Frequently Asked Questions

PBSA yields are driven primarily by location and proximity to a strong-recruiting university, nomination or direct-let mix, operator covenant and management track record, tenancy structure (typically 44–51 week academic-year lets), and the scheme’s specification relative to newer competing stock. Prime, well-let schemes in constrained-supply university towns generally price at tighter yields than secondary stock in oversupplied markets, and institutional buyers place a premium on schemes with a strong occupancy and rental growth history.

Active buyers span open and closed-ended institutional real estate funds, specialist PBSA operators and platforms, and family offices seeking long-income exposure, with continued appetite for stabilised, well-located assets and selective interest in forward-funded development opportunities.

Read the full article →

PBSA assets are typically valued on an income capitalisation basis, applying a market yield to net operating income, with reference to comparable transaction evidence, occupancy performance, lease structure and the specification and condition of the asset relative to competing local stock.

Read the full article →

Under a forward funding structure, an institutional buyer provides development finance in stages during construction in exchange for ownership of the completed asset. Under a forward commit, the buyer instead agrees to acquire the stabilised asset on practical completion, with the developer or their own funder carrying the construction finance risk in the interim. Both are widely used across UK PBSA development.

A well-run disposal process begins with clear positioning of the asset, an accurate view of the likely buyer universe and realistic pricing expectations, followed by a structured, confidential marketing process to relevant institutional and operator buyers through to exchange and completion.

Speak to our disposals advisory team →

Trading hotels are most commonly valued on a profits (EBITDA) basis, capitalising sustainable trading profit at a market-derived yield, with reference to trading performance, brand and operator covenant, physical condition and comparable transaction evidence. Development or vacant-possession assets are typically valued with reference to comparable capital values and residual appraisal.

A freehold hotel investor owns the underlying real estate outright, capturing both operational income and long-term capital value. A leasehold investment instead acquires a leasehold interest, typically with an operator paying rent under a lease or management agreement — offering a different risk and income profile, often with lower capital outlay but less direct exposure to asset-level upside.

In a sale and leaseback, the current owner-operator sells the freehold to an investor and simultaneously enters into a lease or management agreement to continue operating the hotel, releasing capital from the real estate while retaining operational control of the business.

Buyers currently active in the UK hotel market include institutional real estate funds, private equity platforms, family offices and experienced hotel operators, with continued interest in both stabilised trading assets and re-positioning or conversion opportunities.

Read the full article →

Build-to-Rent forward funding is a structure in which an institutional investor provides development finance in exchange for a forward purchase commitment on the completed, stabilised scheme — allowing developers to de-risk delivery while giving the investor a pipeline of purpose-built rental stock.

Build-to-Rent and multifamily are largely used interchangeably in the UK to describe purpose-built, professionally managed rental housing held as a single institutional-grade asset. The terminology varies more by scheme scale and management approach than by any fixed legal distinction.

Senior debt is a conventional first-charge facility sized conservatively against income or development cost. Stretched senior debt provides enhanced leverage beyond a conventional senior line from a single lender, without introducing a second, subordinated lender into the capital structure — typically priced higher to reflect the additional risk taken.

LTC (Loan-to-Cost) measures development debt against total project cost, while LTGDV (Loan-to-Gross-Development-Value) measures it against the completed scheme’s gross development value. Lenders typically reference both metrics together when sizing a development facility.

Read the full article →

Preferred equity sits between senior debt and common equity in the capital structure, typically receiving a fixed or preferred return ahead of the sponsor’s own equity, offering developers additional leverage beyond senior debt without diluting overall control of the project.