Learn
A little clarity for your next decision.
Loading your learning library…
Investor WorkspaceWelcome, there!Log Out
Investor WorkspaceA little clarity for your next decision.
By Jerry Baker
Reliant Real Estate Management is a self-storage investment firm based in Roswell, Georgia, with properties operated under the Midgard name. This guide explains its sponsor and operating roles, its DST program, and the records I would review before considering a self-storage investment.
This profile concerns the firm at reliant-mgmt.com. It should not be confused with other businesses using the Reliant name. Its public website describes an integrated business covering acquisitions, development, property operations, asset management, and investment sales. Those capabilities are company descriptions; the results of any proposed investment need their own review. [1]
A Midgard sign tells a customer where to rent a storage unit. It does not tell an investor which entity owns the property, whether it has a loan, or how its cash reaches the investor. I would begin with those questions.
The ownership chart should show the trust or fund, the property owner, Reliant's management entities, and any partners. If another firm supplies capital, I would ask which decisions it controls. If an affiliate manages the site, I would review its contract and fees. Common branding does not make every property part of the same investment.
Reliant's news page includes an announcement of its inaugural Delaware statutory trust offering. The release identifies Midgard as its property management company and places the DST business alongside the firm's existing private investment products. That establishes a DST program; it does not show that any particular offering is currently available through Baker 1031. [2]
I would keep the DST record separate from the broader company record. Experience buying and operating storage sites can be relevant. It does not erase differences in trust rules, investor rights, financing, reporting, and sale decisions.
Reliant's current team page lists Todd Allen and Lewis Pollack as managing principals, Paul Ragaini as chief financial officer, and Tom Hughes as chief investment officer. It also identifies separate leaders for acquisitions, operations, asset management, and investor relationships. [3]
I would want to know who handles the particular property from purchase through sale. Does the acquisition team stay involved after closing? Who checks whether the operating plan is working? Who can approve a large repair, a rent change, or a switch in the local marketing plan?
For self-storage, the daily details matter. I would ask how local staff report broken gates, water intrusion, billing issues, or empty units that need cleaning. A regional team needs reliable information from each site before it can make good decisions about price and spending.
The same applies to financial controls. I would ask who reconciles customer payments to bank deposits and who reviews adjustments, refunds, and bad debts. I would also want to know how the manager protects customer information and limits access to payment systems.
These are my review questions, not allegations about Reliant. A public biography can explain experience. The reports, contracts, and controls show how the work is carried out for investors.
My first operating review would compare occupied units, occupied square feet, billed rent, and cash collected. Each answers a different question. A large unit counts as one unit, just like a small locker. Filling small units can lift unit occupancy without filling the same share of the property's rentable space.
I would ask for the unit mix and rent roll by size and type. Climate-controlled space, drive-up units, and outdoor parking may have different prices and expenses. The investment model should use the mix at the actual property, not an average from another site.
Consider an invented 600-unit property. At 90% unit occupancy, 540 units are occupied. If the average collected rent is $120 a month, annual rent is $777,600 before other income and expenses. At 95% occupancy and $110 average collected rent, annual rent is $752,400. More units are filled, yet rent is $25,200 lower. This is a teaching example, not Reliant's forecast or results.
That is why I would not stop at a high occupancy percentage. I would ask what discounts, concessions, unpaid balances, and fees sit behind it. I would also compare move-ins and move-outs over time. A single strong month may not describe the full year.
For a recently opened property, I would want a monthly lease-up record. How long did it take to reach each occupancy level? How much marketing money was used? Were customers paying the full rate, or was the site still building its base through discounted offers?
Reliant describes revenue optimization as part of its operating approach. I would test that claim with property records rather than assume that a price change becomes lasting cash flow. [1]
For each price increase, I would ask what happened next. How many customers stayed? How many left? What rent did the next customer pay? How long did the unit sit empty between them? Those measures help explain the difference between an increase on paper and an increase in collected income.
