Vistry Group PLC (VTY) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Welcome to the Vistry Group results Q&A. Today, we're joined by Greg Fitzgerald, Graham Prothero and Earl Sibley. As most of you are aware, we'll be inviting people to ask question or a video today.

[Operator Instructions] Now we've got our first question from Chris Millington. Chris, please go ahead.

Well done on the results. A few, if I may, please. First one, can you just talk us through the impact, bulk sales and maybe that halo deal has had on both the order book and the sales rate numbers at the start of the year? That's the first one.

Well, I'll do them as you as you go through, Chris. So that's only 81. So next to nothing of the 1,000. So we'll take the reservations as they come through.

Got you. And other bulk sales through the start of this year, have they been more or less important than maybe last year?

Far less than ever. So 75 in the first 8 weeks. And if I'm honest with you, we probably wouldn't take a bulk deal at the present moment in time. I'd rather then sell them in the market because obviously, a bulk deal, you will give some level of discount. The market is such at the moment that I'd be prepared to take the risk and not do a bulk deal.

Got you. Clear. And second one is just on build cost inflation. A few of the majors seem to be saying it's starting to emerge a bit. I understand your commentary that you're not seeing a great deal of pressure in that regard. Perhaps you can just kind of talk us through the differential and whether or not you see any kind of cost inflation emerging across the business?

Yes, I think our peer group is probably [ seeing ] somewhere between 2% to 4%. We're seeing 1% to 2%. And a huge part of that is down to the size of Vistry now compared to where we were as Bovis. And a number of the deals we've put together were over 2 years. And this is going back to the first half of 2020. We put together deals for 2 years as opposed to 1 year, which is basically giving us some protection on the increases that are out there, particularly the likes of timber, which in some places -- or cases have gone up by 20%. But overall, Chris, 1% to 2%, it's for us at the present moment in time. It's okay, very manageable. Labor is pretty good. And I'd also say that where we do have European labor, which is predominantly in London, over 95% of the -- particularly Eastern European labor we had on our sites, leading up to Christmas, has already returned. So no real effects from COVID or Brexit, as far as we're concerned.

Great. And then the final one, it's probably quite a difficult one to answer, but it's about the blend between sales rates and pricing. I mean, you said in your presentation, Linden nor Bovis have never seen this 0.78 sales rate, and given you're so far forward sold with that 64% number, at what point do you look to kind of move pricing just to moderate that sales rate and capture a bit more margin.

Okay. So the market is strong in all of our areas of operation. Our West division have -- 2 weeks ago, put prices up across the board by 1%. And our other businesses are not across the board, but the vast majority of sites, we are reducing the level of discount that is available, that our business units and sales advisers can do. So one area where we've put prices up 5%, the West division. In other areas where the headline price stays the same, but we're reducing the amount of discount that we actually allow our sales advisers particularly to give out without getting authorization. So it's happening as we speak, Chris, and it will continue to happen, I suspect, over the next 4 to 6 weeks.

And those discount levels, Greg, are they lower than they were at the front end of 2020 when the market was clearly on the upper [indiscernible]?

I would say, the West division, they're lower. And I would say the South and East, probably in line. But against 2020, January and February was incredibly strong. [indiscernible] just got into power. Brexit [indiscernible] for year around. And COVID, even at the end of February, was still something that was in kind of China. Prices and the market only started to come back as we got into March. So the comparison that we're giving for the first 8 weeks is against a very strong period the year before.

Thank you. We've got our next question from Will Jones from Redburn.

Can I ask three, please? Apologies, I haven't got the time as yet to listen to the presentation. But the first was just on the tricky subject of fire safety. I appreciate it is a complex area. But we are seeing different companies view things differently in terms of how they approach it. But can you just give us a feel for how you've tackled it as best you can at this particular junction?

