Jered Sturm is the co-founder and CEO of SNS Capital Group, a private equity investment firm with a focus on acquiring and operating large apartment communities in Cincinnati, Ohio. In this episode, Jered Sturm talks about how he focuses on improving his company's operations to prepare for future growth. He also talks about investing in software, hiring staff, and streamlining training.
Jered Sturm | Real Estate Background
- Co-Founder and CEO of SNS Capital Group
- 1,000 multifamily units
- Based in: Cincinnati, OH
- Say hi to him at:
- Best Ever Book: Breath by James Nestor
- Greatest Lesson: Trust in others to do something better than you can. Delegate, and you will often be surprised by what people can do.
Click here to learn more about our sponsors:
Slocomb Reed: Best Ever listeners, welcome to the best real estate investing advice ever show. I'm Slocomb Reed, and I'm here again with Jered Sturm. I interviewed Jered at the Best Ever Conference, and this is a deep-dive follow-up to that conversation. As a refresher, Jered is joining us from Cincinnati, Ohio. He's the CEO of SNS Capital Group, which acquires and manages multifamily apartment communities in the Greater Cincinnati, Ohio market, with a focus on adding value. The current portfolio is just over 1,000 units here in Greater Cincinnati. I want to start us off, Jered, returning to a piece of the conversation we had last time. You were on stage at the Best Ever Conference to be asked what you are currently investing in, given the economic climate, the real estate market climate that we find ourselves in in early 2023. And the answer that you gave was that you are focusing on your operations.
Now, within the Greater Cincinnati apartment real estate investing community you are already known as someone who's always had really sharp operations... So really intriguing to hear that that's something that you're doubling down on right now. Let's start here... That's where our deep dive is, is in what you're doing to improve your operations currently. But why is that your focus now?
Jered Sturm: I guess before we jump to that, I'll jump back and say thank you for having me back.
Slocomb Reed: Yes, of course.
Jered Sturm: I enjoy all of our conversations, but I feel privileged to, I guess, have had a good enough one to have a follow-up. So thank you for that. Why I answered that question the way I did - truly it's because the question was "What asset class are you most excited about investing in right now?" and I would love the answer to be "300 unit apartment communities in Cincinnati, Ohio." But that's not what the opportunities are presenting to me currently. So the best option currently is to really double down on my operations. But that should always be something that a business is investing in. It shouldn't just be like, "Oh, because I can't buy new apartments, I'm only looking to enhance my operations right now." It's just the market is challenging, returns don't make a ton of sense to me for what I've been able to uncover... So another way of wording my answer is I'm investing into the future growth of my company. Positioning the operations to be ready to add another 1000 units whenever I'm able to uncover those opportunities. I try not to point the finger at the market too much. At the end of the day, it's my responsibility to acquire, whether the market's up or down or sideways. But right now we're just not buying a lot, so we're investing into hiring, improving softwares, improving efficiencies in current systems and processes.
Slocomb Reed: I resonate with the way that you're framing that right now, meaning that you're investing in the future growth of your company. I'm experiencing something very similar right now. Again, I manage under 200 units, so less than 1/5 the size of your company... And I went into the Best Ever Conference thinking that it shouldn't take as much of my time with the team that I have to make sure that my management portfolio is operating optimally. There must be some efficiencies that I can build into the way that I'm already doing things, to make it easier to record, easier to track, easier to deliver the results I'm getting now, and hopefully improve them. And I find myself thinking that if I just zero in on some operational efficiencies now, I could very easily be poised to double my portfolio without having to add very much staff, which is a very intriguing position to be in. You're adding staff and making the future growth of your company, or being in a position to operate a growing portfolio again soon. What are the primary factors in improving your operations right now?
Jered Sturm: I think what I'm hearing you say, if I'm understanding correctly, is there is a difference between what I'm saying on operational efficiency and payroll efficiency.
Slocomb Reed: Yeah.
Jered Sturm: We're hiring people, and even just today, I promoted one of our property managers to regional manager. And you may ask "Why? You didn't buy anything new. Why are you doing that?" And that's gonna cost me more, right? That's a higher-paid position, then I've gotta hire someone to replace this person who we've promoted... That in itself is not efficient within a revenue expense structure, but your question was -- remind me what your question was?
Slocomb Reed: Where are you currently focused? What are the key factors to operations that you're focused on improving right now?