I would also compare advertised move-in rates with rates paid by existing customers. Both can be useful, but they should not be blended without explanation. If the forecast assumes that every new customer soon pays a much higher rate, I would ask for evidence from similar units at that site.
A hypothetical unit renting for $150 a month earns $1,800 over a full year. If a price increase to $165 causes the customer to leave and the unit sits empty for two months, ten months at $165 produces $1,650. That does not prove a price increase is wrong. It shows why retention and downtime belong in the same model.
I would want the manager to explain the tradeoff in ordinary language. Raising rents, filling units, and protecting customer relationships can pull in different directions. A sound operating plan should show how those goals are balanced.
I would group customers by the month they moved in and follow each group over time. That can show whether an attractive opening offer produces long stays or frequent turnover. I would compare the cost to win each group with the rent it actually pays before leaving. If the property is changing its pricing plan, the budget should allow enough time to observe the result. A test that works for one unit size or season may not work across the whole facility.
A national storage business still competes one location at a time. For a Reliant property, I would map the nearby alternatives a customer can reach with a loaded car or moving truck. The question is not whether a state is growing. It is whether this site can win and keep paying customers at the assumed rents.
The comparison should include access hours, visibility, drive-up convenience, elevators, loading areas, security features, and available unit sizes. A lower-priced competitor may offer a different product. A new climate-controlled site may be a closer substitute than an older outdoor facility.
I would also ask about projects that have not opened. A permit, a site under construction, and a finished competitor should be listed separately. A model that ignores new supply can overstate rent growth or understate the cost of attracting customers.
If the sponsor expects population growth to support demand, I would connect that idea to specific housing, jobs, or moving patterns. I would then test slower growth. A good location argument should still be understandable when the optimistic case is removed.
Self-storage may appear simple because customers bring their own goods and use relatively small spaces. I would still examine the physical property with care. Roofs, drainage, doors, elevators, access systems, paving, and climate equipment all belong in the inspection and reserve plan.
For climate-controlled buildings, I would ask for service history, equipment age, utility bills, and the cost of replacement. For outdoor storage, I would focus on water flow, surfaces, fencing, lighting, and permitted uses. The budget should match the facility's actual design.
Insurance deserves more than a single annual cost. What covers the building? What covers business interruption? What obligations exist for customers' stored goods? Are flood, wind, or other hazards excluded or subject to large deductibles? I would have the relevant professionals explain the coverage rather than assume a policy covers every event.
Access and customer safety also affect the business plan. I would ask how the manager monitors gates and cameras, handles after-hours problems, and documents incidents. These are operating questions, not a claim that a particular Reliant property has experienced a loss.
JLL reported in March 2026 that it arranged a three-year bridge loan for an 11-property portfolio owned by a Harrison Street and Reliant joint venture. The properties were in Colorado, Georgia, and South Carolina, and Midgard managed them. That transaction shows one use of joint-venture financing; it is not evidence that a Reliant DST owns those properties or uses the same debt. [4]
For the investment in front of us, I would request the actual loan summary and key documents. What is the maturity date? Is interest fixed or floating? Is there a rate cap, and when does it expire? What must the property achieve to extend or refinance the loan?
A bridge loan needs a clear bridge to something. The plan might call for higher income, a sale, or longer-term financing. I would ask what happens if that next step takes longer or requires more equity.
Suppose a hypothetical property produces $900,000 before debt service, capital reserves, and other excluded costs. Annual debt payments of $600,000 leave $300,000 before those costs. If debt payments rise to $750,000, the remaining amount falls to $150,000. The property did not lose a tenant in this example, yet the cash left after debt fell by half.
I would also compare leverage using a clearly stated value. Debt divided by purchase price may differ from debt divided by total investor cost or a later appraisal. We should label the denominator and use the figure relevant to your exchange and review.