I'll take that one now then. So you have to look at us as 2 organizations. So Bovis, as you probably know, Will, used to get vertigo if they built anything over 3 storeys. So Bovis were -- are a traditional 2 and 3-storey house builder. So the issues on cladding are 0 to very, very minor. Linden, I'm pleased to say, we're not far off, but they did build the odd apartment block around about the place. As of now, and you would have thought if it wasn't now, with all the publicity around it, we would have heard about it by now, but we're only dealing with 10 blocks of apartments from queries from freeholders, leaseholders. So we have sympathy with those people. We've only got 10 blocks, not even developments that we're looking at. We don't know what our liability is. We're not sure we have any liability on those. We have sympathy with the people. In fact, we agree or support the government levy. But for Vistry, this is not -- it's an issue, but nowhere near top of my agenda. And the provision that we've introduced on top of the balance sheet, which gives us now in excess of GBP 20 million to deal with any issues was, if I'm brutally honest, only introduced in the last couple of weeks.

Yes. Got you. That's helpful. Second was just around the land bank, just eyeballing the Housebuilding position at December versus June. It looks like a few changes in the shape of it. We've got bigger sites that during December versus June a lower average selling price and a lower cost of land. I mean, is that just the way that the mix [ fell ] over the last 6 months? Or can we read something to that around your strategy on [ land bank ]?

Yes. Well, I'll pick up that. So I mean, the lower ASP, obviously, by strategy and a continuation of what we've been doing, so looking to buy on average smaller plots, as we've been doing both in Bovis and Linden. The percentage cost of land is very -- slight difference, and that's just the mix of what's gone out and come in, in truth. And obviously, we've given you, as always, the margin in the land bank at 24.2%. But we have for the first time in December, put in our estimate of the cost for the next part of the Future Home Standard, so the Part L regulations that come in during 2022.

Got it. And we -- again, maybe I'm [indiscernible] there slightly, but the average plot size has gone from 112 to 130 in 6 months, which again feels like quite a big change. But maybe that's just -- is it...

It's a bit of mix, but if anything, the competitive advantage now of the larger group. We're in much better shape to take on the larger sites. Dual branding is working very successfully, and we're looking at opportunities for Partnerships and Housebuilding to work alongside each other. And they will be the largest sites.

And I would just emphasize on that. I mean, we are looking at 2 very large opportunities at the moment, which you've got the enlarged Housebuilding business and Partnerships working together, which we think gives us a USP. So we have solicitors instructed on both, and hopefully, both will exchange and that would equate to in excess of 2,000 units. So without any shadow without -- the strategic rationale of bringing Galliford Try's housing businesses and Bovis together is absolutely working purely on the Housebuilding side, that the average size of the sites that we are able to look at now, dual branding, because we used to get to the margin but didn't get their own return on capital just selling as Bovis or just selling as Linden is working. But what really excites me is Partnerships will stop. Because of the pandemic the potential in Partnerships is huge, and it's going great guns, as you would have seen from the statement. But the fact that our Partnerships business are now working very, very closely with our Housebuilding business, we are looking at sites that, frankly, Bovis or Linden wouldn't have been able to look at, or frankly, Bovis and Linden together wouldn't have been able to look at and be competitive. So we're really feeling confident. And going forward, we will buy larger sites than we did, which means you've got less development to actually do, which derisk the business. Because I'd rather be running a housebuilder with 100 sites than 200. It's easier to do, more predictable.

All right. And then the last one, if I could please, is just exploring the guidance. When I look at some of the individual comments around Housebuilding units, Housebuilding gross margin, [indiscernible] in Partnerships versus GBP 310 million PBT. And I appreciate the comment is at least GBP 310 million PBT. But it will be quite [indiscernible] I think, to get the moving parts and not do somewhat better than GBP 310 million. Is that -- I don't know -- I don't -- obviously things like the Housebuilding ASP, you don't know that perhaps there was something in that. But if [ that was the notion...]

I'll let Earl. But the at least is the new word there. So it's at least GBP 310 million. We're feeling pretty confident. We introduced the GBP 310 million last September. And you've got to say the way we ended the year, the carryforward position and the strength of the market in the last 2 months, I feel more comfortable with GBP 310 million than I did and I felt confident then back in September. But do you want to add anything to that?

