Transcript
1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,459
Walk me through the nightmare scenario when it
comes to organizational risk out of fund.
2
00:00:03,600 --> 00:00:06,240
You're marrying these institutions when you
make these first commitments.
3
00:00:06,240 --> 00:00:10,900
You're looking at 10, 12, and sometimes even
longer relationships in these underlying funds.
4
00:00:10,960 --> 00:00:15,615
And at the end of the day, organizations that
stayed together, and even if they were
5
00:00:15,615 --> 00:00:19,454
challenged or investments were challenged,
generally, you're getting your money back and a
6
00:00:19,454 --> 00:00:21,314
little return on those types of investments.
7
00:00:21,535 --> 00:00:26,494
And when you looked at things that did not work
out and really you had a loss of capital, it
8
00:00:26,494 --> 00:00:28,515
was usually an organizational breakup.
9
00:00:28,734 --> 00:00:33,149
What is the ideal endowment size or ideal check
size?
10
00:00:33,450 --> 00:00:40,409
To me, the ability to invest 10 to $30,000,000
in funds is probably a pretty good sweet spot
11
00:00:40,409 --> 00:00:43,335
to not limit you too much in what you can
invest in.
12
00:00:43,414 --> 00:00:48,695
If I've run the math on that in some scale of
doing, you know, $5 to $600,000,000 a year
13
00:00:48,695 --> 00:00:53,414
across alternatives and what that builds to,
then you assume you're kind of 40 to 50 percent
14
00:00:53,414 --> 00:00:53,994
of liquid.
15
00:00:54,215 --> 00:00:58,155
You get to somewhere north of 5,000,000,000 but
it's probably less than 10.
16
00:00:58,215 --> 00:01:02,899
The National Debt, Every investor that I talk
to says it's a big problem but not many
17
00:01:02,899 --> 00:01:06,439
investors actually are constantly thinking
about it and allocating their portfolio
18
00:01:06,579 --> 00:01:07,079
accordingly.
19
00:01:07,379 --> 00:01:10,519
How do you prepare for something like a
ballooning national debt.
20
00:01:19,025 --> 00:01:21,025
Mark, I've been really excited to chat.
21
00:01:21,025 --> 00:01:22,564
Welcome to 10X Capital podcast.
22
00:01:22,784 --> 00:01:23,745
Oh, thanks for having me.
23
00:01:23,745 --> 00:01:24,704
Really excited as well.
24
00:01:24,704 --> 00:01:28,680
So, Mark, you've worked at some of top
endowments, on the planet, University of Texas
25
00:01:28,680 --> 00:01:29,319
and Stanford.
26
00:01:29,319 --> 00:01:32,060
Tell me about your experience at University of
Texas.
27
00:01:32,120 --> 00:01:35,480
You know, the the big thing about the
experience for me at UTIMCO is that was my
28
00:01:35,480 --> 00:01:37,340
inroad into the investment world.
29
00:01:37,880 --> 00:01:41,400
Out of you know, I was mechanical engineer out
of undergrad and spent the better part of the
30
00:01:41,400 --> 00:01:46,001
nineties with in technology versus a consultant
and then with a startup company that kinda went
31
00:01:46,001 --> 00:01:50,397
through the full boom and bust of the dotcom
era and went back to business school from
32
00:01:50,397 --> 00:01:50,656
there.
33
00:01:50,656 --> 00:01:55,051
So I had predominantly a lot of technology
background and was really excited to try to get
34
00:01:55,051 --> 00:01:56,085
into the endowment world.
35
00:01:56,085 --> 00:02:01,060
I had sought out to pursue working with an
endowment and found my way to UTMCO.
36
00:02:01,120 --> 00:02:05,840
And I started there as a generalist in private
equity, tended to do a lot of our venture
37
00:02:05,840 --> 00:02:09,300
capital and emerging markets work, but did
touch all areas.
38
00:02:09,439 --> 00:02:11,860
It was a tremendous opportunity I got in my
30s.
39
00:02:11,974 --> 00:02:17,014
And I think it afforded me a lot of experience
and responsibilities and ability to form
40
00:02:17,014 --> 00:02:19,254
relationships that I probably wouldn't have
otherwise gotten to do.
41
00:02:19,254 --> 00:02:22,135
Is investment management a solo sport or is it
a team sport?
42
00:02:22,135 --> 00:02:23,835
In what way is it one or the other?
43
00:02:23,974 --> 00:02:25,655
It's definitely a team sport.
44
00:02:25,655 --> 00:02:29,509
One of the things I also learned there was the
need to surround yourself with really good
45
00:02:29,509 --> 00:02:30,009
people.
46
00:02:30,550 --> 00:02:34,949
And everyone that would add in building a team
and even the team that we had on the private
47
00:02:34,949 --> 00:02:37,210
equity side, we were all so complimentary.
48
00:02:37,270 --> 00:02:40,889
We all brought very different things to the
table that were really important.
49
00:02:41,185 --> 00:02:45,104
Just talking through the real estate example, I
didn't really have a lot of experience in real
50
00:02:45,104 --> 00:02:45,424
estate.
