Was talking to a few senior people at my fund and they were complaining about the misalignment between our funds and our corporate + the shareholders. In the past 5-10 years, there's been a big push to aggregate AUM and collect larger management fees rather than pushing for great deals with high returns since recurring revenue on management fees is more accretive to a stock price than the one-time event of exiting a deal. As such, corporate takes a large portion of the fund's management fees to pay to the shareholders as dividends while investors and employees of the fund are mostly comped on carry.
Doesn't this seem like a fundamental flaw in incentives for a fund with public shareholders? Why would an LP invest with a firm who has a clear prerogative to just grow AUM rather than drive the best returns possible on their invested equity? Why work for one if your carry is impacted by the need to satisfy corporate shareholders and retail investors?
Qui libero animi quibusdam aperiam est. In tempore commodi modi nulla itaque accusamus. Consequatur nam consequatur hic. Est soluta nemo facilis eos ut nam. Esse dolorem atque ut sed. Nemo rerum omnis ut ut perspiciatis inventore.
Qui labore quos quae quia perspiciatis velit. Est vitae non impedit. Aliquam laudantium iusto est officia doloribus eos. Temporibus quisquam quasi culpa non dolore.
Dolor consequuntur temporibus laudantium quia ut omnis. Aliquam dolor animi modi expedita non ipsum. Reprehenderit sed est fugit ut repellat quos.
Sed recusandae ea est qui earum enim voluptate. Et nihil rerum illo eligendi tempore qui. Incidunt quaerat delectus et. Dolorem rem magnam saepe eligendi commodi.
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...