Well, I mean, the guidance is largely consistent with what we've given before in terms of coming through. Agree with Greg's comments, obviously, in terms of how we've come into the year and started the year.

You don't have to agree.

No, but I do. You mentioned ASP. I mean, obviously, last year, I don't know what you're guiding off, but 21% affordable. Whilst it looks like what we've got in the land bank was low, so there will be a greater proportion of affordable to come through in '21. So that's more like mid- 20s. So if you're running off an ASP, that could be part of it, but risk on the upside.

And I think the other thing, to just finish on that, Will, is that the GBP 310 million gives a greater EPS than we had in 2019. And I know a lot of analysts are saying that the sector will get back to 2019 levels in 2022. The GBP 310 million, let alone anything more than that, is already ahead of EPS from 2019.

Will, thank you for your questions there. We've got our next question from Dean Grant from Bank of America. [Operator Instructions]

I just want to check that you can hear me okay?

Very well, Dean.

Good. Great. And congratulations on the results.

Thank you.

I just have 2 questions from my side, one related to the Housebuilding business. You obviously provided the volume target of 63,000 units for 2021. I'm just wondering on sort of a medium term...

6,300, Dean, not 63 because that would have been incredible growth.

Sorry, sorry. No, no, I'll take one note of that. I was just wondering, in terms of your medium-term outlook towards your 8,000 unit target, I mean, what is the sort of time line we should be looking at towards this target? And then the second one is just on your land bank strategy, I understand you obviously have controlled land bank around 40,000 plots and strategic at 34,000. Within the Housebuilding business, you outlined your 3 -- 3.5 to 4-year land bank looking to grow Partnerships. I'm just trying to understand, should we expect land purchasing then to remain primarily at a replacement level going forward? And is Partnerships, I think you mentioned it previously, able to draw on land within the Housebuilding land bank? And if you could maybe just differentiate slightly, I don't know, it's obviously a long question, just between your strategies on your controlled and strategic land banks.

Okay. So on the strategic land bank, [ where ] the strategic land bank as Bovis and probably Linden as well was just for Housebuilding. The strategic land bank now should be looked at as a supply to both our Partnerships business and the Housebuilding business. So that's the first thing I would say. So strategic land goes to both aspects of the business. The time line you said to go from 6,300 units to our medium-term target of 8,000, I think we should look at that within 5 years. Would you agree with that, Graham?

Yes.

So within 5 years, and I would just go back to -- we are looking at controlled growth in Housebuilding and going forward, 2% to 3%, I would say, for the next 2 to 3 years. But more -- far more aggressive growth on the Partnership side, particularly with that growth not coming from the Partnership delivery side, but coming from the mixed tenure development. And that is why you're going to see, going forward, as I said to the previous question, far more joint bidding between Partnerships and Housebuilding, taking us into areas where we've not been before. And there's 2 fantastic opportunities where solicitors instructed at the moment: one 1,600 units, one 1,500 units that should exchange in the next month, which see the 2 businesses come together. And we wouldn't have got anywhere near being able to: one, compete; and two, meeting our hurdle rates of -- in Housebuilding 26% -- or 25% gross profit and 25% return on capital. We might have got to the gross profit. But with one brand, you would have never got to on a big site. That 25% hurdle and return on capital bringing Partnerships in and the 2 brands is taking us into areas where, I'm sure, we're now competing more with the Taylor Wimpey's, Barratt's and Persimmon's of this world than we ever were going to do before. With regards to the actual land bank itself, I would have thought we will end up with a higher land bank at the end of this year with that -- we currently have 6,100 plots today with terms agreed and solicitors instructed, which will go through in the next couple of months, against Housebuilding, looking to do 6,300 completions mixed tenure on Partnerships would be how many this year?

[ 2,000, 2002 ].

