Q1 2026 Gaming & Leisure Properties Inc Earnings Call

April 24, 2026

Operator: Greetings. Welcome to Gaming and Leisure Properties, Inc.'s Q1 2026 earnings conference call and webcast. At this time, all participants will be in listen-only mode. The question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero from your telephone keypad. Please note this conference is being recorded. At this time, I'll now turn the conference over to Joe Jaffoni with Investor Relations. Thank you, Joe. You may begin.

Operator: Greetings. Welcome to Gaming and Leisure Properties, Inc.'s Q1 2026 Earnings Conference call and webcast. At this time, all participants will be in listen-only mode. The question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero from your telephone keypad. Please note this conference is being recorded. At this time, I'll now turn the conference over to Joe Jaffoni with Investor Relations. Thank you, Joe. You may begin.

Speaker #2: The question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero from your telephone keypad.

Speaker #2: Please note this conference is being recorded. At this time, I'll now turn the conference over to Joe Jaffoni with Investor Relations. Thank you, Joe.

Speaker #2: You may begin. And thank you, Rob, and good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining Gaming & Leisure Properties' first quarter 2026 earnings call and webcast.

Joe Jaffoni: Thank you, Rob, and good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining Gaming and Leisure Properties First Quarter 2026 Earnings Call and Webcast. The press release distributed yesterday afternoon is available in the investor relations section on our website at www.glpropinc.com. In addition to the press release, GLPI also posted its supplemental earnings presentation, which highlights the events of the quarter, recent developments, and future considerations, and can be accessed at glpropinc.com. On today's call, management's prepared remarks and answers to your questions may contain forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements address matters that are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed today. Forward-looking statements may include those related to revenue, operating income, and financial guidance, as well as non-GAAP financial measures such as FFO and AFFO.

Speaker #2: The press release distributed yesterday afternoon is available in the Investor Relations section on our website at www.glpropinc.com. In addition to the press release, GLPI also posted a supplemental earnings presentation, which highlights the events of the quarter, recent developments, and future considerations, and can be accessed at glpropinc.com.

Speaker #2: On today's call, management's prepared remarks and answers to your questions may contain forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

Speaker #2: Forward-looking statements address matters that are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed today. Forward-looking statements may include those related to revenue, operating income, and financial guidance, as well as non-GAAP financial measures such as FFO and AFFO.

Speaker #2: As a reminder, forward-looking statements represent management's current estimates, and the company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements in the future. We encourage listeners to review the more detailed discussions related to risk factors and forward-looking statements contained in the company's filings with the SEC, including Form 10-Q and in the earnings release, as well as definitions and reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures contained in the company's earnings release.

Joe Jaffoni: As a reminder, forward-looking statements represent management's current estimates, and the company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements in the future. We encourage listeners to review the more detailed discussions related to risk factors and forward-looking statements contained in the company's filings with the SEC, including Form 10-Q and in the earnings release, as well as definitions and reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures contained in the company's earnings release. On this morning's call, we are joined by Peter Carlino, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at Gaming and Leisure Properties. Also on today's call are Brandon Moore, President and Chief Operating Officer. Desiree Burke, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer. Steve Ladany, Senior Vice President and Chief Development Officer, and Carlo Santarelli, Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy and Investor Relations. Thank you for your patience with that. It's now my pleasure to turn the call over to Peter Carlino.

Speaker #2: On this morning's call, we are joined by Peter Carlino, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at Gaming & Leisure Properties. Also on today's call are Brandon Moore, President and Chief Operating Officer; Desiree Burke, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer; Steve Ladany, Senior Vice President and Chief Development Officer; and Carlos Santorelli, Senior Vice President and Corporate Strategy and Investor Relations.

Speaker #2: Thank you for your patience with that. It's now my pleasure to turn the call over to Peter Carlino. Peter, please go ahead.

Joe Jaffoni: Peter, please go ahead.

Speaker #3: Well, thank you, Joe. Happy to be here this morning, and it's always a lot more fun to make these calls when things are looking good, and we've had a terrific quarter.

Peter Carlino: Well, thank you, Joe. Happy to be here this morning and always a lot more fun to make these calls when things are looking good, and we've had a terrific quarter. Our AFFO and AFFO per share both growing in mid to high single digits through this Q1. As we did as we entered 2026, we sit in a very enviable position with a clear, well-documented line of sight toward a very healthy multi-year AFFO growth, both in our acquisition and development pipelines. With the acquisition of Bally's Lincoln in February, as well as progress on several of our development projects, our future capital commitments stand at roughly $1.8 billion, nearly all of which we expect to deploy by year-end 2027.

Speaker #3: Our AFFO and AFFO per share both growing and, mid to high single digits through this first quarter. And as we did, as we entered 2026, we sit in a very enviable position with a clear and, well-documented, line of sight toward a very healthy, multi-year AFO growth, both in our acquisition and development pipelines.

Speaker #3: With the acquisition of Ballie's Lincoln in February, as well as progress on several of our development projects, our future capital commitments stand at roughly $1.8 billion, nearly all of which we expect to deploy by year-end 2027.

Speaker #3: And despite what was a relatively challenging year in the regional gaming markets, 2026, as you've been seeing, the earnings reports have off to a very, very solid start, and our rent coverage remains strong with advanced majority of our leases covered at $1.8 times or higher.

Peter Carlino: Despite what was a relatively challenging year in the regional gaming markets, 2026 has, you've been seeing the earnings reports, off to a very solid start. Our rent coverage remains strong with the vast majority of our leases covered at 1.8 times or higher. We feel pretty good about opportunity that exists in the market today. We remain pretty active and feel pretty well about our balance sheet and our ability to add transactions in a creative manner. As I've offered many times over the years, I would remind you that there is no transaction that we have to do. We're never pressured just to do something new. I used to say over at Penn National that our customers may be in the gambling business, but we are not.

Speaker #3: We feel pretty good about the opportunity that exists in the market today. We remain pretty active and feel pretty well about our balance sheet and our ability to do a transaction in an accretive manner.

Speaker #3: as I've offered many times over the years, I would remind you that there is no transaction that we have to do, we are never pressured just to do something new.

Speaker #3: I used to say it depend over at Penn National that, our customers may be in the gambling business, but we are not. So, our focus remains on thoughtful transaction, underwriting, careful capital deployment, looking always at the health of our balance sheet, and continuing to position the company for multi-year AFFO and dividend growth.

Peter Carlino: Our focus remains on thoughtful transaction underwriting, careful capital deployment, looking always at the health of our balance sheet, and continuing to position the company for multi-year AFFO and dividend growth. With that, I'll turn this over to Des.

Speaker #3: So with that, I'll turn this over to, to, to Dez.

Speaker #4: Thanks, Peter. For the first quarter of '26.

Desiree Burke: Thanks, Peter. For Q1 2026, our total income from real estate exceeded Q1 2025 by over $24 million. This growth was driven by approximately $33 million in cash rent increases resulting from acquisitions and escalation. For Bally's, the acquisition of Bally's Lincoln Real Estate increased cash rent by $7.5 million. The Chicago lease increased cash income by $5.5 million, and the Bally's Baton Rouge development increased cash rent by $2.6 million. For Penn, the Joliet and Maryland funding increased cash income by $5.4 million. The Sunland Park acquisition increased cash income by $3.8 million. The Ione and Cordish Virginia loans increased cash income by $3.5 million. The recognition of escalators and percentage rent adjustments on our leases added approximately $4.6 million.

Speaker #5: Our total income from real estate exceeded the first quarter of '25 by over 24 million. This growth was driven by approximately 33 million in cash rent increases resulting from acquisitions and escalations.

Speaker #5: For Bally's, the acquisition of Bally's Lincoln Real Estate increased cash rent by $7.5 million. The Chicago lease increased cash income by $5.5 million, and the Bally's Baton Rouge development increased cash rent by $2.6 million.

Speaker #5: For Penn, the Jolion and M Funding increased cash income by 5.4 million. The Sunland Park increased cash income by 3.8 million. The Dry Creek I Own and Quarters Virginia Loans increased cash income by 3.5 million.

Speaker #5: And then the recognition of escalators and percentage rent adjustments on our leases added approximately 4.6 million. In addition, the combination of our non-cash revenue growth steps, investment in lease adjustments, and straight-line rent adjustments partially offset these increases, resulting in a collective year-over-year decrease of $8 million, for the non-cash items.

Desiree Burke: In addition, the combination of our non-cash revenue growth, investment in lease adjustments, and straight line rent adjustments partially offset these increases, resulting in a collective year-over-year decrease of $8 million for the non-cash items. Our operating expenses decreased by $49.8 million, mainly due to the non-cash adjustments in the provision for credit losses. Included in today's release is our full year 2026 AFFO guidance of between $1.212 and $1.223 billion. Or $4.08 to $4.12 per diluted share in OP units. The guidance does not include the impact of future transactions.

Speaker #5: Our operating expenses decreased by 49.8 million, mainly due to the non-cash adjustments and the provision for credit losses. Included in today's release is our full year 2026 AFFO guidance of between 1.212 billion and 1.223 billion.

Speaker #5: For $4.08 to $4.12 per diluted share in OP units. The guidance does not include the impact of future transactions. However, we did include additional development funding of approximately $590 to $640 million, which will be funded relatively even by quarter throughout the remainder of '26, bringing our total development spend to between $750 to $800 million, for 2026 full year.

Desiree Burke: However, we did include additional development funding of approximately $590 to 640 million, which will be funded relatively even by quarter throughout the remainder of 2026, bringing our total development spend to between $750 to 800 million for 2026 full year. The acquisition of Penn's Aurora facility for $225 million is also included in our guidance, and we expect that late in Q2. The anticipated settlement of $363 million of our forward equity is also still expected on 1 June. From a balance sheet perspective, our leverage ratio is at 5x at the low end of our target level.

Speaker #5: The acquisition of Penn's Aurora facility for $225 million is also included in our guidance, and we expect that late in the second quarter. And the anticipated settlement of $363 million of our forward equity is also still expected on June 1.

Speaker #5: From a balance sheet perspective, our leverage ratio is at 5 times, at the low end of our target level. We are still under the impression that, given our balance sheet position, our several-year runway to fund our development projects, and our annual free cash flow over that timeframe, we have optionality to fund our accretive commitments.

Desiree Burke: We are still under the impression that given our balance sheet position, our several year runway to fund our development projects, and our annual free cash flow over that time frame, we have optionality to fund our accretive commitments. As a reminder, our significant development projects do pay us cash rent upon funding. With that, I'll turn it back to Peter.

Speaker #5: As a reminder,

Speaker #1: Are significant development projects do pay us cash rent upon funding . And with that , I'll turn it back to Peter .

Speaker #2: And with that, I'll ask the operator: would you open the call to questions?

Peter Carlino: With that, let's see. Operator, would you open the call to questions?

Speaker #3: Thank you. We’ll now be conducting a question and answer session. If you’d like to ask a question at this time, you may press star one from your telephone keypad, and the confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue.

Operator: Thank you. We'll now be conducting a question and answer session. If you'd like to ask a question at this time, you may press star one from your telephone keypad and a confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star two if you'd like to withdraw your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. One moment please for our first question. Thank you. Our first question is from the line of Anthony Pallone with J.P. Morgan. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #3: You may press star two if you'd like to withdraw your question from the queue For participants using speaker equipment , it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys One moment please .

Speaker #3: For our first question Thank you . And our first question is from the line of Anthony

Anthony Pallone: Great. Thanks, and good morning. Maybe can you start with talking a bit more about what your investment pipeline does look like? How does it feel in terms of what you're seeing out there, yields, all those various dynamics?

Peter Carlino: Well, the pipeline that is outlined, that has been disclosed, obviously, I think you're not talking about that. Assuming you're talking about what we're seeing behind the scenes that we've not yet announced, I'd say we're having a very active dialogue on a number of fronts. The marketplace continues to be very productive. I'd say it ranges from anything to large scale divestiture portfolios coming out of whether it be strategic decisions or M&A type of processes all the way through the tribal discussions we continue to have.

