Build to hold? Six asset classes. Six languages.

Build-to-hold is not one model with a dropdown. A hotel lives on occupancy and ADR. A mall lives on occupancy, turnover rent, and tenant mix. A data centre lives on IT load, PUE, and contracted MW. If your feasibility study does not speak those languages, it is a cost sheet with an IRR attached.

The six languages

• Hotel — room mix, occupancy, ADR, departmental profit, undistributed expenses.
• Mall / retail — GLA, occupancy, base and turnover rent, CAM, tenant mix.
• Office — NLA, vacancy, rents, incentives, lease-up, yield on cost.
• Build-to-rent residential — unit mix, lease-up, other income, opex per key or per unit.
• Warehouse — GLA, rents, WALE-style occupancy, logistics cost drivers.
• Data centre — IT load, colocation or wholesale structure, power and cooling opex.

Same component path, different drivers

Every operational study still walks the same institutional path: cash outflows, cash inflows, financing, equity returns, scenario analysis, then the generated study. What changes is the segmentation and the revenue engine. That is how you keep IC-grade structure without flattening every asset into “rent × area”.

A hotel is not a mall. A mall is not a data centre. And your financial model should know the difference.

If you are holding the asset, start in the Operational Stream and pick the language the building actually speaks.