[indiscernible] million miles off, 2 months in replacing the land banking Partnerships and Housebuilding that we already have. So I would strongly suggest that we'll end the year with a slightly higher land bank, which, again, will facilitate the modest growth in Housebuilding that we're expecting going forward, but with 25 outlets expected to be opened in the second half of this year on the Partnership side, is the Partnership side that are going to see the growth in that mixed tenure development going forward. And we -- I'm sure it's not been missed, the 10%-plus margin target that we set for 2022 with Partnerships, in the second half of last year through the pandemic, they achieved 8.7%. So -- and hopefully, people are seeing that 10% is eminently doable. In fact, we have budgets and forecasts now bottom-up, saying that as opposed to me or the group dictating that we're looking for 10%. So -- and it's 10% plus, not 10% end of story.

Now I would like to promote Anastasia to -- from UBS to the panelists.

Two, if I may, please. If you try to breach from gross margin guidance this year in housing of 22% operating margins, where do you see your overhead cost savings this year? And also beyond this year, any more potential savings you expect? And what are the sources for them? And the second question on overall lower ASP housing due to the change of mix. What [indiscernible] do you expect purely due to the mix change this year and next year? And when would you expect your mix in housing to stabilize? And also, if you could give us some guidance in terms of the selling price profile for Partnerships business and looking forward. Yes. So these are my 2 questions.

Thank you. Well that did sound like 3, Anastasia, but anyway, Earl?

Oh, well, Anastasia, I'll try and pick up the overhead. So in reality, the overhead base, we completely restructured with the enlarged group last year. We didn't get all the benefit of that in terms of efficiency, obviously, with what happened through last year in completion. So we've got plenty of capacity in the business for growth. So that overhead is already there. And you'll see that as a percentage. Therefore, revenue come down significantly as we go forward. So that will come, group as a whole, getting that under 5% in terms of the overhead. And we've got the capacity to grow, as we talked about Housebuilding onto -- as far as 8,000 units without putting in new offices. And we've got capacity to grow Partnerships to the 6,000 target as well. In terms of pricing, I think our land bank is fairly stable, but there is still a mix to come through. I think if you're looking at total ASP, the biggest factor will be, as I mentioned to Will earlier, the impact of the affordable coming through compared to 2020. So looking at that mix, and we've clearly given you the overall average that is in the land bank, and I think we've been buying the sites with the mix of units that we want for at least a couple of years. You can see that mix on one of the slides in terms of the level now of smaller, lower-priced units. Very few apartments in the Housebuilding land bank, in particular. So that land bank is largely positioned where we want it to be. We're looking to at least replenish and grow that mix in the land bank. Have I answered all your 2 or 3 questions?

Yes. That's clear.

Our next question will be from Glynis Johnson from Jefferies.

Two questions, if I may, both on the slightly longer-term. One, I wonder if you can just talk us through what you're doing in terms of trying to adapt to the Future Home Standards, not necessarily the Part L, Part F was coming in the next 12 months, but the 2025. What are the estimates of how that might impact your costs? And then while I'm on the longer term, Greg, you've committed to the business until the end of 2022, when will we hear about the future post-2022 in that regard?

Okay. Graham, do you want to take the question on Part L?

Yes. I mean, we're obviously -- obviously, Glynis, as you're aware, we're having to make estimates ourselves because we're still trying to second-guess where the regulation will end. So as I think we probably made clear yesterday, we -- Part L, we've been allowing for that in our -- i.e., the heating, we've been allowing for that in our appraisals now for over 6 months. What we're now doing, as I've said earlier, is that we're reviewing all of the -- both of the ranges and all of the house types to accommodate the -- not only Part L, but also the space standards and everything that we anticipate out of future homes. But to some extent, we're having to second-guess where that regulation goes. So if I -- to give you a number, I mean, if you -- we're sort of looking at the future homes piece, so electric vehicles and so on and so forth, as kind of maybe 1,500, 1,800 plots. But we think that in the redesign, we will save some of that back, and -- i.e., in terms of our Part L costs may be less than we're currently assuming because the redesign will -- the heat -- we will make savings on heat loss, as it were. And therefore, our total current estimate of costs is likely to be slightly lower than we're currently factoring into the land bank, if that makes sense.

