The panel kit.

1. How will you discover which version of this property the market values most, while keeping our leverage intact?

Strong · A quiet, ring-fenced user-sounding campaign; scenario-tests one combined bay vs. re-demise; clear rules on what is disclosed to the tenant and prospects.

Weak · Jumps to “we’ll blast it out”; treats leverage as an afterthought.

2. Show us your last three Tri-Cities landlord-side industrial vacancy, sublease, or assignment files. How much of your last 24 months was landlord-side here versus tenant-side elsewhere?

Strong · Addresses, bay sizes, timelines, outcomes, and a real Tri-Cities landlord share.

Weak · Undated “we do this all the time,” or “we do both sides equally.”

3. For ~20,000 sq ft combined on two legal parcels, what user sets do you test first, and what would make you separate the space?

Strong · Segments by manufacturing, service industrial, warehouse, owner-user; names the thresholds that justify re-demising.

Weak · Offers only rent comps.

4. What would you do in the first 21 days that our current brokers likely did not?

Strong · Targeted call list, tour calendar, broker-to-broker canvass, specific collateral, decision gates.

Weak · Blames the market or the prior broker.

5. How do you get paid if the path changes, replacement lease, to sublease consent, to sale? Where could your incentives distort?

Strong · Volunteers conflict points; proposes credits and clear fee mechanics.

Weak · Waves the question away.

1. Which buyer pools are genuinely in play, private investors, owner-users, split-parcel buyers, developers, and why?

Strong · Segments the market; explains how the in-place lease helps or hurts each pool.

Weak · “All of the above.”

2. How would you test leased-fee value against vacant-possession value without giving the tenant or the market leverage?

Strong · Controlled outreach, staged pricing hypotheses, information discipline.

Weak · Public marketing on day one.

3. What does the two-parcel structure do to financing, underwriting, and buyer psychology?

Strong · Talks title, lenders, owner-user flexibility, whether the split widens or narrows the pool.

Weak · “Probably doesn’t matter.”

4. Give us three recent industrial sales where lease status materially changed value. What did buyers care about most?

Strong · Specific examples.

Weak · Stays theoretical.

5. If selling today were not the best path, what evidence would you expect to find?

Strong · Intellectually honest; names what would disconfirm their thesis.

Weak · Sounds like a pitch deck.

1. Walk us through the landlord decision tree when a tenant asks for early relief but we want maximum sale optionality.

Strong · Separates lease language, remedy election, consent rights, sale consequences.

Weak · Speaks in abstractions.

2. On a first-pass lease review, what clauses are you hunting for before we answer the tenant at all?

Strong · Names assignment, subletting, consent standards, recapture, surrender, default, remedies, notice, estoppel and SNDA, relocation, operating-cost, demolition and redevelopment.

Weak · “It depends,” no checklist.

3. How do you protect a landlord from waiving leverage while still sounding cooperative?

Strong · Reservation of rights, non-waiver language, controlled communications, sequencing of letters.

Weak · Casual about email correspondence.

4. How would you coordinate with separate leasing and sales brokers without one process prejudicing the other?

Strong · Privileged issue memos, approved talking points, document-room controls, who says what to whom.

Weak · Assumes everyone can freestyle.

5. Tell us about recent files: assignments, subleases, terminations, or landlords selling encumbered industrial property.

Strong · Concrete and current.

Weak · Leans on broad reputation.

1. Walk us through the after-tax picture of a sale, capital gains, CCA recapture, transaction costs, before we fall in love with a headline price.

Strong · Distinguishes gross from after-everything; names recapture as a specific bite.

Weak · Talks only about the sale price.

2. If we sell, how do we replace this income, and what is the reinvestment risk?

Strong · Models the cheque-versus-portfolio tradeoff; addresses inflation and longevity.

Weak · Assumes proceeds redeploy at the same yield.

3. How do you handle it when one spouse prioritizes liquidity and the other prioritizes predictability?

Strong · Treats it as a real planning input, not a footnote.

Weak · Ignores the tension.

4. Is this building meant to be spent or passed on, and how does that change the structure?

Strong · Connects the estate question to the tax and sale structure.

Weak · Doesn’t ask.

5. How are you paid, and where could that steer your advice?

Strong · Distinguishes planning fee from AUM; offers a project-fee planning engagement first.

Weak · AUM relationship baked in from the start.