51
00:02:45,424 --> 00:02:50,784
I had a lot of experience in sourcing managers,
dealing through negotiations and structures and
52
00:02:50,784 --> 00:02:53,525
governance, assessing organizational dynamics.
53
00:02:53,905 --> 00:02:57,459
I really needed that person who knew real
estate through and through, and we went out and
54
00:02:57,459 --> 00:02:58,919
found that person to bring on.
55
00:02:59,299 --> 00:03:03,860
You mentioned that your CIO, Bruce, came in and
instituted a new asset class like real estate.
56
00:03:03,860 --> 00:03:08,580
Tell me how a large endowment like UTEMCO goes
about building a competency in a new asset
57
00:03:08,580 --> 00:03:09,080
class.
58
00:03:09,375 --> 00:03:14,574
My relationships in the private equity side
tended to have many of them that focused in
59
00:03:14,574 --> 00:03:19,375
real estate were in the smaller endowments, the
2 to $5,000,000,000 endowments where those
60
00:03:19,375 --> 00:03:21,715
teams would spread across the different asset
classes.
61
00:03:22,110 --> 00:03:22,989
So I leveraged them.
62
00:03:22,989 --> 00:03:24,909
You know, we went and met with many groups.
63
00:03:24,909 --> 00:03:25,549
What's worked?
64
00:03:25,549 --> 00:03:26,349
What hasn't worked?
65
00:03:26,349 --> 00:03:27,949
What are your challenges and pitfalls?
66
00:03:27,949 --> 00:03:30,610
So I learned a tremendous amount just through
that experience.
67
00:03:30,830 --> 00:03:34,189
You know, one, it's just sort of about building
and outlining the strategy that we wanted to
68
00:03:34,189 --> 00:03:34,634
do.
69
00:03:34,875 --> 00:03:37,114
2nd was also, you know, building the
relationships.
70
00:03:37,114 --> 00:03:41,674
I think we were fortunate at the time that a
lot of other institutions were a little more
71
00:03:41,674 --> 00:03:45,534
hamstrung, not able to be as active in real
estate.
72
00:03:45,594 --> 00:03:49,810
And so we were able to harness and and access
some of the, you know, best managers out there
73
00:03:49,810 --> 00:03:50,870
that had capacity.
74
00:03:51,169 --> 00:03:55,169
And we were also in a fortunate position of
people being knowledgeable that we were putting
75
00:03:55,169 --> 00:03:58,930
a lot of capital at work and a lot of the
spinouts, you know, folks that kinda had had
76
00:03:58,930 --> 00:04:03,415
lost the the golden handcuff, so to speak, as
the as the recession hit, that we're spinning
77
00:04:03,415 --> 00:04:04,775
out and investing from scratch.
78
00:04:04,775 --> 00:04:09,895
We took a lot of interest in that idea of not
having a backlog of troubled assets to manage,
79
00:04:09,895 --> 00:04:14,139
but with really good talent that we could be
pretty proactive and progressive in what we
80
00:04:14,139 --> 00:04:14,699
were building.
81
00:04:14,699 --> 00:04:17,019
Talk to me about Utemco's focus on spinouts.
82
00:04:17,019 --> 00:04:18,479
Why did you guys focus on spinouts?
83
00:04:18,620 --> 00:04:20,540
I'll bring this back to Venture a little bit.
84
00:04:20,540 --> 00:04:26,060
Early 2000s, FOIA was established, in Texas,
which which put us in a little bit of a back
85
00:04:26,060 --> 00:04:26,939
seat on the venture side.
86
00:04:26,939 --> 00:04:28,139
Freedom of information act.
87
00:04:28,139 --> 00:04:28,879
And that was
88
00:04:29,394 --> 00:04:30,754
Freedom of Information Act.
89
00:04:30,754 --> 00:04:34,995
And through that, we did work with a couple of
venture firms in Texas to work through the
90
00:04:34,995 --> 00:04:35,474
issues.
91
00:04:35,474 --> 00:04:39,954
We had a law established of what information
would be released, had it challenged and
92
00:04:39,954 --> 00:04:40,454
protected.
93
00:04:40,914 --> 00:04:42,115
So there was precedent set.
94
00:04:42,115 --> 00:04:45,639
And so we did a lot to improve, 1.
95
00:04:46,180 --> 00:04:50,819
But 2, we also recognized that we may not be
able to go after those top decile managers that
96
00:04:50,819 --> 00:04:53,939
we're gonna be might be a little more resistant
to the need.
97
00:04:53,939 --> 00:04:58,745
And in 2,005, 6, and 7, that was a time where
the world was sort of saying, if you can't
98
00:04:58,745 --> 00:05:00,425
invest with those groups, forget about it.
99
00:05:00,425 --> 00:05:04,185
Venture had a, I think the 10 year record was
probably negative at that point.
100
00:05:04,185 --> 00:05:07,064
And so we were challenged about what do we do
in Venture?
101
00:05:07,064 --> 00:05:08,105
Do we build it?
102
00:05:08,105 --> 00:05:09,725
Do we give up on it?
103
00:05:09,910 --> 00:05:13,750
And we did a deep dive in sort of assessing
the, you know, the opportunity set and what
104
00:05:13,750 --> 00:05:14,490
really worked.