Steven Ladany: There are a number of fronts. There is very active dialogue. I think as far as where we're at in the process, we're obviously not in position to be able to announce anything at this time. I will say from a cap rate perspective, since you brought that up, I think the market is normalizing, and normalizing in an area that's accretive to us. I don't think the 7.5% cap rates that have been previously printed in the not so distant past are indicative of what you will see going forward. I think the market has normalized some. I think credit markets continue to be somewhat turbulent for the gaming operators, and therefore, I think the realization of where cap rates probably play out for our benefit is more indicative of the 8% area that you saw Lincoln done, and some of the other transactions we've announced more recently.

Peter Carlino: There are a number of fronts. There is very active dialogue. I think as far as where we're at in the process, we're obviously not in position to be able to announce anything at this time. I will say from a cap rate perspective, since you brought that up, I think the market is normalizing, and normalizing in an area that's accretive to us. I don't think the 7.5% cap rates that have been previously printed in the not so distant past are indicative of what you will see going forward. I think the market has normalized some. I think credit markets continue to be somewhat turbulent for the gaming operators, and therefore, I think the realization of where cap rates probably play out for our benefit is more indicative of the 8% area that you saw Lincoln done, and some of the other transactions we've announced more recently.

Speaker #4: I think the market is normalizing and normalizing in an area that's accretive to us I don't think the 7.5% cap rates that have been previously printed in the not so distant past are indicative of what you will see going forward .

Speaker #4: I think the market is normalized . Some I think credit markets continue to be somewhat turbulent for for the gaming operators , and therefore , I think the real realization of where cap rates probably play out for , for our benefit is more indicative of the 8% area that you saw Lincoln done and some of the other transactions .

Speaker #4: We've announced more recently .

Speaker #5: Okay , thanks . And then just my second one , as we look to 26 , I Is there a sense or can you give us a sense as to which of the leases may not see bumps in 2026 ?

Anthony Pallone: Okay, thanks. Just my second one. As we look to 2026, is there a sense, or can you give a sense as to which of the leases may not see bumps in 2026 because coverage falls below maybe the 1.8? I don't know if maybe if things are still rolling down before they turn the corner. Just trying to get a sense as to where we should assume a bump this year.

Speaker #5: Because coverage falls below ? Maybe the one eight ? I don't know if , if , maybe if things are still rolling down before they turn the corner and just trying to get a sense as to , you know , where we shouldn't assume a bump this year .

Speaker #1: And . The only lease that we currently do not expect escalation on would be the pinnacle lease . We do have percentage rent adjustments that are coming in on the pinnacle lease , as well as a few other leases , and that should be a small decrease for 2026 .

Desiree Burke: Okay. The only lease that we currently do not expect escalation on would be the Pinnacle lease. We do have percentage rent adjustments that are coming in on the Pinnacle lease as well as a few other leases, and that should be a small decrease for 2026. I think we talked about that last quarter. It's below $4 million for a full year, but we would only see about half of that this year. That is baked into our guidance, and that is just an estimate at this point.

Speaker #1: I think we talked about that last quarter. It's below $4 million for a full year, but we would only see about half of that this year.

Speaker #1: And that is baked into our guidance . And that is just an estimate at this point

Speaker #5: Okay . Got it . Thank you

Anthony Pallone: Okay, got it. Thank you.

Speaker #3: Our next question is from the line of Ronald Camden with Morgan Stanley . Please receive with your questions .

Operator: Our next question is in the line of Ronald Kamdem with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #6: Hey , good morning . This is Jennie on for Ron . Thanks for taking my question The first on development funding , you raised your 2026 guidance to 750 to 800 million .

[Analyst] (Morgan Stanley): Hey, good morning. This is Jenny on for Ron. Thanks for taking my question. The first on development funding. You raised your 2026 guidance to $750 to $800 million. Can you walk us through what drives that increase and what projects may be moving faster than expected? Thank you.

Speaker #6: Can you walk us through like , what drives that increase and what projects may be moving faster than expected ? Thank you

Speaker #1: Sure . So from a project perspective , we did raise the guidance . You're right . By 150 million on the high end for the full year .

Desiree Burke: Sure. From a project perspective, we did raise the guidance, you're right, by $150 million on the high end for the full year. That's mainly due to our Chicago project where we have greater visibility and a clearer spend cadence as the project has progressed and the podium has topped off. It does not mean that we're changing timing of when we think the properties may open. It's just the timing of our spend is coming in quicker than what we had originally anticipated.

Speaker #1: That's mainly due to our Chicago project, where we have greater visibility and a clearer spend cadence as the project has progressed and the podium has topped off.

Speaker #1: It does not mean that we're changing timing of when we think the properties may open . It's just the timing of our spend is coming in quicker than what we had originally anticipated

Speaker #6: Perfect. I think the second one is—yeah.

[Analyst] (Morgan Stanley): Perfect. I think the second one is yep.

Speaker #7: Jenny, the only thing I'll add there is that in Chicago, they will be topping out both the podium and the tower next week.

Carlo Santarelli: Jenny, the only thing I'll add there is that in Chicago, they will be topping out both the podium and the tower next week. Pretty pleased with the progress there and still on track for a H1 2027 opening.

Speaker #7: So, pretty pleased with the progress there, and still on track for first half ’27 opening.

Desiree Burke: Okay.

[Analyst] (Morgan Stanley): Okay.

Steven Ladany: We're always happy about that. Putting money out that gets current interest is a happy experience. That's a very positive event for us.

Carlo Santarelli: We're always happy about that. Putting money out that gets current interest is a happy experience. That's a very positive event for us.

Speaker #2: We're always happy about that . Putting money out that gets current interest is a happy experience that we're . That's a very positive event for us .

[Analyst] (Morgan Stanley): That's exciting. I think the second question may be on Live, Virginia. I think you bought the land in Q1. Maybe talk a little bit more on when to expect the remaining funding to be started in H2 2026, and just more details on that, the timing of funding and the first construction draw will be great.

Speaker #6: That's exciting. I think the second question may be on Live! Virginia. I think you bought the land in the first quarter. Maybe talk a little bit more on what to expect, like when to expect the remaining funding to be started in the second half of '26.

Speaker #6: And just more details on that . The timing of funding and the first construction drone will begin will be great

Desiree Burke: Yes. That is included in our guidance and that is included in the $590 to 640 for the remainder of the year. We haven't provided specific guidance on month by month by project. I'm not exactly certain what else I can add to answer that question.

Speaker #1: Yeah, so I mean, that is included in our guidance. And that is included in the $590 to $640 for the remainder of the year.

Speaker #1: We haven't provided specific guidance on a month-by-month or by-project basis, so I'm not exactly certain what else I can add to answer that question.

Carlo Santarelli: Jenny, just as a reminder, the structure that we have for the Cordish deal is a little bit different than we had for the Chicago transaction and our other development projects where the Cordish equity dollars are all being spent first. I think we'll get better visibility into this as the Cordish money goes in and the development gets underway.

Speaker #8: And Jenny, just as a reminder, the structure that we have for the Cordish deal is a little bit different than we had for the Chicago transaction.

Speaker #8: And our other development projects, where the Cordish equity dollars are all being spent. I think we'll get better visibility into this as the Cordish money goes in and the development gets underway.

[Analyst] (Morgan Stanley): Okay, sounds good. Thanks for taking my question.

Speaker #6: Okay . Sounds good . Thanks for taking my question

Operator: The next question is from the line of Steve Pizzella with Deutsche Bank. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #3: The next question is from the line of Steve Bozzella with Deutsche Bank . Please review with your questions .

Steve Pizzella: Hey, good morning, everyone, and thank you for taking our questions. First, obviously, there's a lot in the pipeline that you covered, but can you share your insights into some of the performance of the recent development openings?

Speaker #9: Hey, good morning everyone, and thank you for taking our questions. First, obviously there is a lot in the pipeline that you covered, but can you share your insights into some of the performance of the recent development openings?

Carlo Santarelli: Yeah, sure, Steve. Look, obviously it's been pretty productive here over the last 6 to even 12 months. You go all the way back to Hollywood Casino Joliet. As you heard from Penn yesterday, I think they're very pleased with the early returns there. Clearly been incredibly additive relative to the prior facility. Live! Petersburg, the Cordish development in Virginia, opened on 22 January. That has been incredibly strong, doing a little bit over $15 million a month in each of the 2 months that that's been open. I think from an indication standpoint, clearly shaping up to be a very good market for that permanent development. The other project that we opened, from a development standpoint in December 2025 was Bally's of Baton Rouge. I think the story there is very much the same.

Speaker #7: Yeah , sure . Steve . You know , look , obviously it's been pretty productive here over the last , you know , six to even 12 months .

Speaker #7: You go all the way back to , to Hollywood , Joliet , you know , as you heard from from Penh yesterday , I think they're very pleased with the with the early returns .

Speaker #7: They've clearly been incredibly additive relative to the prior facility. You know, Live! Petersburg, the Cordish development in Virginia, opened on January 22nd.

Speaker #7: That has been incredibly strong doing , you know , a little bit over 15 million a month in each of the two months that that's been opened .

Speaker #7: So I think from an indication standpoint , clearly , you know , shaping up to be a very good market for that permanent development .

Speaker #7: The other project that , you know , we opened from a development standpoint in December of 25 was , was Bally's Baton Rouge .

Speaker #7: I think the story there is very much the same when you look at kind of the progress relative to the old boat , I think the key there is what we're seeing is market expand fairly nicely in Baton Rouge is driven by that new supply .

Carlo Santarelli: When you look at kind of the progress relative to the old boat, I think the key there is what we're seeing is market expand fairly nicely in Baton Rouge as driven by that new supply and some of that incremental investment. I think, those things in general, those data points give us a lot of comfort for some of the things that we're doing on a go-forward basis here.

Speaker #7: And some of that incremental investment . So I think , you know , those things in general , those data points give us a lot of comfort for some of the things that we're doing on a on a go forward basis here

Steve Pizzella: Okay, very helpful. Thank you. Oh, go ahead.

Speaker #9: Okay . Very helpful . Thank you . And then , oh , go ahead

Brandon Moore: Talk about M.

Speaker #2: Ed

Carlo Santarelli: Oh, yeah. As Peter just mentioned, obviously, if you listen to Penn's call yesterday, I know you did. The hotel expansion at M has been very well-received. Obviously, they're outperforming in that market and appear to be taking some share due to that expansion in capital investment.

Speaker #7: Oh , yeah . And then as , as Peter just mentioned , you know , obviously if you if you listen to Penn's call yesterday , I know you did , you know , the , the , the , the hotel expansion at em has been very well received .

Speaker #7: Obviously, they're outperforming in that market and appear to be taking some share due to that. Expansion and capital investment.

Brandon Moore: Yeah. Also, we opened, in February, our first tribal investment with Ione, which had a very strong opening, and that appears to have grown that market. I think we're very positively inclined with this first set of development projects that have come online and the general performance out of those facilities.

Speaker #8: Yeah . I'll also be opened in February . Our first tribal investment with IWN , which had a very strong opening . And that appears to have grown that market .

Speaker #8: So, I think we're very positively inclined with the first set of development projects that have come online and the general performance out of those facilities.

Steve Pizzella: Okay, great. Very helpful. Maybe just a bigger picture question, if I may. How do you value your protections and the long-term relevance of the site versus the potential free cash flow of an asset or the free cash flow conversion?

Speaker #9: Okay , great . Very helpful . And then maybe just a bigger picture question , if I may , how do you value your protections and the long term relevance of the site versus the potential free cash flow of an asset or the free cash flow conversion

Carlo Santarelli: Sorry, Steve, I think you might have cut out for a little bit there. Could you just repeat that?

Speaker #7: Sorry, Steve. I think you might have cut out for a little bit there. Could you just repeat that?

Steve Pizzella: Just asking, how do you value the location of the real estate compared to your protections and the long-term relevance of a site versus the potential free cash flow of an asset or the free cash flow conversion?

Speaker #9: Just asking, how do you value the location of the real estate compared to, like, your protections in the long-term relevance of a site versus the potential free cash flow of an asset, or the free cash flow conversion?

Desiree Burke: We really do value it on a free cash flow basis. We look at the competition in that location, drive times, whatnot, how we think that location will perform over the long run, and what kind of risks there are in the future. Then we derive what we think the fair coverage would be on a property, and it's all cash flow generated rather than value of land and building. I don't know if that exactly answers your question, but.

