@AlbertBridgeCap Private Equity doesn't pay the implicit tax of being public:
No 10-Q, 8-K requirements
No Conflict Minerals Attestation
No Say-on-Pay votes
No ISS/Glass-Lewis lackey opining on ESG disclosures
No Sarbanes Oxley
No PR firm to respond to annual "top paid CEO's" story
@newsreader1314 The "hands off" management style worked pretty well for 20+ years, though. Didn't market a DBS like Danaher, but the results were better.
@MeasureTwiceMNY The benefit of all that conservatism is that it keeps assets in the portfolio. Which makes more money for the AUM business model.
Even as a fiduciary, the financial incentives to hoard assets are hard to ignore.
@moseskagan Leaving *is* fighting. The other side won't be reasoned out of their anti-capitalist positions. They will only change policies if they lose the money funding their ambitions.
@johnarnold I think all public charities -- private foundations, DAFs, whatever -- should be required to distribute 10% of assets each year.
Having foundations that last forever and have inevitable mission drift over time isn't good.
@besttrousers@gbenga_ajilore@JosephPolitano@IrvingSwisher The ending of DEI across the country.
Ending mandates & subsidies (virtue signals rather than $$) leads to fewer non-economic purchases. Same reason EV sales went down after subsidies ended.
@HarryStebbings@DavidGeorge83 Staying private avoids the implicit public company taxes:
10-Q, 8-K's
Conflict Minerals Attestation
CD&A and Say-on-Pay
ISS/Glass-Lewis lackey opining on ESG disclosures
Sarbanes Oxley
PR firm to respond to annual "top paid CEO's" story
@profplum99 gets it. His latest essay (blog post? substack? I never know what to call them) should be required reading for anyone more interested in solutions rather than just arguing.
https://t.co/bb5DkA5uNW