Housed: The Shared Living Podcast
Sarah Canning and Deenie Lee of The Property Marketing Strategists have teamed up with Daniel Smith of Student Housing Consultancy to discuss the latest news, views and insights in the shared living sector.
Each episode they will be delving into a wide variety of subjects and asking the questions which aren't often asked.
This podcast is a must for anyone working in Student Accommodation, BTR, Co-Living, Operational Real Estate or Shared Living.
Housed: The Shared Living Podcast
How Flexible are Contracts Really? Homeviews BTR Report, The Key Feature not Being Communicated and AI in Planning.
Stepping away from remote recording, the Housed - Shared Living Podcast team gathers in-person at a London studio to tackle pressing issues reshaping the shared accommodation landscape in Episode 63.
Following energetic feedback from their UKREiiF coverage, the hosts reveal ongoing conversations to create a dedicated hub for PBSA, BTR, and co-living sectors at future events. This grassroots initiative aims to address the significant representation gap, particularly for student accommodation, which currently receives minimal attention despite its market importance.
The conversation shifts to a groundbreaking development – the government's plan to implement Google DeepMind's Gemini model in planning departments by 2026. While this AI innovation promises to slash processing times by scanning hundreds of files in seconds, the team debates whether automation might inadvertently encourage cookie-cutter designs or even marginalize architectural input. Despite these concerns, they recognize AI's potential to free planning officers from administrative burdens and allow more focus on creative assessments.
Perhaps most revealing is their deep dive into HomeViews' latest Build to Rent report. Against conventional wisdom, residents overwhelmingly prioritise practical considerations – transport links, flexible tenancies, and responsive maintenance – far above luxury amenities like cinema rooms or games spaces. The data exposes a fundamental disconnect between what developers market and what genuinely drives satisfaction.
Most striking is the revelation about security perception. When 78% of young adults cite "stability and security" as their primary motivation for homeownership, it suggests BTR and PBSA sectors face a messaging challenge rather than a product problem. Residents simply aren't aware these accommodation types can provide the tenure security they crave.
The conversation concludes with a call for greater tenancy flexibility, noting universities already beginning to offer two-year agreements with frozen rents. As the podcast team heads off to continue their strategy session over lunch, they leave listeners with a challenge to reconsider what truly matters in shared living spaces: not bowling alleys and rooftop terraces, but the fundamental human needs for security, flexibility, and community.
What housing innovations would you like us to explore next? Share your thoughts and help shape future episodes.
Thank you to our season four sponsors:
MyStudentHalls - Find your ideal student accommodation across the UK.
Utopi - The smart building platform helping real estate owners protect the value of their assets.
Washstation - Leading provider of laundry solutions for Communal and Campus living throughout the UK and Ireland.
We are ready to go now, awesome.
Speaker 3:Hello everyone and welcome back to How's the Shared Living Podcast. This is the seventh episode in season four and today it's a very different kind of day because we're actually all together in person, physically, in a podcast studio in London. Finally, I'm Deanie Lee from the Property Marketing Strategists.
Speaker 2:I'm Dan Smith from Resi Consultancy.
Speaker 3:And I'm Sarah Canning from the Property Marketing Strategists and before we go on, we just have a quick word from our headline sponsor. Dan and the team from my Student Hall have been supporters of how since the beginning and we are truly, really incredibly grateful that they're here once again as headline sponsors of season four. Their student accommodation listing site is easy for students to search and easy for operators to list, so if you haven't already done so, make sure that you are listed. And also a huge thank you to our sponsors, utopia and wash station.
Speaker 3:More from them later, after recording today, because we are all together, we're going to be having a bit of a strategy session about how, so it's a really good time to encourage you all to get in touch with us and continue to give feedback about the topics you want to hear more or less about or any of the experts you want to hear more from and, most importantly, any sponsors wanted to work with us in season five from September. We literally couldn't do this without our wonderful sponsors, so please do get in touch if you would like to partner with us, right? So last week we spoke a little bit about kind of our views on UK Reef and how we found the event. We got quite a lot of feedback from that last episode, but, dan, did you want to give us a bit of an update on that?