Speaker #1: We really do value it on a free cash flow basis . You know , we look at , you know , the competition in that location , drive times , whatnot , how we think that location will perform over the long run and what kind of risks there are in the future .

Speaker #1: And then we derive what we think the fair coverage would be on a property. And it's all cash flow generated rather than value of land.

Speaker #1: And building . I don't know if that answers your question , but

Brandon Moore: I think the location helps you get better visibility into the cash flow, right? As Desiree said, we're valuing off of cash flow. Because these things are licensed and fairly sticky, the location isn't like a CVS where you can move across the street. We do focus on the location, but as Desiree said, really focus on valuing the cash flow.

Speaker #8: I think the location helps you get better visibility into the cash flow . So as Desiree said , we're valuing off of cash flow .

Speaker #8: The location can because these things are licensed and fairly sticky . The location isn't like a CVS where you can move across the street .

Speaker #8: So we do we do focus on the location , but as Desiree said , really , really focused on valuing the cash flow

Steve Pizzella: Okay, great. Thank you.

Speaker #9: Okay , great . Thank you

Operator: Our next question's from the line of John Kochowski with Wells Fargo. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #3: Our next question is from the line of John Kurkowski with Wells Fargo. Please just use your questions.

John Kochowski: Hi, good morning out there. Thank you very much. I'd like to start, Peter. It's good to have you back. I hope your back is feeling better. My first question is on the Caesars master lease too. It had a pretty sizable move down in coverage this quarter. I was wondering if you can give us any color on what's going on with those assets, and maybe if you're seeing any green shoots there that might show a bottoming in coverage for the rest of the year.

Speaker #10: Hi . Good morning out there . Thank you very much . And I'd like to start , Peter , hope you're it's good to have you back .

Speaker #10: Hope your back is feeling better . My first question is on the the Caesars master lease two . You know , it had a pretty sizable move down in coverage this quarter .

Speaker #10: I was wondering if you can give us any color on what's going on with those assets . And maybe if you're seeing any green shoots there that might show a bottoming in coverage , you know , for the rest of the year , yeah .

Carlo Santarelli: Yeah, John, this is Carlo. I think you might have conflated two things, the Caesars master lease or Bally's master lease too. I think if you're asking about Bally's, we pointed out at the time of the Twin River Lincoln acquisition that the pro forma coverage for that lease was going to be a very robust 2.2x after the addition of Lincoln. With respect to Caesars, yes, the master lease with Caesars coverage went to 1.59 in the quarter. It's still a very fine, solid coverage. We've long had a very strong relationship with Caesars management. There were certainly some items in Q4 that I think did negatively impact results, some hold in Atlantic City, also West Tower room renovations at a property there as well for them.

Speaker #7: John , this is Carlo . I think you might have conflated two things . The Caesars Master Lease or Bally's Master Lease . Two , I think you're asking about Bally's , you know , we pointed out at the time of the the twin River Lincoln acquisition , that that pro forma coverage for that lease was going to be a very robust 2.2 times after the addition of Lincoln with respect to Caesars .

Speaker #7: Yes , the master lease with Caesars coverage is went to 1.59 in the quarter . It's still a very fine , solid coverage in .

Speaker #7: We've long had a very strong relationship with Caesars management. There were certainly some items in the fourth quarter that I think did negatively impact results.

Speaker #7: Some hold in Atlantic City . Also , you know , West Tower Room renovations at a property there as well for them . So , you know , I think we feel pretty good that we have our hands around that situation .

Carlo Santarelli: I think we feel pretty good that we have our hands around that situation. As I said, at almost 1.6 times, it's a pretty solid coverage.

Speaker #7: And as , as I said , you know , at almost 1.6 times , it's a pretty solid coverage .

Speaker #10: Thanks , Carlo . And I was complaining , I appreciate you breaking those out for me . And then my second one is just on the city of Chicago is talking about moving ahead with video gambling .

John Kochowski: Thanks, Carlo, and I was conflating two, so I appreciate you breaking those out for me. Then my second one is just on the City of Chicago is talking about moving ahead with video gambling, and Bally's has mentioned an impact to the business. I'm curious on your thoughts on how that may impact Bally's Chicago around rent or coverage.

Speaker #10: And Bally's has mentioned an impact to the business. I'm curious on your thoughts on how that may impact Bally's Chicago around rent or coverage.

Speaker #1: Yes , we did underwrite the VLT facility in Chicago . So , you know , it does definitely impact rent coverage , but it was underwritten in us determining the $940 million that we were willing to provide to Bally's for that project .

Desiree Burke: We did underwrite the VLT possibility in Chicago, so it does definitely impact rent coverage, but it was underwritten in our determining the $940 million that we were willing to provide to Bally's for that project. Can't give you exact numbers as to how it will impact, but certainly the VLT legislation should have an impact if it does go through. We are hearing different things about sweepstakes, Brandon. I don't know if you wanted to add anything on that, but.

Speaker #1: Can't give you exact numbers as what how it will impact . But certainly the VLT legislation should have an impact if it if it does go through we are hearing different things about sweepstakes and I don't know if you wanted to add anything on that , but .

Speaker #8: Yeah , well , the sweepstakes stuff is definitely impacts Illinois . I mean , I think the point in sweepstakes is there's a pretty robust sweepstakes market going on in Cook County today .

Brandon Moore: Yeah. All the sweepstakes stuff, it definitely impacts Illinois. I think the point in sweepstakes is there's a pretty robust sweepstakes market going on in Cook County today. The question of whether or not VGTs are going to have a significant impact on bricks and mortar gaming is somewhat open. We know we'll have some impact. As Desiree said, we underwrote this as if VGTs were in Cook County, and we also, for that matter, underwrote as if Hawthorne had a full gaming facility. Our underwriting in Chicago is fairly conservative, and while we would prefer VGTs not to be in Cook County, we don't view that as being overly adverse to our underwriting with that project if it should come.

Speaker #8: So, the question of whether or not BGS are going to have a significant impact on bricks-and-mortar gaming is somewhat open. We know we'll have some impact.

Speaker #8: And as Desiree said , we underwrote this as if VGS were in Cook County . And we also , for that matter , underwrote as if Hawthorne had a full gaming facility .

Speaker #8: So , so our our underwriting in Chicago is fairly conservative . And while we would prefer not to be in Cook County , we don't view that as being overly adverse to our underwriting .

Speaker #8: With that project, if it should come.

Speaker #10: Very helpful . Thank you

John Kochowski: Very helpful. Thank you.

Speaker #3: Our next question is from the line of Greg McGinnis with Scotiabank. Pleased to see you with your questions.

Operator: Our next question's from the line of Greg McGinnis with Scotiabank. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #11: Hey , good morning . Given some of the challenges that we've seen across gaming this year , firstly , how do you see operators responding ?

Greg McGinnis: Hey, good morning. Just given some of the challenges that we've seen across gaming this year, firstly, how do you see operators responding? What are your thoughts on rent coverage in 2026? Secondly, does it change the nature of the conversations that you're having with casino owners in terms of types of deals that they're looking for?

Speaker #11: What are your thoughts on rent coverage in 2026? And secondly, does it change the nature of the conversations that you're having with, you know, casino owners in terms of types of deals that they're looking for?

Speaker #7: Greg , thanks for the question . I mean , I think we could start with , you know , we've been incredibly encouraged with what we've seen in the first four months across the regional gaming footprint .

Brandon Moore: Greg, thanks for the question. I think we could start with, we've been incredibly encouraged with what we've seen in the first 4 months across the regional gaming footprint this year. I think you saw yesterday very solid earnings from Penn, very solid earnings from Boyd in their Midwest and South region, Churchill earlier in the week, also solid. I think what we're seeing from a regional perspective has been encouraging after, I think, a malaise over 2023 as the industry more or less digested very strong, both margin and top-line comparisons. We certainly saw that period more or less curb rent coverages a little bit. I think, our rent coverages are still in incredibly solid place. We do believe what we've seen early in this year is incredibly encouraging in terms of the progress regional gaming is making.

Carlo Santarelli: Greg, thanks for the question. I think we could start with, we've been incredibly encouraged with what we've seen in the first 4 months across the regional gaming footprint this year. I think you saw yesterday very solid earnings from Penn, very solid earnings from Boyd in their Midwest and South region, Churchill earlier in the week, also solid. I think what we're seeing from a regional perspective has been encouraging after, I think, a malaise over 2023 as the industry more or less digested very strong, both margin and top-line comparisons. We certainly saw that period more or less curb rent coverages a little bit. I think, our rent coverages are still in incredibly solid place. We do believe what we've seen early in this year is incredibly encouraging in terms of the progress regional gaming is making.

Speaker #7: This year . I think you saw yesterday very solid earnings from Penn , very solid earnings from Boyd in their Midwest and South region .

Speaker #7: Churchill earlier in the week also solid . So I think what we're seeing from a regional perspective has been has been encouraging after , you know , I think a malaise over 2025 , as you know , the industry more or less digested , very strong , both margin and top line comparisons .

Speaker #7: And , you know , we certainly saw that period more or less curb rent coverage is a little bit . So I think , you know , our rent coverages are still incredibly solid place .

Speaker #7: And we do believe what we've seen early in this year is , is incredibly encouraging in terms of the progress regional gaming is making .

Speaker #7: I'm sorry. I think there was a second part to your question.

Brandon Moore: I'm sorry, I think there was a second part to your question.

Carlo Santarelli: I'm sorry, I think there was a second part to your question.

Speaker #11: Yeah . Curious on how , you know , if that's had any influence on the types of conversations that you're having with casino owners , developers , folks looking to make investments , that kind of thing , I think .

Greg McGinnis: Yeah. Curious on how, if that's had any influence on the types of conversations that you're having with casino owners, developers, folks looking to make investments, that kind of thing?

Brandon Moore: I think the average-

Speaker #11: Has it changed ?

Greg McGinnis: Has it changed your perspective?

Speaker #4: Yeah . Look , I , I think I think the one thing that that's , that's at least been been more apparent appearing to us is that the operators , developers , etc.

Brandon Moore: Yeah, look, I think the one thing that's at least been more apparent to us is that the operators, developers, et cetera, who would be paying the rent, have been significantly more focused on ensuring that they have a level of cushion and a higher rent coverage starting out of the gate. I think whereby the market in the past may have been a little more nonchalant with respect to their starting point on a rent coverage basis. I think due to some of the struggles that have taken place in things like Maverick, you've seen that portfolios and pieces of portfolios that have been leased that had extra cushion on the rent coverage side have retained value for the owners. Whereas the assets that have significantly lower coverage have struggled to redeem the same type of credit recovery.

Speaker #4: , who would be paying the rent have been significantly more focused on ensuring that they have a level of cushion and a higher rent coverage .

Speaker #4: Starting out of the gate . So I think where , where by the market in the past may have been a little more nonchalant with respect to their starting point on rent coverage basis , I think due to some of the struggles that that , you know , have taken place in , in things like Maverick , you've seen that that portfolios and pieces of portfolios that have been leased , that had extra cushion on the rent coverage side have retained value for the owners Whereby the , whereas the assets that have significantly lower coverage have have struggled to redeem the same type of credit recovery .

Speaker #4: So I think folks are focused on starting with higher rent coverage out of the box.

Brandon Moore: I think folks are focused on starting with higher rent coverage out of the box.

Speaker #11: Thank you. That's it for me.

Greg McGinnis: Thank you. That's it from me.

Speaker #3: Our next question is from the line of Brad Heffron with RBC Capital Markets . Please . Are you with your questions

Operator: Our next question's from the line of Brad Heffern with RBC Capital Markets. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #12: Yeah . Hey , good morning everyone . There's been a lot of investor concern about the rise of prediction markets and the impact on gaming .

Brad Heffern: Yeah. Hey, good morning, everyone. There's been a lot of investor concern about the rise of prediction markets and the impact on gaming. How do you guys view that, and is that something that you think about when you're underwriting new projects?

Speaker #12: How do you guys view that, and is that something that you think about when you're underwriting new projects?

Speaker #8: I think I think prediction markets in underwriting , we lump in with iGaming . I would say we view it similarly . think obviously iGaming has got a more specific path and traction through the state regulation than the predictive markets , which at a federal level , on a state level are completely unregulated .

