VICI Properties (VICI) Q4 2025 Earnings Transcript

Date

Feb. 26, 2026 at 10 a.m. ET

Call participants

• Chief Executive Officer — Edward Pitoniak
• President and Chief Operating Officer — John Payne
• Chief Financial Officer — David Kieske
• Chief Accounting Officer — Gabriel Wasserman
• Senior Vice President of Capital Markets — Lori McCluskey
• General Counsel and Secretary — Samantha Gallagher

Takeaways

• AFFO (Adjusted Funds From Operations) -- $642.5 million, up 6.8% year over year, driven by re-investment of free cash flow and limited share issuance.
• AFFO per share -- $0.60 for the quarter, up 5.6% year over year; $2.38 for the year, up 5.1% year over year.
• Share count -- Increased by only 1% in 2025, supporting per-share AFFO growth.
• G&A expense -- $19.3 million for the quarter and $65.1 million for the year, representing 1.9% and 1.6% of revenue, respectively.
• Net income margin -- Approximately 69%, ranking among the highest in the S&P 500.
• Total debt -- $17.1 billion, with net debt to annualized Q4 adjusted EBITDA at approximately 5x (low end of the 5x-5.5x target range).
• Weighted average interest rate -- 4.46%, as adjusted for hedge activity.
• Weighted average debt maturity -- Six years.
• Total liquidity -- $3.2 billion, consisting of $608 million in cash, $43 million under forwards, and $2.4 billion revolver availability.
• 2026 AFFO guidance -- $2.59 billion to $2.625 billion, or $2.42 to $2.45 per diluted share, excluding non-closed transactions, final loan draws, and nonrecurring events.
• 2025 investment commitments -- $2.1 billion in committed capital with a weighted average initial yield of 8.9%, including major transactions with Caden Eldridge, Red Rock Resorts (NASDAQ: RRR), Clairvest, and Golden Entertainment (NASDAQ: GDEN).
• Golden Entertainment sale-leaseback -- $1.16 billion deal involving seven Nevada casino properties, expected to close later in 2026 and add a fifteenth tenant.
• Penn National lease combination -- Two leases were combined, eliminating percentage rent and introducing cross-collateralization and a single corporate guarantee, with no change to rent collected in 2025.
• Las Vegas locals market -- Noted for a ten-year median household income CAGR of 5.5%, well above the national 1.9% figure.
• Loan book update -- A senior loan collateralized by Golf Development was placed on nonaccrual due to borrower working capital issues; "there is no income related to that loan included in 2026 guidance."
• Upcoming debt maturities -- $1.75 billion due later in 2026 ($500 million in September, $1.25 billion in December), with refinancing anticipated in the bond market.
• New chief accounting officer -- Jeremy Waxman promoted to the role, following Gabriel Wasserman’s shift to business development and experiential credit solutions.

Need a quote from a Motley Fool analyst? Email pr@fool.com

Risks

• The company acknowledged a loan placed on nonaccrual status due to borrower working capital constraints, and management stated, "There is no income related to that loan included in 2026 guidance."

Summary

VICI Properties (NYSE:VICI) reported high net income margins, disciplined share issuance, and year-over-year gains in AFFO, with management emphasizing portfolio optimization and partnerships as key levers for growth. Strategic capital deployment in 2025 exceeded $2 billion, anchored by a major Nevada sale-leaseback and new operator partnerships, driving tenant and geographic diversification. AFFO guidance for 2026 excludes potential upside from deals yet to close and assumes a conservative approach to debt refinancing, reflecting VICI Properties’ focus on risk management and sustainable returns. Management highlighted active pipeline efforts in gaming, sports, and live entertainment infrastructure, while reiterating that all loans except the golf development asset remain current and monitored.

• Management said, "any solutions that we develop and agree to with Caesars help further our larger portfolio goals of optimizing our exposure to any single tenant, to any single category, to any single geography."
• Management confirmed, "There is no income related to that loan included in 2026 guidance," clarifying the financial impact is not material for forecasted results.
• John Payne described the tenant strategy: "we continue to prioritize real estate ownership while also using our loan book that we have talked about to develop new relationships," supporting flexible external growth.
• VICI Properties’ leverage, at 5x net debt to annualized adjusted EBITDA, is at the low end of its self-defined target range.
• The company reported that all other loans are performing and subject to active quarterly review, supporting ongoing credit quality assurance.

Industry glossary

• Triple net lease: A lease structure where the tenant pays all property taxes, insurance, and maintenance in addition to rent, minimizing landlord operating risk.
• Sale-leaseback: A transaction in which a company sells its real estate to a third party (e.g., VICI Properties) and simultaneously leases it back, enabling the operating company to access capital while continuing to use the asset.
• Master lease: A lease that covers multiple properties or assets, often providing credit enhancements such as cross-collateralization and a unified corporate guarantee.
• AFFO (Adjusted Funds From Operations): A non-GAAP REIT metric reflecting core earnings by adjusting FFO for recurring capital expenditures and straight-lining of rents.

Full Conference Call Transcript

Samantha Gallagher: Thank you, operator, and good morning. Everyone should have access to the company's fourth quarter and full year 2025 earnings release and supplemental information. The release and supplemental information can be found on the Investors section of the VICI Properties Inc. website at investors.viciproperties.com. Some of our comments today will be forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements are usually identified by the use of words such as “will,” “believe,” “expect,” “should,” “guidance,” “intends,” “outlook,” “projects,” or other similar phrases and are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from what we expect. Therefore, you should exercise caution in interpreting and relying on them.

I refer you to the company's SEC filings for a more detailed discussion of the risks that could impact future operating results and financial condition. During the call, we will discuss certain non-GAAP measures, which we believe can be useful in evaluating the company's operating performance. These measures should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for our financial results prepared in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of these measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measure is available on our website, our fourth quarter and full year 2025 earnings release, our supplemental information, and our filings with the SEC.