Speaker 2:Sure, yeah, so we got a huge amount of feedback from that. I put a post out on LinkedIn, but also the podcast was yeah, yeah, very, very much. Sorry, gareth, I need to concentrate. So we got a huge amount of feedback from the podcast last week and we had a chat with Matt Christie. So we are going to be continuing conversations with Matt and the team at UK Reef because we do feel that PBSA needs more representation.
Speaker 2:Now there's only so much that the team at UK Reef can do, because all of the tents are typically taken by sponsors and those sponsors then decide exactly who goes into the sessions and onto the panels.
Speaker 2:But to have one hour and 15 minutes across three days, I think there is very much the awareness that that's not quite enough for PBSA in particular. I also think there's probably more that needs to be done on BTR and co-living. So if we can end up with some kind of hub or some kind of a tent maybe a sponsored tent, possibly a housed tent, possibly a housed tent we've already had, you know, expressions of interest from the likes of student crowd class foundation, amber and several others who have sort of said that they might be interested in supporting that, very keen to take that forward. So we'll continue those conversations with matt christie and the team at uk reef just to see if we can get a hub for the shared living sector so that everybody can come and network and we can put a load of sessions on and really make sure that pbsa especially is represented, but also that btr and co-living are top of the agenda too. So, yeah, watch this space. Um, it's definitely something that we're we're passionate about yeah, I think we.
Speaker 1:There was a flurry of messages between us last week about all of the exciting things that we could include A little bit of trepidation, because even just attending UK Reef is exhausting and we're like, oh my God, what are we letting ourselves in for? We're putting our hands up to say that we'll help organise something. So, yeah, we're going into it with our eyes open, but we'd very much like to, you know, do, do what, what the sector wants, really. So, yeah, if anyone else has got any other ideas about how we can bring that to life, then let us know and we will be organizing, um, that meeting with the team from uk reef yeah, I think, ultimately it's going to be a lot of work, and the more that we can pull together and work with everyone and bring the things that I guess people don't normally see or think is missing is actually is where we want to be really, so I think any ideas on that and any help and support it'll be for all the sector.
Speaker 3:Um, so it is exciting. It is a lot of work. Um.
Speaker 2:Watch this space, we'll see what happens yeah, I think part of this is, uh is also I think there's just that huge lack of representation for pbsa in particular. There is no one body that oversees pbsa, not oversees. It represents it, either in government or things like this, and that is where we're really missing a trick. We've got to get something off the ground there. So, uh, again, watch this space, sarah deanie and I will will continue talking about that, and thanks very much to everyone who's reached out to discuss that as well.
Speaker 1:Yeah, a huge amount of support for doing that yeah.
Speaker 3:Yeah, which is great. So thank you to all our listeners for that support. We'll just have a quick break to hear from one of our sponsors. So there was a new article that that I saw this week um around that the government are going to implement ai in planning departments. Um, which is brilliant, I think, and I'm sure, dan, you're going to have a lot to say on this topic. No, of course not um, but I just thought.
Speaker 3:You know, planning is one of the big barriers that we've got in the sector. It is so slow. It's taken years to to get anything through planning. You know their deadlines are being missed and no one even cares anymore because they know the deadlines are going to be missed. So it seems like a massive step forward and a great initiative by the government to do this.
Speaker 3:But I just thought you know you're very much pro-AI and I'm pro-AI, but I kind of think that there's still a lot to learn about pro-AI and it's kind of what are the risks and benefits around the use of this technology? I think one of the things that I worry about is that when you use technology, there's formulas and algorithms and things that make it very easy to pass whatever checks and balances they're looking for and therefore do we end up with this planning process that is all just ticking boxes and actually not really about what the local environment needs, what people need. So I guess that's my fear and my worry, but in terms of speeding it up and making it better, it sounds like a dream come true well, I mean, maybe they've been working off AI in the planning department in Coventry or Nottingham or Sheffield for the last five years or so.
