done a similar structure within Philadelphia. Take two deals out of the mix, and we're rolling up to, call it, 2% cash and a 7.5% cap, so kind of more in line with how the vast majority of the portfolio performs.

Operator

Michael Lewis, Truist Securities.

Michael Lewis

So my understanding on the preferred to the JV partner is the yield is in the teens, that's frustrating when you have a cash balance and nothing drawn on your line of credit. Is there nothing that you could work out prior to stabilization with your partner to kind of get at that high-cost obligation sooner? And when can you repay does the project have to stabilize? Why can't you pay it earlier?

Gerard Sweeney

Yes, Michael, this is Jerry. Very good question. We were fortunate to have to have very good partners. With great relations with them. And some of those discussions that you're referencing are ongoing. So we recognize that when we hit these development joint ventures, our approach was to preserve the significant residual profit position for Brandywine. The cost of us doing that was to do these preferred structures.
So as I mentioned, it's a little bit -- there's pretty much the fine takeout numbers for this. Given our strong liquidity, that's certainly one of the things we're thinking about in terms of how we can minimize the kind of, I'll call it, the FFO earnings impact of paying the preferred dividends on a current basis on the capitalization reserve, by recasting and recapitalizing those ventures. We do not need to wait until there's any stabilization there.
So there's active discussions underway. As Tom touched on things, we think some of -- some of the coupons on the construction loans are higher than we could get today. So we're looking at both recapital on the preferred equity side, but then also recap the debt side as well. So I think one of the questions was how we kind of moved the range. But I think some of those things happening on more of an accelerated basis than we have in our line down would be very helpful.

Michael Lewis

Okay. Great. And then, looking at your portfolio, right? So Philly CBD, 96% leased excellent low rollover. Philly suburbs have been higher at least than the past, but a few spaces in contract and Plenish meeting, but 90% -- over 90% leased in December and then Austin.
So you've already answered some questions about Austin, but there's a lot of conversation about this one big tenant in the market. And these numbers for used, mean is this a case where you hit one or two big leases in this 78% lease shows to 90%? Or do you think it's going to be kind of a longer-term I don't know or to slog in Austin to kind of get that up? And is the market still often it's going to take a while?

Gerard Sweeney

Well, I think the market is still in a recovery basin. George and I will tag team this. But look, I mean, the pipeline we have in our Austin portfolio is significantly higher than it was a couple of quarters ago. So certainly more tenants are moving in the marketplace. I think the positive absorption leasing activity, particularly in some of the submarkets for us has been very helpful. Look, we're always tracking large and small sized tenants.
So certainly, the larger size tenants we pay a lot of attention to. And they're more relevant probably to our Uptown ATX project. But as we're looking strategically in Boston or in next few years, we're certainly very [445] Colorado downtown. We have a wonderful mixed-use development opportunity at Uptown ATX. We're hopeful of the CAD Metro project moving in the next quarter or so. So the other suburban assets, I think it's -- there's -- I defer it, George, but there's a range of larger tenants and smaller tenants.
So my guess would be on some of the projects we're hoping for a quick hit for a larger user and maybe some of the other ones, there's less visibility to a large user. I will note though, Michael, to add on to it is on that page in the site we have identified a couple of buildings at River Place which are underperforming as potential residential conversion opportunities are excellent residential market. We're going through that zoning approval working with the local leadership in the community groups that test the liability of that. So there could be an opportunity for us to recast the use of a couple of those buildings at River Place. But George, any other observations?

George Johnstone

Yes, I think you touched on most of them. But I think, Michael, to kind of amplify on the suburban product, I mean, those projects are going to kind of play in that [5,000 square foot] to 20,000 square foot tenant on the larger end of the spectrum. So a lot of kind of 5s and 10s. And some of these assets we saw a lot of text to this over the years post pandemic.
I think as return to work now starts to rebuild, we feel pretty good about the quality of the project, we are still competing with some new developments and some very good sublease space. But the subnet, that market and often has started to tighten. So again, I think we're on still a couple of quarters away to start posting some absorption in the suburban. But it will be on the smaller side as compared to the larger prospects for seeing in the development assets.

Operator

Michael Griffin, Citi.

Michael Griffin

I'm sorry for the technical difficulties earlier. Wondering if we could get some color just on the year-end asset sales. Can you give us a sense of the buyer pool was like, anything on cap rates and whether or not seller financing was essentially needed to get some of these deals over the finish line?