Brandon Moore: I think prediction markets in underwriting, we lump in with iGaming. I would say we view it similarly. I think obviously iGaming has got a more specific path and traction through the state regulation than the predictive markets, which, at a federal level, on a state level, are completely unregulated, and at a federal level, I will say lightly regulated at best. I think that there are a lot of challenges to the prediction markets right now. While I won't tell you we're not concerned about the prediction markets, I don't think we're overly concerned about the prediction markets at the moment, given the challenges and the fact that, look, there was iGaming legislation, I think in 9 different states, maybe a couple more, but 9 that we were sort of actively monitoring this session.

Speaker #8: And at a federal level , I will say lightly regulated at best . I think that there are a lot of challenges to the prediction markets right now .

Speaker #8: And while I won't tell you , we're not concerned about the prediction markets , I don't think we're overly concerned about the prediction markets at the moment , given the challenges and the fact that , look , there were there was iGaming legislation , I think in nine different states , maybe maybe a couple more .

Speaker #8: Being that we were sort of actively monitoring this session, it really doesn't look like any of them are going to pass, including Illinois and New York.

Brandon Moore: It really doesn't look like any of them are going to pass, including Illinois and New York. They're still alive, but they don't look promising. Colorado may be the one that's a little more open, but the point being, I don't think the proliferation of iGaming is going to accelerate this session, which I think is good for us overall. I think the prediction markets. We'll have to wait and see. We're keeping a close eye on it, but I wouldn't say we're overly concerned at the moment.

Speaker #8: You know , there's still alive , but they don't they don't look promising . Colorado may being the one that's a little more open , but the point being , I don't think the proliferation of iGaming is going to accelerate this this session , which I think is good for us overall .

Speaker #8: And I think the predictive markets will have to wait and see. We're keeping a close eye on it, but I wouldn't say we're overly concerned at the moment.

Speaker #12: Okay . Got it . Thank you for that . And then on Rockford , obviously that loan is coming up for the initial maturity date soon .

Brad Heffern: Okay. Got it. Thank you for that. On Rockford, obviously that loan's coming up for the initial maturity date soon. Do you expect that to be extended? What do you think happens, ultimately at expiration there? Do you think it just gets paid off or maybe converted into ownership of the improvements?

Speaker #12: Do you expect that to be extended ? And then what do you think happens ultimately at expiration there ? Do you think it just gets paid off or maybe converted into ownership of the improvements

Speaker #1: So, Rockford, we've obviously begun discussions with those, but we haven't made a final determination as to what we're going to do with that loan at this point.

Brandon Moore: Rockford, we've obviously begun discussions with those, but we haven't made a final determination as to what we're going to do with that loan at this point.

Desiree Burke: Rockford, we've obviously begun discussions with those, but we haven't made a final determination as to what we're going to do with that loan at this point.

Speaker #12: Okay . Thank you

Brad Heffern: Okay. Thank you.

Speaker #3: Our next question is from the line of Smedes Rose with Citi . Please see with your questions

Operator: Our next question's from the line of Smedes Rose with Citi. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #13: Hi . Thanks . I wanted to ask you , there's been a lot of obviously , discussion in the media about Caesars potentially going private .

Smedes Rose: Hi. Thanks. I wanted to ask you, there's been a lot of, obviously, discussion in the media about Caesars potentially going private. That's led to various discussions around changes that might happen at the corporate level with that company. I'm just wondering, just in terms of your leases, could you just maybe talk about how, I guess, sort of durable they are in terms of, do they attach going forward or are they easy to, well, not easy, but could they sort of be gotten out of, if you will, if someone wanted to do that?

Speaker #13: And then that's led to various discussions around changes that might happen at the corporate level with that company . And I'm just wondering , just in terms of your leases , could you just maybe talk about how I guess sort of durable they are in terms of , you know , do they attach going forward or are they easy to .

Speaker #13: Well , not easy , but could they sort of be gotten out of , if you will , if someone wanted to do that

Brandon Moore: Sometimes illegal. Yeah. Good morning, Smedes. I think it depends on the structure of the transaction. Overall, generally speaking, our leases do have a concept in them of a discretionary or qualified transferee if you've looked at the leases that we have publicly available, but most of our leases all have the same concept. In which case, it's possible that a transaction could be structured where GLPI would not have a consent right to it. That being said, there are a number of different things that have to be true for that to be the case, and I don't think we have enough visibility into the potential structure of that transaction to ultimately determine whether or not.

Speaker #2: , that is .

Speaker #8: Yeah . Good morning . You know , I think it depends on the structure of the transaction . So over overall , generally speaking , our leases do have a concept in them of a discretionary or qualified transferee .

Speaker #8: If you've looked at the leases we have publicly available, most of our leases all have the same concept, in which case it's possible that a transaction could be structured where GLPI would not have a consent right to it.

Speaker #8: That being said, there are a number of different things that have to be true for that to be the case, and I don't think we have enough visibility into the potential structure of that transaction to ultimately determine whether or not a consent will be required from GLP-I.

Steven Ladany: A consent will be required from GLPI. Clearly, if it is, we'll do what's in the best interest of our shareholders in evaluating that. At the moment, we don't have enough information. I think our conversations with Caesars on this topic have been relatively few, but we have a close relationship with that management team, and if that transaction does go through and that management team survives, I think overall, we view that as a neutral transaction to us. Could be positive if there are things that fall out of it, but I don't think we're overly concerned about it. The impact on our lease is, I would say is TBD at the moment.

Speaker #8: Clearly , if it is , we'll do what's in the best interest of our shareholders and evaluating that . But at the moment , we don't have enough information .

Speaker #8: I think our conversations with Caesars on this topic have been relatively few, but we have a close relationship with that management team.

Speaker #8: And if that transaction does go through and that management team survives, I think overall we view that as a neutral transaction to us; it could be positive.

Speaker #8: If there are things that fall out of it, but I don't think we're overly concerned about it. But the impact on our lease is, I would say, is TBD at the moment.

Speaker #13: Okay , okay . Fair enough . I just wanted to ask you bigger picture too , just in general , you mentioned you started out the call talking about , you know , you were an active dialogue across a number of different opportunities .

Smedes Rose: Okay. Fair enough. I just wanted to ask you bigger picture, too, just in general. You started out the call talking about you're in active dialogue across a number of different opportunities. Do you feel like owners who you're speaking with have other sources of capital that are readily available to them? Or do you think that's become more scarce, over the last several quarters, in terms of either direct competitors to you or maybe just more traditional regional bank lending and things like that?

Speaker #13: Do you feel like , you know , owners who are speaking with have other sources of capital that are readily available to them , or do you think that's become more scarce , like over the last several quarters in terms of either direct competitors to you or maybe just more traditional regional bank lending and things like that ?

Speaker #4: So , look , I think there's , there's the haves and the have nots , right ? To be totally honest and candid , there , there are certain parties that I think would , would probably struggle to find inexpensive capital that would be easily accessible based on their , their circumstances , whether it be their leverage or their operational profile , or maybe even just the fact that they're very small or only have 1 or 2 assets , it's harder to get larger banks to finance those types of endeavors .

Steven Ladany: No, look, I think there's the haves and the have-nots, right? To be totally honest and candid, there are certain parties that I think would probably struggle to find inexpensive capital that would be easily accessible based on their circumstances, whether it be their leverage or their operational profile, or maybe even just the fact that they're very small or only have one or two assets. It's harder to get larger banks to finance those types of endeavors. Some of the transactions, though, to be totally candid, the larger operators, even the private ones that are larger, family owned, et cetera, they have plenty of access to capital. It really comes down to broader decision making and whether it's a strategic fit to do a sale-leaseback versus to do a traditional bank loan or bond or what have you.

Speaker #4: Some of the transactions , though , to be totally candid , the larger operators , even the private ones that are larger family owned , etc.

Speaker #4: , they have they have plenty of access to capital . It's really comes down to broader decision making . And whether it's a strategic fit to , to do a sale leaseback versus to , to do a traditional bank loan or bond or what have you .

Speaker #4: So the dialogue depends on the on the counterparty and some of the counterparties have definitely have access to capital and others do not

Steven Ladany: The dialogue depends on the counterparty, and some of the counterparties definitely have access to capital and others do not.

Speaker #13: Thank you . I appreciate it

Smedes Rose: Thank you. Appreciate it.

Speaker #3: Our next questions are from the line of Barry Jonas with Truist Securities . Please see with your questions .

Operator: Our next questions are from the line of Barry Jonas with Truist Securities. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #14: Hey guys . Good morning . Peter , great to have you back . I that back is better .

Barry Jonas: Hey, guys. Good morning. Peter, great to have you back. Hope that back is better. Wanted to start.

Speaker #10: Why don't you start .

Peter Carlino: Slow process, Barry, but we're back. I don't recommend back surgery to anybody, by the way.

Speaker #2: Barry . But but we're back . I don't recommend back surgery to anybody . By the way

Speaker #14: We'll follow that . I want to start with Bally's . You know , they appear to be looking to do a bit more M&A , including a large deal internationally .

Barry Jonas: We'll follow that. I want to start with Bally's. They appear to be looking to do a bit more M&A, including a large deal internationally. Maybe more, as it relates to corporate guarantee, does that influence how you think about future deals and underwriting with them?

Speaker #14: Internationally . So so maybe more as it relates to corporate guarantee , does that influence how you think about future deals and underwriting with them

Speaker #8: I don't think I think our answer is unchanged in the sense that we have always underwritten deals at the property level . If Bally's had a great transaction for a property level asset that we thought was accretive to us in our shareholders , I don't think we'd let Bally's work in international work dissuade us from that being said , clearly , that's another capital allocation decision that they've made with the various projects they have in place .

Steven Ladany: I think our answer is unchanged in the sense that we have always underwritten deals at the property level, and if Bally's had a great transaction for a property-level asset that we thought was accretive to us and our shareholders, I don't think we'd let Bally's work and international work dissuade us from that. That being said, clearly that's another capital allocation decision that they've made with the various projects they have in place. I think that's our focus is more on what, if any, impact does that have on the projects that we have with Bally's and their ability to execute on those. At the moment, we're not concerned with Bally's ability to fund and complete Chicago, for example. I think it's more impactful in that way than it is on the overall risk as we look at it, sort of more property level performance.

Speaker #8: And I think that our focus is more on what, if any, impact that has on the projects that we have with Bally's, and their ability to execute on those?

Speaker #8: And at the moment , we're not concerned with a Bally's ability to fund and complete Chicago , for example . But but I think it's more impactful in that way than it is on the overall risk as we look at it sort of more property level performance

Speaker #14: Understood . And then just for a follow up , you know , appreciate the general comments on the pipeline , but any , any updated thoughts in terms of international or non-gaming opportunities and where that , that ranks in terms of the opportunity set

Barry Jonas: Understood. Just for a follow-up, appreciate the general comments on the pipeline. Any updated thoughts in terms of international or non-gaming opportunities and where that ranks in terms of the opportunity set?

Speaker #4: Well , I'll take international and somebody else take non-gaming . So on the on the on the international front , you know , we , we have had conversations around international properties as recently as this last quarter .

Steven Ladany: Well, I'll take international and somebody else can take non-gaming. On the international front, we have had conversations around international properties as recently as this last quarter. As we've said many quarters in the past on these calls, there's a tax implication aspect of it, there's a repatriation implication aspect of it, and there's just the legal and customs aspect that we have to get comfortable with, depending on the jurisdiction that we're looking at the domiciled business in. We continue to look there. I would love to tell you that we could get comfortable and get something done in an international capacity, non-Canada, just because that seems to be where others have gone, and so I'd like to do some new cutting edge thing somewhere else. I'm not willing to tell you that I think that's coming anytime soon. We're going to keep working.

Speaker #4: But , you know , as we've said , many quarters in the past on these calls , there's always a there's a tax implication aspect of it .

Speaker #4: There's a repatriation implication aspect of it . And there's just the legal and and customs aspect that we have to get comfortable with depending on the jurisdiction that we're we're looking at the domiciled business in .

Speaker #4: So we continue to look , look there , I would I would love to tell you that we could get , you know , we could get comfortable and get something done in international capacity .