For additional information with respect to non-GAAP measures of certain tenants and/or counterparties discussed on this call, please refer to the respective company's public filings with the SEC. Hosting the call today, we have Edward Pitoniak, Chief Executive Officer; John Payne, President and Chief Operating Officer; David Kieske, Chief Financial Officer; Gabriel Wasserman, Chief Accounting Officer; and Lori McCluskey, Senior Vice President of Capital Markets. Edward and team will provide some opening remarks, and then we will open the call to questions. With that, I will turn the call over to Edward.

Edward Pitoniak: Thank you, Samantha, and good morning, everyone. In the next few minutes, you will hear from John Payne on our growth outlook and David Kieske on our financial results and our 2026 guidance. To start, I would like to thank the members of the VICI team for their hard work and dedication. Their contributions are the foundation of our success and we are grateful for everything they do for our company and our shareholders. I would also like to thank our operating partners for all that they do in bringing our buildings to life each and every day. Our leases are triple net; we do not get involved in how our tenants operate their businesses.

But that does not mean we do not pay attention. We pay attention, of course, to what they produce, that is their operating results, but we also pay attention to how they produce results because how they operate today can impact the results they produce in future quarters and years. How gaming, leisure, and hospitality companies produce results is not usually captured in financial statements. And that is because financial statements do not directly tell you much, if anything, about one of the key factors that drives financial results and that key factor is people, namely employees and customers.

When I entered leisure and hospitality in the mid-1990s through ski resort operations, I had the good fortune to be introduced right away to the model that I believe best captures how value is created and sustained in a service-based business, including leisure and hospitality businesses like gaming and other experiential categories. That model was the Service Profit Chain authored by a group of Harvard Business School professors that included Gary Loveman. Here is the essential dynamic of the Service Profit Chain as described in the original Harvard Business Review article published in 1994. “The Service Profit Chain establishes relationships between profitability, customer loyalty, and employee satisfaction, loyalty, and productivity. The links in the chain are as follows.

Profit and growth are stimulated primarily by customer loyalty. Loyalty is a direct result of customer satisfaction. Satisfaction is largely influenced by the value of services provided to customers. Value is created by satisfied, loyal, and productive employees. Employee satisfaction, in turn, results primarily from high-quality support services and policies that enable employees to deliver results to customers.”

This sounds simple and logical. Why would not every service business operate this way? Well, there are lots of reasons starting with creating and sustaining this chain is hard, ceaseless work, especially in operationally intense businesses like gaming, which operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, with multiple guest experience, service, and profit units within a single operation. Because putting the Service Profit Chain into full effect is hard to achieve, it is worth recognizing and celebrating when it is achieved. Last year, Harvard Business School, yes, back to them again, recognized such an achievement when it published a case study entitled “The Venetian Resort: Frontline Engagement as Value Driver.”

It is almost exactly five years ago that we announced our acquisition of The Venetian together with our partners at Apollo. The time was winter 2021, and the COVID pandemic was still severely impacting Las Vegas. As Apollo and VICI collectively underwrote that acquisition, our hope and our stated intention on announcement was that the asset could recover to 2019 levels of profitability by 2026. Well, let Harvard Business School tell you how we collectively fared, and I quote, “To bring Apollo's investment thesis to life, The Venetian’s board of directors made three decisions. First, they appointed Patrick Nichols to lead the transformation.

Second, they committed over $1,000,000,000 in capital to enhance the guest experience from room renovations to convention center upgrades, and third, they implemented a broad-based equity-like program called the Venetian Las Vegas Appreciation Award, grounded in the belief that employee ownership could drive both cultural and operational change.” Continuing the quote, “Three years later, the results were strong. Employee engagement increased materially above historic levels, signaling that cultural change was taking root. Guest satisfaction scores rebounded from pandemic lows of 56% to 61% and the EBITDAR of the property had increased from $487,000,000 pre-pandemic to $777,000,000 in 2024.” End quote.

VICI’s perspective, since Patrick Nichols took over leadership of The Venetian in early 2022, we have been privileged to witness the transformation that ensues when an experiential management team is attentive and responsive every single day to employee effectiveness and morale and its impact on guest behavior, satisfaction, and loyalty. I strongly encourage you to read the HBS case study on The Venetian. You can find a link to a PDF of the case study on our website, www.viciproperties.com. To reiterate, given our triple net leases, we do not operate that goes on within our real estate.

We pay attention to operations and greatly appreciate all that our operators do every day to make our real estate relevant to their end customers and it is those end customers after all who produce the revenue that eventually funds our rent. With that, I will now turn the call over to John Payne.

John Payne: Thanks, Edward. Good morning to everyone. As Edward highlighted, the operating prowess of our tenants is important. When we underwrite new transactions, not only are we assessing the financial profile and projections of these operating businesses, but we are also intentional about deeply understanding the partners with whom we are doing business. As Edward points out, it is an operator's managerial style and ability to retain and attract consumers that filters down to the bottom line.

Over the course of 2025, we have formed and announced several new partnerships that we believe are emblematic of the energized, experienced, and effective operators we seek. Last February, we established a long-term strategic relationship with Caden Eldridge, two companies highly aligned with Vigeon Experiential Real Estate, a $450,000,000 mezzanine loan investment related to One Beverly Hills. In May, we initiated our first partnership with Red Rock Resorts, one of the premier gaming operators, through a $510,000,000 delayed draw term loan for the development of North Fork. Red Rock's fourth quarter results demonstrate how their thoughtful and creative operating model is leading to superior results.