Jered Sturm: I think a big one we had a lot of growth on is how to onboard and get someone up to speed. And when I say up to speed, efficient within our company; the speed at which they go from their first day to fully-integrated, whether they're a maintenance tech, a leasing professional, a regional manager, or property manager, whatever that is; the speed at which we're able to do that was a big focus over the last six months. And that goes into simplifying everything, but not giving up the results that it produces. So pushing everything back into one software, and making the training process more fluid, so you're not jumping in and out of silos all the time.
So I think if you can focus on making things easier to train a new person on, you're basically focusing on efficiencies throughout your whole company. So why that was important to us is because we're growing, so we're hiring a lot, but also, if there is just natural turnover in our company - someone leaves because of whatever reason, it's expensive. Everyone knows that in business, that the efficiencies of someone who's worked at your company for two years is drastically greater than someone who's been there for a week, and is basically just sucking up everybody else's time... So getting very good at getting them from a time suck to someone who's contributing is what we've really, really focused on. And I think in doing that, it has contributed to all aspects of our business becoming more efficient, including the people who have been around for five years.
Slocomb Reed: Jered, let me see if I can rephrase the steps of what you just said. The primary focus is in getting new hires up to speed as quickly as possible, so that they are performing as efficiently as employees in their second and third year, faster. And that's going to lead to efficiency across the board. I think that's something that all of our listeners can inherently understand. Especially anyone who's hired an employee who hasn't stuck around for 90 days, and has hired an employee who has stuck around for three plus years; there's just a huge difference in what those people are capable of getting done in a day, week, month, quarter, year, for sure.
You said that you're doing this by both simplifying your processes, and making them more...
Jered Sturm: Fluid.
Slocomb Reed: I'm not gonna let you get off that easy. You said you're doing this by simplifying your processes while also making them more productive, and more fluid. And you said getting everything into one software, but I have to imagine there's more to it than that. Let me first ask, what is the software, and how is it that you're making your company more productive by also making things simpler?
Jered Sturm: I would say that our whole company is not all within one software, but we're trying to push it to less softwares. The main one that we use for our property management company, which is our operational arm of our business, is Appfolio. So we actually use Appfolio property management, and then we use Appfolio investment management. So when we go from the managing of the business to managing of investors and investor capital, we actually want those two things synched up, because of less complexity, smoother integration... So all of what we're talking about -- so we specifically chose that software because it had both of those platforms, rather than, say, use Yardi, and then export and then use Juniper Square. So there's a lot of companies that that is their structure; they'll run under Yardi, they'll export and they'll use Juniper Square for investment management. But I used to say an employee doesn't hit their true efficiency until one year in. I remember saying it, and I would say it all the time. And then I was just like, "That's crazy. That takes forever." And we have so many people who unfortunately don't make it to a year. So if you think of that from an investment standpoint, it's like that was a terrible investment. So I asked myself, "Well, what should it be, to where the return on investment is good even if this person only works here nine months?"
So our target became, in all of those roles in the property management business - now, we're not talking about an acquisition specialist, or something maybe a little more complex, or an HR person, something like that... I'm talking about your maintenance tech, maintenance supervisor, property manager, leasing agents - those roles, our goal now, and we've been able to accomplish this, is get them from hired to fully efficient, like we used to think would happen in a year, in 10 days. And because we really, really focused on it, and got rid of all the junk that was just distracting and confusing them, we've been able to accomplish that.
So now we can hire someone and in 10 days they're producing a return on our investment, where before it was, "Oh, man, this person is taking all of our time. We're still training them six months in, and they don't get it, they're confused", and then that person's like, "I quit." Oh, my gosh, we've just spent six months... Basically, we would have been better off without them. So we want to do avoid that. And our goal that we've set for those roles is 10 days.
Slocomb Reed: That's 10 business days, right? Two weeks?
Jered Sturm: 10 business days. And then they go into what we see as a continuous education... We call it a module, but just think of it as a circulating loop of responsibilities; so they never get off of it until they get promoted. So you have your core responsibilities that get covered in your first 10 days of onboarding and training, then you get on to your continuous education loop, which is basically one course per month, rotating through the same content that you saw at your training, as a reminder, refresher and update.