Speaker #4: Not Canada, just because that seems to be where others have gone. And so I'd like to do some new, cutting-edge thing somewhere else.

Speaker #4: But I'm not willing to tell you that . I think that's coming anytime soon . So we're going to keep working . We'll keep we'll keep trying to do our diligence and try to look for opportunities that would equate to an accretive transaction for us here in the United States .

Steven Ladany: We'll keep trying to do our diligence and try to look for opportunities that would equate to an accretive transaction for us here in the United States when we bring all the money back and pay all the taxes.

Speaker #4: When we bring all the money back and pay all the taxes.

Speaker #2: And by the way , that answer is a perfect response to the non-gaming as well . We look at a lot of stuff , as I like to say , we kiss a lot of frogs , but we're still looking for a princess in that category

Peter Carlino: By the way, that answer is a perfect response to the non-gaming as well. We look at a lot of stuff. As I like to say, we kiss a lot of frogs, but we're still looking for a princess in that category.

Speaker #14: Great. Thanks, guys. Thanks, guys.

Barry Jonas: Great. Thanks, guys.

Speaker #3: Our next questions are from the line of Todd Thomas with KeyBanc Capital Markets. Please proceed with your questions.

Operator: Our next questions are from the line of Todd Thomas with KeyBanc Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #15: Yeah . Hi . Thanks . Good morning . Brandon , can you just talk a little bit more about the , you know , normalizing cap rates that you discussed ?

Todd Thomas: Yeah. Hi. Thanks. Good morning. Brandon, can you just talk a little bit more about the normalizing cap rates that you discussed? What's driving that specifically? From your comments, it sounded like it was about 50 basis points. Is that sort of the right range to quantify the change that you're seeing in cap rate expansion?

Speaker #15: What's driving that specifically and from your comments , it sounded like it was about 50 basis points . I mean , is that sort of the right range to kind of quantify the quantify the change that that you're seeing in cap rate expansion ?

Speaker #8: Well , I'll , I'll let Steve , Steve , Steve , I believe , answered that the first time I will , I will say , I think what's led to the normalizing of cap rates , with Steve is referencing is obviously , we have a lot of data points behind the scenes of things that are coming to fruition .

Brandon Moore: Well, Scott, I'll let Steve answer. Steve, I believe, answered that the first time. I will say, I think what's led to the normalizing of cap rates, what Steve is referencing, is obviously we have a lot of data points behind the scenes of things that are coming to fruition, and this happens all the time, where things bubble up to the surface, where people are interested in understanding the valuation of what they have. I think Steve's pointed, and he can say it again, but it was just that those cap rates we're seeing are beginning to tighten in a range, and we think we have a pretty good feel of where the right cap rate is for transactions. I say that, at least the cap rate that we'd be willing to execute on transactions. Steve...

Speaker #8: And this happens all the time where things bubble up to the surface , where people are interested in understanding the valuation of what they have .

Speaker #8: And I think Steve's point , and he can he can make it again . But it was just that , that those cap rates we're seeing are beginning to tighten in a range .

Speaker #8: And we think we have a pretty good feel of where the right cap rate is for transactions . And I say that at least the cap rate that we'd be willing to execute on transactions , but , Steve , I don't know .

Speaker #4: Yeah , yeah . I'm sorry . I wasn't trying to peg a 50 basis point number out there I don't think it's as precise as that , to be honest with you .

Steven Ladany: Yeah. I'm sorry. I wasn't trying to peg a 50 basis point number out there. I don't think it's as precise as that, to be honest with you. Each transaction's a negotiation. You're sitting across from a counterparty, and you're trying to figure out what makes sense for you and what makes sense for them, and what's their need and what's your desire, and it all has to go into the blender. My point was, I think if you were to say, what do I think the average market clearing regional gaming asset sale-leaseback on a regular way, down the middle of the fairway transaction's going to go for right now, I think it's going to have an eight in front of it. It's not going to have a seven in front of it.

Speaker #4: Each , each transaction is the negotiation . You're you're sitting across from a counterparty and you're trying to figure out what makes sense for you and what makes sense for them and what's their need and what's your desire .

Speaker #4: And it all has to kind of go into the blender . My point was , I think if you were to say , what , what do I think the .

Speaker #4: Average market clearing , regional gaming asset sale leaseback on a on a regular way down the middle of the fairway transaction is going to go for right now , I think it's going to have an eight in front of it .

Speaker #4: It's not going to have a seven in front of it. I'm not trying to be more specific than that. As far as 50 basis points or 62.5, but I think the reality is that's just kind of where the market's trended at the moment.

Steven Ladany: I'm not trying to be more specific than that as far as 50 basis points or 62.5. I think the reality is that's just kind of where the market's trended at the moment. It doesn't mean that it can't pivot on a dime, and six months from now, we're telling you the market's moved again. We would obviously anticipate and hope that our cap rate, where we trade, our implied cap rate, would grind tighter as well as the market then grinding tighter at that point. Where we're at today, I think from a cost of capital spread. It, where we're at, I think, we're comfortable that the market is probably yielding in the eights.

Speaker #4: It doesn't mean that it can't pivot on a dime in six months from now . We're telling you the market's moved again , but we would obviously anticipate and hope that our cap rate , where we trade our implied cap rate , would would grind tighter as well as the market , then grinding tighter at that point .

Speaker #4: So where we're at today, I think from a cost of capital spread, where we're at, I think, you know, we're comfortable that the market is probably yielding in the eights.

Speaker #15: Okay . That's helpful clarification . Thank you . And then Desiree , I had a question about the guidance adjustment . You know , the nominal FFO was increased about 30 million at the at the midpoint .

Todd Thomas: Okay. That's helpful clarification. Thank you. Desiree, I had a question about the guidance adjustment. The nominal AFFO was increased about $30 million at the midpoint, I think mostly at the low end, but it looked like it was a little more than it would seem to be due to the higher capital deployment on its own. You talked about Chicago, but I was just curious if there were some other changes around either earlier cadence of funding that had an impact or something else altogether. Can you just talk about some of the changes there around the guidance specifically?

Speaker #15: I think mostly at the low end , but , you know , it looked like it was a little more than than it would seem to be due to the higher capital deployment on its own .

Speaker #15: And you talked about Chicago , but , you know , I was just curious if there was , you know , if there were some other changes around either earlier cadence of funding that had an impact or something else altogether , you know , can you just talk about some of the changes there around the guidance , specifically

Speaker #1: Sure. So really, it is mainly due to the funding changes, because that's going to increase their income. That's going to have an impact on our interest income on the high end.

Desiree Burke: Sure. Really it is mainly due to the funding changes because that's going to increase, obviously, our income. That's going to have an offsetting impact on our interest income. On the high end, we did see some increase in SOFR rates, obviously, this quarter, so that some of the benefit gets eaten up by the SOFR rate assumptions in the high end of our guidance that we had already had a little bit of additional interest expense put into the low end of our guidance. That's why you're not seeing an even change. I will also tell you there's some rounding involved because the stronger the run-rate is coming into the guidance, it takes a lot less AFFO to increase that per share amount.

Speaker #1: We did see some increase in sulfur rates . Obviously , this quarter . So that some of the benefit gets eaten up by the sulfur rate assumptions in the high end of our guidance that were not , you know , that we had already had a little bit of , you know , additional interest expense put into the low end of our guidance .

Speaker #1: So that's why you're not seeing an even change . I will also tell you , there's some rounding involved because , the stronger the round is coming into the guidance , you know , it takes a lot less AFFO to increase that per share amount

Speaker #15: Okay . That's helpful . Did anything change there in terms of G and A and the stock based comp component ? Did anything change there with regard to the mix .

Todd Thomas: Okay. That's helpful.

Desiree Burke: Okay.

Todd Thomas: Did anything change there, in terms of G&A and the stock-based comp component? Did anything change there with regard to the mix, as far as the-

Speaker #15: As far as the reconciliation , there . Okay . Okay . All right . Thank you .

Desiree Burke: Not at all.

Todd Thomas: reconciliation there? Okay.

Desiree Burke: No.

Todd Thomas: All right. Thank you.

Speaker #16: All right . Thank you

Speaker #3: Our next question is from the line of Just with Mizuho Securities. Please go ahead. We have received your questions.

Operator: Our next question's from the line of Haendel St. Juste with Mizuho Securities. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #17: Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Desiree, can you talk a bit more about the positioning of the balance sheet in the current macro?

Haendel St. Juste: Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my question. Desiree, can you talk a bit more about the positioning of the balance sheet in the current macro? Lots of, obviously, volatility. You've got $1.8 billion of capital deployment you've outlined over the next 18 months. Leverage today, is that the low end of your target range? It looks like it would be at the high end on a pro forma basis. Are you willing to let leverage tick up? How are you thinking about balance sheet management over the next 18 months, and perhaps the need for new equity? Thank you.

Speaker #17: Lots of obviously , volatility . You've got 1.8 billion of capital deployment . You've outlined over the next 18 months . Leverage today is at the low end of your target range , but looks like it would be at the high end on a pro forma basis .

Speaker #17: So, are you willing to let leverage tick up? How are you thinking about balance sheet management over the next 18 months, and perhaps the need for new equity?

Speaker #17: Thank you

Speaker #1: Sure. So, you sit here today with $275 million of cash that has not been deployed into that run rate of five times.

Desiree Burke: Sure. We sit here today with $275 million of cash that has not been deployed into that run rate of 5x, right? As that becomes income earning, the leverage ratio will not increase for that portion or for the $363 million of forward equity that we have outstanding. We also have free cash flow to the tune of $230 million or so per year. We have the majority of that still coming for this year. Then, the rest, as we said, we can do either debt or equity depending on what we expect to do. I still expect us to be at the end of this when all of our transactions are completed, the remaining $1.8 billion is funded. We get full credit for the AFFO that those transactions derive.

Speaker #1: Right . So as that , you know , becomes income earning the the leverage ratio will not increase for that portion or for the $363 million of equity that we have outstanding We also have free cash flow to the tune of 230 million or so per year .

Speaker #1: So we have the majority of that still coming for this year . And know , the rest , as we said , we can do either debt or equity depending on what we expect to do .

Speaker #1: But I still expect us to be, at the end of this, when all of our transactions are completed, the remaining $1.8 billion is funded.

Speaker #1: We get full credit for the AFFO that those transactions derive, will still be at the low end of our 5 to 5 and a half times guidance for leverage.

Desiree Burke: We'll still be at the low end of our 5 to 5.5 times guidance, or leverage, sorry.

Speaker #1: Sorry .

Speaker #17: Got it , got it . I appreciate that . And then more broadly , the growth for this year is mid-single digits . I think next year is kind of the same Is this something you think is sustainable beyond the next 18 months .

Haendel St. Juste: Got it. No, I appreciate that. More broadly, the growth for this year is mid-single digit. I think next year is kind of the same. Is this something you think is sustainable beyond the next 18 months? I'm curious how you're thinking about the sustainability of the long-term cash flow growth from the portfolio here, and if the next two years are more of an aberration or something you feel you can sustain over the longer term. Thanks.

Speaker #17: I'm curious how you're thinking about , you know , the sustainability of , you know , the long term cash flow growth from the portfolio here .

Speaker #17: And if the next two years is more of an aberration, or something you feel you can sustain over the longer term. Thanks.

Speaker #16: Thanks .

Speaker #1: Yeah . So , you know , look , I can clearly see through 27 and see the growth there . Just as you can at 28 and beyond .

Desiree Burke: Look, I can clearly see through 2027 and see the growth there just as you can. At 2028 and beyond, depends on which transactions that we come up with over the next year or two. We certainly will have growth related to escalation.

Speaker #1: Depends on which transactions that we come up with over the next year or two. We certainly will have growth related to escalation on our transactions.

Chris Darling: On our transactions. Outside of that, until we do an accretive transaction, I can't really predict 2028 and beyond.

Desiree Burke: On our transactions. Outside of that, until we do an accretive transaction, I can't really predict 2028 and beyond.

Speaker #1: But you know, outside of that, until we do an accretive transaction, I can't—I can't really predict 2028 and beyond.

Speaker #18: Fair enough. Thank you. I appreciate the time.

Haendel St. Juste: Fair enough. Thank you. Appreciate the time.

