This is the second half of the panel discussion around the theme of Co-Living. This is an emerging trend and so many of the concepts and practical elements shared are still emerging and at the early stages of development in the sector. However, it perhaps gives us a direction of travel as to how some elements of shared living are likely to evolve in the years ahead.
My thanks to the panelists, Dan Jackson from Urban Shared, Luke Spikes from Higgihaus, David Bonk from Homefree Living, Angharad Owen from YPN Magazine and David Thomas from Libertygate Estate Agents and to Helen Pollock, The Content Doc for arranging it.
See the show notes for info on how to get hold of my own article on the subject of Co-Living as well.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Resources mentioned
Contact links for the Panelists... Dan Jackson from Urban Shared, Luke Spikes from Higgihaus, David Bonk from Homefree Living, Angharad Owen from YPN Magazine, David Thomas from Livertygate Estate Agents and Helen Pollock The Content Doc
From Community Living to Shared Houses to HMOs and back to Co-living again - an article written by Richard Brown for YPN Magazine.
Link to The Property Voice YouTube Channel
The Property Voice Meetup Page & Eventbrite Page
How to Reach Richard By Telephone
Link to the Podcast feedback survey
TPV Apprentice Programme info HERE
Today’s must do’s
Subscribe to and review the show in iTunes…and while you are at it please help us to spread the word by telling all your friends too!
Property Investor Toolkit – here is the book link on amazon.co.uk & amazon.com in case you would like to get yourself a copy to accompany this series
Get talking!
Join in the discussion, either here in the comments section below, or by emailing us at podcast@thepropertyvoice.net
Start a conversation on Twitter with us @PropertyVoiceUK or on our Facebook page
Transcription of the show
This is the second half of the panel discussion around the theme of Co-Living. This is an emerging trend and so many of the concepts and practical elements shared are still emerging and at the early stages of development in the sector. However, it perhaps gives us a direction of travel as to how some elements of shared living are likely to evolve in the years ahead.
My thanks to the panelists, Dan Jackson from Urban Shared, Luke Spikes from Higgihaus, David Bonk from Homefree Living, Angharad Owen from YPN Magazine and David Thomas from Libertygate Estate Agents and to Helen Pollock, The Content Doc for arranging it.
See the show notes for info on how to get hold of my own article on the subject of Co-Living as well.
Property Chatter
But just to bring it back a little, I think, what are the key attributes or facilities or services that define a good co-living environment? Let's say that.
Who would like to take this one?
Yeah.
I'll jump in.
I'm going to bring David Thomas back in, actually, but I'm trying to find the perfect moment to do that. But maybe asking him about his impressions about co-living is a bit unfair.
In some ways, what's interesting ... From our perspective, we're only really seeing PRS schemes popping up now. I mean, we've got the first one now in Nottingham, and that's a bit of a weird mash-up in some ways, because that's bringing the purpose-built, standard apartment block, but then bringing in services, gym, swimming pools, concierge, some elements of that. So what's interesting is that's almost a halfway house, from what I'm hearing. It's kind of-
Built to rent.
Yeah, built to rent, but they call it PRS schemes and things like that for the private rental sector. But there's no community element to that. It's basically an apart-hotel with more facilities. But that's all the mainstream market's seeing at the moment. That's the nearest we're getting to co-living, is apart-hotels with more facilities.
But from hearing all of this ... I mean, this is amazing. This is what we need to get more out into the market to offer to the mainstream private rental sector. The tenants that don't even like being called tenants would love to have an opportunity to live somewhere like this. But bizarrely, it's not out there yet. I mean, the nearest we're getting is apart-hotels.
There's some clues there already. So there's services that people are starting to provide within accommodation. It's been alluded to a couple of times. Gyms, pools, concierge services, for example. I know, Dan, you didn't really want to mention the name earlier, did you? But in some of the large operators in London, you can hire a Zipcar. You can have laundry done. There's a number of extra facilities. So there is the facilities aspect, and this is what I'm driving at here.
I bet, David Bonk, you've got extra services and extra facilities, apart from just a bedroom that people share in your accommodation block. Would that be fair?
Absolutely. We don't show all of those amenities on every tour, but we do have a room with an accessible bath tub, so with the hydraulic seat lift that ... The idea being that we want people to live well here and not have to move out and go to the traditional type of facility. I can't imagine my mom being in that type of an institution, or my grandma. I want people who live in the HomeFree development to be able to stay here. And as our mobility decreases, as it does, I don't want people to have to move out of here, move away from their friends and their family and their spouse just for the sole reason that their legs don't work anymore.
