Private Equity - Operating Side
Are there any good threads on this area of the business? Would be great to hear some detail on the sort of work that gets done from that end.
I have the opportunity to join a small PE firm that is led by a PE operating expert (top PE experience.) It doesn't seem like they're interested in picking up more than a few companies and building them up, so I'd like to know more about what I would possibly be getting myself into.
Thanks.
My firm is similar but we focus in real estate. Different asset class but I'm sure there are some similarities if you want to talk via PM
There are definitely some threads on here and you are welcome to PM or ask specific questions in this thread as it is right up my alley. Spent most of my career making highly concentrated sector specific bets and relied heavily on operational restructuring and strategic divestitures to drive returns. What you are getting yourself into really depends on your investment team/boss and your interest in the industry. I really enjoyed my team and my industry so it was a great experience from me and I developed a very marketable skillset.
Operations-Focused PE Firms? (Originally Posted: 12/28/2011)
Hi all,
First off, I apologize if this has been addressed numerous times, but I was basically wondering if anyone knows PE firms that are more operationally oriented than some of the larger megafunds. People I've talked to have said that a lot of the megafund PE firms don't do too much on the operations sides and mostly just fire people, do bolt-on acquisitions, etc.. (which is important of course) and load up the company with debt to generate value. I'm not here to criticize Megafund PE (believe me, I don't know enough about those firms to be in any position to criticize them), so please don't take offense to the last statement, rather, I'm just asking if anyone knows if there are firms that are known for being more operationally oriented, because I have heard that megafunds focus less on this aspect.
When I first heard of private equity, my initial idea of it was to buy the firm, take control of the board, and then reorient it in a direction that would make it more profitable before taking it public and selling for a profit. This would be heavy on the operations/business strategy side, so I was wondering if firms do this, or if this is beyond the scope of private equity since my vision of it obviously will differ from what is realistically feasible.
Again, if this has already been addressed, I apologize and I'll delete this thread and try searching a bit harder on my own.
I'm not an expert on this part of investing, but you might find this Wharton class interesting. The guy giving the lecture is a founder of Audax Group, which is a middle market PE firm that takes a more active approach to companies they invest in.
BainCap?
Yeah, the Audax guys are ex-BainCap.
That make sense. I met a couple of them at a career fair by me, seems like a very solid group.
Learning about the operational side of PE (Originally Posted: 06/08/2013)
Do you have any resources to learn about the operational side of an attractive investment opportunity? I know PE interviews often have a modeling portion, but I know there is also a qualitative aspect and I'd like to prepare.
Thanks in advance
Bump please. Do you think Case In Point is a good place to start?
The operating side of PE (Originally Posted: 11/09/2012)
Does anyone have any experience on the operating side of private equity, where instead of doing deals you are working with portfolio companies in which your firm has invested? I'm trying to get a sense of what being on this part of the business is like, and am looking at jobs in this type of function.
Has anyone worked in this kind of position? Or, if not, has anyone in a more traditional role worked closely with advising portfolio companies - not just sitting on their boards but getting more closely involved with their operations and management.
Hi
During the summer I worked at a MM PE firm and due to small headcount I got to work on all sides of the deal including a little bit of operations.
Here is my modicum of experience. From an analyst perspective PE firms try to deduce methods to increase the efficiency, scope or scale of a firm. For example would firm X be more efficient if we moved production plant x to location y or should we change how the contract/licensing structure of the products are. It is vastly different every time depending on the company, industry and deal. This only occurs if a PE firm acquires a controlling share of a company or if a company is willing to acquiese operational decisions or inputs.
Usually most firms have a select group of operating directors, that may or may not directly work for the PE firm. The operating directors, especially if controlling shares are acquired, are placed on the BOD of the acquisition. The operating directors then implement the necessary changes that they feel are appropiate. This can be anything from changing management, to changing production methods, to attractive new clients depending on depths of connections.
An interesting scenerio is when a PE firm owns multiple firms in the same industry. My firm did. Here the PE firm might attempt to find cross synergies between the companies by either combining ops or implementing each others comparative advantages but keeping the firms seperate entities. The firms might be kept seperate entitites if the core market segments are just vastly different.
I don't have much experience so take everything I say with a grain of salt but that's my 2 cents.
OP: pm me
I also work at a PE shop where the headcount is lean so I am doing some portfolio management (especially on one company we recently purchased).
A huge value add is actually sitting in on their calls and looking at how they're looking at bolt-ons and future acquisitions. We gave them an x amount budget/allowance that they can use for acquisitions so while the process is theirs, we lend our expertise to make sure they do good deals and that they know how to value the company (we help them model out earn out structures and arrive at a firm price). You might be surprised but most companies/corporations have a really really unsophisticated way of doing acquisitions/bolt ons where they can pay for a small company with near to zero due diligence and with a simple 1 page P&L model.
However the most interesting part of managing a company is looking at new initiatives and capex spend. So instead of just looking at a financial statement and seeing 100 million in capex, you get to actually work with management in how to allocate that effectively. It helps a lot for information based companies to have a very solid plan where you will contact them every day or week and see the progress they're making on a new initiative such as expanding to a new country or a new product.
The product stuff is interesting but my favorite is expanding the company overseas. That's when you get to travel and help with the smallest details such as which building to rent out as well as big picture things like working with that country's local government with regards to regulations/taxes/etc.
