PE question
IB
(Monkey, 44
Points)
on 3/7/10 at 3:16pm
Hey, total PE newcomer. I read from a newspaper article that a PE fund raised $1.1 billion. Does this mean that the fund has $1.1 billion AUM? (I also read from another source that the fund had approximately 400 million AUM.) Sorry if this question is really basic, just trying to clear some things up, thanks.





You generally don't say a
You generally don't say a "fund" has a certain AUM, but rather an entire PE shop. The PE shop's AUM is equal to the sum of all its funds. So if a shop has 3 funds consisting of $200M, $500M, and $1.1B, the total AUM would be $1.8B.
CompBanker
Thanks very much appreciate
Thanks very much appreciate it.
wrong answer. It is not as
wrong answer. It is not as simple as adding together all the funds, it will depends on which funds they have exited as well.
In my experiences, PE shops
In my experiences, PE shops (including mine) always advertise the sum of all their funds as their AUM, even if the funds have since been liquidated. I suppose you could get technical and say AUM is "active" funds only, but that would be misleading for someone who was looking at websites and trying to determine size.
CompBanker
CompBanker wrote: In my
In my experiences, PE shops (including mine) always advertise the sum of all their funds as their AUM, even if the funds have since been liquidated. I suppose you could get technical and say AUM is "active" funds only, but that would be misleading for someone who was looking at websites and trying to determine size.
WRONG!! you're saying you work at a PE firm? let me guess, you haven't been there for long. jesus stop providing false information, i'm trying to help people out here, what YOU'RE saying is MISLEADING.
Aceman is right. You may work
Aceman is right. You may work at a PE firm CompBanker, but you have no idea what is happening at a level above your spreadsheets. Don't comment if you don't know.
Why would you refer to getting technical? Don't know know PE is all about being technical? I call bullshit on associate at PE shop.
baylormale wrote: Aceman is
Aceman is right. You may work at a PE firm CompBanker, but you have no idea what is happening at a level above your spreadsheets. Don't comment if you don't know.
Why would you refer to getting technical? Don't know know PE is all about being technical? I call bullshit on associate at PE shop.
It is hard for me to take your points seriously if you just call me wrong and don't offer a competing viewpoint. Either way, I will defend myself with examples:
Case 1, Oaktree Principal Investment claims $7.6bn of Assets Under Management ("AUM")
http://www.oaktreecapital.com/strategies/principal...
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund V, L.P. - $1.0bn
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund IV, L.P. - $3.328bn
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund III, L.P. - $1.4bn
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund II, L.P. - $1.3bn
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund I, L.P. - $0.625bn
Case 2, Leonard Green Partners claims $9.0bn of equity capital under management.
http://www.leonardgreen.com/
Green Equity Investors V, L.P. - $5.3bn
Green Equity Investors IV, L.P. - $1.85bn
Green Equity Investors III, L.P. - $1.244bn
Green Equity Investors II, L.P. - $0.311bn
Green Equity Investors, L.P. - $0.216bn
Case 3, Charlesbank claims more than $2bn in assets, but their largest and most recent fund is only $1.5bn.
http://www.charlesbank.com/
Charlesbank Equity Partners VII, L.P. - $1.5bn
Charlesbank Equity Fund VI, L.P. - $1.0bn
Charlesbank Equity Fund III, L.P. - $0.59bn
Charlesbank Equity Fund II, L.P. - $0.3bn
And for the record, I sit on the Board of Directors of multiple of our portfolio companies and am involved in every decision that gets made at the Board level. As for the spreadsheets, I just call up bankers when I need a comp set run. Please take your negative attitude elsewhere.
CompBanker
OWNED
OWNED
Haha, damn, thanks for the
Haha, damn, thanks for the insight CompBanker, ignore the wannabes
CompBanker wrote: baylormale
Aceman is right. You may work at a PE firm CompBanker, but you have no idea what is happening at a level above your spreadsheets. Don't comment if you don't know.
Why would you refer to getting technical? Don't know know PE is all about being technical? I call bullshit on associate at PE shop.
It is hard for me to take your points seriously if you just call me wrong and don't offer a competing viewpoint. Either way, I will defend myself with examples:
Case 1, Oaktree Principal Investment claims $7.6bn of Assets Under Management ("AUM")
http://www.oaktreecapital.com/strategies/principal...