105
00:05:14,629 --> 00:05:19,029
We found ourselves gravitating to sort of
capital efficiency, less tech risk, a little
106
00:05:19,029 --> 00:05:21,795
more market risk, and the types of investments
we would make.
107
00:05:21,875 --> 00:05:25,735
And we just said to Vic, build that next
generation portfolio.
108
00:05:26,595 --> 00:05:30,275
I gotta give credit, Linda Eckman was a big
part of that in in sort of helping establish
109
00:05:30,275 --> 00:05:31,814
that and build what we did.
110
00:05:32,035 --> 00:05:36,595
And through our work, we built that out and
focused on establishing relationships in a way
111
00:05:36,595 --> 00:05:40,509
that probably the market didn't really
appreciate or think was a reliable option.
112
00:05:40,509 --> 00:05:43,329
But, you know, fast forward and then, you know,
I think it's worked really well.
113
00:05:43,470 --> 00:05:47,069
When it came to the real estate asset class,
how long did it take for you guys to go from
114
00:05:47,069 --> 00:05:49,490
exploring investing to making your first
investment?
115
00:05:49,964 --> 00:05:51,725
We made our first investment pretty quickly.
116
00:05:51,725 --> 00:05:56,705
And I joke we had Bruce had hired somebody that
came in and had a short stay and left.
117
00:05:57,084 --> 00:06:01,324
And there was I mean, literally in his office,
there was a stack of PPMs that were about waist
118
00:06:01,324 --> 00:06:03,339
high of just things that hadn't gone through.
119
00:06:03,339 --> 00:06:05,259
And, you know, again, this, you know, where do
we go?
120
00:06:05,259 --> 00:06:05,819
How do we do it?
121
00:06:05,819 --> 00:06:08,779
Our first step was like, you know, let's just
go through these things and make sure there's
122
00:06:08,779 --> 00:06:11,099
nothing here that we're missing and understand
what's out there.
123
00:06:11,099 --> 00:06:12,319
What are the different opportunities?
124
00:06:12,379 --> 00:06:15,759
What are the different things that we might
assess while we're talking to other managers?
125
00:06:16,214 --> 00:06:19,495
And through that, we had one that sort of
really rose to the top.
126
00:06:19,495 --> 00:06:20,774
You know, I always like to joke it.
127
00:06:20,774 --> 00:06:25,254
It kinda read like the Jerry Maguire memo, the
the things we think that do not but do not say
128
00:06:25,254 --> 00:06:26,375
in the real estate industry.
129
00:06:26,375 --> 00:06:27,814
And I was just very intrigued by it.
130
00:06:27,814 --> 00:06:31,699
And we set up a call and quickly started
migrating to making that first investment.
131
00:06:31,860 --> 00:06:35,319
So that was one of our first active investments
and it was fairly quick.
132
00:06:35,620 --> 00:06:39,860
They had happened to be a group that had had
ambitions to raise a fund.
133
00:06:39,860 --> 00:06:44,295
The financial crisis hit and they were became
an operating partner under a very large hedge
134
00:06:44,295 --> 00:06:44,615
fund.
135
00:06:44,615 --> 00:06:48,455
They had a carve right right to allow investors
to ride alongside some of those investments
136
00:06:48,455 --> 00:06:49,014
that were happening.
137
00:06:49,014 --> 00:06:51,014
That hedge fund happened to also be a
relationship with ours.
138
00:06:51,014 --> 00:06:52,134
We had a lot of trust in them.
139
00:06:52,134 --> 00:06:56,055
And that was a way for us to begin dating, so
to speak, before we anchored them in their
140
00:06:56,055 --> 00:06:57,540
first institutional fund.
141
00:06:57,540 --> 00:07:01,639
Looking back at your endowment experience, what
are the pros and cons of anchoring a fund?
142
00:07:01,779 --> 00:07:05,800
A big piece of it for us is that we were at
pretty significant scale.
143
00:07:06,500 --> 00:07:11,779
And it was challenging to if you think about
this world where we gravitated to lower middle
144
00:07:11,779 --> 00:07:14,714
market, generally, and that was true across the
board.
145
00:07:14,714 --> 00:07:16,074
We liked early in seed stage.
146
00:07:16,074 --> 00:07:17,915
We liked lower middle market buyouts.
147
00:07:17,915 --> 00:07:19,935
We liked smaller real estate firms.
148
00:07:20,394 --> 00:07:24,634
And a lot of that was based on the particularly
in real estate that we felt like that was the
149
00:07:24,634 --> 00:07:26,154
universe of investment opportunity.
150
00:07:26,154 --> 00:07:28,470
That was the best place to be and place to
navigate.
151
00:07:29,089 --> 00:07:35,329
And for us to go find a, you know, $200,000,000
venture firm or a $100,000,000 buyout or a
152
00:07:35,329 --> 00:07:39,970
$300,000,000 real estate firm that was really
well established, it would be very difficult
153
00:07:39,970 --> 00:07:44,764
for us to go deploy, you know, 60, 70, maybe a
$100,000,000 in that asset.
