Who doesn't love a politician with a plan, especially regarding affordable housing? We can't have this conversation without considering its impact on gentrification. Neighborhoods like Bedstuy and Flatbush are already dealing with this, and policies must go beyond producing housing. They must address the risks of displacement and cultural erosion while ensuring that long-time residents benefit rather than bear the development costs.
I'm happy to help with the event in January if you need someone to capture content. I own a couple of Canon cameras that I can use to film and take photos.
As a founder with a PE backer doing the growth buyout strategy, I think a big motivator for me (and the backer) is Expected Value.
The upside is lower (we're not chasing 100x) but the probability of success is higher (we're buying existing EBITDA). Founders and investors are realizing there is blue ocean, high IRR, and mispriced opportunity in between ultra high-risk potential unicorns and low-risk boring traditional PE targets.
I disagree with you about the lower upside in a **true** growth buyout, at least for the earliest stage investments that are about validating rather than scaling
My caveat is whether or not the "growth" serves outside of its "buyout." To use the parking lot example, if they are exclusively using their growth tools to add value to their acquisition, they are limited by the inefficiencies within their PortCos, growth capability of the PortCo, and availability of additional buyouts. A limited TAM.
If they offer their "growth" to companies to they do not own, their TAM expands but they lose their acquisition advantage.
Once we had validation on our growth tools, we spent a lot of time debating whether or not to ever offer them outside of a PortCo. We decided against it because we preferred the acquisition advantage to a larger TAM.
Who doesn't love a politician with a plan, especially regarding affordable housing? We can't have this conversation without considering its impact on gentrification. Neighborhoods like Bedstuy and Flatbush are already dealing with this, and policies must go beyond producing housing. They must address the risks of displacement and cultural erosion while ensuring that long-time residents benefit rather than bear the development costs.
I'm happy to help with the event in January if you need someone to capture content. I own a couple of Canon cameras that I can use to film and take photos.
awesome. I'll put you on the list... still working on details and will def be doing more than one event :)
The biggest driver of displacement is increasing rents. The biggest driver of rising rents is insufficient supply.
Count me in for wanting to make the abundance agenda happen! 🤝
on the list!
As a founder with a PE backer doing the growth buyout strategy, I think a big motivator for me (and the backer) is Expected Value.
The upside is lower (we're not chasing 100x) but the probability of success is higher (we're buying existing EBITDA). Founders and investors are realizing there is blue ocean, high IRR, and mispriced opportunity in between ultra high-risk potential unicorns and low-risk boring traditional PE targets.
I disagree with you about the lower upside in a **true** growth buyout, at least for the earliest stage investments that are about validating rather than scaling
https://x.com/yrechtman/status/1848803870555967673
I think you're generally right.
My caveat is whether or not the "growth" serves outside of its "buyout." To use the parking lot example, if they are exclusively using their growth tools to add value to their acquisition, they are limited by the inefficiencies within their PortCos, growth capability of the PortCo, and availability of additional buyouts. A limited TAM.
If they offer their "growth" to companies to they do not own, their TAM expands but they lose their acquisition advantage.
Once we had validation on our growth tools, we spent a lot of time debating whether or not to ever offer them outside of a PortCo. We decided against it because we preferred the acquisition advantage to a larger TAM.
Yes - own all the upside. TAM might be larger but potential profit pool may not be