Speaker #3: The next question is from the line of Rich Hightower with Barclays. Please proceed with your question.

Operator: The next questions are from the line of Richard Hightower with Barclays. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #11: Hey , good morning guys . Thanks for taking the questions here . So I want to go back to Smeed's question on the potential Caesars deal and how it how it might affect G .

Richard Hightower: Hey, good morning, guys. Thanks for taking the questions here. I want to go back to Smedes's question on the potential Caesars deal and how it might affect GLPI. There's obviously a parent guarantee in place on your master lease, and I appreciate the idea that it's really four-wall coverage that's the primary focus in any scenario. But what's your legal understanding of the ability of the parent guarantee to travel with the lease under a variety of potential deal structures, and how should we think about that from the outside? Thanks.

Rich Hightower: Hey, good morning, guys. Thanks for taking the questions here. I want to go back to Smedes's question on the potential Caesars deal and how it might affect GLPI. There's obviously a parent guarantee in place on your master lease, and I appreciate the idea that it's really four-wall coverage that's the primary focus in any scenario. But what's your legal understanding of the ability of the parent guarantee to travel with the lease under a variety of potential deal structures, and how should we think about that from the outside? Thanks.

Speaker #11: You know, there's obviously a parent guarantee in place on your master lease. And I appreciate the idea that it's really for wall coverage.

Speaker #11: That's the primary focus in any in any scenario . But what's your what's your legal understanding of the ability of the parent guarantee to travel with the lease under a variety of potential deal structures ?

Speaker #11: And how should we think about that from the outset? Thanks.

Speaker #8: I think you should think of it as the parent guarantee being one of the requirements. That has to be in place for us to be forced to take a new tenant.

Brandon Moore: I think you should think of it as the parent guarantee being one of the requirements that has to be in place for us to be forced to take a new tenant. In other words, in order to meet the definition of a qualified or discretionary transferee, certain things have to be true with respect to the transferee, but also with the transaction, including the pro forma leverage and the existence of a replacement parent guarantee. Again, I don't think we know enough about the anticipated structure of that transaction in order to determine whether or not, for example, the parent guarantee is at an entity level that would meet our lease requirements and be acceptable to us. We just don't know yet. You should assume that that does in fact travel with the next tenant.

Speaker #8: In other words , in order to meet the definition of a qualified or discretionary transferee , there have to be certain things have to be true with respect to the transferee , but also with the transaction , including the pro forma leverage and the existence of a parent guarantee .

Speaker #8: So again , I don't think we know enough about the the anticipated structure of that transaction in order to determine whether or not , for example , the parent guarantee is at an entity level , that would be would meet our lease requirements and be acceptable to us .

Speaker #8: We just don't know yet. But you should assume that that does, in fact, travel with the next tenant.

Speaker #11: Okay . That's that's really helpful . Thanks . I guess more broadly and maybe it relates to the , you know , the cap rate comment as well , but are you seeing and I'll use the Bally's in New York project as an example here , but are you seeing other sort of previously competitive capital providers ?

Richard Hightower: Okay. That's really helpful. Thanks. I guess more broadly, and maybe it relates to the cap rate comment as well, but are you seeing, and I'll use the Bally's New York project as an example here. Are you seeing other sort of previously competitive capital providers, and I'm really thinking of sort of the private credit universe that appears to be having its own issues in various ways. Are you seeing those potential competitors pull back from the market? Does that imply anything about GLPI's ability to step in as a capital provider to a project like that or any other development going on? And does that affect market pricing for the capital as well? Thanks.

Rich Hightower: Okay. That's really helpful. Thanks. I guess more broadly, and maybe it relates to the cap rate comment as well, but are you seeing, and I'll use the Bally's New York project as an example here. Are you seeing other sort of previously competitive capital providers, and I'm really thinking of sort of the private credit universe that appears to be having its own issues in various ways. Are you seeing those potential competitors pull back from the market? Does that imply anything about GLPI's ability to step in as a capital provider to a project like that or any other development going on? And does that affect market pricing for the capital as well? Thanks.

Speaker #11: And I'm really thinking of, sort of, the private credit universe that appears to be having its own, you know, issues in various ways.

Speaker #11: Are you seeing those potential competitors pull back from the market? Does that imply anything about API's ability to step in as a capital provider to a project like that, or any other development going on? And does that affect market pricing for the capital as well?

Speaker #11: Thanks

Speaker #4: Sure . I'll give it a shot . To date , we haven't seen the private credit type of folks pulling pulling away . Now I can't speak to their ability to to show up at the finish line , but I can just tell you on the at the early onset , they seem to be just as .

Steven Ladany: Sure. I'll give it a shot. To date, we haven't seen the private credit type of folks pulling away. Now, I can't speak to their ability to show up at the finish line, but I can just tell you at the early onset, they seem to be just as much engaged and participating as anybody else. I don't think there's a huge seismic shift in the competitive landscape. There are not new folks seemingly pouring in. It's the same handful of people are looking at transactions. I think this all kind of goes back to relationships at the end of the day and underwriting. They're kind of both critically important, and they work together. You can obviously have successful underwriting and maybe not the greatest relationship, but that just means you did a transaction.

Speaker #4: As much engaged in participating as anybody else, so I don't think there's a huge seismic shift in the competitive landscape. They're not new folks seemingly pouring in.

Speaker #4: So it's the same handful of people that are looking at transactions. I think it all kind of goes back to relationships at the end of the day.

Speaker #4: And underwriting . And so they're kind of both critically important and they work together . You can , you can obviously have successful underwriting and maybe not the greatest relationship , but that just means you did a transaction .

Speaker #4: And conversely, you have a great relationship and poor underwriting, and then you have a friend that is not doing so great in either. You—

Steven Ladany: Conversely, you have a great relationship and poor underwriting, and then you have a friend that is not doing so great and neither are you. I think we continue to try to operate in a position where we hope to be everyone's first call if there's something they're looking to do or something they're trying to be creative around. Then we look to try to make sure we overlay our underwriting success with that. So far, it's worked out well for us. I think it will continue to at least have a seat at every table. Whether it plays out the way we want it to or not is yet to be seen.

Speaker #4: So I think we continue to try to operate in a position where we hope to be everyone's first call if there's something they're looking to do or something they're trying to be creative around.

Speaker #4: And then we look to try to make sure we overlay our , our underwriting success with that . And so , so far , it's worked out well for us , I think continue .

Speaker #4: It will continue to have us at least have a seat at every table , whether we whether it plays out the way we want it to or not , is , is yet to be seen

Speaker #8: Well , and I think New York , you kind of picked out the one unique animal in the bunch , which is , you know , that that is a unique market that has a lot of interest of people that want to have a piece of that .

Brandon Moore: Well, I think in New York, you kind of picked out the one unique animal in the bunch, which is a unique market that has a lot of interest to people that would want to have a piece of that. I think Bally's is in an enviable position in New York, where they're having a lot of different capital sources to discuss and talk to. Whether or not we have an opportunity there for a piece of that will be relationship driven more than economically driven, I suspect. I don't think we're doing it at a cap rate that's any lower than what Steve has indicated, because quite frankly, that wouldn't be accretive to us and not a smart use of our capital. We'll see how New York plays out. I think that's somewhat unique.

Speaker #8: So I think Bally's is in an enviable position in New York, where they're having a lot of different capital sources to discuss and talk to.

Speaker #8: Whether or not we have an opportunity there for a piece of that, we'll be relationship-driven more than economically driven, I suspect.

Speaker #8: But I don't think we're doing it at a cap rate that's any lower than what Steve has indicated, because, quite frankly, that wouldn't be accretive to us and not a smart use of our capital.

Speaker #8: So, we'll see how New York plays out. I think that's somewhat unique.

Speaker #2: But there may be several layers of opportunity there, to say the least. And we expect at least to be at the table, as Steve and Brandon as well outlined.

Peter Carlino: There may be several layers of opportunity there to say the least. We expect at least to be at the table as Steve and Brandon have well outlined.

Brandon Moore: Viability of opportunities in New York. Some of it should fall our way, we hope.

Speaker #11: All right .

Speaker #8: Great, in New York. Some of it should, but should follow our way. We hope.

Speaker #11: Got it. I also appreciate the hat trick in terms of management's responses from all three of you. Thanks.

Richard Hightower: Got it. I also appreciate the hat trick in terms of management's responses from all three of you. Thanks.

Rich Hightower: Got it. I also appreciate the hat trick in terms of management's responses from all three of you. Thanks.

Operator: The next questions are from the line of Chris Darling with Green Street. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #3: Next questions are from the line of Chris Darling with Green Street. Please review with your questions.

Speaker #19: Hey , thanks . Good morning . So with Acorn Ridge now open , I'm wondering if you've had any discussion around the conversion of the loan into a formal lease structure .

Chris Darling: Hey, thanks. Good morning. With Acorn Ridge now open, I'm wondering if you've had any discussion around the conversion of the loan into a formal lease structure. Then separately, whether it's Acorn Ridge or any other tribal investment, can you talk about your level of visibility into the underlying financial performance of those properties and sort of the regular cadence of any updates you might get?

Speaker #19: And then separately, whether it's Acorn Ridge or any other tribal investment, can you talk about your level of visibility into the underlying financial performance of those properties, and sort of the regular cadence of any updates you might get?

Steven Ladany: Um-

Steven Ladany: Well, it has a term, right? The Acorn Ridge loan has a 5-year term with, I think it's two 6-month extensions. We're not in discussions about converting it to-

Desiree Burke: Well, it has a term, right? The Acorn Ridge loan has a 5-year term with, I think it's two 6-month extensions. We're not in discussions about converting it to-

Speaker #1: It has a term , right ? So the Acorn Ridge loan has a five year term with I think it's two six month extension .

Speaker #1: So we're not in discussions about converting it to ultimately to a lease at this point As far as performance goes , we do get quarterly certifications , which will include coverage ratios at least as far as how it's going to cover the rent .

Carlo Santarelli: Ultimately to a lease at this point. As far as performance goes, we do get quarterly certifications, which will include coverage ratios, at least as far as how it's going to cover the rent. In this case, it's interest, so we're really just going to be looking at the AFFO vis-a-vis what interest payments we have as far as the stability of the operations of the project. We will get information on a quarterly basis.

Desiree Burke: Ultimately to a lease at this point. As far as performance goes, we do get quarterly certifications, which will include coverage ratios, at least as far as how it's going to cover the rent. In this case, it's interest, so we're really just going to be looking at the AFFO vis-a-vis what interest payments we have as far as the stability of the operations of the project. We will get information on a quarterly basis.

Speaker #1: In this case , it's interest . So we're really just going to be looking at the a f o vis a vis what interest payments we have as far as the stability of the operations of the project .

Speaker #1: But we will get information on a quarterly basis.

Speaker #4: And I think that with respect to Acorn Ridge , we we have dialogue with the , the , the chairwoman there and , you know , she's she's very , very level headed with respect to this and said like , look , let's get six months of operations under our belt .

Steven Ladany: Yeah. I think that with respect to Acorn Ridge, we have dialogue with the chairwoman there, and she's very level-headed with respect to this and said, Look, let's get six months of operations under our belt, and then as a tribe, we'll start to reevaluate what we want to do as far as future capital spend or financing markets, et cetera. We're cheering them on and anxiously awaiting future dialogue.

Speaker #4: And then, as a tribe, we'll start to kind of reevaluate what we want to do as far as future capital spend or financing markets, etc.

Speaker #4: . So we're , we're cheering them on and , and anxiously awaiting future dialogue .

Speaker #19: Okay, that’s helpful. And then maybe taking a step back, more broadly, as you think about underwriting new investments in the tribal space, are there any jurisdictions that are more or less attractive to you?

Chris Darling: Okay. That's helpful. Maybe taking a step back more broadly, as you think about underwriting new investments in the tribal space, are there any jurisdictions that are more or less attractive to you? I'm curious how you think about that.

Speaker #19: I'm curious how you think about that.

Speaker #8: I think different jurisdictions lead to different opportunities , and by that , I mean in a jurisdiction like California , you have a very large number of tribes , and the opportunity for expansion , what you're seeing in California is , despite the fact that there are a lot of tribal casinos , the tribal casinos opening appear to be growing .