154
00:07:44,764 --> 00:07:49,805
So it it leaned us to, if we can find really
great talent that we are could build a deep
155
00:07:49,805 --> 00:07:53,964
relationship with, get the time to really get
to know them, it was a meaningful way for us to
156
00:07:53,964 --> 00:07:57,105
step in in a more meaningful way to build that
exposure we needed.
157
00:07:57,289 --> 00:07:59,769
So I'd say that was probably a big piece of it.
158
00:07:59,769 --> 00:08:04,910
Secondly, you do have the ability to form
closer relationships.
159
00:08:04,970 --> 00:08:09,050
I think a big part of what's important in
creating alpha long term is that you have
160
00:08:09,050 --> 00:08:13,444
smaller, closer relationships that you really
get in the flow of understanding how they
161
00:08:13,444 --> 00:08:15,705
think, what they're seeing in the markets.
162
00:08:16,004 --> 00:08:19,605
Because of all these areas that we're
allocating to, the ability to kind of see when
163
00:08:19,605 --> 00:08:23,125
a dislocation happens, be close to it, then we
can sort of rifle shot and flex.
164
00:08:23,125 --> 00:08:24,905
I think that's a big value creator.
165
00:08:25,209 --> 00:08:28,810
And I think as an anchor and a core
relationship, you're able to have those
166
00:08:28,810 --> 00:08:29,689
relationships more.
167
00:08:29,689 --> 00:08:31,209
Do you believe in the liquid assets?
168
00:08:31,209 --> 00:08:33,789
Do you believe First Call Alpha exists, that
relationship?
169
00:08:33,929 --> 00:08:38,384
To jump to that, just to a third layer of this
anchoring is I do think you get your alignment
170
00:08:38,384 --> 00:08:39,584
is a big piece of it.
171
00:08:39,584 --> 00:08:43,524
And you're forming a relationship with a group
that is forming a new organization.
172
00:08:43,664 --> 00:08:45,664
It's likely their own their only product.
173
00:08:45,664 --> 00:08:47,105
They really need to get it right.
174
00:08:47,105 --> 00:08:49,985
It's a time that all of their eggs are sort of
in one basket.
175
00:08:49,985 --> 00:08:55,149
And that we think that that generally forms a
much better, closer alignment for us.
176
00:08:55,210 --> 00:08:57,529
The flip is you have to worry about
organizational risk.
177
00:08:57,529 --> 00:08:59,789
That's probably an elevated risk with the new
organization.
178
00:09:00,169 --> 00:09:03,769
And so if you could spend the time to really
get comfort with that, we think that ability to
179
00:09:03,769 --> 00:09:05,870
get that alignment is is really strong.
180
00:09:06,315 --> 00:09:11,674
To your question on first call alpha, I think
it's I'm a little mixed on that topic.
181
00:09:11,674 --> 00:09:17,294
Because I you know, one, I very much believe
that it's important to have true partnerships
182
00:09:17,434 --> 00:09:21,330
where all partners and LPs are treated equally.
183
00:09:21,470 --> 00:09:27,950
I don't like the idea of special economics for
an anchor or, Hey, we get the rights to this,
184
00:09:27,950 --> 00:09:29,710
your co investments versus the others.
185
00:09:29,710 --> 00:09:32,610
I just feel like you need to build that
community in close partnership.
186
00:09:33,324 --> 00:09:39,485
And so I feel like that first call alpha still
exists in that in that world where you still
187
00:09:39,485 --> 00:09:40,945
can have a very close relationship.
188
00:09:41,004 --> 00:09:42,684
You still are in constant dialogue.
189
00:09:42,684 --> 00:09:45,745
And maybe there are other LPs in the in the
group that don't do that.
190
00:09:46,070 --> 00:09:49,830
And if you have those close relationships, I do
think you're in the flow of seeing what they're
191
00:09:49,830 --> 00:09:53,610
seeing and that you're in a position to be
active when something happens.
192
00:09:53,990 --> 00:09:57,509
And I absolutely think that it's a a very
important way to be able to create that alpha.
193
00:09:57,509 --> 00:10:01,664
Just to play devil's advocate, shouldn't anchor
investors get preferred economics because they
194
00:10:01,664 --> 00:10:05,664
provide the opportunity for the fund to exist
and they provide opportunity for other LPs to
195
00:10:05,664 --> 00:10:08,085
go into an otherwise non existent fund?
196
00:10:08,465 --> 00:10:09,764
I get it for sure.
197
00:10:10,144 --> 00:10:15,820
And I do think there are reasons that for being
an early supporter of an organization that
198
00:10:15,820 --> 00:10:18,080
there are probably some benefits to be had.
199
00:10:18,139 --> 00:10:21,440
I think it's just you got to be very careful
about how that's set up.
200
00:10:21,899 --> 00:10:29,934
The flip is that I think really good LPs out
there really want the organization itself to be
201
00:10:29,934 --> 00:10:35,054
strong and very well positioned and raising the
right amount of capital for the right
202
00:10:35,054 --> 00:10:35,554
opportunity.
203
00:10:36,014 --> 00:10:41,054
And you can imagine if, in that scenario I said
earlier, if we were to come in and we're
204
00:10:41,054 --> 00:10:45,450
100,000,000 of a $300,000,000 fund and we say,
You know what?