So having amenities that serve our members as they age is absolutely important. And the other services that become important as we age as well, like food, and a place to maybe meet with a medical professional. So yeah, we've thought of spaces like that as well.
Yeah. I would echo that. The community kitchen we reframe it is ... Breaking bread and having a meal and sharing food with someone is a way to break down some of the barriers that exist and address some of the issues we have with technology. Having an apart-hotel, which is full of individual things, of individual kitchens, doesn't necessarily help you, because it doesn't force you, to an extent, to get out and in and amongst the other folk.
So our sense is that whilst you might offer some people their own cooking facilities, in the main, you'll have community kitchens. And those community kitchens might just be a shared kitchen, so in the sense that you'll go and cook your own stuff in the shared kitchen. On the other hand, they might actually be places to go, a little bit like co-housing. I know we said we weren't going to specifically talk about that, but like co-housing where you have a hub at the center, and that hub is a shared property where people might go and share a meal. So everyone in the building, 30, 40, 50 people might sit down and eat. That, I think, is almost a fundamental.
Beyond that, fitness, wellness, so gyms, yes. Well, that comes back to your physical wellbeing. Art, mental wellbeing. It's all about how we feel, I think. So in our vision of the world, the amenities we want to provide that are shared are those things that make most sense to share because they contribute to the sense of community and improve wellbeing.
It's interesting, because I think there's probably ... Maybe most of us on this call ... We're perhaps familiar with co-living to some degree. I know, David Thomas, you said you haven't heard about it before, but you've picked up on it pretty quickly, I have to say. But if we can say co-living 1.0 has some of these components to them, what is co-living 2.0 going to look like? In other words, where is it taking us? Where are the changes? I think there's been some hints and suggestions towards that already that have been made.
Just to pick up Angharad, what you said, my own daughter had a similar experience at university. She stayed in an environment where she literally had a studio room. She had bathing facilities, cooking facilities, and a bed, and she struggled with loneliness because it was just corridors and corridors of doors.
So perhaps leading the discussion along those lines, what would be needed to take co-living that maybe lots of people are not even so familiar with to something really good and enjoyable for the future?
Beyond space, Richard. It's into having people whose job it is to curate the experience. We have what we call a community manager. We don't do lettings, David, because that's not what we're about. We have a community manager, because that person's responsibility is first and foremost to the experience of the people who live in our community.
Second ... "Oh, if we happen to have an empty room, please make sure it's filled." So it's just an attitude adjustment, but it's really all about ... Are you shifting to someone being actually responsible for thinking about how you create the experience of the people that live with you really want?
That, to me, is the next generation. It's beyond space, beyond place. Everyone's got gyms and pools and shared kitchens and libraries and gardens and all that sort of stuff. Now how is it different? It's different because there's actually a focus on how you make all that stuff work, and you draw every single individual who lives there out of their shells, out of themselves, and into a community. That would be my take on that.
Interesting. And Dan, I know you use technology. I know I'm bringing you in with the technology angle, but just also bringing you into the conversation. Not just technology, but where do you see co-living evolving?
The first thing that I see is that these huge purpose-built spaces need to be very, very careful about simply not just causing a different problem. There's been some talk around, again, that some of these London-specific solutions as feeling quite soulless. These shared spaces not being used, someone sat in the corner eating a pot noodle on his own. It wasn't me, by the way, but ...
I visited one yesterday undercover to do some research. Whilst the finish is fantastic and the facilities were amazing, it felt like I was in a hotel. I think we need to think about the compromise between economies of scale and simplification versus the experience. I think 100, 200 units combined together ... You can see the investability of that. You can also see the simplicity around maintenance. I think you need to be very careful that you're not just creating a big space with a shared lounge that no-one uses.
Again, going back to something that Luke mentioned around the community management side of things, it's super important, certainly as British people, that we do everything we can to create opportunity to engage with other people, because by virtue of the fact that we're British, we do tend to withdraw a little bit. Therefore, we need to encourage engagement.
My view is that we will do that with smaller ... I'm going to say this, because this is my model right now, but with small units that are connected to other smaller units in some way, shape, or form. So we're living in a kind of traditional sort of family size. Looking at some of the things, for example, that Common are doing, brownstones in New York with 19 to 20 rooms. I think that's the perfect size for a great co-living experience. 200, 300, 400 rooms? I think you need to be very careful that you're not just creating a different problem. So I've-
I completely agree with you, Dan, yeah.