In October, we welcomed Clairvest as our future fourteenth tenant following the announcement of their pending acquisition of operations at MGM Northfield Park, and finally, in November, we announced a $1,160,000,000 sale-leaseback at seven casino properties in Nevada with Golden Entertainment and Blake Sartini, a highly seasoned gaming operator, which will add our fifteenth tenant when the transaction closes, which is expected later this year. These announcements combined represent $2,100,000,000 of committed capital in 2025 at a weighted average initial yield of 8.9%. This volume of commitment and quality of partnership is what differentiates DG.

I would like to take a moment to focus on the Golden transaction. We are very proud to have announced a $1,160,000,000 fee simple real estate deal in the gaming sector involving seven properties located in Nevada, a state that is very protective of land-based, brick-and-mortar gaming. We also look forward to our future partnership with Blake Sartini, current Chairman and CEO of Golden Entertainment, who will own and control a newly formed entity that will acquire the operating business of Golden in connection with the closing of the transaction, subject to Golden shareholder vote as well as customary closing conditions and regulatory approvals.

Blake has a long-tenured history of over thirty years in casino operations, and has an established reputation as an effective operator with strategic focus on the Nevada gaming landscape. We hope to grow together in the coming years.

At B2, we have talked about investing in the Las Vegas locals market for years, and Golden has allowed us the opportunity to do so. The market is demographically attractive. Median household income in the locals Las Vegas market has a ten-year CAGR of 5.5% compared to the national median household income ten-year CAGR of 1.9%. Las Vegas locals market has also maintained incredible resiliency as demonstrated by most recent market results. We acknowledge that the Las Vegas Strip had a relatively softer 2025 compared to prior years, but as we have discussed over the last few quarters, we view 2025 as more of a normalization than a pullback.

For instance, though the number of passengers traveling through Harry Reid Airport was down on a year-over-year basis largely due to a dip in Canadian visitation, it was still the third-busiest year in the airport's history. But as John DeCree astutely noted in a recent research report, despite many domestic casino stocks being out of favor at present, credit spreads for casino companies remain tighter than ever. We agree with John that these spreads are the more appropriate barometer for the health and durability of the casino operating model.

Looking ahead to 2026 in Las Vegas, the strong convention calendar has already started to have an impact with the highly attended CES in January, and with ConEdCon Expo approaching in March, the group segment that has historically been a pillar of Strip demand should provide meaningful support through 2026. Our operators' ability to react and respond to changes in the macroeconomic picture and shifting consumer demand contributes to the longevity of the experiential sectors in which we have invested, and we will seek to continue to diversify our partnership across best-in-class experiential operators just as we did in 2025. Now I will turn the call over to David, who will discuss our financial results and guidance.

Samantha Gallagher: David?

David Kieske: Great. Thank you, John. In terms of financial results, for the quarter, AFFO increased 6.8% year over year to $642.5 million and, on a per-share basis, increased 5.6% year over year to $0.60. For the full year 2025, AFFO increased 6.6% year over year to $2.5 billion and, on a per-share basis, increased 5.1% year over year to $2.38. The compelling growth in AFFO on a per-share basis for both the fourth quarter and full year 2025 was delivered primarily through the reinvestment of our free cash flow. We only increased our share count by 1% in 2025, highlighting VICI’s ability to deliver sustainable per-share returns as our portfolio continues to scale.

Our results once again highlight our highly efficient triple-net model. Our G&A was $19.3 million for the quarter, $65.1 million for the year, and, as a percentage of total revenues, was only 1.9% and 1.6%, respectively. Our net income margin for the year was approximately 69%, one of the highest net income margins in the S&P 500. Touching on the balance sheet and liquidity, our total debt is $17.1 billion, and our net debt to annualized fourth quarter adjusted EBITDA is approximately 5x, at the low end of our target leverage range of 5x to 5.5x. We have a weighted average interest rate of 4.46%, as adjusted for our hedge activity, and a weighted average of six years to maturity.

As of December 31, we have approximately $3.2 billion in total liquidity, comprised of approximately $608 million in cash, $43 million of proceeds available under our outstanding forwards, and $2.4 billion of availability under our revolver.

And turning to guidance, as you saw in our press release last night, we are initiating AFFO guidance for 2026 in both absolute dollars as well as on a per-share basis. AFFO for the year ended 12/31/2026 is expected to be between $2.59 billion and $2.625 billion, or between $2.42 and $2.45 per diluted common share. And just as a reminder, our guidance does not include any transactions that have not closed, interest income from any loans that do not yet have final draw structures, possible future acquisitions or dispositions and related capital markets activity, or other nonrecurring transactions or items. With that, Operator, please open the line for questions.

Operator: Of course. We will now open for questions. If you would like to ask a question on today's call, please press star followed by one. If you wish to withdraw, please press star followed by two. Our first question comes from Caitlin Burrows from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Caitlin Burrows: Hi, everyone. Good morning. I guess it seems like you guys have had some preliminary discussions with Caesars regarding the master lease. So wondering if you could give any updates on what has been discussed, potential update potential and timing, and to the extent you do not want to discuss those, perhaps you could say maybe what is off the table or that an announcement X date is probably not reasonable.

Edward Pitoniak: Yeah. Good morning, Caitlin. Good to talk to you. Yeah. We are obviously not going to get into any kind of detail on what we might have discussed already with Caesars or, more importantly, what we will be discussing. But what I want to emphasize, Caitlin, is that as we address lease issues with Caesars, we are going to do so within the context of our overall approach to portfolio and risk management so that any solutions that we develop and agree to with Caesars help further our larger portfolio goals of optimizing our exposure to any single tenant, to any single category, to any single geography.