Slocomb Reed: I want to come back to how you're packing a year's worth of training into two weeks. Before I do that though, some pushback that I'm hearing in the back of my head, that also resonates with my own experience, Jered - I know a lot of employers, not necessarily in the same space as us, but who are building teams that have a lot of entry-level responsibilities... And I'm thinking in particular of some companies that put everyone on a 30/60/90 the first day that they're hired, and there are certain responsibilities, and there's a certain level of proficiency, and a certain level of results that they are expected to have shown after 30 days, 60 days and 90 days.
To back that up with my own personal experience, I would say that I don't even really know who I've hired, and how they're going to perform as an employee, until I've seen them in my organization for a full 90 days. Is that something that you agree with? Or are you experiencing now that two weeks in you can let people loose, and just -- I'm not sure how to finish that question, but I think you know what I'm getting at.
Jered Sturm: Yeah, that has been my experience. After two weeks, we know if they can work on their own. And obviously, they have the support of a manager and supervisor, not running solo... And I would say it's not that they are 100% ready to go solo, but it's more of the 80/20 principle; are they producing a return on our investment for the 10 days that we put in? Or are we going a year out just to figure this out? But we have also, on the other side of that coin, at the end of our 10-day process that we say we should know if this person is a fit, there have been multiple people where the answer was no. So it got us to the decision much faster of -- it wasn't 90 days in where we said "This person's character is not very great", or "They don't really know what they're doing", or "Their default is to avoid work." There have been multiple people where we make it through that 10 days, and the coordinator of the department is the person who decides, is this a fit or not? Should we then hand them off to the supervisor or property manager to let them loose in the organization? And the answer to some of those was no, and what we do is we let that person go. And I have heard from others that's kind of cutthroat; you don't even give them a chance after 10 days. And obviously, some of these people have given us that feedback, and it's like, "Well, we want to encourage you to go find an organization that works for you, and we don't want to invest anymore in this relationship, because all the indicators are telling us it won't work out anyway." So to answer your question bluntly, we feel like yes, we can get them there that fast, or we know by that time.
Slocomb Reed: Jered, how much are you sharing with these new hires day zero or day one about how they're going to be measured in these first 10 days? Are you experiencing that it comes as a shock to these people, their expectations, that they're not meeting in the first two weeks? Or is it pretty clear after two weeks that there are expectations you've had from day one that haven't been met?
Jered Sturm: So the expectations are laid out right away. Basically, day one of onboarding, there's a graphic that we show them that says, "Here's our process of onboarding. At day 10, you're going to take one final exam that tells us if you have learned the content or not. And it doesn't mean that if you don't get them all right, you don't last in the organization, but the coordinator who implements the shadowing process over the 10 days, and that exam, is going to make a determination based on the shadowing and the results of your exam. It might just be that this one component of the business, or your job, you need a little extra training on, and we'll say, "Okay, well, we're going to spend another day or two going back over that." Or they say, "We didn't get what we needed over 10 days for you to be able to absorb the important content of your job, and therefore it's not a fit anymore."
One key component of that is we do not ask the coordinator, who is the person responsible for implementing this onboarding process, to let that person go; our HR person comes in, and the relationship with that new hire -- that is never our goal. But you asked, so it's just part of the process. Our goal is obviously to get everyone to success. But if the coordinator has to make that hard decision, we want to make it easier on them to make that hard decision, so they don't have to be the person looking across the table and saying, "I don't think it's a fit. Why don't you go find a place that's a better fit?"
Slocomb Reed: That makes a lot of sense, Jered. And to be fair, with some people you can only be so clear upfront before they get in their own way about understanding what it is that you're trying to tell them... And those are often the people who need to be let go after two weeks, or the people who didn't fully understand what they were signing up for, for whatever reason. You've talked about shadowing, you've talked about an exam after two weeks, which makes me think there's studying involved in these 10 days... Tell us more about what these 10 days look like.
Jered Sturm: It depends on the position. But I think we're too high-level right now. So let me bring it back down to a specific position and give you more [unintelligible 00:17:03.14]
Slocomb Reed: Great, yeah.
Jered Sturm: So maintenance tech, one that everyone in property management struggles to hire, onboard, train, and get production out of. So maintenance tech - what they do is they start, and on day one with HR they're introduced to their maintenance coordinator. The coordinator then pulls up a one-page graphic that says, "Here's our onboarding process. I want you to know that at day 10, you are going to be ready to work on your own, with the support of your supervisor. And I have a process that I'm going to put in place where you're going to be shadowing me over the next 10 days. I'm going to teach you everything you need to know to cover 80% of your responsibilities. At the end of that 10 days, you're going to take an exam that confirms you were listening to me and that you absorbed this information." They'll be crystal clear, like I said - if you miss some... If it's just something we need additional training on, we'll do that. But if you are not a fit, then we will be parting ways at that time. So it is a clear starting point.