Is that okay, Glynis?

That's lovely.

And then with regards to me, Glynis. So you're right, that's what we said. We weren't expecting a pandemic at the time. So I -- unusually, I think, invested in excess of GBP 0.5 million of my own money into the company from March 1 last year as the pandemic came in. If you watch your screens today, maybe there might be some more news of a further investment today from myself, which kind of puts where I am. But I honestly would say now, I think the opportunities, the potential of this group is far greater than I thought, and I think we're going to come out of the pandemic stronger than we went into it by a country mile. And I'm actually quite enjoying it at the moment. So that's a lot of waffle there, Glynis, to say, I'm not sure. At the moment, I'm thoroughly enjoying it. I think the company needs me at the present moment in time to keep going through the pandemic. We'll see how things pan out during the course of 2021 and maybe think about things again as we get into the start of 2022. I don't think I said anything there really, but there you go.

The next person to be promoted to panelists will be Clyde Lewis. Clyde is from Peel Hunt.

All in all, I think I've got four, if I can. First, I suppose, a couple around sort of Partnerships and land, and I suppose, the demand side from the major sort of structural buyers. But on sort of the competition for land, in Partnerships, what are you sort of seeing on that side? And I suppose linked to that is, what are you seeing from the local authorities in terms of their appetite for sort of Partnerships related to land at the moment?

Graham, do you want to take that?

So -- sorry, Clyde, are you asking their desire -- local authorities' desire to work with us or competing with us in the land market?

Well, it could -- obviously, it could be both, couldn't it? I mean, I think ultimately sort of demand for the product from the different aspects, local authorities, in particular, because that's very much a sort, I mean, an evolving part of the demand profile there.

So yes, thank you. So I mean, well, as you know -- I mean, that demand continues to be very strong from the registered provider sector. And the local authorities have just been increasingly coming into that marketplace over the past probably year, 18 months. And so I would say, we're seeing -- it's much more the case that they're looking to work with us rather than competing against us. So we're working with a large number of local authorities across the country. And in general, it's that developer acumen that they're looking. That's the missing piece. So in many cases, they've got land. They've got access to land or they've got a requirement, and they have the funding to -- for the development. But what they want from us is the ability to develop. And that's really -- that's the match made in heaven. That's what Partnerships are looking for. And that's, at the moment, a very fruitful opportunity for us and a growing one.

Mentioned that 1 of the 2 opportunities we're looking at.

Well, yes, I am. I wasn't sure whether we were publishing that. But one of the opportunities that Greg is referring to, one of the large sites, it's actually over 600 units, is actually being -- the funding will be 100% from a local authority.

And the sort of the competition for Partnership schemes, are you seeing that change in any way at the moment?

There's less competition for Partnership schemes than housing schemes. So -- and we don't see any change in that. And that's against where they're more in the marketplace because of the balance sheet of Vistry than they were within Galliford Try, for obvious reasons. So I'm not saying they're going to win every site that they look at, but their win ratio is strong.

The second one I had is on ESG. I mean, I haven't had a chance to go through all of the comments about it. But have you changed the sort of management incentivation around some of the sort of ESG targets and strategies that you've evolved?

Graham, do you want to take that? You mentioned that [indiscernible] include that.

Yes. So I mean, clearly, Clyde, in terms of the broad umbrella of ESG, we always have a health and safety underpin anyway. So we have had that for a long time, and we'll continue with that. In terms of adding further specifics for the ESG agenda, we're looking at that. So we haven't got it right now, but certainly, that is very much on the Remco's agenda and our agenda. We share that, that we will be looking at that for schemes going forward and for the LTIP going forward.

So from 2021, it will definitely be a key part of our incentive schemes.