Speaker 2:Look, I see it as a positive thing because it is embracing the future and AI can really speed up a lot of those manual processes and the admin side of things.
Speaker 2:So, this AI tool that they're implementing. I don't actually know exactly what it is. So this AI tool that they're implementing I don't actually know exactly what it is. I'm assuming it's sort of a bit more internal, rather than them purchasing a specific suite from somewhere, but it will scan hundreds of files in seconds and that's ultimately going to mean that, rather than a planning department sitting through that and we know that they are short-staffed already Planning departments are really short-staffed they can get someone doing the grunt work for them and that is what the AI is ultimately there to do.
Speaker 2:So really making sure that during the application process, all of those boxes have been checked that's half the battle. If AI can do that, just by scanning it in and uploading it, and then AI providing a summary and going through those checkboxes, that's going to make a massive difference to the timelines. Yes, you could still get snarled up in the rest of the planning process. So we do still need root and branch review of the planning regime and we need to reform it completely, but this is definitely a positive step in the right direction.
Speaker 1:And.
Speaker 2:I'm certainly not. You know not the um. I'm not elon musk. I don't advocate for completely getting rid of, you know, government departments and I do think that there is an opportunity here to take the positives from ai and make sure that that can be implemented to speed up that planning process. That's where ai should be benefiting. But you do still need those checks and balances as it goes further down the line of having your typical planning officer really have a good look over things. It can't just be a case of yep, send that through AI and all of a sudden you've got planning approved. It's really got to still be part of a thorough process, but God, we could speed it up so much, so much quicker I guess I've listened to to both of you and um.
Speaker 1:My view on it really is that I think when, um, when labor came into power and they had these ambitious targets, they talked about increasing planning departments across the country and increasing people to get this through anyway. So part of me is thinking well, isn't that a shame that maybe the employment opportunities aren't going to be there if we're replacing humans with AI? So there was an opportunity there to create lots of job roles which now isn't going to be there if they're using AI. I mean, they said they were going to be there.
Speaker 2:If they're using ai, I am, I mean they.
Speaker 1:They said they were going to put 300 planning officers well, yeah, that is a drop in the ocean, like that's great, like they could have that one city exactly genuinely.
Speaker 2:you know you could have that in one city, so why not then have those as senior planning officers? Uh, working with the ai, and this is what every single job role is going to be. It's going to be how you manage AI agents and how you manage your AI within your company, within your local authority, whatever it might look like, and I think it's actually really refreshing to see the government push this to local authorities as well and say, look, we've done this great thing for you here. It's going to speed up your planning applications, et cetera. We can continue to do this in other departments. I do think that that is a huge opportunity for AI, and I'm not promoting Vervaflow here in any way, shape or form.
Speaker 2:We're not here to digitize and streamline the planning departments, although I'm sure that might be something down the line departments, although I'm sure you know, I'm sure that might be something down the line. But there is just such an opportunity here to really streamline, make sure everything is as efficient as it possibly can be, without necessarily saying, right, okay, don't hire those 300 extra planning officers, because, to be fair, we probably needed 3000, I would have said that's what I thought when it first came out.
Speaker 3:Well, I did speak to a family member who is a planning officer and he said it it doesn't even cover the vacancies they currently have, so it was just a drop in the ocean and I think, actually, reflecting on it, what actually this could do is give that creativity back to planning departments, which I think they've lost because they're so bogged down in just get through this, just get through the task, and actually they've missed a bit of the planning because they're just ticking boxes and getting through things.
Speaker 1:So hopefully that's a positive step although when I read it I kind of was thinking to your point, dini, that you said about it being a tick box exercise. Will it take creativity out of the design of buildings? Because if there's something that isn't in the box, you know is it going to be a computer says no situation whereby you know if there's something that isn't pre-populated as part of you know, the AI process, that doesn't fit in a box, is it going to get either missed or rejected because AI might not be able to understand something that's completely new and exciting and innovative that's what I worry is.