205
00:10:45,450 --> 00:10:47,470
Why don't we should get half of your carry?
206
00:10:47,610 --> 00:10:51,529
All that's going to lead to is that either you
can't hire and retain the best talent to go
207
00:10:51,529 --> 00:10:56,330
execute because you're hamstrung versus that
other $300,000,000 fund executing the same
208
00:10:56,330 --> 00:10:56,830
strategy.
209
00:10:57,529 --> 00:11:01,745
Or you got to go raise twice as much as you
probably should have to be able to support that
210
00:11:01,745 --> 00:11:02,485
great team.
211
00:11:02,865 --> 00:11:04,945
But you're maybe missized your opportunity set.
212
00:11:04,945 --> 00:11:08,164
And so I think that's the dynamics we really
try to understand.
213
00:11:08,384 --> 00:11:09,445
There's always nuances.
214
00:11:09,585 --> 00:11:14,809
I'm a big believer in Goldilocks scenarios
where usually nothing in the extreme is the
215
00:11:14,809 --> 00:11:15,450
right answer.
216
00:11:15,450 --> 00:11:18,409
And there's always nuances of these hybrid
approaches to think about.
217
00:11:18,409 --> 00:11:22,909
At the end of the day, if there's some ability
to recognize the supporters, early supporters
218
00:11:23,049 --> 00:11:25,009
of a team, it's great.
219
00:11:25,009 --> 00:11:28,764
I think you just got to be really careful about
how that's implemented and and what that looks
220
00:11:28,764 --> 00:11:29,084
like.
221
00:11:29,084 --> 00:11:33,565
I had Mike Maples on the podcast, and he
reflected on his relationship with David
222
00:11:33,565 --> 00:11:33,964
Swenson.
223
00:11:33,964 --> 00:11:38,845
One of the things that he said is a nuanced
explanation of David Swenson's style, which was
224
00:11:38,845 --> 00:11:42,430
he made sure he got really good economic
arrangement for Yale.
225
00:11:42,430 --> 00:11:46,290
He made sure he got a really good economic
arrangement for other LPs.
226
00:11:46,509 --> 00:11:50,670
And he also made sure that the GPs were
sustainable, were happy, were growing, and they
227
00:11:50,670 --> 00:11:52,129
were partnering with the GPs.
228
00:11:52,430 --> 00:11:57,554
So he he was able to balance these three
seemingly conflicting dynamics.
229
00:11:57,774 --> 00:11:59,054
And it is extremely important.
230
00:11:59,054 --> 00:12:03,535
And I I do think it plays into the LP community
and our networks that we build and the groups
231
00:12:03,535 --> 00:12:09,240
that we share ideas and opportunities with as
you want those other like minded investors
232
00:12:09,240 --> 00:12:10,200
alongside you.
233
00:12:10,200 --> 00:12:13,899
And it could be look very different if you feel
like somebody might come in and want to
234
00:12:14,039 --> 00:12:17,820
stronghold their positions or maximize for
themselves over the collective.
235
00:12:17,959 --> 00:12:22,200
You had experience at UTIMCO and then later
Stanford Management Company, 2 of the most
236
00:12:22,200 --> 00:12:24,165
prolific endowments on the planet.
237
00:12:24,225 --> 00:12:26,225
You mentioned organizational risk.
238
00:12:26,225 --> 00:12:27,264
Can you unpack that?
239
00:12:27,264 --> 00:12:30,785
Walk me through the nightmare scenario when it
comes to organizational risk at a fund.
240
00:12:30,785 --> 00:12:35,205
And what are the actual effects to the
underlying investor, the underlying endowment?
241
00:12:35,264 --> 00:12:38,144
That's interesting because I've done work on
this in my in the past.
242
00:12:38,144 --> 00:12:42,409
And, one of the nice things of being at those
large institutions is there is a lot of private
243
00:12:42,409 --> 00:12:45,209
equity history to look back on and learn from.
244
00:12:45,209 --> 00:12:50,089
And it's an interesting dynamic around
organizations are you're marrying these
245
00:12:50,089 --> 00:12:51,929
institutions when you make these first
commitments.
246
00:12:51,929 --> 00:12:56,414
You're looking at 10, 12, and sometimes even
longer sort of relationships in these
247
00:12:56,414 --> 00:12:57,394
underlying funds.
248
00:12:58,254 --> 00:13:02,495
And at the end of the day, organizations that
stayed together, and even if they were
249
00:13:02,495 --> 00:13:06,335
challenged or investments were challenged,
generally, you're getting your money back and a
250
00:13:06,335 --> 00:13:08,434
little return on those types of investments.
251
00:13:08,679 --> 00:13:13,720
And when you looked at things that did not work
out and really you had a loss of capital, it
252
00:13:13,720 --> 00:13:15,740
was usually an organizational breakup.
253
00:13:15,879 --> 00:13:22,695
A big divorce, a split organization with nobody
really there to help maximize the return of
254
00:13:22,695 --> 00:13:23,195
capital.
255
00:13:23,415 --> 00:13:27,095
And so, I think that's the underlying risk we
think about, 1.