But here's the key point, is the curriculum. What are you doing to get from taking a year to be efficient, to 10 days? And really, what we did on the maintenance tech there is we looked at the Pareto's Principle, 80/20. We ran reports, thousands of work orders, thousands, and then we categorized them on what trade - so you're talking carpentry, electric, plumbing, HVAC, flooring, and paint. So there was probably 10 different trades that we categorized every work order to, and then a sub-trade. So if you said HVAC - condensation line; plumbing; toilet. And then what we realized after we did that for an entire year, which is thousands and thousands of work orders, we realized that about 30 work orders produce 80% of the workload. So we knew that. And you know by property. So if I said "At Amberley House, the number one work order is AC condensation lines. Second one is toilet fill valves." So if this maintenance tech is going to do, let's say, 2000 work orders in a year, and 1,600 of them are actually only 30 different things, it's pretty easy to then say "We're going to teach you these 30 things in 10 days, and then you're going to be tested on them." And it's as simple as "Here's a common work order. My toilet running. What's the problem? How do you fix it?"
So it's about knowing how to create the curriculum that you really understand what is the 80/20 of your job. So if we can train them on the 20%, and it produces 80% of results, that's where we get that efficiency and that squeeze in time. So we do that, they shadow with the maintenance coordinator for 10 days; that maintenance coordinator knows exactly what the exam is, and we tell them "Here's the key to the exam. Go out and make sure you hit these 30 topics. If you don't, you need to make sure it's happening in the classroom." And then the exam lands on their desk at day 10, and they have to pass that. It's stuff like the technical side, but then it's also things like core values. How do you request time off in our system? How do you file a complaint with HR? They need to know all of these things to be a functioning employee. So I think the exam for maintenance tech is probably 90 questions long.
Slocomb Reed: You make 90 sound like it's not a lot of questions, especially for a maintenance technician...
Jered Sturm: An example, a really simple one, would be like, "At what dollar amount do you need your supervisor to approve the purchase?" So $250 is our answer.
Slocomb Reed: Jered, that specifically, and a couple of other things that you just said, lead to my next question, which is in your onboarding, in your training curriculum - and I'm sure this could be role/position-specific - how much of the curriculum is specific to how a new hire does their job, and how much of the curriculum is about how that individual interfaces with your company about doing their job?
Jered Sturm: Good question. I would say 60% on how they do their job, and then 40% on the interface of how they work with our company. But then I would say that continuous education is maybe 90/10. So that's when it gets more about how do you knock on the door of the resident? Not "How do you fix the fill valve in the toilet?", but how do you make sure that your logo is visible on your shirt, so they can see you through the eyeglass in the door, and what do you say when they open that door?" So we would say "Mr./Mrs. Smith, I'm here to fix your X" and the maintenance tech should know that.
So hopefully I answered your question... I'm going more in the weeds there. It's like, continuous education is more nuanced, where the initial 10 days is like, "Let's get the meat of it done, because we need you up and running."
Slocomb Reed: It feels unfortunate to me, Jered, that this is a shorter-form podcast, because there's so many more questions that I want to be able to ask. To summarize here, before we move on, specific to improving your operational efficiency, your primary focus these past six months has been how do you onboard new hires as quickly as possible to get them to proficiency as quickly as possible. And your answer has been this 10-day onboarding curriculum that involves a lot of shadowing, a lot of interface with this person's manager or coordinator, and an exam at the end of that demonstrates whether or not they caught what they needed to catch in those 10 days.
Jered Sturm: I'm going to add the KISS principle, "keep it simple, stupid." It's like one business philosophy... Or I would rephrase that for my own business and say "If you can simplify it enough to get someone to a high degree of a efficiency in 10 days, then you have found so much efficiency within your business." So I think a lot of our conversation went into this onboarding and training, but I think what I'm trying to highlight and maybe didn't do the best job of is if you can accomplish that, all the other things have been put in place. So you have eliminated waste, you have eliminated softwares, you've eliminated poor communication, you've eliminated working in silos, you've eliminated cross-department confusion... You have made it so simple that you can get someone to a high degree of efficiency within 10 days, and that's almost the secondary result to what we were after. If we can get it that simple, our business will be firing on all cylinders. And that's what we were able to accomplish because we need to stop pretending that everyone we hire is going to know our business as well as we do... Because a year ago, it was just too complicated. It's like, these Google sheets that have these amazing formulas in it, and two people in our company can understand how those formulas work. So let's boil it down, let's get it simple, so we can get people up and running faster. And the end result was our business itself is better because of that.