Speaker 3:The risk is, but what I'm hoping is, if you've got people that have more time, that they're able to actually look at the results of the AI and go well, hang on a minute. You shouldn't have rejected that because of this or this is quite interesting. So actually I'm going to go and explore this. Um, so, hopefully, in my rosy world, that is what will happen.
Speaker 2:No, I think you're right. I do think you're right. I think that that's the ultimate goal, surely, and it will be flagged, I would say, anything that is slightly either controversial or a bit too innovative for the AI to understand. I've just checked. Actually, it's Google DeepMind's Gemini model, so it's very legitimate. It's built off of, you know, a very credible platform, and I think that then, making sure that you've got that human interaction to be able to catch some of those things, that's absolutely key, but we have no idea yet as to what that will look like. Are we just going to end up with big square boxes uh, you know or or are we going to be able to be fairly innovative? I think, obviously, the architects and the designers are going to be really keen for there not to be this sort of cookie cutter approach. As you've said previously, it's got to be still innovative, exciting design can't just be that okay. Well, this worked for the last place.
Speaker 3:I'm just going to stick that in, and that's just going to be a tick box exercise I think that is the risk that actually it's developers stop innovating because they think I can get it through and it's easy to get it through, and that that is the worry.
Speaker 3:That is kind of like, well, actually. And then that impacts architects because architects are going to go. Well, I'm being told to do this because that's for clients paying. So I think it's like I've always thought that we've all we all should have a wish and want for our local communities to be in keeping with where we live, that deliver for the people that live there, and we haven't had that in the department for god knows how long.
Speaker 3:So it's a good shake-up that hopefully will, um, will be a massive benefit and I think you're right is that actually the government can go down this route and do more around using AI to kind of stop those gaps. But it gives you know. Having been a civil servant, one of the biggest issues I always find in civil service is that you it's always the computer says no kind of thing. It's not. Actually I'm an individual that's accountable for this decision and I'm going to make a decision based on understanding all the facts, because it's the computer says no and actually using AI, we're able to actually give people more accountability as human beings, then that's a positive thing.
Speaker 2:I think you've just got me thinking there about architects and designers in particular Is this advent of ai? And if this is going to be a tick box exercise and we're hopeful that it's not, but you know from what? From what we're?
Speaker 2:seeing and reading it, looks like it will be effectively along those lines. Will it mean that developers just skip architects and they just I know I really hope not and all of the art, and we know there's a lot of architects that listen to this my worry is that we will then end up with developers who is that's a very, very different skill set to an architect or a designer just effectively doing their own thing, creating what they think will get passed rather than copy and paste.
Speaker 1:If it worked through the last round, why would you not just?
Speaker 2:submit exactly the same again, if you know that ai passed it the first time and then it saves you on the architects fees and the design fees and and that is a major worry for me and for, obviously, the design sector but, um, I would, I would like to think there would have to be some kind of yeah, you can't just design a 700 bed pbsa asset with no architect or design or interior design input at all. So I hopefully there will be some kind of prerequisites for each of the applications that it's been through certain yeah, I don't know how you would. I don't know how you would manage or control that. I don't know. I really want to see this. So I'm going to start asking to have a look at what that portal is going to look like.
Speaker 2:It will start coming in, I think it said July 2026. So, yeah, spring 2026. So got a little while yet. Hopefully there'll be some kind of heads up to developers, architects, and that they actually involve people in that process rather than just say, hey, give it to the planning officers and away you go. Actually, it should be the people who are going to be using that in the way that you know, we're going to be putting the applications in. They're the ones who should be being you know, who should be informing the design of this, rather than the planning officers just themselves. So might be a bit of lobbying to do. Who the hell's going to do that lobbying, I don't know.
Speaker 3:But you know we'll have a go ourselves, um, and I guess, as the general public should probably be a little bit more, um, forceful in actually what they want, and I guess, as you change supply and demand, then actually they do have the ability to be more proportional. I think, because we've got this housing crisis, that people don't really have a choice about living in this place or that place. It's just I've got to live here. Um, so hopefully it's a, it will be a positive thing and you know, we'll start to see some innovative and and the planning kind of barrier will hopefully not be a barrier anymore, because that is one of our biggest issues. Um, right, we'll just have a quick break to hear from my sponsor um, thank you, uh, once again, utopi, for sponsoring this season. We do appreciate all our sponsors help. So thank you, um. So I know, sarah, you have been digesting the new bill to rent report from home views. What have you found in that report?