256
00:13:27,095 --> 00:13:32,855
And 2, in assessing that organizational risk, I
think it's all about, again, I love the
257
00:13:32,855 --> 00:13:36,235
alignment factor of early funds and what they
bring.
258
00:13:36,529 --> 00:13:41,090
But you have to think a lot about those the org
dynamics and and what they're assessing their
259
00:13:41,090 --> 00:13:42,290
ability to kinda stay together.
260
00:13:42,290 --> 00:13:44,070
Do they have the right incentives in place?
261
00:13:44,450 --> 00:13:46,149
Does the team have are they cohesive?
262
00:13:46,210 --> 00:13:47,570
Have they worked together before?
263
00:13:47,570 --> 00:13:49,830
If they haven't, are they coming from similar
cultures?
264
00:13:50,075 --> 00:13:51,754
Or are they coming from very different
cultures?
265
00:13:51,754 --> 00:13:53,214
We want to explore all those things.
266
00:13:53,595 --> 00:13:55,774
We've hit a world of remote working.
267
00:13:55,835 --> 00:14:00,634
And more and more often, you see partnerships
with partners in different towns and states and
268
00:14:00,634 --> 00:14:01,455
even countries.
269
00:14:01,595 --> 00:14:05,429
And that's kind of an interesting development
when you think about organizational risk.
270
00:14:05,429 --> 00:14:08,549
In the old world, when these partnerships would
come together, they kinda had to get married,
271
00:14:08,549 --> 00:14:08,790
right?
272
00:14:08,790 --> 00:14:12,970
They're coming together, they're moving to the
same towns, whatever they had to do, where now
273
00:14:13,350 --> 00:14:15,190
they can kinda test the waters, right?
274
00:14:15,190 --> 00:14:16,965
Like, hey, I don't really have to move yet.
275
00:14:16,965 --> 00:14:18,565
I can have this startup, this fund.
276
00:14:18,565 --> 00:14:21,044
And those are things that are like, how
committed are they?
277
00:14:21,044 --> 00:14:24,884
And we just really wanna understand that
because we don't wanna find ourselves 2 or 3
278
00:14:24,884 --> 00:14:29,125
years into a 12 to 14 year relationship and and
seeing those things breaking apart.
279
00:14:29,125 --> 00:14:29,605
Absolutely.
280
00:14:29,605 --> 00:14:34,659
I think a partnership is like any relationship,
and long distance relationships are inherently
281
00:14:34,720 --> 00:14:35,220
fragile.
282
00:14:35,919 --> 00:14:38,399
Congratulations, 10X Capital podcast listeners.
283
00:14:38,399 --> 00:14:42,019
We have officially cracked the top 10 rankings
in the United States for investing.
284
00:14:42,240 --> 00:14:46,415
Please help this podcast continue climbing up
in the rankings by clicking the follow button
285
00:14:46,415 --> 00:14:46,894
above.
286
00:14:46,894 --> 00:14:50,735
This helps our podcast rank higher, which
brings more revenue to the show and helps us
287
00:14:50,735 --> 00:14:54,674
bring in the very highest quality guests and to
produce the very highest quality content.
288
00:14:54,815 --> 00:14:56,035
Thank you for your support.
289
00:14:56,654 --> 00:15:02,240
When you look at the org operational risk, it's
not just a sunk cost of time, but also worse
290
00:15:02,240 --> 00:15:02,740
performing.
291
00:15:02,960 --> 00:15:07,759
Why does a fund that's only around for 1 fund
perform worse than a fund that's there for
292
00:15:07,759 --> 00:15:08,559
several funds?
293
00:15:08,559 --> 00:15:11,779
It's really about managing the assets and the
underlying investments.
294
00:15:12,235 --> 00:15:18,154
So in venture, you have this speaks across
different illiquid strategies but in venture,
295
00:15:18,154 --> 00:15:19,455
there's follow on decisions.
296
00:15:19,995 --> 00:15:22,894
There's protection positions that have to be
made.
297
00:15:23,274 --> 00:15:27,360
And it's just about having somebody that's
really keeping their eye on the ball and seeing
298
00:15:27,360 --> 00:15:28,339
what's really happening.
299
00:15:28,720 --> 00:15:32,799
And if you have partners that have kinda split
up and they've now tried to go start their own
300
00:15:32,799 --> 00:15:36,240
firms or maybe a start up company and they're
doing something different, they're just they're
301
00:15:36,240 --> 00:15:40,555
taking their eye off the ball and they may not
maximize the outcomes of of those underlying
302
00:15:40,555 --> 00:15:41,055
investments.
303
00:15:41,274 --> 00:15:43,035
So I think that's that's the real big one.
304
00:15:43,035 --> 00:15:47,355
So you went from UTIMCO, one of the top
endowments in the country, to another fairly
305
00:15:47,355 --> 00:15:49,274
elite endowment, Stanford Management Company.
306
00:15:49,274 --> 00:15:51,179
What were your first couple of years like at
Stanford?
307
00:15:51,339 --> 00:15:52,700
It was an amazing experience.
308
00:15:52,700 --> 00:15:57,019
I think the the big part of this and, you know,
the decision to leave is I did have you know,
309
00:15:57,019 --> 00:16:01,100
had a huge affinity for the University of Texas
and all that it represented and, you know, grew
310
00:16:01,100 --> 00:16:01,820
up in Texas.
