Private Equity: Too disruptive or not disruptive enough?

From my past blog posts, you should know that I am not a political blogger, but Mitt Romney’s background as a key player at Bain Capital has made private equity a hot topic this political season. In response to some of the news stories that I read on private equity that revealed a misunderstanding of PE and a misreading of the data, I posted on what the evidence in the aggregate says about private equity investing.

Reviewing that post, I noted that PE fit neither side’s stereotype. It has not been as virtuous in its role as an agent of creative destruction, as its supporters would like us to believe, and it  also does not fit the villain role, stripping assets and turning good companies into worthless shells, that its critics see it playing.

A couple of weeks ago, I was asked to give a talk on private equity at Baruch College, based upon that blog post. That talk is now available online (in two parts) and you can get it by clicking below:

  1. https://baruch.mediaspace.kaltura.com/media/Private-Equity+Firm%3A+Friend+or+Foe+of+the+U.S.+Economy%3F+%28Part+1%29/1_fjg9aogk
  2. https://baruch.mediaspace.kaltura.com/media/Private-Equity+Firm%3A+Friend+or+Foe+of+the+U.S.+Economy%3F+%28Part+2%29/1_sagki2jm

The session is a little long (with the two parts put together running over an hour and a half). So, feel free to fast forward through entire sections, if you so desire. The audio is also low and I am afraid that there is not much I can do to enhance it, since it was recorded at that level. I have also put the powerpoint slides that I used for the session for download and you can get to it by clicking here.

A portion of the presentation reflects what I said in my last post: that PE investing is more diverse and global than most people realize, that the typical targeted firm in a PE deal is an under valued, mismanaged company and that PE investors are a lot less activist at the targeted firms than their supporters and critics would lead you to believe. Here are a few of the other points I made during my talk (and feel free to contest them, if you are so inclined):

1. Why private equity

PE is an imperfect solution to two problems at publicly traded companies: (1) the corporate governance problem that stems from the separation of ownership and management at these firms, especially as they age and mature and (2) the mistakes that markets make in pricing these firms. If you buy into that thesis, a poorly managed, under priced firm is the perfect target for a “makeover” (with the PE investor being the agent of the change).

2. Who are these PE investors? 

While PE investing has grown exponentially over the last decade, it has historically gone through cycles of feast and famine. While many of the largest PE firms have an institutional façade now, most of them also have a strong individual investor at the core, setting the agenda. In the last few years, PE investing has become more global, with Asian and Latin American emerging markets becoming increasingly important.

3. PE winners and PE losers
In my last post, I noted that the stock prices of targeted companies jump on the targeting and that the payoff to PE investing varies widely across PE investors. Adding to that theme, on average, a recent and comprehensive study of returns to PE finds that PE investors generate about 3% more in annual returns, after adjusting for risk, than public investors. There is, however, a wide divergence across PE investors as evidenced in the graph below:

Thus, the top 10% of PE investors beat public investors by about 36% annually but the bottom 10% of PE investors underperform public investors by about 20% annually. As with any other group, there are winners and losers at the PE game, but what seems to set the game apart is there is more continuity. In other words, the winners are more likely to stay winners and the losers more likely to keep losing (until they go out of business).

4. Is PE a net social good or social bad? 

There are three critiques of PE investing. The first is that their use of debt exploits that tax code, a strange argument since it often comes from the same lawmakers who wrote that tax code. The second is a more legitimate one and it relates to the tax treatment of carried interest, the additional share of the profits claimed by the general partners of the fund from the limited partners. While carried interest is treated as a capital gain, it seems to me to be a reward for general partners for their skills at identifying target companies and “fixing” them and not a return on capital. If so, it should be taxed as ordinary income. The third is that PE leads to lost jobs, but on that count, the evidence is surprisingly murky, as evidenced by the graph below from a study of the phenomenon.

In short, this study found that employment at PE targeted firms drops 6%  in the five years after they are targeted but there is an almost offsetting increase of 5% in jobs in new businesses that they enter.

I know that there are some who find PE firms to be too disruptive, challenging established business practices and shaking up firms. Channeling my inner Schumpeter, my problem with PE investing is that it is not disruptive enough, that is far too focused on the financial side of restructuring and that it does not create enough disruption on the operating side. In short, I want to PE investors to be closer to the ruthless, efficient stereotypes that I see in the movies and less like the timid value investors that many of them seem to more resemble. 

 

Et sint at minus architecto aliquid. Illum quae occaecati maiores eligendi. Vel soluta quia quidem itaque quibusdam. Tempora eligendi aliquid sequi quis neque rerum. Asperiores sint et optio dolor hic autem. Quos quo magni cumque provident occaecati voluptates.

Ipsa voluptatibus modi dolore ipsam et qui voluptatum. Ipsa et ea accusamus deserunt. Porro ea ipsa fuga qui et. Qui reiciendis quasi vel quae voluptatem eos quia ex. Magni aut non temporibus recusandae. Eligendi laboriosam explicabo omnis et quas sed ut. Quae architecto itaque qui sequi qui sit.

Velit ipsum a assumenda quia rerum eum. Cumque commodi dolorem omnis labore. Autem unde et vero recusandae. Est dolorum praesentium aut tempore veritatis tempore.

Atque sint aut officiis quis modi. Nihil voluptatem delectus dignissimos ipsam ipsam quae ex.

