Debt and Economies.

From time to time, we get data, and news, on debt, and how it is affecting country economies, corporations and individuals. Sometimes, with so much going on in terms of the impact of debt on corporations and individuals, the value of looking at debt's impact on country economies may not be obvious. Or perhaps, the impact of news from Dubai made you go "Wha?".

While economists may not always (!) be successful in demonstrating the interconnections between country economies, corporations and individuals, through neatly tied in, accurate and precise models, we still have a sense of how these interconnections affect us.

Say, a country's debt troubles affect the medium to long term rates it offers on government debt. If an industrial sector company, say in the infrastructure sector, has limited financing options, this impacts the internal hurdle rate that the CFO would set for the company's internal projects. This, in turn, would impact a division's ability to innovate and price products to its customers, which, in turn, could impact the sector's ability to service its individual consumers. One of the many possible outcomes- you, as a utilities consumer, end up paying exorbitant electricity charges for power served off an outdated grid that wouldn't let you leverage advances in renewable energy within your home.

You may argue that economies are complex systems, and practically every outcome could be termed an "unintended outcome", but that does not mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater. It pays to "watch" the macroeconomic world around us.

Lets look at the impact of debt with country economies on returns on long term government bonds. Here's an article that should make you think:
http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15016142

This is a quick review of recent perspectives on debt's impact on country economies to provide background on :
Japan:
1. Deflation:
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14966237
2. Managing Debt:
http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14972943

Dubai:
1. Sovereign debt and risk:
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15017205
2. Potential lessons from market reaction:
http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15016168

Speculation about an EU country default:
http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/economicsfocus/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15016124

Are there any other economies you believe that need a closer look? Economies in Asia or LATAM, perhaps? Why? What could be the potential impact?

What do you think?

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?

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.