Speaker 1:um. Well, firstly, it's a great report and anybody that's got any interest in the shared living sector should um should download it. I'm not going to talk through every single point. There's so much to cover um. What I really like about it is that it covers um co-living and single family. What it calls is true btr, and then it compares to the wider prs sector as well.
Speaker 1:Um, and whilst the data is taken from the satisfaction and the ratings and the reviews of residents living in the buildings um, they, home views are taking that data and creating their own report about it. So Dini asked me earlier when I was talking about this do people know that they're living in a BTR building or a co-living? And I'm like, no, they don't, but Homeviews does. So they have taken the data and they have categorised it rather than people because, as we know, they wouldn't know, and nor should they people because, as we know they, they wouldn't, they wouldn't know and that nor should they um. So the data um is from a. I think over 22 and a half thousand reviews um from 758 communities around the uk. Um and this it talks a little bit about the satisfaction um of it, but also of the, the facilities um. So value what you know, value for money um. That was really really interesting, um, because there's been an increase in the ratings um of value, um and the on the other side of things, london btr despite making up 43 percent of all btr, their residents are slightly less satisfied than the rest of the UK. So I was thinking how does this fit in? Is it just a volume thing, um, or is it that there's such a it's? No, it's some of it's a little bit older. You probably have a much more wider breadth of um, price points and facilities as well, um. So you know that I thought was quite interesting because the numbers spread around the rest of the UK are quite low. So obviously, whatever people say, london is going to have the majority impact on those results.
Speaker 1:One thing that I found really interesting as well is that co-living is outperforming ratings compared to other BTR subcategories. Again, co-living is really relatively small as a subsector, so that's probably going to skew it and you know I'd say that the probably the co-living developments that we've seen come through probably only in the last couple of years. So again, they're rating very, very new, shiny products really. One thing that I think, dan, that you'd love this because you've talked about it a lot. They actually have compared the satisfaction between in-house management versus third-party management and whether that makes a difference to the resident experience.
Speaker 1:Um, and it doesn't really, in this report it's very, very, very minimal um, and I know that we've been obviously um asking our um, our audience, for ideas to to talk about in the podcast, and one that came through this morning was about that operational and management fees and well, actually, how, how would a you know, how would an investor pick, and you know, should it be done by this? And I thought actually this is a really really great barometer for an investor as to how their operator is performing. But, yeah, I think it's great that there's no difference really.
Speaker 2:Yeah, me too, and I think that what's interesting from this HomeViews report and we should just say so HomeViews is owned by Rightmove. They sold out relatively recently. Fair play to them Did very well and it's a review site very similar to Student Crowd but obviously focused on BTR, co-living, et cetera. Single family housing Management is the differentiator across BTR and co-living, et cetera. Single family housing Management is the differentiator across BTR and co-living and, you know, I think it's coming down less to sort of design amenities and it's more sort of focused on how are you made to feel when you enter into the property and how is that, by your resident concierge or the general manager or whoever that might be. I think that's becoming, you know, increasingly more important now in a world of AI. We are very focused on those human interactions because it's about how you live and who you meet and who you speak to and how you curate that community. And I think that you know, coming to your point, one of the one of the questions we had, um for off the back of us talking today was about, you know, what are, what are those key differentiators and and how, what are investors looking for? You know, and I can tell you now from having done quite a few tender processes and having a lot of different investor clients where I oversee the management of those properties and effectively oversee the third party operator. It is very varied and you have to adjust as a management operator based on what the investor wants.
Speaker 2:I've just done a value proposition piece for an operator, helping them to just define exactly what their value proposition should be going out to investors. I had to really say to them look, sometimes your investor is just going to want the highest possible gross revenue. That can be a thing. Sometimes they are going to be very focused on the NOI and, all in all, you need to adjust your approach accordingly. You have to be able to say, right, well, we are going to reduce our operating costs to a certain level.
