Multiple capital’s data has shown quite the opposite. Fund II can be raised purely on the premise that fund I’s raise was a success. It gets tricky where investors look at Fund III, then performance really counts. Thoughts?
Absolutely true that you can raise the second fund on early indicators. We’re doing that too, as we speak. It’s just that the majority of (institutional) LPs were talking to are asking the wrong questions entirely. Of course there is no DPI in a fund that’s 2 years and a few quarters old, and the tvpi is at best a questionable indicator of early success. The only thing that we ask for is that we’re judged on the quality of our actions and how those align with what we’ve been telling we wanted to do and are doing. That what I tried to bring across as the point of this post.
Multiple capital’s data has shown quite the opposite. Fund II can be raised purely on the premise that fund I’s raise was a success. It gets tricky where investors look at Fund III, then performance really counts. Thoughts?
Absolutely true that you can raise the second fund on early indicators. We’re doing that too, as we speak. It’s just that the majority of (institutional) LPs were talking to are asking the wrong questions entirely. Of course there is no DPI in a fund that’s 2 years and a few quarters old, and the tvpi is at best a questionable indicator of early success. The only thing that we ask for is that we’re judged on the quality of our actions and how those align with what we’ve been telling we wanted to do and are doing. That what I tried to bring across as the point of this post.
I hear you brother, that point was made well.