“And we think the true pro forma of this will ultimately manifest itself in year '25 or even in '26.”

In context

“n the office building we own, too, which is all 100% owned asset. So I don't want you to confuse those 2. But that's the rough math on Phipps. And then the true lease up of Phipps, again, which goes back to the -- my earlier comment on the NOI. The true lease-up effects because you have -- you see Malone and some of the high-end brands building out their stores, it's not a 3-month build. It's, in many cases, 9 months to a year. The true offering that Phipps will have will really show in '24 when all of these retailers open the stores. So Christian Louboutin, Hermès and AKRIS and on and on. But most of those will either open late '23 or '24, and that's when Phipps really will be finished. These things don't just -- you don't just flip a switch and it opens. So that gives you a sense of it. And we think the true pro forma of this will ultimately manifest itself in year '25 or even in '26. Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Alexander Goldfarb with Piper Sandler. Alexander Goldfarb: So a question on the retailer brand portfolio and your equity stake in Authentic Brands. You guys have a headwind -- sorry, not a headwind. You guys have a fluctuating contribution from the retailers just based on their actual sales, right? Because it's not rents, it's based on sales. Yet I'm assuming you get some sort of recurring cash flow from the intellectual property that you own in Authentic Brands, managing the brands and all that. So I'm just trying to understand, as you guys sell more of the brand equity and exchange it for a bigger stake of Authentic Brands, how does your income mix switch from being solely sales-dependent to being more consistent, whether it's managing”