Speaker 2:But my feedback to this operator in particular was do not bastardize your brand by saying, yeah, look, we're just going to win this business, we're going to have the lowest possible OPEX and we're going to have the highest possible revenue. We need the fees, we want the business. We'll get to scale and then see where we're at. I don't think that that washes anymore and quite clearly coming through from this report is that the residents in particular are so focused on that management and how they feel when they're in the building rather than oh hey, we've got this cinema room, this media room, this podcast studio, this, this, whatever.
Speaker 2:So I think there's going to be a lot of value proposition work on a individual property level, but also from a lot of third-party operators on a brand level too. So I mean, hopefully there's a lot of consultancy for us all to pick up along the way but yeah, there's. There's got to be this renewed focus on what are you actually delivering? Why, should the resident actually say that they are, you know, giving you five out of five for that experience.
Speaker 1:Well, the demand for facilities came out really, really strongly and it's exactly what you just said. So the top demand for facilities were actually fully managed transport links, well-connected, flexible tenancies, 24-hour maintenance, and they all came way way higher than any amenities. And even then the top amenities were parking and storage before any um of I guess we'd call kind of you know, the luxury community amenity space. And then, when you get further and further down that list, um, the gym was the most popular. But cinema room, games room, private dining room are way, way down the list.
Speaker 1:I'm not saying that people don't enjoy them, because the ratings would suggest that they do, but they're not looking for it, it's not important to them. So if you're trying to match, I guess, your marketing and your proposition to what people are looking for, you've got to get those top things right first. And, yeah, if you've got a cinema room and a, you know, podcast studio, then it's a bonus. Yeah, um, but um, what was interesting as well is um, gym, pet friendly and co-working facilities do appear in the top 10 rated developments. So they might not have been, you know, rating gym as the top thing that they're looking for, um, but it adds to the experience and they're very happy in a building um I can't remember who we were talking to about this and I don't know if it was on the podcast.
Speaker 1:I don't know if it was you, dan, were you deanie or somebody else. Um answers on a postcard, but we were talking about um why btr might be really popular with students and being able to bring your own pet. Um was was really up there. Um from whoever said it. Um, so that's got to be considered as well.
Speaker 1:Um and then the um, the inquiries about the length, the um lease lengths also came up in this um report. Um most inquire about a 12-month lease, but there's also a demand for six months. I think off the top of my head, it was between 15 and 20 percent looking for six months, and then there's even demand for people looking for over 24 months as well. We're doing a lot of reviews at the moment in student accommodation particularly and you and and university accommodation as well, and we we keep drumming that home about the flexible leases and I think a lot of the time people think of flexible leases. You know offering between 42 and 51.
Speaker 1:Let's be honest, that's not the you know clearly, that's not the flexibility that people you know are are looking for um and you know moving forward with the renters rights bill, um and hmos being able to offer more flexibility. You know, we'd really really like to see that in pbsa, because btr are already doing it and there is a demand um for it as well, I think. I mean, this is all of their data from 2024, um, I think possibly not 2025, but I think if they were to do it again in 2026 after the renters rights bill settled down, that lease length thing might, might well change even more. So, um, anyway, I'm not gonna regurgitate any more of the data from the home views report because there was loads of it, but I found it really, really interesting and I'd love to see that level of detail in pbsa.
Speaker 3:We've got some great organizations that are doing bits of it, um, but I haven't seen anything to you know that in depth yeah, I mean I might regurgitate some of this, the update, um, but I just wanted to say, like going back to our kind of planning conversation around cookie cutter, like all this stuff we know, like we've found it in our research and it's still the same thing, still being built, and it's kind of like actually, guys, let's stop like sitting on our laurels and let's actually start changing things and doing things differently, because the data is all there, it's all clear to see, um, so let's do things differently.