Slocomb Reed: That's immensely helpful, Jered. Thank you. There are two more questions that I want to make sure that we touch on in this conversation. The next one is how do you know within SNS when you have an employee that you need to promote, whose responsibilities and compensation you need to increase?
Jered Sturm: I'd say it depends. I'd love that silver bullet, but it's very different for everyone. I guess the one piece of advice I can give through my own learning experiences is you've got to watch out about promoting to the point of incompetence. What I mean by that is, you don't want to take your rockstar leasing agent and promote them to property manager, where they're terrible. Just because someone is good at one role does not mean they will be good at the next role. So you have to look at deciding on those internal promotions, "Are the skills and attributes translatable into the next role?" So good doesn't equal good in another role. So you've really got to pay attention to not promote to the point of incompetence, which I see a lot of organizations do. "You were great as a leasing agent, let's promote you to property manager." You were great as a property manager, let's promote you to regional." "Oh, you're terrible. You hate your job. We have to fire you." It's like, "Man, I wish I would have kept you as a property manager", right? So it depends; monitor if this person's skills and attributes are going to translate over into the new role.
Slocomb Reed: Jered, when you recognize within a member of your team that they have skills that you think will translate to that increased, but also different responsibility, like leasing agent to PM, PM to regional, is there anything that you're doing to groom that talent in the meantime? Are there any conversations you're having? Does your follow-up [unintelligible 00:28:01.00] communication with them differ at all?
Jered Sturm: For that specific person?
Slocomb Reed: Yes.
Jered Sturm: Yes, but I can't pinpoint anything specific. We're a small enough organization that if we feel this person has what it takes, we'll lean into that a little bit more. Universally, what I've done in our organization is - maybe some of the listeners are familiar with it, but a vivid vision. And Slocomb, I don't know if I showed you the one that I actually have for our company, but I wrote a magazine as if it was a business review of SNS in 2025, and I said "This is what we'll look like, act like, feel like. This is what each position is." It took a lot of time. But it outlines each position as well. So it tells about the regional managers, and what they make, and how they act, and how they lead... And then basically, at the end of it, I tell our organization, "This is me empowering you to reverse-engineer." And I said, "This is where we're going. If you're interested in this role, I have now told you how you need to behave to be able to be that person." And those who are really driven and want it, they really appreciate it, because they say "Okay, well, I get it. This is what I need to do. I can put myself in that position, rather than wait for you to coach me on what needs to be done." And we've seen it happen time and time again.
Slocomb Reed: Last topic here for this conversation, Jered - what is the meeting cadence in your organization? And by that, I mean, "What meetings are you having on a regular basis?" Why are they important, and how frequently do they happen?
Jered Sturm: So every manager or supervisor does a check in meeting with their respective direct report once a week. It's up to them to set up when that is, but it is required that it's consistent. So we're not rescheduling it every week. But that's like a 15-minute meeting. They're just going to see what do they need help with? Where do they need support? But something unique to us at SNS is they also will review their - what we call peer to peer answers. And I'm getting pretty into the weeds here, but each week, the departments will get together, and they're there to socialize and build connections, but there's four or five questions that myself or someone else will prompt them to talk about. So like, "What process in our organization causes you frustration?" And they'll answer it; the answers to that goes into a Google form, and then it gets sent to anyone in the chain of command above them. So as CEO, I get the privilege of being able to read everyone's inputs. But if it was like a leasing agent, it would get sent to a property manager. And then in that check-in meeting, they're discussing those responses. So they say, "Hey, I noticed you said the guest card process in AppFolio is not making sense to you. I'm going to update you on that, or we're going to talk about it."
Then you have monthly meetings that are going to review KPIs, and each role has specific KPIs that are outlined from day one. And then on a quarterly basis for higher-up employees, being like property managers and above, we're gonna do budget reviews, and then annual performance reviews.
Slocomb Reed: What I'm hearing is - insufficiently summarized - weekly check-ins, monthly KPI reviews, quarterly budget reviews, annual performance reviews.