Brandon Moore: I think different jurisdictions lead to different opportunities. By that I mean in a jurisdiction like California, you have a very large number of tribes and the opportunity for expansion. What you're seeing in California is despite the fact that there are a lot of tribal casinos, the tribal casinos opening appear to be growing the markets that they're in. There's a lot of opportunity in California, just given the sheer size. California doesn't have, with their compacts, a very stringent taxing regime. Even when the tribes enter into compacts, they're not paying a lot of tax. In other states, they're paying more tax and have different compacts. I think just sheer numbers, California. New York has some tribes. The Midwest has several tribes. Oklahoma.

Speaker #8: The markets that they're in. So there's a lot of opportunity in California, just given the sheer size. Other in California doesn't have, with their compacts, a very stringent taxing regime.

Speaker #8: So even when the tribes enter into compacts , they're not paying a lot of tax . In other states , you know , they're paying more tax and have different , different , different compacts .

Speaker #8: And so I think just sheer numbers , California , New York has some tribes and Midwest has several tribes . Oklahoma , I'd say it's more relationship driven at this point .

Brandon Moore: I'd say it's more relationship driven at this point, and we're looking at tribal needs and trying to figure out which transactions best suit our underwriting. I will say there are a lot of opportunities. We're getting a lot of inbounds. We're getting a lot of questions around what we can offer. We have a lot to digest. We'll continue to get a lot to digest, I think, this year, and try to figure out how much capital we want to allocate to this form of financing and where. I don't think it's necessarily driven by state lines per se, it's just more the number of tribes in different areas is obviously a lot different in California than, for example, Alabama, which has one tribe.

Speaker #8: And we're looking at tribal needs and trying to figure out which transactions best suit our underwriting. I will say there are a lot of opportunities.

Speaker #8: We're getting a lot of inbounds . We're getting a lot of questions around what we can offer . And so we'll have a lot .

Speaker #8: We have a lot to digest . We'll continue to get a lot to digest . I think this year and try to figure out how much capital we want to allocate to this form of financing and , and where .

Speaker #8: But but I don't think it's necessarily driven by state lines per se . It's just more the number of tribes in different areas is , is obviously a lot different in California than , for example , Alabama , which has one tribe

Chris Darling: All right. Understood. Thank you for the time.

Speaker #19: I understand. Thank you for your time.

Operator: The next question. The next questions are from the line of Daniel Guttmann with Capital One Securities. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #3: Question. The next questions are from the line of Daniel Good with Capital One Securities. Please receive their questions.

Daniel Guttmann: Hi, everyone. Thank you for taking my question. Just one from me. Do you all have a minimum dollar size for redevelopment projects that you'd be willing to fund? It feels like operator CapEx budgets are down for 2026 versus 2025, but improving properties has been working. We're curious if smaller, less invasive projects at more properties are coming.

Daniel Guglielmo: Hi, everyone. Thank you for taking my question. Just one from me. Do you all have a minimum dollar size for redevelopment projects that you'd be willing to fund? It feels like operator CapEx budgets are down for 2026 versus 2025, but improving properties has been working. We're curious if smaller, less invasive projects at more properties are coming.

Speaker #20: Hi, everyone. Thank you for taking my question. Just one from me: do you all have a minimum dollar size for redevelopment projects that you'd be willing to fund?

Speaker #20: It feels like operator CapEx budgets are down for '26 versus '25, but improving properties has been working. So we're curious if smaller, less invasive projects at more properties are coming.

Steven Ladany: Daniel, just to clarify, do you mean this is a capital improvement project at an asset we already own?

Speaker #4: Daniel, just to clarify, do you mean this is a capital improvement project at an asset we already own?

Daniel Guttmann: Yes. Yep.

Daniel Guglielmo: Yes. Yep.

Speaker #20: Yes . Yep .

Steven Ladany: I don't think there's any number. We would fund down to whatever the tenant needs, assuming that it's a project that they think will be accretive to them and will generate pro forma business for them that surpasses the cost of our capital. I think we would look to be supportive of the tenant in any of these opportunities.

Speaker #4: I don't think there's any number we would we would fund down to whatever the tenant needs . So that it's it's a project that they think will be accretive to them .

Speaker #4: And will generate pro business for them that's that surpasses the cost of our capital. So I think we would look to be supportive of the tenant and any of these opportunities.

Daniel Guttmann: Okay, great. Thank you.

Daniel Guglielmo: Okay, great. Thank you.

Speaker #20: Okay, great. Thank you.

Operator: The next question is from the line of Chad Beynon with Macquarie. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #3: The next question is from the line of Chad Bennion with Macquarie. Please, repeat your question.

Chad Beynon: Hi. Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. You guys have clearly differentiated yourself with more of a drive to regional focus versus destination. We've talked about it a couple times on the call, how strong the regional market has been year to date. Some operators actually improving margins, which we haven't seen for a few years. Does this vindication or validation in your thesis maybe dissuade you into leaning in back into Las Vegas, beyond the Trop side and really just doubling down in your current thesis and drive to in regionals? Thank you.

Speaker #21: Hi . Good morning . Thanks for taking my question . You guys have clearly differentiated yourself with , you know , more of a drive to regional focus versus destination .

Speaker #21: And we've talked about it a couple of times on the call . How strong the regional market has been year to date . Some operators actually improving margins , which we haven't seen for for a few years .

Speaker #21: So does this vindication or validation in your thesis maybe dissuade you into leaning in kind of back into Las Vegas ? You know , beyond the trop site and really just kind of doubling down in your in your current thesis and drive to in regionals .

Speaker #21: Thank you .

Peter Carlino: Yeah. I don't think we ever were leaning into Las Vegas. As has been well said, we look at these projects one at a time, almost location not critical. We have no special focus on Las Vegas at all. Look, I've been an enthusiast for the regional market for 20 years and trying to make the case that it's the better place to be, safest place to put capital by far. I think we've demonstrated that in a lot of events, and recent events in Las Vegas highlight that where we put our capital makes a lot more sense.

Speaker #2: Yeah, you know, I don't think we ever were leaning into Las Vegas. I mean, and as has been well said.

Speaker #2: We look at these projects , one at a time , almost the location , not not critical , but we have no special focus on Las Vegas at all .

Speaker #2: Look , I've been in an enthusiast for the regional market for 20 years and trying to make the case that it's the better place to be , safest place to put capital is by far , I think we've demonstrated that in a lot of events in recent events in Las Vegas .

Speaker #2: Highlight that where we put our capital makes a lot more sense. But

Carlo Santarelli: Hey, Chad. Oh, go ahead, Desiree.

Speaker #7: Yeah , Chad , I think it's I'll go ahead . Desiree . Chad . I think it's , you know , I think as always , it's the strength of the cash flows .

Desiree Burke: No, you go.

Desiree Burke: No, Chad, I think as always, it's the strength of the cash flows. It's not the building, it's not necessarily the geography, it's the strength and safety of the cash flows. I think if you look over time, acknowledging we don't share in upside any more than just the escalators we receive for a well-covered lease. The regional business has provided a lot of stability, and

Carlo Santarelli: No, Chad, I think as always, it's the strength of the cash flows. It's not the building, it's not necessarily the geography, it's the strength and safety of the cash flows. I think if you look over time, acknowledging we don't share in upside any more than just the escalators we receive for a well-covered lease. The regional business has provided a lot of stability, and

Speaker #7: It's not the building , it's not necessarily the geography , it's the strength and safety of the cash flows . And I think if you look over time acknowledging , you know , we don't share in upside any more than just the escalators we receive for a well covered lease .

Speaker #7: You know , the regional business has provided a lot of stability . And , you know , if you look back over the last few years , you've come off of a very solid peaks and , you know , as you mentioned , first quarter has been a a very nice indicator that things are strengthening here .

Steven Ladany: If you look back over the last few years, you've come off of very solid peaks. As you mentioned, Q1 has been a very nice indicator that things are strengthening here again.

Carlo Santarelli: If you look back over the last few years, you've come off of very solid peaks. As you mentioned, Q1 has been a very nice indicator that things are strengthening here again.

Speaker #7: Again .

Peter Carlino: I would add, we've been saying this for a long time, but even back at Penn, in our Penn days in 2008, the financial crisis, our properties held up, the regionals much better than what happened in Las Vegas. You saw that coming out of COVID, as the regional properties held up much better than those in Vegas. That trend is continuing, so I agree with you on the thesis, I think everybody should see it on their own at this point in time.

Desiree Burke: I would add, we've been saying this for a long time, but even back at Penn, in our Penn days in 2008, the financial crisis, our properties held up, the regionals much better than what happened in Las Vegas. You saw that coming out of COVID, as the regional properties held up much better than those in Vegas. That trend is continuing, so I agree with you on the thesis, I think everybody should see it on their own at this point in time.

Speaker #1: I would add , you know , we've been saying this for a long time , but even back at Penn and our pennies in 2008 , the financial crisis , our properties held up the regional much better than what happened in Las Vegas .

Speaker #1: You saw that, coming out of Covid as a regional, properties held up much better than those in Vegas. You know, that trend is continuing.

Speaker #1: So I agree with you. The thesis—I think everybody should see it on their own at this point in time.

Chad Beynon: Great. Thanks. Maybe just to hit on one market to keep it fun here. Peter, I know 20 years or so ago, you were looking at Atlantic City. We just returned from the East Coast Gaming Congress, and it sounds like a lot of the operators down there are pretty scared in terms of what could happen with New York. Is that a market that you think could recover with capital, and would you be interested in helping out some of those operators, either on the developmental side or pivoting their strategies? Thanks.

Speaker #21: Great . Thanks . And maybe just to hit on one market to keep it , to keep it fun here , Peter . I know , you know , 20 years or so ago , you were you were looking at Atlantic City .

Speaker #21: We just returned from the East Coast gaming Congress . And it sounds like a lot of the the operators down there are , you know , pretty scared in terms of what what could happen with New York is that a market that you think , you know , could recover with capital and would you would you be interested in , in helping out some of those operators ?

Speaker #21: Either , you know , on the developmental side or , or pivoting their strategies ? Thanks .

Peter Carlino: Probably pretty risky looking at what's on the horizon. New York's going to have a big impact. I've long said that sooner or later, New Jersey's going to have to break down and put something up in North Jersey. Unless they want to lose all that business to the New York properties. That's just my view about it. It's not a happy time to be in Atlantic City today. Look, there's always going to be some winners there, without a doubt. It's not a market that's looking for more investment.

Speaker #2: Probably pretty risky looking at what's on the horizon . New York is going to have a big impact . And I'm long said that I sooner or later , new Jersey is going to have to break down and put something up in North Jersey .

Speaker #2: I if unless they want to lose all that business to to the New York properties , that's just my view about it . So it's not a happy time to be in , in Atlantic City today Look , they're always going to be some winners there , without a doubt .

Speaker #2: But it's not a market that's looking for more investment.

Chad Beynon: Yep. Thank you all. Appreciate it.

Speaker #21: Yep. Thank you all. Appreciate it.

Operator: Next question's from the line of David Katz with Jefferies. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #3: Next question from the line of David Katz with Jefferies. Please proceed with your question.

David Katz: Yes. Hi, good morning. Covered a lot of details already. Look, when we look at the market for regional properties today, if we can be sort of upfront about it, there's yourselves and one other who's closest like you, and then obviously other capital sources that may be available, right?

Speaker #22: Yes . Hi . Good morning . Covered a lot of details already . But look , when we look at the the market for regional properties today , you know , if we can be sort of upfront about it , there's , you know , yourselves and one other , you know , who's closest like you .

Speaker #22: And then, obviously, other capital sources that may be available, right?

Peter Carlino: You can say the name.

Speaker #2: You could say that. You could say their name.

David Katz: I can.

Peter Carlino: Go ahead.

David Katz: I can. I just usually don't as a policy and same with yours. Look, the nature of the question is, are you seeing a change in that competitive landscape, specifically for regional properties? We're in a moment where our collective expectation is that there's things coming to market. What does the competitiveness look like for you today versus where it was 6 to 12 months ago?

Speaker #22: Can , you know , I can , I can , I , can , I , you know , I just usually don't as a policy and , you know , same with yours .