And that is the way in which we will evaluate any possible solutions that get shared at the table. We cannot, obviously, and will not specify any single date by which an agreement is made or arrived at. But I would reemphasize the degree to which our history over eight years has been a history in which we continually used our strategies to achieve our goal of getting better. I would remind everyone, not that probably anyone needs reminding, that we started out with 100% exposure to Caesars and only Caesars. Today, we are in the high thirties as a percentage of our annual rent roll.

But what we undertake with Caesars, again, will be a solution that we believe can and will be a win-win, but win-win for us insofar as it also helps further our portfolio optimization goals.

Caitlin Burrows: Got it. Okay. And then I guess, I saw on the 10-K that it mentioned you had placed the senior loan collateralized by Golf Development on nonaccrual status. So wondering can you give more color on this, maybe what visibility you had going on at the property and any assumed impact to AFFO in 2026 guidance?

Edward Pitoniak: Yeah. So this is one of the benefits for us, Caitlin, of having so small a partner roster, whether it be on the asset investment side or on the lending side, is that when issues do arise, we are able to get all over them.

In this particular case, it became clear that our partner, in this case the borrower, was facing a working capital issue, and we made what we think is a very sound tactical decision in relation to this tactical issue of making sure that they would have the working capital to continue to operate and develop in a way that preserves the value of the property so that during that time, they could also focus on recapitalization on their side, and they are working very intensely on that. And we are tracking that with them day by day.

In terms of any impact on earnings for 2026, again, this is a de minimis part of both our loan book and, of course, our overall asset base. But, Gabriel, I do not know if you want to offer any thoughts in regard to Caitlin's around earnings impact.

Gabriel Wasserman: Yeah. I would just reiterate it. It is de minimis, and it is not included in guidance for 2026.

Caitlin Burrows: By not included, you mean there is not a headwind included?

Gabriel Wasserman: Correct. There is no income related to that loan included in 2026 guidance.

Caitlin Burrows: Got it. Thanks.

Operator: The next question comes from Barry Jonas from Truist. Barry, please go ahead. Your line is open.

Barry Jonas: Hey, guys. Good morning. I mean, I guess, just broadly speaking, can you talk about the deal environment, what you are seeing out there between sale-leaseback or increasing loan book discussions? Thank you.

John Payne: Yeah. Good morning, Barry. It is nice to speak with you, and I know we have talked before. I cannot tell you exactly what is in our pipeline, but I will take a moment. I do think it is important to remind everyone what we at VICI get paid for. You know, on the short-term incentive, it is 100% based on a rolling two-year AFFO per-share growth. And our long-term incentive is based on an absolute relative total return. And we aim for 8% to 10% total return annually. And I simply bring that up to orient you on how we approach the pipeline and external growth.

We are all very clear here, and we have been since we started the company, that we need to line up to stand up sustainable external growth. So with that said, we continue to prioritize real estate ownership while also using our loan book that we have talked about to develop new relationships. So we continue to be active. I will remind you, Barry, from at this point last year, I think we had only announced our partnership with Kane and Eldridge. We had not even announced our partnership with Red Rock Resorts or Golden this time last year. So we continue to do our work.

We will continue to employ our relationship-based approach to future transactions, and we feel good about what is out there.

Barry Jonas: Got it. And then, maybe related, maybe not, I noticed there is a change in your accounting leadership with Mr. Wasserman moving to an expanded role for biz dev and experiential credit solutions. So just wondering if any ramifications to Gabriel’s shift there as you think about VICI’s strategy or focus.

John Payne: Barry, well, Gabriel is on the call right now, so I do not want this to go to his head a little bit. But I could not be more excited to have Gabriel shift over and help me and help us grow our business development. He is going to be a great resource. He has already been working with me for the past couple months, primarily on non-gaming and experiential, but I know the whole company—particularly me—is excited to have him be working on business development. He is on the call. He can weigh in as well if he would like.

Gabriel Wasserman: Yeah. Hey, Barry. Thanks for the shout-out, and also want to give a shout-out to Jeremy Waxman, the new Chief Accounting Officer. Jeremy has been part of the team for eight years, joined at the same time as I did, and we are all incredibly excited for his promotion here, and he will continue to do a great job on the accounting side.

Operator: Great. Thank you, guys. The next question comes from Greg McGinniss from Scotiabank. Greg, please go ahead. Your line is open.

Greg McGinniss: Hey, good morning. I was just hoping you could talk about the rationale on the Greektown–Margaritaville combination lease adjustment there and, you know, the genesis of how that deal actually happened, who approached who. Any color would be appreciated.

John Payne: Good morning, Greg. It is nice to hear from you. Just about who approaches who, remember, because we only have 13, 14, 15 tenants, we are always talking about a variety of things, whether that is with PENN or with any of the others. Regarding the combination of the leases, we really saw the opportunity to combine two leases, simplify the escalation structure, remove the volatility by eliminating the percentage rent. This combination clearly enhances our credit protections by cross-collateralizing two of our assets in a master lease with a corporate guarantee, while at the same time, it did not change the amount of rent collected by VICI this year. So we saw it as a really good opportunity.

Both sides came together and we negotiated. Obviously, we announced it when we put out our earnings last night.

Greg McGinniss: Okay. Thanks. Speaking of the kinda limited tenancy and the relationships that you are building on the debt side, how do the debt investments, you know, like with Red Rock as they build out the tribal casino, impact your relationship with them and the discussions that you have with them or how frequently you are communicating with them? How do you view the long-term benefit of that transaction versus just stepping in as bank adjacent, someone that has a pocketbook as opposed to someone that is a long-term partner?