Well said, Dan. Our view is that between 50 and 150 people is the zone in which we want to play, but we want to play there partly because we're trying to get the economics right. That is clear, that is an important part of it as well. But more to the point, there is lots and lots and lots of research that points to how people exist and behave in groups. When the group gets too big, 400, 500, you've got no chance. So 50 to 150 we think is optimal.
But to go to your point, I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all. I think what there is ... You'll have a cluster of five-bed units and 10-bed units and 20-bed units, 50-bed, 100, all connected together, more importantly. And they'll all be slightly different and they'll all have a slightly different purpose.
Angharad might feel more comfortable staying in a five, 10-bed, more family-oriented unit, but where, by definition, you can't have quite as many facilities because the building doesn't allow it and the economics don't allow it. But if up the road there's a 150-bed unit that has a pool and other things that you can use and share because you're part of this extended community, that would work well, to my mind. So I'm not seeing a one-size-fits-all. I'm seeing a network of connected entities of different sizes, but they probably top out at about 150 in our world, for the reasons you just pointed out.
Yeah. I can certainly see there'd be the opportunity to partner and engage with providers of facilities in cities like London, for example. Why would I put a restaurant in a co-living unit if I've got 20 great restaurants on my doorstep? If I can find a way of using technology to make them feel like my own restaurants, I would surely look to do that as an alternative.
The use of technology to create the community side of things I think is important, and I think that will evolve as we kind of understand what the requirements of the customers are. We're very early stage right now. We keep going back to the same development in London, but they learned a lot from their first building around things that work, things that don't work. They've increased room sizes now, because eight square meters, whilst it ticks the HMO minimum size requirement ... If you put a kitchen in there and a wardrobe there's not much room to do anything. So we're learning, I think as a community. The research around optimum room space and community elements and aspects is creating so much opportunity to do different things to enhance this asset class even further, I think.
So we're talking about space utilization. We're talking about services and facilities. We're talking about community in this part of the conversation. What about from a consumer point of view, customer, consumer, in how they like to buy? We've seen a lot of change, obviously, over the last decade with the sharing economy, for example. Angharad, you know. You going off and backpacking or you going and living in Barcelona for a period of time is another sort of shift. We're all individuals, but it's a changing landscape. Job mobility is also important.
So where I'm going is ... There's a lot of policy talk, and I'm not trying to be controversial, but there's a lot of policy talk about having longer tenancies and security of tenure. But actually, what do people want? Do they want that, or do they want something else? Perhaps a bit of a leading question.
I've been quite shocked by this political stance of having longer tenancies. From a letting agency point of view, I've never seen that being an issue, ever. If a tenant wants to stay there and they extend their tenancy, or if they want a longer tenancy, then that's perfectly fine. I think that should be up to the tenant and then the landlord to negotiate that. I think trying to tie people into that or almost create this feeling that tenants want that as a collective I think is completely false. From being in the market and speaking to tenants daily, that's not ...
Actually, it's almost the reverse, where a lot of them want to have that flexibility, hence why you're now seeing short let accommodation becoming even more popular with Airbnb, because people actually like the flexibility of being able to be transient if that's what they want, or put their roots down if they want to. I think if you take that flexibility away it just wouldn't work, and I actually think the market would compete against that and say, "That's not what we want at all. We want flexibility."
I agree with you, actually, because I'm renting this place right now, and I know that ... Well, I want to go to spend another month away in January, and I'm trying to figure out a way how to sort of approach the landlord to try ... Because if I keep on paying my rent here, I can't afford to go. And I know I don't need to go, but I want to. I can. I work from anywhere. Why wouldn't I?
So yeah, I'm with you. I don't particularly want to be tied down to longer tenancies, because I don't need to be at the moment. And I don't want to also leave my boyfriend stuck with a huge rent to pay while I'm off gallivanting.
And I think it's a political mismarketing that it's needed, because it's always been there. If tenants want to stay long-term and they discuss that with their landlord and that's agreeable, that's always been an option. I don't really understand where this kind of misrepresentation that landlords want to be able to kick tenants out whenever they want ...