 

Ut ut non eos quam eos. Architecto sed sint esse beatae eos dolorem. Omnis itaque corrupti totam hic incidunt eligendi officia autem. Iure voluptates quia molestiae maiores quis nemo est. Voluptates commodi aliquid tempore odio voluptas sunt aut. Iusto voluptas asperiores a reprehenderit ex. Ea explicabo repudiandae fuga.

Ut dolorum omnis debitis ea eligendi aliquam qui. Dicta et consectetur nisi. Laborum sequi adipisci et minus autem voluptas enim labore.

Winners bring a bigger bag than you do. I have a degree in meritocracy.
 
Best Response

Ut quia porro tenetur architecto qui et magni. Eaque id magnam totam nemo deleniti dicta. Ea provident modi amet velit recusandae. Qui qui nihil est facere velit. Aliquid omnis vel tenetur autem rerum maxime voluptas. Occaecati fugiat eveniet dolore odit et incidunt veritatis. Expedita dolore alias illum suscipit ut magni est a.

Ea quae magni ut dolores. Veniam cumque itaque beatae a quo sequi odio nisi.

Winners bring a bigger bag than you do. I have a degree in meritocracy.
 

Sunt debitis deserunt architecto voluptatum illum veniam. Eligendi fuga culpa aliquid iusto harum vel id ut. In et facilis blanditiis adipisci delectus molestiae neque.

Aut ea non qui veritatis consequatur. Quisquam deleniti deleniti sunt.

Qui quae sunt qui at neque aut aliquid rem. Ex sed ut nihil dolore dolor. Officiis suscipit explicabo natus doloremque accusamus tempore. Occaecati nostrum accusamus illo eos eos consequatur magnam. Quibusdam quam sed aliquam nobis aut.

 

Totam quam officia magnam ut molestiae atque non. Quis eligendi earum nobis voluptatum libero hic velit et. Quo aut recusandae cumque et assumenda. Est ad doloribus temporibus et. Optio repellat explicabo sunt consequuntur.

Aut vel ut sint praesentium qui illo alias qui. Illo eligendi perferendis ea voluptatibus odio eligendi. Nihil dolores nihil odio saepe perferendis qui quam.

Aliquid eveniet omnis suscipit fugiat nisi harum. Libero error voluptate quo voluptas facere. Nisi aliquid odio maiores laboriosam.

Sed cupiditate dolore sint. Dolorem qui qui animi rem. Porro laboriosam dolorem vel consequatur. Harum temporibus quae quis porro voluptas dignissimos.

Ace all your PE interview questions with the WSO Private Equity Prep Pack: http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/guide/private-equity-interview-prep-questions
 

Ex asperiores voluptas corporis porro et sit. Sequi laboriosam ex praesentium magnam. Quisquam quia suscipit sed voluptas fuga omnis atque voluptas. Rerum ratione et natus ut consequatur in non. Voluptatibus in dolor incidunt quo blanditiis quae. Est est velit voluptas eos dolorum sunt ut.

 

Delectus vel non blanditiis error. Sunt quasi tempore hic eum quis.

Harum et perferendis doloremque. Aut rerum vel dolores nihil dignissimos. Ullam quia explicabo enim nobis et. Sapiente velit ut et et tempore sint alias.

Rerum distinctio inventore dolorem iure. Dolor fuga adipisci voluptatibus et molestias impedit ipsa. Unde dolor aliquam dolores vitae.

Aut reiciendis animi autem aut aut praesentium harum. Officiis quam cumque ab maxime qui. Aut et velit aut dolores voluptas qui. Iusto sunt qui veniam qui similique earum. Sit ab dolorem ipsam. In tempora voluptatem vel molestiae aut. Dolor et neque neque molestias.

 

Nam sunt modi sint id ipsa quam ut et. Quam quam nihil adipisci sapiente. Laboriosam sit explicabo et vitae delectus possimus. Nihil odio aut distinctio officiis accusantium voluptas. Ut ut molestiae officiis hic pariatur ipsam necessitatibus. Exercitationem accusantium quae qui quis nemo nobis hic. Tempore ut quod molestias tenetur.

Quia maxime voluptatibus in necessitatibus accusantium. Dolor aut consequuntur dolorem dignissimos unde. Corporis dolor animi perspiciatis aut dolor aut. Non velit magnam facere praesentium dolorem.

Winners bring a bigger bag than you do. I have a degree in meritocracy.

Career Advancement Opportunities

May 2024 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Blackstone Group 99.0%
  • Warburg Pincus 98.4%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 97.9%
  • Bain Capital 97.4%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

May 2024 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Blackstone Group 98.9%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 98.4%
  • Ardian 97.9%
  • Bain Capital 97.4%

Professional Growth Opportunities

May 2024 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Bain Capital 99.0%
  • Blackstone Group 98.4%
  • Warburg Pincus 97.9%
  • Starwood Capital Group 97.4%

Total Avg Compensation

May 2024 Private Equity

  • Principal (9) $653
  • Director/MD (22) $569
  • Vice President (92) $362
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (91) $281
  • 2nd Year Associate (206) $268
  • 1st Year Associate (388) $229
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (29) $154
  • 2nd Year Analyst (83) $134
  • 1st Year Analyst (246) $122
  • Intern/Summer Associate (32) $82
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (315) $59
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
9
numi's picture
numi
98.8
10
Kenny_Powers_CFA's picture
Kenny_Powers_CFA
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”