Gabriel Wasserman: Yeah, Greg, it is a good question because we approach all of our investments from a fundamental relationship-based position. And particularly with Red Rock, as we announced, we talked about when we announced that last year, I mean, John and Edward and team and I have been meeting with Frank, Lorenzo, and Steve and team for years and just getting to know them, getting to know their business. And when they called us last fall to come into that syndicate, it was very much this is a way to continue to grow that relationship and develop that relationship, and we still have frequent dialogue with them even though they are the developer and the tribe will operate the asset.

But it is via Red Rock relationship that we did that investment with their credibility and expertise around development. If you have been out or seen any renderings of the North Fork asset, it is on time and slightly under budget, and will open here in the fall. So we are not just a lend-and-stick-the-credit-on-the-shelf-and-walk-away. Everything is relationship-based and who is our partner, and there is strategic merit to the capital that we deploy whether it be through equity investments or the debt investments.

Operator: Thank you. The next question comes from Haendel St. Juste from Mizuho. Haendel, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Haendel St. Juste: Thank you for taking the question. First question is on the guidance. I am just seeing a large majority of the growth you have is locked in through your bumps. So I guess I am curious on some of the variables that could drive us to the upper and lower end of the range. I know it is not a wide range, but it also does not assume transactions or capital markets. So some thoughts there and maybe also some thoughts on the debt coming due later this year. I think it is $1,750,000,000.00 in a low 4% rate. Thanks.

Edward Pitoniak: Yeah. I will start, and then I am going to hand it over to David. Yeah. We obviously do not guide to investment activity that has not yet been announced or even to loan draws that have not been formally calendarized. And, you know, that obviously sets us apart somewhat. And when we boil down the key reasons as to why we do not give investment guidance, like many of our net lease peers do, there are really, I think, two key reasons. The first one is obviously visibility and predictability would be hard to achieve.

Secondly, I, as a risk manager, am a little hesitant around the whole idea of investment guidance because if you give an investment target and you do not know exactly with certainty how you are going to achieve it, it can, in some cases—I am not saying all—can, in some cases, lead investment teams to make investments for the sake of making damn sure they hit the target, and that can often be a road to trouble. But I will now turn it over to David to answer the back half of your question.

David Kieske: Yeah. Just in terms of the range, Haendel, I mean, we have some draw schedules for, you know, Kalahari, North Fork that we just talked about, and a few others. So we, you know, bake in some flexibility around that, in terms of percentages that they may draw each month. There is obviously—you get on our income statement—there are not a lot of other lines. There is a little bit of fluctuation around G&A. There is a little bit of fluctuation on interest income.

And then we do bake in some conservatism, not specificity, around the refis in which you have mentioned that we have upcoming at the end of this year: maturity in September of $500,000,000 and the maturity in December of $1,250,000,000, and then you roll into ’27 and we have another, you know, billion and a half coming due. So we will look to access the bond market later this year, obviously ahead of those maturities, to continue to term out our debt wall, debt ladder, as we have been doing since inception.

Haendel St. Juste: Would your preference be to do term and curious on kind of where you see the ballpark estimated cost of new unsecured debt?

David Kieske: Yeah. We are getting quotes in kinda ten-year is how we look at it, you know, 125, 130 over the ten-year right now. So I do not know what ten-year is exactly this morning, but low fives, you know, all-in coupon. So, as we have done last year, mix of, you know, tens—we would love to do tens, thirties if the target is there—but we have got optionality in a very deep fixed income investor base that we are very grateful for and will come to the market at the right time for the company.

Haendel St. Juste: Got it. My second question is on GOLDEN. I wanted to go back to the pricing on that transaction for a moment. I appreciate the stats on the Las Vegas local market. Certainly encouraging things we heard there. But the mid-7 cap rate is inside of where we have seen other regional deals trade, largely in the 8%+ range. So curious how we should think about and how you are thinking about cap rates for regional versus Strip assets going forward. And if this is a new pricing level you think or are expecting in the market? Thanks.

John Payne: Yeah. Look. We felt very good about the pricing. You have been able to get seven assets with a team of Golden and them being able to operate them and understand them and then also be able to grow with them, we felt that was the appropriate price at the time. We are obviously getting more exposure to Nevada, which we are excited about. So it is easy to kinda lump everything into regional assets, but there is no question there is a big difference between middle-market regional assets as well as what we have described as Nevada regional or local assets.

So we think the price was appropriate for getting a whole portfolio of assets and helping the team grow their business. And I think over the years, we would hope that we do more with the Golden team.

David Kieske: No. You covered it well. There is a difference between regional assets in the local market and the regulatory environment that Nevada—or the importance of the regulatory environment in Nevada—and bricks and mortar and the income and the taxes that they generate and the employment base that they support through that state and their economy?

Haendel St. Juste: Got it. Got it. Thank you, guys.

Operator: The next question comes from Jim Kamlitsch from Evercore. Jim, please go ahead. Your line is open.

Jim Kamlitsch: Thank you. Good morning. It seems like Sphere Entertainment is pretty likely to go forward on their deal down National Harbor. I am just curious, has VICI had any talks with Sphere or their Peterson Company partners about participating in that deal?

Edward Pitoniak: Well, Jim, good to talk to you. Obviously, we do not really—we never—talk about deals in progress of any kind or whether or not any kind of conversations are in progress. But I guess I will say that we have been, ever obviously, able to have a ringside seat on Sphere’s success at The Venetian and, you know, from what we have seen and heard and witnessed through the results, Sphere has created, obviously, a very compelling offering. Sphere is run by a very strong management team not only on the entertainment programming side, but on the construction and development and risk management side.

So, we are obviously paying attention, and perhaps I will leave it there unless any of my colleagues want to offer anything more.

John Payne: Only thing I would add, Edward, is that we are seeing this potentially could go—obviously, we are the owners of National Harbor, and MGM runs it. And what we have seen, as Edward mentioned, in Las Vegas for this year is the amount of new customers that get attracted to that. So it could only help our business and MGM’s business should the next Sphere be built on that campus.