311
00:16:01,820 --> 00:16:03,019
And my wife's from Austin.
312
00:16:03,019 --> 00:16:07,195
So there were a lot of reasons that I thought I
may never leave.
313
00:16:07,414 --> 00:16:10,154
And I always thought if I did, it would be one
of my alma maters.
314
00:16:10,214 --> 00:16:13,274
And when Stanford came along, it was
interesting.
315
00:16:13,334 --> 00:16:18,539
I mentioned earlier with UTMCO, my entire
career there was about first principles.
316
00:16:18,539 --> 00:16:19,899
We kinda all learned on the job.
317
00:16:19,899 --> 00:16:25,340
We didn't really have those outside influences
of education in the space to know what the
318
00:16:25,340 --> 00:16:26,059
right answers were.
319
00:16:26,059 --> 00:16:26,559
Right?
320
00:16:26,700 --> 00:16:31,500
Everything we did was was very bottoms up
oriented how we did it, where Stanford was kind
321
00:16:31,500 --> 00:16:33,185
of a totally opposite situation.
322
00:16:33,185 --> 00:16:37,925
I mean, here you have Rob Wallace who had an
amazing reputation.
323
00:16:38,625 --> 00:16:40,725
He trained under Swenson at Yale.
324
00:16:40,865 --> 00:16:45,845
David helped him find his first job and sat on
his board for a large family in Europe.
325
00:16:46,350 --> 00:16:49,230
And and Rob was recruiting people from all over
the industry.
326
00:16:49,230 --> 00:16:54,110
So folks that had worked at Yale, from Hilton
Foundation, from University of California, from
327
00:16:54,110 --> 00:16:54,610
Timco.
328
00:16:54,990 --> 00:16:57,330
There were some amazing people at Stanford
already.
329
00:16:57,789 --> 00:17:01,995
And that was really intriguing to me of of sort
of this thought of, like, hey.
330
00:17:01,995 --> 00:17:03,274
We've done what we thought made sense.
331
00:17:03,274 --> 00:17:06,174
Now we can go see how the sausage was made at
all these different institutions.
332
00:17:06,394 --> 00:17:11,355
You went from UTIMCO, where you were going into
new assets and Stanford that had more of an
333
00:17:11,355 --> 00:17:12,575
established program.
334
00:17:12,890 --> 00:17:18,330
When it comes to large pools of capital like
endowments, how often should ICs really
335
00:17:18,330 --> 00:17:20,430
recalibrate their portfolio's construction?
336
00:17:20,730 --> 00:17:24,970
1st, from an asset allocation perspective, I
think it's something you revisit, you know,
337
00:17:24,970 --> 00:17:25,470
annually.
338
00:17:25,610 --> 00:17:25,850
Right?
339
00:17:25,850 --> 00:17:31,154
You're always constantly running the your
models of long term assumptions by asset class
340
00:17:31,154 --> 00:17:32,055
and as you're building.
341
00:17:32,434 --> 00:17:34,914
And so I think you you wanna have this
consistent approach.
342
00:17:34,914 --> 00:17:35,234
Right?
343
00:17:35,234 --> 00:17:39,315
And, generally, the revamping of asset
allocation you're doing is probably pretty
344
00:17:39,315 --> 00:17:40,775
marginal, those subtle shifts.
345
00:17:41,179 --> 00:17:46,700
And at the same time, I think you're constantly
evaluating your processes, the investments
346
00:17:46,700 --> 00:17:50,779
you're making, and thinking about what are the
new challenges ahead and how should we be
347
00:17:50,779 --> 00:17:52,160
shifting our thinking, right?
348
00:17:52,460 --> 00:17:59,244
And a case in point was seeing both of those
institutions going from $20,000,000 when I
349
00:17:59,244 --> 00:18:05,805
joined to north of $40,000,000,000 Your ability
to invest changes and you have to constantly be
350
00:18:05,805 --> 00:18:08,759
evaluating, are there things that we need to do
similarly or different?
351
00:18:08,839 --> 00:18:12,119
You can probably always maintain those
principles in how you invest, but you may have
352
00:18:12,119 --> 00:18:14,700
to shift subtleness in how in that strategy.
353
00:18:15,400 --> 00:18:19,400
A lot of institutional and sometimes non
institutional investors will say they don't
354
00:18:19,400 --> 00:18:20,279
like to time the market.
355
00:18:20,279 --> 00:18:22,200
They don't like to play macro investors.
356
00:18:22,200 --> 00:18:27,164
Is that a naive approach, or do you really
wanna take the same portfolio allocation in any
357
00:18:27,164 --> 00:18:27,644
market?
358
00:18:27,644 --> 00:18:30,944
This gets back to my my Goldilocks theory of of
many things.
359
00:18:31,085 --> 00:18:36,605
I definitely do not believe in market timing
and too much macro tactical shifting, premise
360
00:18:36,605 --> 00:18:37,085
number 1.
361
00:18:37,085 --> 00:18:41,190
But 2, I think there's components of both that
can live together.