The IRS ruling commonly used in DST planning addresses a trust with specific limits on its powers and activities. It does not declare that every trust or every real estate fund qualifies for a 1031 exchange. The actual documents and your transaction facts need review. [5]
For a Reliant DST, I would ask how property operations fit within the chosen structure. Is there a master tenant? Which entity signs customer agreements? Who pays operating costs and makes repairs? What rights does the trust have if the party handling operations cannot perform?
If a master lease is used, I would not treat its payment schedule as a guarantee. I would examine the tenant's resources, its obligations, and any reserves or guarantees. The trust's income still needs a reliable source.
I would also read the rules for a sale, a change in structure, and a manager replacement. Investors should understand the choices they give up when moving from direct control of a property to a passive interest. A more hands-off role does not mean there are no important decisions being made.
Your qualified intermediary, CPA, and attorney should confirm the exchange mechanics. The sponsor's ability to operate storage properties and the tax treatment of your purchase are related but separate parts of the review.
I would ask for a full sources-and-uses statement at purchase, followed by a plain cash-flow schedule. The first explains where the raised money goes. The second explains how collected revenue becomes an investor payment.
Property expenses, management fees, asset management fees, loan costs, reserves, and any other charges should be visible. I would check which payments go to affiliates and whether fees continue when cash flow falls. An affiliate can provide useful services; the price and scope still need review.
Reserves deserve special attention. If a hypothetical property needs $180,000 for a roof and holds $100,000 for that work, the $80,000 gap must come from somewhere. A current distribution may need to fall if future receipts are used to fill it. The model should not count the same dollars both as reserves and as money available to pay investors.
I would also ask how customer fees and ancillary revenue are treated. Does the property keep them, share them with another party, or pay a service charge to earn them? Gross revenue can look attractive while the net benefit is smaller.
I would request results from comparable storage investments, with sold properties separated from those still held. The record should identify the ownership structure, debt, hold period, investor fees, and the dates of cash payments. A platform-wide total cannot answer all of those questions.
I would also want to see difficult periods. How did occupancy, collected rents, expenses, and investor payments change? Were loan terms modified? Were reserves used? A clear explanation of setbacks can be more useful than a highlight reel of successful sales.
For the exit, I would compare several possible buyers and pricing assumptions. Is the plan to sell one facility or a group? Does combining properties create costs before a sale? Would the buyer need to replace software, staff, or contracts after closing?
Private placements can be hard to sell, and their disclosures and protections differ from those of public securities. FINRA's investor guidance emphasizes reviewing the documents and understanding these risks. I would not count on selling an interest whenever cash is needed. [6]
The household question is simple: can you leave this money invested through a delay and a period of lower income? If the answer is no, a strong sponsor story does not fix that mismatch.
Reliant identifies Midgard as its property management company. The names describe related roles, but the exact owner of a property or investment must be confirmed from its documents.
Its current website includes an announcement of its first DST offering. That confirms the program's existence, not present availability, exchange suitability, or a recommendation from Baker 1031.
No. I would compare occupied units, rented square feet, collected rent, concessions, and expenses. Different unit sizes and prices can make the same occupancy percentage produce different income.
The cited financing announcement concerns one joint venture. It should not be applied to every Reliant fund or DST. Read the loan terms for the exact investment under review.
Yes. A higher price may be offset by vacancies, discounts, expenses, or debt costs. I would review what customers actually pay and the cash remaining after the property's obligations.
No. This is an educational profile, not a completed offering review or a statement of availability. Any investment needs current documents, a careful risk review, and a fit with your exchange, income needs, and other assets.
Educational information, not an offer or a personal tax, legal, or investment recommendation. Examples are hypothetical and omit stated adjustments. Tax treatment depends on your facts and current law. Review your transaction with your CPA, attorney, and qualified intermediary. Real estate investments can lose value and may be illiquid.
Enter your approved email to explore investments, save your shortlist, and keep learning.