Jim Kamlitsch: That is helpful. Thank you. Appreciate the caveats. And then I know, Edward, again, you cannot really speak to the Caesars discussions, but given the strong rapport between the two companies, is there just sort of like a regular, to use your term, calendarized series of discussions? I mean, is this ongoing or is this sporadic? I am just trying to understand kinda what the interaction feels like.

Edward Pitoniak: Yeah. Yeah. It is obviously—it is regular by nature of us needing, obviously, to have a regular dialogue with the single biggest tenant on our rent roll. And, you know, again, there are conversations that obviously have to take place around issues that are not necessarily specific to the regional lease. But, John, I do not know if you want to add any more than that.

John Payne: No. Look. I mean, if the question was just about the lease, that is a different question than are we talking to Caesars and our tenants about their business to understand the trends. And the latter, we do all the time. And it is, again, one of the benefits of our model where we do not have 500 or 1,000 tenants where you cannot understand the business and trend. By having 14, 15 tenants, we can talk to them and understand specifics about our assets. So I speak frequently. Danny, the lawyer who works in our group, speaks frequently, not only with Caesars, but really all our operators.

Edward Pitoniak: And let me just reiterate, Jim, what I said in response to Caitlin’s question at the outset. For both Caesars and for us, I really believe the ultimate best solutions will be solutions that simply do not only address issues of lease coverage but solutions that enhance both portfolios, which is to say I think there are going to be multiple levers, multiple strategies to achieve portfolio optimization for both parties.

Jim Kamlitsch: Alright. Thank you.

Operator: The next question comes from Anthony Paolone from JPMorgan. Anthony, please go ahead. Your line is open.

Anthony Paolone: Yes, thanks. Maybe for John, can you go through some of the bigger buckets of investments and give us a sense as to where you are more or less active in terms of seeing things these days, whether it is sports, wellness, gaming, international, and so forth.

John Payne: Hey. Good morning, Tony. I would just say yes. But let me just give you some—I will talk about experiential. Obviously, we will continue to grow our gaming portfolio, and I feel that we are well aware of potential opportunities in that space, really all over the world, obviously here in the U.S. When we turn to experiential or non-gaming, there are a couple areas I will just touch on. And do not assume that is all we are looking at, but we only have thirty-five seconds here for me to talk about this.

So a little bit about—you mentioned sports, and this has been really interesting for me. And you hear Gabriel in a new role. He has spent a lot of time on this. And we are in discussions with a variety of sports operators, teams, leagues. And frankly, it just takes time, just like it did when we started the company, taking time to learn all the gaming operators. We are needing to take time to introduce ourselves to sports operators, teams, and leagues. And frankly, the sports financing world is changing rapidly.

You can pick up your news, however you get your news—I almost said newspaper; no one does that anymore—but pick up your news and look, and you will see there is always something happening in sports finance world. And, really, whether it is a university, whether a pro team, they want to understand their options before moving forward. I will tell you about the VICI team is we are getting in front of the right people. We are staying patient because we really do believe there is an opportunity for great growth in the sports infrastructure space.

And the other area we are spending time with because we really like the data we see is in live entertainment. If you look at the data from Millennials and Gen Z, there seems to be a large appetite and willingness to spend a great amount of money on live entertainment. So we continue to spend time understanding, is there an opportunity for our capital in those type of infrastructure developments? So, Tony, I will hit on those, and see what else you got.

Anthony Paolone: Okay. Thanks for that. My only other one, maybe for David, just I think one of the Kane loans has an initial maturity that is, perhaps, next month, if I recall. What is the likelihood of getting paid back on that or does that just get extended out?

David Kieske: Yeah. So you are right. There is an initial maturity next March—or this March, sorry, next month. The likelihood is it gets rolled—unlikely it gets repaid—but gets rolled into a broader construction syndicate that the Kane team is working on. And timing of that is TBD. It is hard to predict. It is a big construction loan, but it is something they are very focused on and ensuring that they get that done in a timely manner.

Anthony Paolone: K. Thank you.

Operator: The next question comes from David Katz at Jefferies. David, please go ahead. Your line is open.

David Katz: Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. John, I was hoping to just go back to the sports opportunity because we have been talking about it for a while, and I understand the answer about patience and persistence. Have you talked about any TAM or sizing that opportunity? Just a little something more that we can chew on while we are waiting.

John Payne: We do not have an exact number. I will let Gabriel weigh in a little bit. What I would tell you, David, is that we have approached 50, 60, 70 universities to date. There is clearly a need for capital to build sports infrastructure. And because we have not announced a deal yet, we are trying to see how our capital can work in that environment. So what I do know is there is a large TAM, and that is just in universities. We are not even talking about professional sports teams, mixed-use facilities around new arenas, new stadiums as well.

So, David, I cannot give you an exact number, but what I do know when I meet with these groups is that there is a need for capital, and there are projects there on the board. Now how they ultimately get financed is something that we continue to be, as I mentioned, being patient in discussion about how our capital can work. Gabriel, anything else you would add to answer David’s question?

Gabriel Wasserman: Yeah. I think just to reiterate, everyone we have talked about really has almost like a nine-figure need for athletic infrastructure on campus. Timeline is shorter for some and more immediate. Others, it is part of a long-term plan, and, you know, hopefully, our capital can be a good fit and can help with their, you know, future development goals and opportunities.

David Katz: Perfect. And then just to follow that up, when we look at, John, some of your commentary about live entertainment venues, which is certainly relevant in our coverage, as well as the sports opportunity—that is a little bit new—how can we think about the duration or durability of that real estate in comparison, you know, to your initial core, which was casinos? I know we have talked about we know what the Strip is essentially going to be in 20, 30 years. How do we feel about that in those other types of real estate venues?