Gerard Sweeney

On the technical issues we were having a few of those this morning ourselves. So -- understood perfectly. Yes. Look, we actually went up have a very successful close of '24 of the asset sale, certainly, or beyond what we initially had in our plan. So we wound up essentially including a parcel of land in our (inaudible) area about over $30 million of sales or in $10 million.
The cap rates range on that from low 5s on the sales up to a 10 plus on our suburban Philadelphia asset. I guess at from a buyer pool standpoint, a couple of things. One is we're definitely seeing some owner occupants seizing the opportunity to buy assets at fairly low price. I actually, we were able to last year was one of our other assets and a couple of the sales here in the Philadelphia region have gone to owner occupant. We're definitely seeing more family offices, well-capitalized buyers kind of all cash moving into the market to take advantage with, again, may see is lower pricing with significant upward bias.
Most of the institutional capital that we're saying is really still opportunistic. We're looking for mid kind of mid- to high teens total returns. We are being -- that includes, I would say, some of these smaller syndicators like the buyer of one of our properties was a syndicator. They're raising money for some smaller family offices and aggregating capital. We are beginning to see though the emergence of some core and core plus buyers. What was interesting is most owners like Brandywine are reluctant to sell our really truly high-quality assets.
Today given kind of depressed valuations and also the anticipation of a much lower supply coming in over the next few years to better position those better assets, both from a rental rate and a value standpoint. So some of those core buyers where we're getting pinged on different unsolicited sales, et cetera, are trying to get in now in anticipation of the continued recovery in the marketplace when the forward supply pipeline for office as you well know, is very, very low for the foreseeable future.
We're also seeing a lot of preferred equity and mezzanine financing sources out there. who are still looking to take advantage of kind of a recovering debt capital market to provide bridge financing to get certain transactions done. And then certainly, one of our larger sales last year went to the city of Austin, who's going to occupy that for a public building public safety building. So that was a very fortunate internal event for us as well.
So I think it's still being dominated, Michael, by kind of the family offices, smaller syndicators core plus -- I'm sorry, opportunistic routes targeting those returns I mentioned. There's an awful lot of capital sitting on the sidelines. I think is as the market gets more visibility on the slight quality, no future pipeline, demand drivers picking up, I think you'll see a big uptick in buyers coming back into the marketplace in a much more realistic values are close to historical levels.

Michael Griffin

Thanks, Jerry. I really appreciate the color there. And then maybe just one on kind of the development leasing pipeline as it relates to 3151. Obviously, you've had success at 3025, but they largely signed there. The commercial component is about 80% leased but still seems like it's lagging from the 3151 probably just a function of where we are in the life science cycle right now. Would you ever consider leasing space there to traditional office users if demand was there for it?

Gerard Sweeney

Yes, great question. A couple of things. One is that building was literally just completed. So we still have perimeter work to do log is still big finish. So it's not quite interesting marketing conditions. So -- but we are having, as I mentioned, earlier, some significant increase in the pipeline. The life science market has been slow to recover. That being said, we are seeing a lot of, as we call them green shoots out there for a half floor full floor couple of floor users. There's still some institutional demand out there that we're talking to. So we still feel very good about the track that we have that project on right now.
Your question is an excellent one, though, and we certainly have -- given the success we've had at 3025. We certainly have started to show that building to other office users who are looking to get next to a mass transportation center, move into University City, looking for a very, very high-quality office space that has great visibility.
So I think one of the beauties of how we design that property can accommodate as heavy a life-sized user as is out there from a lab research mechanical system standpoint, but it also can become a recipient for office users as well. So we really weren't pushing that very hard until we achieve this lease at 3025. Now, with that project, clearly on a path to stabilization success, we've made a tip with our marketing teams to put 3151 to that market queue as well.

Michael Griffin

That's it for me, and good luck for the Eagles this weekend.

Gerard Sweeney

Thank you very much. We appreciate that.

Operator

I'm not showing any further questions at this time. I'd like to turn the call back over to Jerry Sweeney for closing remarks.

Gerard Sweeney

Dean, thank you today. And everyone, thank you very much for participating in this earnings call. We look forward to continued progress on our '25 business plan and updating you on that progress on our next -- our first quarter call in April. So thank you very much and have a great day.

Operator

Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect. Good day.