Some of them do. Some of them do, and that's where it's come from. I think a small minority has made a lot of noise, and this has sort of been a reaction to that. And I understand that there's good and bad landlords, as well as there's good and bad occupants of buildings. So it goes both ways. But it was more a case of ... Do you think there's going to be more demand for these bite-sized sort of living experiences?
I think you're going to see a shift over time to housing as a service. You think of software as a service. I'm from the world of technology, by the way, so my background, I'm at start-up number 7 over 30-odd years, and the first six were all technology companies. So that world where ... Effectively evolved from big, monolithic systems that were really, really expensive and only the big companies could afford. You now get to cloud and software as a service, and you consume software completely differently.
I think you're going to see the same with housing. Over time, what will effectively happen ... These barriers will just disappear. You will simply consume the services you wish to consume and pay for the services you wish to consume in the way you want to consume it. You will have housing as a service. Maybe 50 years hence. I'm not saying it's tomorrow.
Well-
That is pretty much where it's headed. The reason it'll take a long time, by the way, is because the political system, political establishment, the whole planning infrastructure is absolutely the opposite of what it is we need it to be. That's the problem right now.
Because we've already encountered this. Even where what you want to do is to run a property where you effectively have a hybrid of people staying permanently, they're permanent residents, six months or longer on an AST, and in the same building you want to also have people who are living in it for a night or two, in other words serviced accommodation ... Planners hate it. It's almost, "Well, no. You can't do that." It's got to be an HMO or it's got to be C1 or ... It can't be both.
I think that's quite British specific, though.
Yeah, I'm sure it is.
Because places that I know that ... Well, the place that I was staying in in Barcelona. There were people who had been living there for more than six months, and then there was people ... If there was a gap, because sometimes there was a gap of one or two or three nights, people would come in and stay for just that amount of time. And then there was people like me, who would stay for one or two months. So I think that is quite a British specific problem, that you can't really be ...
That particularly is, but the planners and the plannings and the authorities and the licensing and the politicians is not. That's a universal challenge. Different flavors, different issues depending upon the geography.
You may, in fact, even find in Barcelona where you stayed that was illegal to do that, technically. I'm not saying it's a problem. but you may find that's the case.
Or it might have been licensed as a hotel.
Or it could have been a hotel.
Maybe.
Yeah, a hotel. So I just raise it because I think unfortunately the political environment in which we operate is a brake on some of these more amazing things happening as quickly as they could.
Lenders to the financial institutions aren't understanding it either, and that's a big gap.
Yeah. You got to have the money on side. You've got to have the politicians, the planners on side. You've got to have all ... Those of the stiff collar. All of those guys have to be aligned and thinking along the same lines.
Which brings me to the ... I mean, or just with one eye on the time as well, it brings me to think about different stakeholder interests. So thank you for that cue. Obviously we've got the planners, the politicians, the lawyers, the banks and financial institutions. But maybe a bit closer to home in terms of the audience here and perhaps who's going to be listening to this, we've got developers, service providers, occupants of buildings. We've got estate and letting agents and facilities managers. So how is this model going to have an impact from those special interest groups? Dan, you haven't spoken for a while. I'd love to get your take.
Well, I think the first port of call ... I mean, specifically with regards to the potential audience for this piece is a change in mindset from people that are looking at creating HMOs. Why don't we think about some of the things that we've discussed, specifically with regards to the customer experience and the creation of a great space with layered-on services, so that we're talking about something that's different to the way in which the mindset is currently being positioned? I think that's the starting point. I think if we start to think about ...
I like the as-a-service solution to anything, because I believe in that too. I think whether it's living as a service, space as a service, house as a service, I think as soon as we start to think about serving, then we have a different mindset. I think that's an important shift that we need to move away from. Property investment is a great way of creating wealth. How about we think about creating great businesses. So I would start with that kind of take on the audience that would be looking at this.
I think one of the things that's also important to bear in mind is that the reason we're doing this stuff is partly because we feel there's a contribution we can make, but actually, it's also because it leads to superior financial performance.
I think one of the things that we do need to articulate, particularly to, let's say, the more traditional property investor or the more traditional landlord, is that actually, if you do the things that we're talking about, you address the customer, you design a product that the customer wishes to purchase, they will gladly pay more for what it is you're providing. You will almost certainly have lower operating costs, because you will, we do. The consequence of that is higher margins, higher cash flows.