Gabriel Wasserman: I think, David, as I am sure you are seeing in your meetings, a lot of these sports-anchored mixed entertainment districts are popping up all over the country, and they are trying to get some live entertainment to anchor them and to drive visitation, really activates site and increases the value of the surrounding real estate. I think if you talk to any operators that would operate these venues, they see them as a 25-year-plus investment, you know, 25- to 50-year horizon, which really aligns really well with our investment horizon and looking at these as permanent capital investments.

So we see these as really kinda core infrastructure that are part of the development and is a really good fit for our capital and our long-term outlook.

Edward Pitoniak: David, I am really glad you asked that question because it is very—it is not only timely. It is also a perpetual question. And, you know, you have probably heard, David, the kinda acronym of the week, HALO—H-A-L-O—which is to say in the last couple of weeks, as software stocks have self-immolated, suddenly there is a focus on heavy assets, low obsolescence—HALO. And yet, one thing we can never be smug about is obsolescence risk because it is the key value-destruction risk in every category of real estate. So it is something we very much focus on, category by category, location by location, use by use.

And I think Gabriel answered well how we would look, for instance, at sport assets—their likely both useful life, but moreover, their relevant life. But certainly, as we look across experiential categories, that is probably, at least for me, the number one risk factor, which is to say how relevant will this real estate be twenty or thirty years from now.

David Katz: Thank you. Appreciate it.

Operator: Next question comes from Wes Golladay from Baird. Wes, please go ahead. Your line is open.

Wes Golladay: Hey. Good morning, everyone. I just got a question for you on the cost of capital. Your 10-Ks highlighted that sometimes it falls out of favor. Just curious if you are looking at different ways to diversify your equity source, whether it is joint ventures, maybe even start a fund business at some point, but is that becoming a bigger priority?

Edward Pitoniak: Samantha, you want to talk about that?

David Kieske: Yeah. Wes, it is a good question. And we, you know, we have the benefit of those that have come before us. Obviously, Prologis has a very robust and high-quality fund business. We are, you know, watching and seeing what Realty Income does with their fund business. Welltower's. And it is something, you know, more broadly we think about—what is the evolution of the REIT market? And is it, you know, becoming more of an asset management market or more of an asset management model, excuse me, because, obviously, fund flows over the last five, ten, fifteen years have been very, very anemic within the REIT world. So it is something that we are watching and learning and thinking about.

There is nothing imminent on the horizon, but, like any good stewards of capital, we want to make sure that we are forward-thinking and putting the best practices forward.

Samantha Gallagher: David said it well. My job is to make sure we can basically structure anything we need to structure to accomplish our objectives.

Operator: Thank you. The next question comes from John DeCree from CBRE. John, please go ahead. Your line is open.

John DeCree: Hi. Good morning, everyone. I know we talked about New York casinos in prior calls, but with three licenses awarded, Edward, John, David—whoever wants to take this—how are you thinking about New York development opportunities and your appetite to get involved in financing in Huller Park? Can you kind of walk us through your view on New York City development opportunity right now?

John Payne: I will start, and then David can jump in. John, good to talk to you this morning. Obviously, these are very large developments that are going to happen with these licenses. We do already have a partnership, as you know, with the Hard Rock organization that are rebuilding The Mirage in Las Vegas. We also have a partnership with them in Cincinnati. So we are watching to see where there are opportunities for us to be part of a capital stack, so to speak, in New York. So still a wait and see. Still seeing what is going on and where our capital could be productive. The projections of these businesses as well—we are getting a better handle on.

David Kieske: Hey. You covered it well, John. Obviously, you have got two ground-up developments that will be farther out, and obviously, World has a bit of a head start given the existing facility. So, you know, timing is timing, amount, and magnitude, and what partners have been TBD still at this point.

John DeCree: Yeah. Thanks. And I wanted to circle back to your prepared remarks as it relates to The Venetian and the case study that you have referenced and the success that Pat had there and the development capital. I am curious to get your views on opportunities where that could be replicated, where there are large assets, great assets in great locations, casino assets that, with the right focus and capital, could earn significantly more. An asset like The Strat is coming into their portfolio that is a fantastic asset that could maybe have a lot more potential. It was such a unique opportunity for The Venetian, but can you see that being replicated anywhere?

Edward Pitoniak: Yeah, John. Very, very much so. And then, obviously, it is—you know, the fundamental approach that Patrick and The Venetian team have taken is an approach that I believe you fundamentally see across the street at the Wynn. You see it in many other assets up and down the Strip. And if I was going to distill what I think is essential to increasing the vitality and relevance of an asset, it is that the management team has really strong, really broad, really deep cultural insights into how people want to experience the world and how much of those consumer desires they can capitalize on in terms of how they program the asset.

Because at The Venetian, as at so many other places, what you are seeing is, you know, acting on really strong cultural insights on how people want to be entertained, how people want to dine, how people want to socially gather, how people want to shop, how people want to pursue wellness. And that, I think, is the key ingredient. You know, an old friend of ours, David—I do not know if John Arabia coined the term “relevant real estate,” but at any rate, we stole it from him. And that is what we fundamentally believe in, John, is making the real estate as relevant as it can possibly be to consumer desires.

And I think that is an opportunity that can be realized on the Las Vegas Strip, it can be realized in regional assets, and it can be realized in so many different experiential categories. And, again, it really takes having a really profound feel for where not only the culture is, but where it can or should go.

John Payne: And, John, before you drop off, I will just say if Patrick was on the phone, I do not think he would say they are done at The Venetian. I think they still think that, yes, they have grown, but they are a management team that continues to look for opportunities to grow the business in a variety of ways there.

