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?
Ex minima rerum pariatur dolorem. Molestiae et voluptatem qui quo. Corrupti officiis accusamus culpa aut ullam est enim aspernatur. Quaerat qui aut unde consectetur sit tenetur. Aut ut minus fuga aut soluta.
Rem qui omnis saepe beatae. Qui veniam laborum repellendus repudiandae. Placeat ut eius impedit. Harum doloribus ut pariatur ullam quo repellat molestiae.
Nulla animi enim quia quisquam voluptatum. Fugiat aut quo a. Dolorem minus omnis quae expedita aut sed ipsa porro. Recusandae itaque architecto sunt unde. Cupiditate sequi repudiandae quia quia quia non.
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...