Great. And the last I had was around, I suppose, product type. Obviously, sort of a lot of -- a lot of people considering whether they want to be living in cities, in flats, apartments, and looking to move out, obviously, less commuting, all those sorts of trends, and obviously, the requirement for sort of home offices. I mean, are you noticing a sort of a different demand profile in terms of your smaller units as opposed to your bigger units? Is that fascinating at the moment?

It's fascinating. So Bovis and Linden, some years ago, decided to focus more on 2 and 3-bedroom houses than 5-bedroom houses. Bovis particularly built, for the size of them, an awful lot of 5-bedroom houses, which was partly to do with why their sales rate was always so much lower than them -- other volume housebuilders. So we've gone down the road successfully, I would say, both organizations, over the last 3 or 4 years of land buying more for 2 and 3-bedroom than 4 and 5 bedroom. And you can see that with the average plot size within our land bank is now about 1,000 -- just over 1,000 square foot. So been successful. That said, we entered into -- in 2019, we had some stock going into 2020. And the large percentage of that stock was larger 4 and 5-bedroom houses. Since the pandemic, they've all gone. We do not have any large houses left. And if you were just basing your strategy on what's happened in the last 9 months, as we've gone into lockdowns and the pandemic, we wouldn't be looking to go into 2 and 3-bedroom houses. We'd be quite happy building the 4 beds and the 5 beds because the demand has been a lot stronger than it was pre the pandemic. For obvious reasons, people are spending more time in their houses, they want an office, et cetera, et cetera. But I don't think those conditions will prevail, and they'll be around. But it's definitely -- no doubt about it, the pandemic has definitely helped go through our larger 4 and 5-bedroom houses quicker than we would have expected to without it.

Thank you very much for your questions so far. [Operator Instructions] Our next question is from John Fraser-Andrews from HSBC.

Three for me, please. First one is on Partnerships. And you've alluded to it, Greg already with these 2 big sites that are close to completion. But are you generally going to much larger sites in Partnerships to fuel that sort of strong volume growth that's in your business plan? So that's the first one.

So the first -- Graham, you want to take it?

Yes. I mean, clearly, for any number of reasons, John, as you're aware, larger sites are more an economic way for us to approach it. And it's very natural with Partnerships and their place making and regeneration approach that they are very happy to take on the larger sites. And of course, whilst 4 Partnerships, the key is not to use our own capital, but it sure helps and makes us more flexible in putting the deals together if we've got the stronger balance sheet. So Partnerships absolutely is able, under the Vistry umbrella, to work with those larger sites and more of them. So I think that's definitely a yes.

Okay. And we're just discussing, I think it was a comment, Greg, was mostly around the Housebuilding business, how you're positioned and you're in the sort of out of the city centers that gone to the smaller product. But on the Partnership side, can you clarify that, that is a business that also focused out of town in the suburbs as opposed to a city center operation?

Again, do you want to take that?

Yes. No, I think Partnerships will very definitely take on both, John, because if you think about where the large region schemes are happening, that's typically local authorities looking to renovate and -- or not renovate to refresh, so in other words demolish and replace aging stock that's not really fit for the future. And so very much Partnerships will take on city center projects. Having said that, we will then look at it as a group to ensure -- so that we risk assess and manage our exposure to the demand in city centers because we want to make sure that's right for us as a group. So we're happy to take on some, if you like, sales risk in city centers, but we will moderate that. We wouldn't want to end up with a disproportionate sales risk in city centers. But of course -- and that doesn't mean that we won't work -- the Partnerships won't work very effectively in city centers.

And predominantly, in city centers, it would also be in a JV probably with...

Yes, almost always. So -- almost always. But city centers is a great source of work for the business. We will just balance the risk that we take in sales.

Did you want to put some sort of number on that, Graham, I mean, in terms of city center exposure of that Partnerships' business?

What sort of percentage we -- I mean, it would -- John, it would vary. So for instance, we would be probably more cautious about the Central London or the center of Manchester. But in terms of across the piece, I would say we would probably be 15%, 20% in city centers and the balance out in the regions. But it will vary according to the pallet of schemes at any time.