Speaker 3:And the only other thing I wanted to discuss was the whole um, the reasons around home ownership. Home ownership and Homeviews did ask the question of why do you want to own a home, and I think what was really interesting they talk about in their report is that all of those top three reasons, which is, have a place that truly feels like mine, more freedom to decorate and personalize and to feel a sense of stability and security, and it's that one that was 78 for 18 to 34 year olds and 67 for 35 to 54 year olds that this is a marketing problem, because we've been saying that for years you have got a sense of stability and security in a btr building, um, but people aren't aware of that and they're saying that's the reason they want to buy a home.
Speaker 3:And if we really want to truly change things, then we've really got to get stronger that message to say that actually you don't need to worry about moving, I mean, and there's another one in there around um, live without fear of evictions, I mean, or rent increases. So they're two separate things really, um, but yeah, it's kind of like we do need to get this messaging out.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and that messaging has to change and and I think the great thing about btr is that btr and co-living have shown how quickly they can pivot certain properties and entire brands towards students. So we know that. You know you could just change that messaging very quickly and the you know. Obviously there's a reason that a lot of students are choosing btr and I thinkTR. I was having a good conversation with Scott Lewis, actually from Homes for Students, the other day when I was on a boat with Scott.
Speaker 1:Not for very long, you may add.
Speaker 2:No, I must just say, and a big thanks to the Utopia team for inviting me onto the boat for the Dot Group Regatta, a very short-lived sailing experience, to be completely honest. We broke our foresail within uh, which sounds incredibly painful um, within sort of five minutes of getting out there.
Speaker 2:The first tack just ripped it straight off of the mast, but anyway, um, where where was I going with that? Uh, yes, so I was chatting to scott lewis and and we were talking about how to stabilize btr. You know riveting conversation that it was. It's um but but you know my I was saying to scott that I think that actually there's a huge amount of um students in btr.
Speaker 2:He knows that, I think that, and we were kind of discussing how, what that should look like after, you know, a few stabilized years effectively and, and you know, I, I know that there is scott's obviously got a good view of it because he sees verve life and he sees that actually the first year, yes, you will probably end up with more students, but then that will kind of dissipate and it should start to stand on its own two feet with a much more of a sort of self-imposed cap and and I think that that is something that BTR has been really clever to kind of pivot towards students in that way.
Speaker 2:And I think that that's where we also need, you know, we need to be talking about the flexibility side of things within BTR, but also then within PBSA, and I think that comes back to that sort of era of flexibility that we're moving into. Um, I I really want to to ensure that we can push that out. Um, because it you're right, sarah, it's not just the 44 and 51 weeks and that's you know. Hey, we'll get. Show a bit of flexibility. We'll drop from 51 to 44 weeks.
Speaker 1:I think we're going to need to go quite a bit further this year, especially but based on that, I'm just wondering the people that are demanding 24 months, what if they're students? Because they might spend their first year in university accommodation, which we know is kind of generally the accepted route in most cities and most universities? After that, you know, are particularly um undergraduates, who are from abroad that are not based in the UK. Where else do they go? Maybe they don't have anywhere else to go and they're maybe the ones that are saying I want 24 months. I know that I'm going to be here for another two years and PBSA does not offer that. I mean yes. I'm sure that a lot of you will say well, we do, because you can rebook and it's like yeah, but you you're, you're rebooking on the basis of 51 weeks.
Speaker 1:They don't know that when you say 51 weeks, you're probably going to go all right stay for the 52nd week If you're not telling them that at the point that they're rebooking, they don't know that it's not a two-year contract. That could be another reason why students are looking to BTR, Sorry go ahead.
Speaker 3:Dean, I was just going to say, but again, that's research that we've done and we've got the data to say that we know students want to book for the life of their tenancy their course. So yes, we know that that is something that is there and we've told the sex that and we've not seen it in pbsa.
Speaker 2:No, no, and you know what really that's really interesting. So we need flexibility both ways. You can't, we can't just have that, you know. Oh well, you just do 51 or 44 weeks and that is it.
