What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Big12 Considering 1 Billion From Private Equity Investment Firm

PE investments usually benefit only the PE firm. They're really good at destroying what they buy to extract maximum return over a short term.

This is not true. I have worked closely with private equity for 20+ years, and in the large majority of cases when a private business sells to PE, it's a great outcome for both the business owner, the employees and the PE firm's investors.
 
Last edited:
After talking with a couple of connected folks in college athletics, a real possibility for many schools, including the CU AD, is to borrow money from its Endowment to help fund the required $20-30 mm in required payments to players.. CU has a $2+ billion Endowment. Of course, some of that Endowment is invested in fixed income. As long as the return on the on borrowed $$ yields a sufficient income stream to the Endowment, this could be a win-win. And, it could minimize or eliminate the need for private equity capital, at least in the short run.
 
After talking with a couple of connected folks in college athletics, a real possibility for many schools, including the CU AD, is to borrow money from its Endowment to help fund the required $20-30 mm in required payments to players.. CU has a $2+ billion Endowment. Of course, some of that Endowment is invested in fixed income. As long as the return on the on borrowed $$ yields a sufficient income stream to the Endowment, this could be a win-win. And, it could minimize or eliminate the need for private equity capital, at least in the short run.
Good investment, imo. We've seen how the excitement for the football program is affecting enrollment, diversity and the community.
 
Anyone who thinks a PE infusion that, at best, gets existing members closer to the B1G/ SEC for perhaps a couple of years is somehow going to lure FSU or Clemson into a long term Big XII arrangement... Well, please let me know what you're smoking, because I'd love to try it.
What do you think the money will be used for?
 
This is not true. I have worked closely with private equity for 20+ years, and in the large majority of cases when a private business sells to PE, it's a great outcome for both the business owner, the employees and the PE firm's investors.
LOL 😂

Ive worked for three companies that PE came into and worked with a 4th. Three were founder owner and one used to be Fortune 500. The employees got mostly ****ed in all 4 situations. One went completely out of business after PE discovered the founder knew what he was doing and they didnt. One is on the ropes still taking gut punches. The other two have had 100% turnover mostly by layoffs and have changed hands a couple of times. The founders however did great.

My experience was the PE folks slashed inventory, got rid of high paid high performers and staffing depth, replacements were paid under market so we churned a lot. PE demanded cash flow increases constantly. When the customer base started shrinking they fired most of the C Suite.
 
LOL 😂

Ive worked for three companies that PE came into and worked with a 4th. Three were founder owner and one used to be Fortune 500. The employees got mostly ****ed in all 4 situations. One went completely out of business after PE discovered the founder knew what he was doing and they didnt. One is on the ropes still taking gut punches. The other two have had 100% turnover mostly by layoffs and have changed hands a couple of times. The founders however did great.

My experience was the PE folks slashed inventory, got rid of high paid high performers and staffing depth, replacements were paid under market so we churned a lot. PE demanded cash flow increases constantly. When the customer base started shrinking they fired most of the C Suite.
n = 4.
 
What do you think the money will be used for?
Will differ by school. Not trying to lure FSU and Clemson, that's for damn sure. That's like throwing ones at a dancer who knows if she works one club over she'd be making thousands every day. (FSU and Clemson are looking to make SEC/ B1G money long term, not for a couple years until some PE fund runs out).
 
I wasn't hot after you. You have the best pitch I've heard so far. In the post you quoted, I even said "I'd back it." "It" being your investment thesis. It's a good one. I'd deploy money behind it.

I was hot after the idot that wrote the sh!tty misleading article.

If you're in the valley, your frame of reference is VC, not PE. VC hold times are also getting longer. Annoyingly long - I've got a fund that is literally in year 20, and they just told me it will be 1-2 years more before they're done. Their investment period ended fifteen years ago.

OTOH, we've made a good chunk of change from them, so they kinda bought themselves a long leash with good results. Funny how that works.
Oops, my bad! Thank you for replying again.

Indeed, that is my frame of reference mostly, though some PE too in unusual circumstances. When we've raised late rounds, those VCs were looking for a little faster turns. But it ebbs and flows, been here 30 years so lots of changes. Interesting you mention hold times are getting longer, Im helping an early phase company raise now and the demands are much tougher on real, proven revenue. If you have that seems like the time horizon should be shorter. (Not arguing at all, just interesting and I appreciate your perspective)
 
LOL 😂

Ive worked for three companies that PE came into and worked with a 4th. Three were founder owner and one used to be Fortune 500. The employees got mostly ****ed in all 4 situations. One went completely out of business after PE discovered the founder knew what he was doing and they didnt. One is on the ropes still taking gut punches. The other two have had 100% turnover mostly by layoffs and have changed hands a couple of times. The founders however did great.

My experience was the PE folks slashed inventory, got rid of high paid high performers and staffing depth, replacements were paid under market so we churned a lot. PE demanded cash flow increases constantly. When the customer base started shrinking they fired most of the C Suite.
Large parts of the biopharma industry have been built by PE.
 
Back
Top