Sure. And last one on Partnerships, the partner delivery operation. Is it fair to say now that land led solutions are becoming the lion's share of that activity? And you're sort of leaving behind the low-margin design and build work?

Correct. So we absolutely are happy to continue with partner delivery, as it was contracting. But yes, we would much rather -- the majority of it be where it's a negotiated contract, which predominantly comes from it being land led or land introduced at the very least.

And final one for me on the land markets. With everybody now getting back in the swing of getting their volumes most targeting to 2019 levels, so quite a lot of activity, I'm sure, in the land market. Are you able still to be securing those gross margin hurdle rates you've mentioned earlier, Greg?

Yes. And as I said -- yes, and we have 6,100 plots with terms agreed and solicitors instructed. And it's quite surreal, the amount of land approvals we have to go through at the present moment in time compared to where it was with just Bovis. So no, we're not noticing any more -- there are -- everyone is looking at land, I agree with that. But that is -- we are winning enough land at those hurdle rates to keep us very, very happy. And if anything, on some of the larger ones, I would actually say, at the margin, the payment terms have actually got better over the last 12 months, i.e., the market hasn't moved, but we're able to extend the payment of it for an additional 12, 24 months.

We've got our next question from Charlie Campbell from Liberum.

Just one from me, really. We've talked a bit about the sales rate so far this year and obviously the acceleration in the last month. But just wondering if you could maybe talk a bit about the lead indicators of reservations. So whether that's kind of web traffic or appointments for visits or anything of that sort of order, just to give us an idea of whether this momentum can continue much further. And what sort of visibility you've got on that? Because things strengthening the last month, it's maybe a bit of a surprise for us.

Earl will answer that. I would say that the current week, which will be the last 5 weeks, will be more in line with 0.78 as well. So the current week is strong. But on the prospects, Earl?

I mean, Charlie, the best indicator at the moment is our prospects coming through our websites. That's where virtually everything is originating for obvious reasons. Those are levels that we've never seen before -- obviously, a step change with COVID, but the levels we've never seen before, they're continuing at that level. The highest we've ever recorded was 2 weeks ago, and there doesn't seem to be too much stopping it as we go forward. And that's what's coming through. Clearly, that then translates into appointments, calls, et cetera. But it's really prospects is the lead indicator, which kind of looks at what's going to happen over the next 3 or 4 weeks.

And I would actually say, I think that is one of the reasons why Bovis is used to lag the volume housebuilders by a great -- a fair distance with regards to our rate of sale. I think over the last 12 months, what we do on the website is better because Bovis have learned from Linden, Linden have learned from Bovis, and you come up with a better solution, which was another strategic rationale for the deal. And we are undoubtedly, I would say, better today as an organization than we were 15, 16 months ago. So I think there is an increase in the number of people. But I also think, if I'm making any sense at all, Charlie, we're better at it as well as an enlarged group. And that will be nothing to do with me, of course, because I'm useless with IT, as we know.

[Operator Instructions] And we've got a further question from Dean Grant from Bank of America.

Great. So I've just got one follow-up. It's actually just on Partnerships, and obviously, your target for 2022 of operating margin of 10% or above. I just want to understand, of the 3,000 units in contracting or partner delivery, as you call it, in FY '22, what percentage would be land led? And am I correct in my understanding that land led would be at the sort of upper range of the 3% to 11%? So I mean, would we be looking at sort of 8% to 11%? Or what does that sort of bring primarily for land led?

I think you'd be looking at 8% to 10% from the land led. And for the percentage of 2022...

I would say about 40% to 50%.

40% to 50%. And that percentage will get higher as per one of the previous questions as we go on from 2022.

Okay. We have no further questions at the moment. If I could pass back to yourself, Greg, for closing remarks.

Thank you. Thank you for all the questions. Hopefully, you all found the video useful and even entertaining. And I will just finish off by saying, I am genuinely excited about the prospects for Vistry Group going forward. We've done exceptionally well over the last 12 months, and I think we're in great shape. Thank you.