Speaker 2:I've had two calls in the last week from universities saying have you heard anything about two-year tenancy lengths within universities or within PBSA? And yes, I have. There are several universities who are offering sort of two years. In particular, I haven't seen a three-year yet, but offering two years, and that is because it is, as every university will attest.
Speaker 2:It is much harder to fill your rooms this year and it has been post-COVID ultimately, after the bounce that we had.
Speaker 2:So the last two years have actually been really tough. There are a lot of universities sitting on a lot of voids, and one of the ways to encourage longer tenancy lengths ultimately is to say well, we'll freeze your rents, we don't have to worry too much about the increases, et cetera that PBSA probably would. So we'll freeze your rents and we'll do a two-year tenancy length and away you go. So I think that, yes, most of the time we're talking with flexibility, about having shorter tenancy lengths and breaking it into semesters or whatever that might look like. I think this is going to be a model that really takes off, especially amongst universities, where they can say to people look, we know we're going to have space because of the various different factors that are coming into play, with international students in particular and some of those accommodation guarantees that they're giving out. I'm really interested to see how much that really does take off. I think that's a really good opportunity I was just thinking as well.
Speaker 1:You know, when we're always talking about, one of the key features that students look for is safety and security. Have we been misunderstanding this the whole time? Do you think security means rental security and not the security of the building? Um, you know and I say this as somebody who, um you know, has worked in the property industry for like 23 years, and it's only just occurred to me, so. I'm not, yeah, I'm not showing myself with glory with that one, but I wonder if it does you know based on what?
Speaker 1:the Homeviews report is saying that. That came out really strongly about a reason why people don't want to rent because they don't think there's security in tenure.
Speaker 2:That actually, that's what they mean and I wonder if mainly, maybe that would affect the hmo sector more than it would btr, because if you're in a big btr if you're in a moda or a native or somewhere like that, you're probably going to feel fairly reassured that it's not going to be sold from underneath you, whereas if you're in an hmo at the moment or you're moving into a student HMO whether you're a student or just a general resident I'd be pretty concerned, given that a lot of landlords are looking at I say a lot of landlords. Yeah, there are landlords looking at selling up because of the EPC legislation, because of the renters rights act or reform bill or whatever it's called. I can't remember these days, um, but but yeah, I, I think that's.
Speaker 1:That's something really interesting but going back to the podcast that we recorded a couple of weeks ago where we analyzed the report from housing hand, is the tenants don't know that the renters rights bill's coming. They don't know anything about it. They're probably not worried just yet. Yeah, but they might get more worried, um, you know. So those messages and you know we've talked very much about how you know student accommodation needs to be more pbsa, be more student focused to compete with btr. Um, you know, and that that still stands really is actually. You know we talked about. You know why is accreditation not talked about?
Speaker 1:well, that symbolizes security yes um, in tenure, and you know we're still not seeing those messages about, you know, being fully managed and what that actually means. We're still in pbsa and clearly in btr as well. We're still talking about cinema rooms and rooftop terraces and bowling alleys and dining. You know, rooms. We're not talking about the things you know, and we started this conversation, I think, talking about how somebody feels. Yeah, well, actually, doesn't everyone just want to feel safe and secure where they live? Um, you know, and they're the things that we're not talking about enough right, it's maslow's hierarchy of needs.
Speaker 3:Yeah, and that's if you fear that you're going to get kicked out of your home. You don't have the control to stay in your home for as long as you need to. That's going to be a constant worry to you and a source of anxiety. So I think, yeah, the more that we can speak about that um, they're better, um. So if you haven't seen that report, please do go and have a look at it. There's a lot of data in there. Um, so do go to home views website and find that report. Um, right, that's a wrap for today.
Speaker 3:So thank you to my student halls for being a headline sponsor for the season, and your support is hugely appreciated. And, of course, thank you to utopia and wash station for coming on board for season four. We're grateful for your support. If you work in pbsa, btr, co-living hmos or university accommodation sectors and enjoy our weekly podcast, please give it a rating and review it on our podcast channel of choice. I think we are off for lunch, lunch altogether, and I'm sure this conversation will continue, but we hope to see you next week. Thank you.