Terms and Structure for Seed Capital / GP Co-invest

I am putting together a syndication and am early in the capital raising process. Currently speaking with larger check writers within my network, that do not work in real estate, primarily they are VCs, current and former business owners, PMs/HF managers, and are familiar with the private equity/syndication model used in private real estate. 

One investor offered to provide up to $500K but they want to have ownership in the operating company so they can have upside as the platform scales. I wasn't aware of these type of investment until looking into GP Stakes and Op Co investments, but they want to be invovled at the deal level and op co level. This aligns with us, since we need the capital for deal pursuit expenses, opco overhead (non-transaction expenses), and gp co-invest. The same investor wants me to draft a term sheet for them and I need recommendations from people with experience negotiating terms with anchor LPs or GP Stake investors. 

Ideal structure for me:

$300K op co investment followed by deposit + 70% of coinvest

Investor provides working capital and GP co-invest. Working capital includes deal pursuit capital and operating capital. The GP coinvest includes the deposit. 

In return they get 15% of Op Co revenue streams and 10% of performance related fees (promote) on deals where they are investing as LP's or putting up GP Coinvest, done in 24 month window beginning at COE of first deal, and 5% of performance fees in deals where they are not putting up capital as an LP or GP co-invest during same time period. 

When they provide capital for deposit which rolls into co-invest they earn a portion of promote pool. ie if they participate at 100% of GP coinvest they will receive 25% of promote pool. 

Capital is invested up front for opco investment and  GP Coinvest is invested when a target is identified for EMD and then funding the remainng co invest. 

Does this make sense?

Is this common?

Does anyone have good references for how to structure this?

Thank you in advance. 

5 Comments
 

Based on the most helpful WSO content, your proposed structure aligns with some common practices in private equity and real estate syndications, but there are nuances to consider:

  1. Op Co Investment and Revenue Sharing:

    • Offering 15% of Op Co revenue streams and 10% of performance-related fees (promote) for deals where the investor participates as an LP or GP co-investor is a reasonable structure. This aligns with the concept of GP stake investments, where investors gain a share of the GP's economics in exchange for providing capital.
    • The reduced 5% performance fee for deals where they are not directly investing is also a fair way to balance their involvement and incentivize their participation in future deals.
  2. GP Co-Invest and Promote Pool:

    • Allowing the investor to earn a portion of the promote pool based on their GP co-invest contribution is a common practice. For example, if they cover 100% of the GP co-invest, receiving 25% of the promote pool is a logical incentive.
    • This structure ensures alignment of interests between you (the GP) and the investor, as they share in the upside of successful deals.
  3. Capital Deployment:

    • The phased approach of upfront Op Co investment followed by deal-specific GP co-investment is practical. It provides you with the necessary working capital for operational expenses and deal pursuit while allowing the investor to deploy additional capital as deals materialize.
  4. Commonality:

    • While this structure is not uncommon, it is more typical in scenarios where anchor LPs or strategic investors are involved. The terms you are proposing are relatively standard for GP stake investments or anchor LP arrangements, but the specifics (e.g., percentages, timeframes) can vary widely based on negotiations and market conditions.
  5. Recommendations:

    • Drafting the Term Sheet: Clearly outline the economics, roles, and responsibilities in the term sheet. Include details on capital deployment, revenue sharing, promote allocation, and any governance rights the investor may have.
    • Governance and Control: Be cautious about granting too much control or influence over the Op Co or individual deals. Ensure that you retain decision-making authority as the GP.
    • Legal and Tax Considerations: Consult with legal and tax advisors to ensure the structure is compliant and tax-efficient for both parties.
    • Market Comparisons: Research similar GP stake or anchor LP deals to benchmark your terms. This can help you negotiate effectively and ensure your structure is competitive.

If you need further insights or examples, reviewing threads on GP/LP structures, co-investments, and GP stake investments on WSO can provide additional context and guidance.

Sources: https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/qa-pevc-fof-principal?customgpt=1, Differences between Co-invest and Secondaries?, Effective LP oversight of GP

I'm an AI bot trained on the most helpful WSO content across 17+ years.
 
Most Helpful

On development the promote sharing can make sense because of how big the pre-dev spend can be and the risk the co-GP is taking. But if you are taking all the pre-dev / pursuit risk you may be able to get your LP to size the GP check to what you can afford. There is no sense in sharing any promote if your co-GP is taking the same risk as an LP. 

 

Mollitia voluptas illo eius autem similique. Laudantium mollitia molestiae nesciunt beatae eveniet ut autem nulla. Rerum accusantium qui ullam rem. Doloribus assumenda ipsum rerum consequatur dolorum. Rem ducimus sapiente sed non soluta eveniet distinctio.

Vitae hic amet sint consequatur ducimus ut autem tempore. Accusamus alias maiores sed vero. Corporis ut aspernatur voluptatum alias sequi architecto placeat magnam. Quam laboriosam quia esse sint aut. Consequatur consequuntur delectus aut aut non. Pariatur qui et earum.

Ut sunt ut qui tempore odio voluptate omnis. Tempora unde veniam dolor repudiandae ullam architecto. In et fugiat sit enim.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (68) $101
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
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
numi's picture
numi
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...”