As far as Brookfield Property, my guess and it is only a guess as I'm not going to spend the energy to look, is that if you compare revenues to interest expense here vs elsewhere? I'll bet nobody much comes close to matching the figures of Brookfield Property.

But those high energy over-the-top positive investor presentations are simply astoundingly generalized. Growth is the repeated chant.

As I've written ad nauseum, way back debating manlobbi on his euphoric view of Brookfield Property, it ain't investing that's made Brookfield special...for years, years, and more years. It is fees.

Joe and Bob got bored buying real estate and "real" assets and trying to manage living off of them. Joe and Bob set up a business on the side to manage things and sold off a percentage of them to others. And that people is all you need to know about Brookield.

How do you get as close to the fee thingy as possible? Again it should be debated: Is it BN or BAM? I will always has some amount of concern that the power is 100% with BN and if BN needs to re-gain the 25% of the manager that's in BAM they will find a way to do that and it will be at a "fair" price (read cheap) to BN shareholders.

In the meantime let's pretend interest expense doesn't count, you know, those investor day things.