Ergo, it's not all about ephemeral, soft, wishy-washy, "We're going to change the world," things. It's all about the good, old, hard currency. You will make more profit. So create nicer spaces that meet the needs of the customer as they are today. You will make more profit. The more times we repeat that, the more likely it is ... Because we'll have those who would traditionally not have spent quite as much on their properties actually spending a bit more and then finding out that that's true.
Of course, when you find more we do this, that just becomes true... A few becomes many, right? And then all of a sudden, housing stock is upgraded. The politicians and the other stakeholders start to take notice that the product's better. It meets the needs and it's making more money. "Hey, this is a good thing. Let's do more of this. What else could we do? What else can we do?"
I think that's the language we have to have. We have to have the language that ... Focus on the customer. But we also have to have, the corollary to that, is the language that actually allows the more traditional parts of the industry to come along and play too. And that's the language of the dollar, I'm afraid.
So we've got the mindset and we've got the language. Angharad, I know you're dying to come in there. You were indicating. I'd love to bring you in, and [inaudible 01:10:08] we'll bring the two Davids in as well. But Angharad, come on. What is it?
Yeah. Well, as a customer ... I get that people go into property to make money and you've got to make a profit at the end of the day. However, I don't really feel comfortable knowing that people are sort of marketing towards my lifestyle, potentially, as a way to make more money. Because to me then, that just feels like it's almost selfish. They're thinking of themselves first and foremost. They're not really thinking about my needs and what I actually want as a customer, if that makes sense.
Do you have an Apple, Angharad?
An Apple?
Do you have an iPhone?
What's that got to do with it?
I think I know where he's going with it.
The iPhone is the most expensive, most profitable phone on the planet, but it doesn't stop people wanting it. The point is if we want to create businesses for good, they have to be good businesses. That means they have to be profitable.
So I wasn't necessarily saying it wasn't more for you. I was saying it's more profitable for the individuals who are investing in these things, because if we don't get the folk who have the money right now investing in these things, you won't have what you want. It's about trying to get the balance right between the economics, making it sustainable, which means it has to be profitable. It has to be attractive to those who have the capital, and if it's attractive to those who have the capital, the capital will come and you'll get the product you want.
So it's a difficult one, but what we think of is a term that internally we refer to as "compassionate capitalism." In other words, with an eye to what it is you want to create because it's good, but also, it's profitable and therefore sustainable, so you can keep delivering good. Does that make sense?
What stops somebody just sort of making a nice place and then branding it as co-living, and then just charging more for using that word when it's actually not?
Well, nothing. That's actually happening.
But then I think the market will overtake them. Yeah, they'll get found out eventually.
Serving is the word. David Thomas, I think bringing you back into the conversation ... Obviously you're representing agents. There you go. There's a big responsibility. What do you think is the stakeholder interest, and how's it going to be impacted, and how's it going to change your life?
I think it's revolutionary, and it is what a large portion of people out there on the market could do with. The whole community element to it is really well needed. I think part of it is just that this hasn't made it out into the mainstream market yet in terms of education for PRS funds developers, mainstream developers. They haven't got their radar on this yet, to some degree.
I mean, I even struggle looking at ... We've got a 350-apartment PRS scheme going up here in Nottingham, and they're working on returns of 6 to 8% to their pension fund, whereas in reality I know even if they turned half of that into serviced accommodation, their returns would be much higher. If they added more community things in there, their returns would be much higher, but the reality is they don't know it yet. They don't understand the market, so what they're doing is sticking to what they know, which is if they put a one-bed flat on the market, they'll get £700 a month. So I think they're being very simplistic with it at the moment.
But I've been really inspired by Luke's enthusiasm and his passion for it that actually, if that resonated out to bigger developers and PRS schemes, they would love it. I actually think that they would get on board with it because the returns are there, but at the same time, you're providing something that the market actually wants, which is all that service and community element, so yeah.
I think it's more an education thing now. I think it's a bit of marketing and a bit of maybe even working more with local estate agents within your areas to say, "Push this out to what would be your normal tenant, but make them aware that they have a better option that's even better for them."
Absolutely. And maybe a bit of a link into David Bonk. Obviously, David, you're a developer, but you're equally operating in a niche, social and care crossover. What about from other niches within the housing sector? Do you see big changes ahead for care homes or social living as a result of the co-living emergence?
Well, around here I've heard that some large developers ... The building boom's been going crazy for older adults. I've heard that's slowing a little bit. There might be enough stock to get through the next ... There's going to be certainly an increase in demand. How much more building is going to happen ... I think those buildings that are there are going to stay full and get more expensive, and it's going to create the opportunity for this type of co-living that we're talking about. There's going to be lots of space for it, for sure.