John DeCree: Good point, John. I agree. Thanks, Edward. That is great color. I really appreciate it.

Operator: The next question comes from Smedes Rose from Citi. Line is now open. Please go ahead.

Smedes Rose: Hi. Thanks. I know you have covered a lot of ground here, but I wanted to circle back on something—maybe just a little bit of a clarification to the combination of the two PENN leases. You mentioned there is no change in rent this year to VICI, but it looks like the escalators going forward were reduced or is the rent going forward the same as well?

John Payne: Yeah, Smedes, we simplified the escalation structure there. If you remember, there was a percentage rent in these leases. We removed the volatility by eliminating the percentage rent. I think that is important to see.

David Kieske: We created a master lease with a much simpler structure going forward. The aggregate rent does not change. There is a change in the potential escalation going forward, but it is a much cleaner, simpler structure going forward.

Smedes Rose: Yeah. No. That makes sense—so less upside, but I guess less downside too. I wanted to ask you on the loan book. Just in general, I mean, I know you cannot name names, but is there anything kind of on your watch list or things that you are concerned about coverage going forward, given that you had one that obviously moved to nonaccrual? I realize it is small, but these are the kinds of things that people care about. Just sort of wondering if you can give any color on that.

Edward Pitoniak: Sure. Gabriel, you want to talk about our approach?

Gabriel Wasserman: Yeah. Thank you. So all the other loans in our portfolio are performing and are current on their obligations. But we have an active asset management approach where we review every single lease and loan investment in our portfolio on a quarterly basis. So, as John Payne has been emphasizing, we have really great insight into all of our partners, all of our tenants, all of our borrowers, their underlying financial performance and business plans. So we continue to stay close to them and understand, you know, future forward-looking performance.

Edward Pitoniak: And I am just going to add that Gabriel came to us from the Blackstone Mortgage REIT. So Gabriel has done this before. Have you not, Gabriel?

Gabriel Wasserman: Yeah.

Operator: The next question comes from Rich Hightower of Barclays. Rich, please go ahead. Your line is open.

Rich Hightower: Hey, good morning, guys. I know we covered quite a lot of ground this morning, but I want to piggyback off of—I think it was Wes Golladay’s—question earlier and also referring to, Edward, you said VICI had sort of a target total return annually of 8% to 10%. And if I look at current dividend yield plus AFFO growth as embedded in guidance, you are essentially already there without really investing another dollar in anything that has not been announced. And so, I guess, in that context, where do share repurchases fit into the capital allocation framework? I know that is unusual for a REIT, but sometimes circumstances are unusual.

Edward Pitoniak: Samantha would justifiably smack me if I said we would never do share buybacks. So I am not going to say we would never do share buybacks, but I would consider them highly unlikely, Rich, given what we fundamentally believe is the better use of our cash, retained cash resources, and any other incremental capital that we were able to source to invest in experiential assets that we think will give our investors better long-term returns than would the repurchase of shares. I mean, you are right. The math as it is certainly adds up to what should be a compelling total return.

If we have learned anything though, Rich, in the last few years—and you have lived this right alongside us—you never want to make assumptions about where multiples are going to go in any given cycle and what that is going to mean for the capitalization of earnings growth or, frankly, the capitalization of the base earnings. You know? But as we look out over the course of this year, I think you have heard from John and the team, you know, the energy that they are bringing to growth activities.

And I would reiterate that while we do not obviously give investment guidance, we have a track record of working hard to produce growth within a given year, both for the year and for the following year. And so, you know, we start the year with the guidance that we do, but I would also encourage everybody to look at our track record over our history of where we end up in relation to where we started—in other words, where do we end up with year-end earnings in relation to where we started at the beginning of the year with our initial guidance.

And I think you will see a pretty strong track record of the team working hard to produce results in the year for the year.

Rich Hightower: Okay. Thank you, Edward.

Edward Pitoniak: Thanks, Rich.

Operator: Our final question today comes from Chad Beynon from Macquarie. Chad, please go ahead. Your line is open.

Chad Beynon: Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking my question. Just one for me. Just wanted to go back to the 1.9. Can you talk about how you thought about that level at this time in the cycle, maybe versus prior negotiations? And then more importantly, does this portend for future negotiations in terms of how you are thinking about the coverage? Or is every deal a different snowflake, so to speak? Thanks.

John Payne: Yeah. I will take the last part of your question, which is every deal we have is just so different, whether it is a portfolio of assets, whether it is a single asset. So as it pertains to your question about coverage, every time we look at something, we go through what is the appropriate coverage to start with. Regarding Golden, it is a belief—you know, these deals, they are real estate deals, but we are really, as I said in my opening remarks, underwriting the management team and understanding their plans for the assets and where the markets are and how these assets can perform.

So as we put it all together and we are looking at a portfolio deal of the Golden assets, our team and our investment committee took a look and believed that was the appropriate way to start at that coverage. And we believe that the operating team will be successful running the business based on their future plans.

Chad Beynon: Great. Thank you very much.

Operator: I will now hand the call back to Edward for any closing comments.

Edward Pitoniak: Yeah. Operator, thank you. I will just close out by thanking everybody for dialing in today at the end of what I know has been, for all of you both on the sell and buy side, a very long earnings season. We look forward to seeing many of you at the conferences over the next few weeks and then, of course, again in about two months for our Q1 call. And, Operator, that will conclude the call.

Operator: This does indeed conclude today’s call. Thank you all very much for your attendance. You may now disconnect your lines.

This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. Parts of this article were created using Large Language Models (LLMs) based on The Motley Fool's insights and investing approach. It has been reviewed by our AI quality control systems. Since LLMs cannot (currently) own stocks, it has no positions in any of the stocks mentioned. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.

The Motley Fool recommends Vici Properties. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.