PE structure/function
I am looking for information on typical structure/functionality of a private equity firm. My specific questions are:
1) Is the management team usually part of the GP i.e. same company or separate company? If separate, is it a partnership usually?
2) Are there board of directors? Who appoints them and where in the structure do they sit?
3) Who appoints the investment committee and where in the structure do they sit?
4) Is there any other governance council or board?
5) How are roles/responsibilities of GP, investment committee and mgmt. distributed?
6) Is there any benefit of structuring a PE as a private limited company?
Thanks!
Given how imprecise your questions are, it would be helpful to know why you are asking. Because I have no idea how to answer these questions -- board of directors of what? Is what a partnership? What do you mean "structuring a PE as a private limited company"?
That said, this is a good representation: http://www.nordiccapital.com/media/37633/fund_structure_nordiccapital.j…
@mrb87 lol. Your comments are always so savage.
I'm not trying to be savage at all - people need to understand what the question is before they can answer it.
Maybe this is more helpful:
Let's use an example of a private equity fund and call it KKR Limited Partnership I ("KKR I"). KKR I has one General Partner ("GP") and many Limited Partners ("LP"s). Let's call the GP "KKR GP I Inc." The LPs are the economic beneficiaries of KKR I and own LP units comprising most of the capital of KKR I. KKR GP I Inc. makes a nominal capital contribution to KKR I and owns a special class of shares that allow it to receive carry according to the provisions of KKR I's constating documents. KKR GP I Inc. is responsible for operating KKR I and the LPs are silent partners who cannot participate in the running of KKR I in any way.
There are all sorts of tax and flexibility reasons that this structure is popular, but the upshot is that the LPs have no liability and their capital-at-risk is limited, while the GP carries unlimited liability.
KKR GP I Inc. then enters into an advisory agreement with the management company -- in this case, KKR Inc. -- under which the management company is actually made responsible for selecting/making/managing investments as the Investment Advisor. The management company is where all the private equity investment professionals actually work. So as far as an "investment committee" goes, this would be at the management company level. In return for acting as the investment advisor to KKR I, KKR Inc. gets a management fee, usually expressed as a percentage of capital committed to KKR I -- what you know as the 2% in "2-and-20".
The GP is usually owned by another company (let's call it "KKR Holdings I Inc."), which in turn is owned the principals of the management company or the management company itself. The point of all these GP ownership entities is to insulate the management company/principals from as much legal and economic risk as possible. If KKR I does well enough that there is carry available to pay out, that amount is paid to the GP., KKR GP I Inc.
Note that any entity which is a corporation -- KKR GP I Inc., KKR Holdings I Inc., KKR Inc. -- requires directors. The Limited Partnership does not have directors but will usually have something called an "advisory panel" (or similar) whose function is to try and mediate any disputes that arise within the context of the limited partnership and the limited partnership agreement (e.g. disputes with investors, changes to the LPA, waivers of concentration limits. etc...). The advisory panel, as an ostensibly independent body, should comprise representatives of the management company, investors, and outside members.
Excellent explanation above.
Thank you, clarifies a lot and very useful! 1) To clarify as I understand the Mgmt company once appointed will have the power to invest without any permission from GP/LP. 2) The Advisory panel would be the governing body but would be looking at policy level decisions. 3) The mgmt. company gets the management fee and the GP gets the carry? I though mgmt. would also get carry
No, the fee streams are usually split for tax purposes. At least that is my experience. Ultimately they end up in the same place, though.
Mrb87 described the typical legal org chart of how a PE firm is structured and they're structured this way for reasons he outlined. The people working at a PE firm sit in the mgmt company entity and principally own and manage the GP entity from an arms length distance. The mgmt company thereby is effectively the GP making the investment decisions and receive the mgmt fee and any carry above a pre-determined annually compounding preferred hurdle rate (usually 8pct) on the LP's money. The clock on this hurdle rate starts ticking when capital is called for an individual investment. The advisory panel is probably akin to what you'd think of as a BoD but likely with more limited scope than a traditional BoD.
Thank you mrb87 and MidtownParkAve. Just following on the legal structure, if any of you could please explain: 1) Legal structure if the PE is structured as a Trust - as compared to the Limited Partnership structure, would the Trustee be the GP/Fund Mgm Company and the trust itself the LP? 2) Pros and Cons of structuring as a Limited Parternship vs a Trust?
Thanks!
To go back to my first point, why are you asking all these questions? Much easier for people to answer you if they know the context.
Not to add complexity to the conversation but do PE funds typically have the domestic / offshore feeders that flow into an offshore master fund, or is that unique to the HF industry?
Yes offshore feeders exist in PE fund structures as well.
mrb87 the end goal is to launch an infrastructure fund - with part govt part pvt/dfi investments. But right now want to present something to our investors before hiring any external professionals - mainly focusing on what options there are to structure it.
Slow down there dude, you need to do quite a bit more homework before pitching investors if you don't understand the fund/mgmt co./GP structure. You need to take tax implications into account as well which the very thorough explanation above didn't address.
Yeah, I mean, I was just giving a general overview. If that is actually OP's goal then OP needs to speak with legal/accounting/tax professionals. It's laughable that he'd present something to investors based on an online message board.
get a lawyer
Am I correct in assuming the following structure: (1) General Partner with it's Board of Directors (who will ultimately be responsible for investing). (2) a Fund Management Company (appointed by the GP or the GP itself) with an Investment Committee and Management team (which would recommend investments to the GP's board of directors) (3) Limited Partners with a Limited Partners Advisory Committee (which could advise on investments).
Please let me know if something is incorrect.
No
OP what is your background and how many years have you worked? It's hard to explain these things to people who don't have real experience in PE. We clearly explained things that you are not getting. Not your fault if you have no idea what we're talking about b/c you're not in the industry.