Sure. Okay. With maybe an eye on the time, I'm just thinking maybe a sort of one-minute passing thought from each of the panelists, unless there's anything that I've kind of missed in my role as host. So somebody pull me up on that. But maybe if we just go round ... I was going to say go round the table. Go round the virtual table, and just some closing remarks and final thoughts, anything that you want to add, maybe starting with Angharad.
Well, I love co-living and everything that it encompasses. For me, it was such a positive experience being able to land in a completely foreign city and almost have instant friends. The day after I landed, we actually went on a house day trip on a 10-mile hike, which was something that I don't think would have happened in a normal shared house. I'm still in touch with the people that I was living with, and it was a really special time for me. So because of that positive experience, I'm not going to go and do some more. But yes, I love it. It allows me to be able to travel and work, and that makes me happy.
Well, that sounds like a good, fitting end. It makes me happy. Luke, what about your final thoughts?
The thing is, it's to the existing world of property investors to shift their mindsets from how it functions to how it feels. If you can start thinking about putting yourself in the shoes of your customer, because that's who they are, and then reflecting upon whether or not the space you're creating functions well and enhances the way that person feels, you will end up with lower voids, higher ... Sorry, Angharad. Higher rent, lower voids, higher margins. So function to feeling.
Function to feeling. Like it. Dan, over to you. Final thoughts.
I think that yeah, we are going to see a significant shift in the foreseeable future. It's happening now, and I think the more we focus on the tenant as a customer and think about the customer experience and what we can do enhance that, to reduce friction, to make things easier, and to make lives more enriched ... That, for me, is where we need to be heading with the housing market and specifically co-living.
Fantastic. Less friction. Like that. David Bonk, closing remarks.
Sure. I see this as an opportunity to do well by doing good. Finally, for me, I get to feel like my work in real estate and investment has some heart to it. I don't need to go and volunteer in another organization. This is an opportunity for anyone in real estate who wants to add more meaning to their lives, have a more rich life. We can really take care of people's hearts who live in our properties now, and it's a real opportunity to live our best lives as investors, so that's ...
Who would have thought the words "heart" and "meaning" would come out from a property developer [inaudible 01:19:18]? But indeed it did. David Thomas, I'm going to pass over to you for your final thoughts.
Yeah, I mean, that kind of sums it up, but it's been quite inspiring to hear everybody on the panel talk from a completely different perspective, but actually what is really needed in the housing sector, because I think our existing housing model is outdated. There is no element of service to it. And from just hearing how passionate somebody like Luke is about the concept and what he can give to the consumer, and then Angharad on the other end saying, "I absolutely loved it ... " That sums it all up. I mean, if that isn't a model that will work, then I don't know what is. So yeah, I think it definitely just needs more education and more marketing, I think, just to get out there and educate people that it is a really viable model to move forward with.
Yeah. I think I would tend to agree. I think this is part of the purpose of this forum, of course, is to educate and share the model more widely. So it's great that all of you have given up so much of your time to share. The passion is evident from all of you, from whichever stakeholder interest group that you have. I just want to say thank you very much.
I think maybe the next stage is about ... In our conversation, it's about communication. It's about how do we make this thing real? I mean, personally, for example, it excites me, but I don't have any what I would call models of this in my own portfolio right now. But I'd like to. There's a number of you guys who're doing it, and you're blazing the trail, so all credit to you.
And if you ever need a tenant or a housemate, I'm more than happy to come and take up one of your rooms, preferably in a nice, sunny place.
I'm surprised you didn't Airbnb your own place to go back to Barcelona, or something.
I almost did. It was just a case of then managing and cleaning it.
Landlord permission required.
Yeah.
Anyway, that's all I wanted to add. I don't know if anybody else ... There's anything I've missed before we close today. Is there anything? Perhaps put your hand up.
Well, just to say thank you to all and to everyone on the panel for such an enlightening and enjoyable discussion, and also just the opportunity to talk about what it is that we're all trying to do. More of that, right? So thank you, generally. Thank you all.
That's all from me this week, remember if you want to talk about anything from today’s show, or just talk property investing more generally, email me at podcast@thepropertyvoice.net, I would be happy to hear from you! The show notes can be found at our website www.thepropertyvoice.net
Thanks very much for listening again this week, so all that left to say is ciao ciao!