Hi Folks -
I wanted to see how people typically approach these questions:
1) Would you rather own a bad company in a good industry or a good company in a bad industry?
2) Would rather own a good company in a great industry or a great company in a good industry?
Thank you!
| +43 | Lateraling at senior associate / VP level | 15 | 11h |
| +27 | Imposter Syndrome: PE to Publics | 4 | 3d |
| +26 | Ares buying LGP...now what? | 8 | 2d |
| +19 | Do PE VPs Always Have An Associate Under Them? | 12 | 2d |
| +17 | GTCR vs BDT MSD vs MDP | 16 | 1d |
| +16 | Hours at MF Infra Funds in London | 2 | 19h |
| +14 | Setting the right LBO entry multiple without information | 3 | 6d |
| MBA to EM Infra Investing? | 3 | 3d | |
| +11 | Committing to CD&R? | 6 | 8h |
| +11 | London Version: PE Check-in on Attrition, Promotions and State of Play | 6 | 1d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
1) I'm assuming you mean bad company in good industry vs good company in bad industry. I think I would lean towards bad company in good industry on principle because it's relatively easier to improve a company tactically (improve operations) than to improve a company strategically (pivot industries). However, I would caveat to this, it also depends on the market structures of each of these industries. If it turns out that the bad company operates in a high barriers to entry "good" industry that's already very consolidated (monopoly/oligopoly) and they are not a part of the "winners" I could potentially prefer a good company in a bad industry with the thinking being that both the loser in a consolidated good industry and operators in a bad industry are doomed to zero economic profits in the long-term, so maybe I'd prefer the one that's better operated.
2) Good company great industry for a similar reason to the above, additionally, the "good" company could be relatively cheaper than the "great" company with more room for growth.
1) Bad company in a good industry. Listen to what Buffett says - When a management with a reputation for brilliance tackles a business with a reputation for bad economics, it is the reputation of the business that remains intact.
2) Depends on many factors, I would start probing the interviewer with questions like are they thinking about any one specific industry or business model. Good company in a great industry = you can have multiple players who win and capture share. Industry growth can carry the industry participants even if product's aren't differentiated / have a competitive advantage. Great company in a good industry = over the long-term can still outperform (i.e. think cyclicals)
But defining a GREAT industry really comes down to 1) rate of change in the industry, 2) supply / demand dynamics which in turns drives pricing trends and growth, 3) barriers to entry, and 4) nature of relationships between the customer and business
Aut iure quibusdam voluptatum molestias eveniet ab aut. Consequatur eum necessitatibus earum iste. Voluptatem excepturi repellendus perspiciatis consequatur.
Cum sint doloremque eos totam aliquam expedita minus. Hic laudantium distinctio ut. Ab vero quia odit. Rem a laborum itaque.
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...
Consequuntur facere laudantium possimus quos. Accusamus dolore enim facilis debitis. Ipsum et in enim odio assumenda rerum molestias.
Molestiae ratione quasi eos dolores consequatur. Nulla dolores illo est facere vero explicabo ipsum. Rerum laborum quia eos dicta. Quia et reprehenderit est magnam enim officia. Ea earum maxime repellat quia. Id corrupti ducimus ea modi deleniti.
Qui ut id veniam recusandae. Minima aut velit cumque voluptate rerum magnam. Qui libero et numquam eveniet sit fugiat qui ipsam.