Speaker #22: Look , you know , the nature of the question is , are you seeing a , you know , change in that competitive landscape , specifically for regional properties ?

Speaker #22: We're in a moment where , you know , our collective expectation is that there's , you know , things coming to market . What is the competitiveness ?

Speaker #22: What does it look like for you today versus where it was six to twelve months ago?

Peter Carlino: That's an interesting question.

Speaker #2: It's it's a question .

Steven Ladany: To be honest, I think there's less competitors right now. I think there have been a couple gyrations in the market. There have been a couple people that have dipped their toes in and either decided it wasn't for them or got burned. We've seen some funds, I guess we won't name names either, but we've seen some funds that have bought some properties which later then divested of those pieces or are currently going through the Maverick bankruptcy and trying to figure that piece out. I think that as the market evolves, there's always going to be someone that's going to take a look. We love this business, right? There's a reason why we're in this business, and we think we're undervalued. It only makes sense that others will probably see that light and will decide they want to get involved as well.

Peter Carlino: To be honest, I think there's less competitors right now. I think there have been a couple gyrations in the market. There have been a couple people that have dipped their toes in and either decided it wasn't for them or got burned. We've seen some funds, I guess we won't name names either, but we've seen some funds that have bought some properties which later then divested of those pieces or are currently going through the Maverick bankruptcy and trying to figure that piece out. I think that as the market evolves, there's always going to be someone that's going to take a look. We love this business, right? There's a reason why we're in this business, and we think we're undervalued. It only makes sense that others will probably see that light and will decide they want to get involved as well.

Speaker #4: To be , to be honest , I , I think there's less competitors right now . And , and I think there's just been , there's been a couple gyrations in the market .

Speaker #4: There have been a couple people that have dipped their toes in and, and either decided it wasn't for them or got burned.

Speaker #4: And so , so , you know , we've seen that we've seen the , the , you know , some funds , I guess we won't name names either , but we've seen some funds that have that have bought some , some properties which , which later then divested of those pieces or currently going through the maverick bankruptcy and trying to figure that piece out .

Speaker #4: So, I think that as I think, as you know, the market evolves, there's always going to be someone that's going to take a look.

Speaker #4: We love this business , right ? There's a reason why we're in this business . And we think we're undervalued . So if only makes sense that others will will probably see that light and will decide they want to , they want to get involved as well .

Steven Ladany: I think the complexity has been in the regional markets, is there's a lot of diversity. You have to understand who the operators are. You have to understand the assets, and it's multiple assets with different competitive landscapes and market dynamics that go into a portfolio. That's where it gets complex for someone sitting in an office in, you name the big city, to decide that, I can just roll this thing up at a certain percent and this is going to make me a wizard. I think it becomes more difficult than that, and I think the reality is, because of that, there'll constantly be people that will come in and then out of the space. Right now, I think there's three to four or five people that are probably looking at any larger portfolio that comes to market.

Peter Carlino: I think the complexity has been in the regional markets, is there's a lot of diversity. You have to understand who the operators are. You have to understand the assets, and it's multiple assets with different competitive landscapes and market dynamics that go into a portfolio. That's where it gets complex for someone sitting in an office in, you name the big city, to decide that, I can just roll this thing up at a certain percent and this is going to make me a wizard. I think it becomes more difficult than that, and I think the reality is, because of that, there'll constantly be people that will come in and then out of the space. Right now, I think there's three to four or five people that are probably looking at any larger portfolio that comes to market.

Speaker #4: I think the complexity has been in the regional markets is there are a lot of there's a lot of diversity . You have to understand who the operators are .

Speaker #4: You have to understand the assets . And it's multiple assets with different competitive landscape and market dynamics that go into a portfolio . And that's , that's where it gets complex for someone sitting in an office in , you know , you name the big city to decide that , like , I can just roll this thing up at a certain percent and this is going to make me a wizard .

Speaker #4: I think it becomes more difficult than that. And I think the reality is, because of that, there will constantly be people that will come in and then out of the space.

Speaker #4: So right now , I think there's there's , you know , three to 4 or 5 people that are probably look at any larger portfolio that comes to market .

Steven Ladany: At the end of the day, it's probably the same three-ish people that will put in some kind of indication.

Peter Carlino: At the end of the day, it's probably the same three-ish people that will put in some kind of indication.

Speaker #4: And at the end of the day, it's probably the same three-ish people that will put in some kind of indication.

David Katz: Okay. Thank you. Nothing worse than back pain, Peter. Feel better.

Speaker #22: Okay . Thank you . Nothing worse than back pain . Peter . Feel better .

Peter Carlino: Thanks very much, David.

Speaker #2: Thanks very much , David

Operator: Our next questions are from the line of Robin Farley with UBS. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #3: Our next question is from the line of Robin Farley with UBS. Please proceed with your question.

Robin Farley: Great. Thank you. Speaking of not leaning into Las Vegas, I wonder if you could just update us on potential timing or what your latest thoughts are on opportunity for you at that site? Thanks.

Speaker #23: Great . Thank you . Speaking of not leaning into Las Vegas , I wonder if you could just update us on , you know , potential timing or what your latest thoughts are on opportunity for you at that site .

Speaker #23: Thanks

Steven Ladany: I'd love to tell you our answer's changed. As we sit here today, I think that the stadium is progressing quite nicely. If you've looked at the cameras sitting on top of MGM Grand, you'll see that the stadium, the concourse level is up and they're probably going to be putting on the first roof cuts here in the next 6 to 8 weeks. Integrated resort was always behind, and not in the sense of being behind in a bad way, but it was going to follow the construction of the concourse. I think we're getting to the point where Bally's will have some decisions to make about how much they want to do and how they're going to do it. We have $125 million commitment remaining.

Speaker #8: I'd love to tell you our answers change, but as we sit here today, I think that the stadium is progressing quite nicely.

Speaker #8: And if you if you've looked at the cameras sitting on top of MGM Grand , you'll see that the stadium concourse level is up and there probably going to be putting on the first roof truss here in the next six to 6 to 8 weeks , integrated resort was always behind and not in a sense of being behind a bad way , but it just it was going to follow the construction of the concourse .

Speaker #8: And so I think we're getting to the point where alleys will have some decisions to make about how much they want to do and how they're going to do it.

Speaker #8: We have 125 million commitment remaining . Whether or not we expand that commitment is to be determined as we see the leasing of the site in the r e d space start to fill out , and we get a better picture of the revenue .

Brandon Moore: Whether or not we expand that commitment is to be determined. As we see the leasing of the site and the RED space start to fill out, and we get a better picture of the revenue that'll be generated on that site, we and Bally's will be discussing what level of investment above and beyond the $125 million, if any, will be appropriate from GLPI. Unfortunately, I don't think we have much different answer right now. I do think in the next six months, that'll change. I think the integrated resort will come into clarity in the next six months or so.

Speaker #8: That will be generated on that site. We and Bally's will be discussing what level of investment above and beyond the $125 million, if any, will be appropriate from GLPI.

Speaker #8: But unfortunately, I don't think we have a much different answer right now, but I do think in the next six months that will change.

Speaker #8: I think the integrated resort will come to will come into clarity in the next in the next six months or so .

Robin Farley: Okay, great. Thank you. Peter, good to have you back. Thanks.

Speaker #23: Okay , great . Thank you . And Peter , good to have you back . Thanks .

Peter Carlino: Thank you, Robin.

Speaker #2: Thank you . Robin

Operator: Our final question is from the line of John DeCree with CBRE. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #3: A final question is from the line of John DeCree with CBRE. Please proceed with your questions.

John DeCree: Hey, everyone. I think we covered mostly everything, so I apologize if this is a touch redundant. I think you'd already answered investment sizing questions as it relates to development, but with the Caesars buyout talk, we've got questions about portfolio transactions. From your perspective, an investment sizing question, large portfolio of assets, do you think there's a market there for real estate today? I think much of what we've seen so far is single asset and from GLPI, is there an investment size that would be too small or too large, rather? Would you kind of consider anything that might come to market, even if it's chunky?

Speaker #19: Hey everyone . I think we covered mostly everything so apologize if this is a touch redundant . I think you'd already answered investment sizing question as it relates to development , but you know , with the Caesars buyout talk , we've gotten questions about portfolio transactions .

Speaker #19: So from your perspective , you know , an investment sizing question , large portfolio of assets , do you think there's a market there for for real estate today ?

Speaker #19: I think much of what we've seen so far is asset . And from Glpi , I would you know , is there an investment size that would be too small or or too large rather , would you kind of consider anything that might come to market , even if it's chunky

Brandon Moore: I think it might depend on whether or not it's going into another master lease with another tenant or how it's being done. I mean, are there assets that are too small for us to look at? There may be. If they're accretive and they're generating good capital and we can put them into a lease with an existing tenant, I don't think there's anything we necessarily would not look at. If you're talking about the Caesars portfolio specifically, it's not clear to us which, if any, assets may fall out of that portfolio as a result of the impending or proposed transaction. We just have to take a look at it when the time comes.

Speaker #8: I think it might depend on whether or not it's going into another master lease with another tenant, or how it's being done.

Speaker #8: I mean, are there assets that are too small for us to look at? There may be, if they're accretive and they're generating good capital, and we can put them into a lease with an existing tenant.

Speaker #8: I don't think there's anything we necessarily would not look at . If you're talking about the Caesars portfolio specifically , it's not clear to us which , if any , assets may fall out of that portfolio as a result of the impending or proposed transaction .

Speaker #8: We just have to take a look at it when the time comes.

John DeCree: Brandon, maybe more broadly, if there was a multi-billion dollar transaction unrelated to Caesars, if there was a seller of a package of assets, is that something that would be in your wheelhouse? Or is there a dollar amount where you say that we don't wanna deploy that much capital, or the market might not be there for that?

Speaker #19: Maybe more broadly , you know , if there was a multibillion dollar transaction unrelated to to Caesars , if there was a seller of a package of assets , is that something that would be in your wheelhouse or is there a dollar amount where you say that , you know , we don't want to deploy that much capital or the market might not be there for that ?

Brandon Moore: Oh, I think as long as it's accretive, we do. I mean, look, we did the Pinnacle transaction a few years out of the gate, which was roughly $4 billion. I don't think that there's any number that's necessarily too high of all the portfolio assets we see right now. We just have to underwrite it, and if it's accretive, based on our cost of capital at the time, I think we would look at it and do it. No, I don't think there's anything too big or too small at the moment that we wouldn't look at.

Speaker #8: Oh , I long as it's accretive , we do it . I mean , look , we did the pinnacle transaction a few years out of the gate , which was roughly 4 billion .

Speaker #8: I don't think that there's any number that's necessarily too high of all of the portfolio assets . We see right now , we just have to underwrite it .

Speaker #8: And if it’s accretive based on our cost of capital at the time, I think we would look at it and do it.

Speaker #8: So, I don't think there's anything too big or too small at the moment that we wouldn't look at.

John DeCree: Perfect. Thanks.

Peter Carlino: Yeah, I've always felt that there's never a shortage of opportunity for funding for a good deal. I think Brandon answered it pretty well. As to small, we jokingly say we'll hit some singles and even every now and then take a bunt if the spread is worth it. Nothing we won't look at.

Speaker #2: Yeah, I've always felt that there's never a shortage of opportunity for funding for a good deal. So I think Brandon answered it pretty well, as the small—we jokingly say— we'll hit some singles and even every now and then take a punt.

Speaker #2: If the . If the spread is worth it . So nothing . We won't look at

John DeCree: Thanks, all.

Speaker #19: Thanks all

Operator: Thank you. At this time, I'll turn the floor back to Peter Carlino for closing comments.

Speaker #3: Thank you. At this time, I'll turn the floor back to Peter Carlino for closing comments.

Peter Carlino: Okay. Well, with that, I think the morning's been productive from our point of view, and we thank you for tuning in today. See you next quarter. Thanks very much.

Speaker #2: Okay, well, with that, I think the morning has been productive from our point of view, and we thank you for tuning in today.

Speaker #2: See you next quarter . Thanks very much .

Operator: This will conclude today's conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation, and have a wonderful day.

Q1 2026 Gaming & Leisure Properties Inc Earnings Call

Request DemoDemo

Gaming and Leisure Properties

Earnings