Gary Loveman, Harrah's Entertainment, was asked about how he would act if slowing economic conditions impact business despite his assertion that economic conditions would not really impact his business.
He said he had the leeway to adjust his planned capital spending (approx. $4BN) to meet debt commitments.
It was interesting to note that he would rather kill/ delay Capex than sell assets to meet commitments.
I did a quick mental check of this insight against his assessment that growth in the industry came from M&A for assets, and that the WACC was currently pretty high within the firm. It fit.
Later, I asked a panel of General Partners (GPs) how frequently, in their substantial experience of dealmaking and investing, did the GPs have such contingency planning (operations risk management, really) conversations with the portfolio company senior management? Did such conversations impact the outcomes of their investments?
The response, as I am beginning to expect from superb panelists, provided insights into GP operations.
On a tangent, a panelist was of the opinion that folks like Gary Loveman operate at a different level. As the one who raised the question, I was inclined to agree. What an insight into talent- all from a simple question put to a CEO!
The Usual Disclaimer: This is purely a knowledge sharing resource and I have been careful to protect panelist interests. Ethically, context is everything, and I will gladly retract anything that affects the parties mentioned. Call this my mini OpenCourseWare, if you will, where Open signifies life experiences.
Showing posts with label operations risk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label operations risk. Show all posts
Sunday, April 06, 2008
Monday, March 24, 2008
Conference Panel: Investing in India- The Maturation Process, whats next?
The amazing panel, drawing from PE, management consulting and IB firms emphasized that they are taking a long term view of the Indian market and are doing well thought out due diligence on deals to make the best decisions for the funds. Deals have been quite competitive and negotiated.
This approach raises a line of thought regarding the non-core (?) activities of a PE fund. Why am I calling them non-core? Well, most folks would say that the only core activity for GPs is to find good investments and fund them, the rest can go for a toss. Performance is the cornerstone of success. The "official" lore is that the high performing GPs do not really have to bother much about non-core activities.
This query on capital deployment and how much GPs think about it is still worth considering as it seems to be closely tied with fund raising. The response to the query by the GPs can be that they do not really care about capital deployment as they tap into their funds on an deal by deal basis. However, I am inclined to think the GPs have a sense of what the LPs are thinking of when LPs make investments in the PE funds. Sounds like business development, doesn't it?
Anyhow, non-core or otherwise, lets dig into some aspects of the PE business. How do the GPs:
1> Handle uneven deal flow?
2> Manage different relative risk levels across deals?
3> Manage different rates of returns on their deals?
4> Set LP expectations on deal flow and deal sizes, across business environments, while still keeping LPs on board?
What do you think?
From the LP point of view, How do LPs:
1> Manage cash (e.g. lack of predictability in drawdowns)?
2> Allocate capital, from the asset allocation policy and portfolio management point of view, between drawdowns, and for drawdowns?
What do you think?
This approach raises a line of thought regarding the non-core (?) activities of a PE fund. Why am I calling them non-core? Well, most folks would say that the only core activity for GPs is to find good investments and fund them, the rest can go for a toss. Performance is the cornerstone of success. The "official" lore is that the high performing GPs do not really have to bother much about non-core activities.
This query on capital deployment and how much GPs think about it is still worth considering as it seems to be closely tied with fund raising. The response to the query by the GPs can be that they do not really care about capital deployment as they tap into their funds on an deal by deal basis. However, I am inclined to think the GPs have a sense of what the LPs are thinking of when LPs make investments in the PE funds. Sounds like business development, doesn't it?
Anyhow, non-core or otherwise, lets dig into some aspects of the PE business. How do the GPs:
1> Handle uneven deal flow?
2> Manage different relative risk levels across deals?
3> Manage different rates of returns on their deals?
4> Set LP expectations on deal flow and deal sizes, across business environments, while still keeping LPs on board?
What do you think?
From the LP point of view, How do LPs:
1> Manage cash (e.g. lack of predictability in drawdowns)?
2> Allocate capital, from the asset allocation policy and portfolio management point of view, between drawdowns, and for drawdowns?
What do you think?
The Usual Disclaimer: This is purely a knowledge sharing resource and I have been careful to protect panelist interests. Ethically, context is everything, and I will gladly retract anything that affects the parties mentioned. Call this my mini OpenCourseWare, if you will, where Open signifies life experiences.
Conference Panel: Media & Entertainment in India
TATA Sky setup a nationwide support structure in India, flat. It is growing at a pace that is set to drive the company to leadership in satellite TV subscriber base.
How does a company manage operational decisionmaking, organization structure, core competencies, vendor relationships, training, and breakeven in such a context?
What do you think?
Given that India has over 250 MM cellphone screens, versus upto 50 MM in PC screens, how do service providers support the growth of applications and products for the cellphone screens? Does a Microsoft-Facebook dealmaking approach work in an Indian context?
What do you think?
1> India seems to have a lack of startup oriented risk-taking despite a large pool of enterpreneurs.
2> The Indian market does not have mature "competitive" technology clusters and mature financial players that support various stages of a company's lifecycle in a cluster.
3> Leaders from Microsoft India, pointed to a lack of expertise in business models.
This lack of business model innovation may be impeding a ramping up of local application/ product based activity. Would a Microsoft-Facebook type deal-making model- as a means for service providers to support cellphone market development- work in India?
What do you think?
How does a company manage operational decisionmaking, organization structure, core competencies, vendor relationships, training, and breakeven in such a context?
What do you think?
Given that India has over 250 MM cellphone screens, versus upto 50 MM in PC screens, how do service providers support the growth of applications and products for the cellphone screens? Does a Microsoft-Facebook dealmaking approach work in an Indian context?
What do you think?
1> India seems to have a lack of startup oriented risk-taking despite a large pool of enterpreneurs.
2> The Indian market does not have mature "competitive" technology clusters and mature financial players that support various stages of a company's lifecycle in a cluster.
3> Leaders from Microsoft India, pointed to a lack of expertise in business models.
This lack of business model innovation may be impeding a ramping up of local application/ product based activity. Would a Microsoft-Facebook type deal-making model- as a means for service providers to support cellphone market development- work in India?
What do you think?
The Usual Disclaimer: This is purely a knowledge sharing resource. Ethically, context is everything, and I will gladly retract anything that affects the parties mentioned. Call this my mini OpenCourseWare, if you will, where Open signifies life experiences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)