Anyways, there's a million things you do in running a company so I won't list it all here but I find that managing companies (30% of my time) is just as interesting as looking at new deals (70% of my time). However, you might want to look at operationally focused PE firms if you want to ONLY do portfolio management where they actually split up investment team vs. operations team.
Or you can go to a shop where you do a bit of both which happens I think in most mid market PE shops. The megafunds a majority of the time will be focused on just modeling/acquisitions at the junior levels since the seniors will take care of actually "running" the company.
The old "operations" myth. Operations in PE will consist of:
--Add-On acquisitions --Occasionally helping with budgeting and analyzing big capex projects (especially if financing is needed) --Sitting on calls / going to board meetings
You won't be doing really "operational" things. People have this idea in their head that you'll be some sort of business demi-god who does the deal and then runs the company. That's not the case. Not for the Associates, not for the VPs, not for the Partners. The job of running the company goes to the company. You provide help with things that are in your wheel-house, not in theirs.
This is not to say that you won't learn a ton of stuff, but it's almost always going to be around financials.
As a side note, I think deep-down, we all want to be doing things, creating things as opposed to buying things and looking at them as abstract spreadsheets. Hence the constant bubbling up interest in PE for "operational experience."
So true man.
Fully agree. Especially with the last sentense. The soul wants doing real things, while brain forces you to be around financials.
PE usually use specialist consultants (post deal team, 100 days...) or very experienced ex-CEOs to run these operational changes. A number of PE now pay for operational due diligence work to be done during the deal due diligence to help them identify future sources of operational savings. This space is getting more and more active and some firms have now their own small operational team in house. This has been reinforced by the recent debt crisis when no one could sell anything and PE firms had to sit on some crappy investment whose EBTIDA was melting every quarter...
I've been curious about portfolio arms of megafunds, e.g. TPG Ops Group, KKR Capstone. How do these places compare to MBB in terms of:
Would anyone care to chime in?
No one?
Interested on this topic as well.
bump
There are countless examples of PE/HF guys becoming so enamored with a particular portfolio company or a portfolio company becoming such a substantial portion of their portfolio that they get very involved in the day to day operations and decision making process, which can obviously be rife with potential conflicts of interest and lead to contentious issues with company management. My shop had two internal groups that worked collaboratively during the entire deal cycle. One group focused on the typical financial engineering aspects of private equity (acquisition due diligence, capital raising, financing, etc.) while the other group was comprised of former industry operating professionals who advised on strategic action plans, SG&A reduction, forecasting/budgeting, etc. We also hired the standard management consultants to come in during various phases of due diligence.
My point is, that there are opportunities in PE whereby you can participate in various facets of the traditional PE deal cycle and the operations of a portfolio company. Our analyst/associate groups definitely worked closely with the operational group and directly with senior level executives within the portfolio company on tasks such as: capital budgeting, strategic partnerships, marketing campaigns, opportunistic dispositions of assets, advising on PP&E related decisions, etc. It definitely offered a unique perspective.
Thanks, appreciate the insight.
How operationally-involved is PE? (Originally Posted: 12/31/2013)
I am attracted to PE because it is a hybrid of investing in and operating businesses. I know someone in PE would not necessarily be running the day to day, but I am under the impression that they do get to make some high level decisions - management hiring/firing, hiring consultants, further M&A after the buyout, etc. To what extent is this true, and a valid reason for getting into PE or at least selling your interest during interviews.
It really, really depends on firm. Although the trend is moving towards operational improvements, as financial wizardry just isn't as profitable lately.
Really depends on the fund you join. I think in general, the smaller the size of the business, the more operational involved you can potentially get. This is largely also due to SMEs being good candidates for organic growth through expansion or growth via M&A. I think Audax is a good example of such operationally oriented fund in the US.
Operationally involved can be a pretty broad term in and of itself.
For example, large-cap buyout funds tend to look at the strategic direction of a firm and make investments based on how they can add value to an existing strategy, or retool the business to capitalize on a new strategy.
Whereas for middle-market firms, especially at the lower end of the defintion, PE firms can add value by adding MIS, streamlining processes, etc...pretty much implementing plans that allow a business to scale up and function like a larger organisation.
That makes sense thanks for the help guys! Do you think one can use this operational spin to investing as a reason to do PE?
Smaller, more specialized "distressed" PE firms are a revolving door for MDs in operational turnaround consulting teams at reputable firms. They are confined to operational roles, but still it's a nice route.
Omnis vero dolore et quasi repudiandae. Perspiciatis voluptatem hic iure modi illo dicta. Nihil natus neque laboriosam repudiandae quos.
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...
Cumque voluptatem pariatur eum fugit assumenda molestias voluptatum. Et saepe voluptatem dolores aut. Omnis fugit assumenda pariatur optio qui impedit. Deleniti consequatur voluptatem dolor vitae. Minus qui qui eveniet.
Dicta delectus eligendi aut nam voluptas exercitationem. Molestiae inventore non enim est. Nihil quod molestias quis autem ea. Ea maxime quidem unde corrupti.
Quibusdam dolor at error id placeat ipsum. Dolorum consequatur eaque ipsam qui. Animi porro rerum vitae debitis temporibus dolorem deserunt.
Non neque culpa ducimus velit. Et enim ipsum dolorum cupiditate sit quam. Magnam aliquid nihil quia sequi eius accusamus.