Jered Sturm: Yes. Much more succinct than I made it.
Slocomb Reed: Well, I get to sit here and listen to you and take notes and then summarize, Jered. You make it easy for me. How often as the CEO are you meeting with the company to broadcast the vision for the trajectory of the company where you all are going together, and who else is on that meeting?
Jered Sturm: Unformalised, all the time. I'm not saying everyone is in the room, but a huge part of my job is to get the buy-in from our team on believing in our vision and mission, and creating action within them... Because ultimately, they're the ones that are running the business. So I'm doing that all the time in small ways on an individual basis, or small groups.
An example would be today our longest employee had her annual performance review today, and I asked her manager, "Can I sit in on it? Because I would really love to just kind of double down on what she has brought to our team and show appreciation, and how her loyalty and what she has been able to establish within her department." And that's doing what you're describing, but it's not formalized.
Another example is I had a leasing agent reach out to me directly and say "I read your vision magazine. I'm interested in acquisitions. Here's 20 questions I wrote down after I read the magazine. Would you be willing to answer them?" And I said, "Let's sit down and I'll answer them." So kind of pouring into our team is a huge part of my responsibility. And we're not that big of a company. We have 40 employees now. And 40 is not a big enough number that I can't individually interact with each of them.
Now, on a more formalized approach, I do things to try to make it more fun. So example is I got the whole company together and I said we're doing SNS trivia. All the answers to the trivia are in that magazine, and I'm going to ask you 60 questions (I think that was what I did). Whoever studies the magazine the most will win trivia 400/300/200." First place, second place, third place.
So what I was doing was I got the whole company together, and I said, "Study the magazine", and it helps them understand my vision, but it also helps me identify who is actually paying attention here, who is aligning themselves with this vision; who should be promoted when the time comes. So that was a more formal approach to what you're asking.
Slocomb Reed: That's awesome. I totally get what you're saying about not just talking about instilling the vision for the company and its future, and discerning your employees' alignment with their future through those meetings and through those conversations. That makes a lot of sense, and I do something similar, currently.
Jered, I've taken a lot of notes; a lot more notes than I normally take in one of these Best Ever interviews. Thank you. Best Ever listeners, thank you as well for tuning in. If you've gained anywhere near the value from this conversation that I have, please do subscribe to our show. Leave us a five star review and share this episode with a friend who's involved in the operation of their own management portfolio or their own small business. Thank you, and have a Best Ever day.
Jered Sturm: Thank you, Slocomb, and thank you to the Best Ever audience. I appreciate your time.
This website, including the podcasts and other content herein, are made available by Joesta PF LLC solely for informational purposes. The information, statements, comments, views and opinions expressed in this website do not constitute and should not be construed as an offer to buy or sell any securities or to make or consider any investment or course of action. Neither Joe Fairless nor Joesta PF LLC are providing or undertaking to provide any financial, economic, legal, accounting, tax or other advice in or by virtue of this website. The information, statements, comments, views and opinions provided in this website are general in nature, and such information, statements, comments, views and opinions are not intended to be and should not be construed as the provision of investment advice by Joe Fairless or Joesta PF LLC to that listener or generally, and do not result in any listener being considered a client or customer of Joe Fairless or Joesta PF LLC.
The information, statements, comments, views, and opinions expressed or provided in this website (including by speakers who are not officers, employees, or agents of Joe Fairless or Joesta PF LLC) are not necessarily those of Joe Fairless or Joesta PF LLC, and may not be current. Neither Joe Fairless nor Joesta PF LLC make any representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of any of the information, statements, comments, views or opinions contained in this website, and any liability therefor (including in respect of direct, indirect or consequential loss or damage of any kind whatsoever) is expressly disclaimed. Neither Joe Fairless nor Joesta PF LLC undertake any obligation whatsoever to provide any form of update, amendment, change or correction to any of the information, statements, comments, views or opinions set forth in this podcast.
No part of this podcast may, without Joesta PF LLC’s prior written consent, be reproduced, redistributed, published, copied or duplicated in any form, by any means.
Joe Fairless serves as director of investor relations with Ashcroft Capital, a real estate investment firm. Ashcroft Capital is not affiliated with Joesta PF LLC or this website, and is not responsible for any of the content herein.
The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as an offer to buy or sell any securities or to make or consider any investment or course of action. For more information, go to www.bestevershow.com.