I thought I did get it. Pls let me know where I'm wrong. I have a few years of PE experience but on the distressed loan acquisitions side not on the fund level
You literally got it all wrong. The GP is not responsible for investing, the Investment Advisor/Mgmt Co does not merely recommend, and the Advisory Panel is not an "LP" panel and does not "advise on investments."
well to backup what i was saying, please see this
https://www.eqt.se/About-EQT/Funds-Structure/ and http://www.nordiccapital.com/organisation/general-partner-and-fund-admi…
it clearly states "The Board of Directors of the fund’s General Partner makes investment and divestment decisions, based on recommendations from the Investment Advisory Committee and advice from the investment advisor."
As far as LP Advisory Committe is concerned please see: http://www.agg.com/An-Overview-of-Limited-Partner-Advisory-Committees-a…
Some pretty solid advice in this thread, despite the disagreement. Not all funds are set up the same exact way, although my experience is pretty much identical to mrb87's hypothetical.
Also -- the primary purpose of the LP Advisory Board is to make sure the PE Firm is behaving properly. This includes things such as approving quarterly mark-to-market of the investments. Also, if the PE Firm wants to do something that is outside of the bounds of the Limited Partnership Agreement ("LPA"), the LP Advisory Board determines whether to grant that right. For example: If the LPA says no more than 20% of the fund can be invested in a single portfolio company, the PE Firm can ask the advisory board for an exception if the situation arises.
Private Equity firm - structure of a firm (Originally Posted: 03/06/2013)
Can someone point me to a resource or share info about structure of a PE firm in general? Like for IB I know they are for example industry groups and product groups in most shops. or that you start as a analyst then associate, VP, Director, etc. How are these for a PE firm. I am looking at opportunities and have no idea what would be a good or bad position. Need to educate myself about things. thank you
Hey James, welcome -- I suggest you check our the PE section of the FAQs here: //www.wallstreetoasis.com/frequently-asked-questions/industry-specific
PE group structure & resposibilities (Originally Posted: 04/24/2013)
Question for those that have actually worked in PE-
from my understanding, some PE firms have division where the tasks from sourcing to operations are broken up as the following-
1) business development: looking for good target LBO comps, looking for distressed comps or auctions, maintaining relationships with exec teams at comps or BODs & bringing the good candidate comps for further review by M&A team 2) M&A/Execution team: looks over investment opportunity, decides how to structure the LBO, credit/debt issues, tax structures/implications, valuation..etc.etc. 3) operations: team that develops strategy for how company should go to improve core competencies, works with BOD or management to hit targets or performance goals or how to change operations if needed etc.
but then again, some firms i've heard of (ex- Bain Capital: but i dnt have the stats/pedigree for Bain. i'll be at a strong MM firm in M&A team so targeting good MM PE firms eg Platinum, Sycamore) are structured so associates do all 3 aspects...but more big picture stuff for #3 and not day-to-day stuff at all.
Now to me, 1 2 & 3 all seem VERY vital and key in the deal/turn-around process and something i personally would love to learn all around, not just M&A, for my own personal plans when older...
my question really is- are there any firms that will allow exposure to all roles? if so, how can i find out which will give me most holistic exposure? Or is it really like:
"okay you did M&A/Lev Fin or another product group, you go to M&A team. okay you did a coverage group (or something else? nothing against coverage) you go to business development. okay you did MBB/consulting you go to operations"
thanks!
Generally speaking, the smaller the shop the broader your responsibilities will be. Chances are you will need to look at funds that are sub $1B AUM and that look at smaller companies and have leaner teams.
Keep in mind, that as a junior person, your primary role will be the execution of the due diligence and modeling aspect up until you close the deal, then you may be more focused on the financial aspects of the portfolio monitoring, post-close.
I'm sure it will vary by culture, etc. but from what I've seen and heard from peers in PE, the smaller shops will provide more exposure to all three of the points you listed.
Regards
okay thanks! my goal is to basically run or be a partner at one of these smaller MM firms as i'd have more autonomy, more pay (assuming the firm does well) and ultimately work for myself (to the extent that i can work for myself when you are dealing with other investors money)
so would it makes sense to go to a shop with like $500m-$1b AUM to learn the entire process hands on? or to do a better name PE firm even tho il be more research/execution/due diligence just for the name/pedigree sake for if i want to raise funds in the future (i know a lot of wealthy people in LA and this isnt far off for me to try to do by early 30s thats why im curious)
PE org structure and expected entry for MBA+4 (Originally Posted: 03/18/2010)
I'd like some help understanding the org structure of PE firms. Please see below for what I have so far, however, I welcome thoughts on 1. How these roles/ designations vary 2. More fleshed out descriptions of what a person in each role does 3. Where a candidate 3-4 years out of MBA with strat/ops experience can expect to fit
My early understanding------------------------------> - Analyst - Associate - Snr. Associate - VP/ Principal - VP/ Director - Partner - MD
Thanks...
Most likely, a candidate with 3-4 years out of MBA will 1) not fit in anywhere since most PE shops will require some sort of PE experience from pre-MBA, or 2) potentially an associate/senior associate on the portfolio management side (vs origination).
Usually the Partner(s) sit at the top. Then, MD, Principal, VP, Associate, Analyst. Obviously, titles vary from firm.
Occaecati nihil expedita tempore qui sed fuga. At amet necessitatibus ad doloribus commodi rerum. Aliquam enim ea iste quibusdam quos cupiditate odio. Ab soluta sint fugiat ut labore. Commodi et qui esse et nemo minus. Fugit harum laboriosam illo aspernatur aperiam.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Mollitia laborum vel quaerat perspiciatis nostrum voluptas et. Ut aspernatur et sed est nobis. Facere quia a et eos in ut.