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund V, L.P. - $1.0bn
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund IV, L.P. - $3.328bn
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund III, L.P. - $1.4bn
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund II, L.P. - $1.3bn
OCM Principal Opportunities Fund I, L.P. - $0.625bn
Case 2, Leonard Green Partners claims $9.0bn of equity capital under management.
http://www.leonardgreen.com/
Green Equity Investors V, L.P. - $5.3bn
Green Equity Investors IV, L.P. - $1.85bn
Green Equity Investors III, L.P. - $1.244bn
Green Equity Investors II, L.P. - $0.311bn
Green Equity Investors, L.P. - $0.216bn
Case 3, Charlesbank claims more than $2bn in assets, but their largest and most recent fund is only $1.5bn.
http://www.charlesbank.com/
Charlesbank Equity Partners VII, L.P. - $1.5bn
Charlesbank Equity Fund VI, L.P. - $1.0bn
Charlesbank Equity Fund III, L.P. - $0.59bn
Charlesbank Equity Fund II, L.P. - $0.3bn
And for the record, I sit on the Board of Directors of multiple of our portfolio companies and am involved in every decision that gets made at the Board level. As for the spreadsheets, I just call up bankers when I need a comp set run. Please take your negative attitude elsewhere.
oh my freaking lord, I get busy for a few days and when I come back what do I see? a bunch of idiots spewing false info and patting eachother on their backs, hey fools, congrats on being dumbasses. People are here to LEARN, so make an effort to check your info please. And when someone tells you you're wrong, you might want to educate yourself before making yourself look stupid.
First of all, don't waste my time with your so called "proof", just a quick glance at your "case 3" show me that you can't even add. Thank you for proving MY point.
So you want additional proof is that right? OH OK, well, where do I start?? HOW ABOUT THE LETTER A?? let me see, the FIRST firm i find, Abry Partners, let's see what they have. http://www.abry.com/Home/AboutUs/OurFunds.aspx
OK, 2.75 billlion AUM.
ABRY Broadcast Partners I 35 M
ABRY Broadcast Partners II 250M
ABRY Partners III 575M
ABRY Partners IV 750M
ABRY Partners V 950M
ABRY Partners VI 1350M
Ok, i'll let you practice a bit and let you add it all up, since you seem to have major issues with addition. I can tell you right now that NO IT DOES NOT EQUAL 2.75, it is MUCH BIGGER.
There. I just saved you your job. No i don't need you to thank me. Just stop wasting my time and go learn what AUM means.
TheGame wrote: OWNED Now you
OWNED
Now you look stupid dont you.
masterg wrote: Haha, damn,
Haha, damn, thanks for the insight CompBanker, ignore the wannabes
hahaha, damn, you're an idiot, thank you for playing.
wtf, half a year ago you
wtf, half a year ago you asked this exact same question, and now you're suddenly the expert, aceman?
http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/what-exactly...
not only do you not work in pe, i'm not so sure you even work in the industry.
and re: the abry example - they describe the 2.75 million as what is in their "active funds," not aum, total assets under management, total contributed capital, or anything like that. "We currently manage over $2.75 billion of capital in our active funds". It's all in how you word it.
aardvarkaa wrote: wtf, half a
wtf, half a year ago you asked this exact same question, and now you're suddenly the expert, aceman?
http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/what-exactly...
not only do you not work in pe, i'm not so sure you even work in the industry.
and re: the abry example - they describe the 2.75 million as what is in their "active funds," not aum, total assets under management, total contributed capital, or anything like that. "We currently manage over $2.75 billion of capital in our active funds". It's all in how you word it.
WTF aardvark, my question half a year ago EXACTLY proves my point. The firm I worked for (not anymore) lists 1 billion invested, 300 M new fund. Guess what, I KNEW finding the AUM is not as easy as adding it all up, so i made the effort to go out and ACTUALLY LEARN THE STUFF.
WTF IS YOUR POINT? sneaking around and diggin stuff up? For what???
Since you're so damn smart, why dont you tell us what AUM is then? COMPBanker the fool says its just adding it all up, why dont you tell us if you agree??
i hope i never have to work
i hope i never have to work with any of you
there's not really a clear
Some firms list total
ews09 wrote: Current assets
Everyone who thinks Aceman is
Aye
Aceman, The original poster
CompBanker
baylormale wrote: Aceman is
TheGame
You should try replying to
aceman wrote: most of the
CompBanker wrote: Aceman, The
TheGame wrote: You should try
Aceman, I still think we
CompBanker
Longest post ever^^^
One of the lamest arguments
Lets end it all with
Financial Modeling Training
Guide to Finance Interviews
Banking Resume
hey Marcus Halbertram, who
ibleedexcel wrote: One of the
Aceman, When you enter the
junkbondswap
There have probably been 10
Financial Modeling Training
Guide to Finance Interviews
Banking Resume
Ha! i'm not the one talking
Dude aceman...you're getting
Dude, I am not trying to be
lol this thread was a ray of
Concerning AUM, definitions
Most funds will use whatever
Jeez.... I worked in PE in
http://www.privateequitywire.
aceman
It is the idiots who don't
Aceman is still listed as a
INTERVIEW GUIDES -- Technical, Fit and Networking... The Biz School Bible and More...
aceman, there are a number of
Billy Ray Valentine
By the way, staying in