362
00:18:41,569 --> 00:18:46,529
We do our asset allocation work is relatively
high level.
363
00:18:46,529 --> 00:18:51,490
It's fixed income, how much fixed income, cash
are we going to have, how much private equity,
364
00:18:51,490 --> 00:18:55,585
how much venture, energy, real estate, credit,
public markets?
365
00:18:55,724 --> 00:18:59,404
Maybe you can get granular to public markets of
how much do we do in developed markets in the
366
00:18:59,404 --> 00:19:00,605
US and emerging markets?
367
00:19:00,605 --> 00:19:01,884
And what do we do in hedge funds?
368
00:19:01,884 --> 00:19:07,024
So that's this big picture that I think can
stay very consistent over the very long term.
369
00:19:07,789 --> 00:19:11,950
But when you take those buckets individually
and you're very bottom up in your approach at
370
00:19:11,950 --> 00:19:15,950
how you assess and find really good managers,
you're gonna have a lot of tactical things
371
00:19:15,950 --> 00:19:18,529
potentially happening within each of those
investment categories.
372
00:19:19,309 --> 00:19:23,335
And I do think it's often hard for us as
allocators to make those decisions.
373
00:19:23,335 --> 00:19:24,634
We're a little more removed.
374
00:19:24,694 --> 00:19:28,615
We wanna be knowledgeable of what's going on in
the industry and see it, but we may be a little
375
00:19:28,615 --> 00:19:31,274
more hamstrung to be able to execute as things
are happening.
376
00:19:31,654 --> 00:19:36,849
And so finding ways that you find amazing
managers, amazing talent, and that having the
377
00:19:36,849 --> 00:19:41,410
flexibility to migrate the market dynamics that
they're seeing, I think, allows you to do some
378
00:19:41,410 --> 00:19:44,950
tactical things without being too macro in your
in your orientation.
379
00:19:45,329 --> 00:19:49,865
From my conversations with a lot of limited
partners, one thing that seems to be highly
380
00:19:49,865 --> 00:19:52,585
rational is almost a countercyclical market
timing.
381
00:19:52,585 --> 00:19:55,065
So you invest as a general rule.
382
00:19:55,065 --> 00:19:59,964
There's obviously exceptions, but you invest
into assets that are out of favor for macro
383
00:20:00,105 --> 00:20:01,464
macro reasons or otherwise.
384
00:20:01,464 --> 00:20:06,190
That seems to be an interesting kind of
contrast with, of course, making sure that you
385
00:20:06,190 --> 00:20:11,070
have a conservative tilts to to your
liabilities and making sure that you're able to
386
00:20:11,070 --> 00:20:13,089
cover your liabilities as a first rule.
387
00:20:13,150 --> 00:20:17,784
I also believe in animal spirits quite a bit
and figuring out ways to protect yourselves in
388
00:20:17,784 --> 00:20:20,204
some ways of succumbing too much to emotion.
389
00:20:20,984 --> 00:20:25,065
And to me, that asset allocation methodology
helps that quite a bit.
390
00:20:25,065 --> 00:20:30,025
So if we're building these models in a little
more detached framework of how we want to
391
00:20:30,025 --> 00:20:32,410
build, they serve as amazing guardrails.
392
00:20:32,789 --> 00:20:38,710
And more times than not in my career, they have
moved you to make the right decisions at the
393
00:20:38,710 --> 00:20:41,910
right times without necessarily that macro
overlay.
394
00:20:41,910 --> 00:20:48,684
And what I mean by that is when the pandemic
hit and equity markets sort of, you know,
395
00:20:48,684 --> 00:20:53,404
unfolded, all of a sudden, here we are finding
ourselves well under under allocation, and our
396
00:20:53,404 --> 00:20:57,644
rebalancing efforts would allow us to put
dollars to work at the time that valuations
397
00:20:57,644 --> 00:20:59,184
were necessarily diminished.
398
00:20:59,650 --> 00:21:04,690
And similarly, on the upside, when markets are
really running, you'll, you know, you'll get
399
00:21:04,690 --> 00:21:05,650
out of your asset allocation.
400
00:21:05,650 --> 00:21:08,049
So you're rebalancing out of more frothy
investments.
401
00:21:08,049 --> 00:21:12,049
I think those are kinda nice little guardrails
that serve the ability to help you be a little
402
00:21:12,049 --> 00:21:14,444
more counter countercyclical in how you think
about things.
403
00:21:14,524 --> 00:21:19,565
So you're both riding it up, but also taking
some chips off the table and making sure that
404
00:21:19,565 --> 00:21:22,944
in the case of a retreat, you're balanced in an
appropriate way.
405
00:21:23,005 --> 00:21:28,304
So you've mentioned real estate a couple of
times at UTIMCO as well as Stanford Management
406
00:21:28,365 --> 00:21:28,865
Company.
407
00:21:29,480 --> 00:21:33,960
And a lot of your peers in endowment world
today will say that real estate, especially for
408
00:21:33,960 --> 00:21:37,000
nontaxable investors, is a dominated assets by
other asset classes.
409
00:21:37,000 --> 00:21:38,279
A lot of them aren't even allocating.
410
00:21:38,279 --> 00:21:40,059
We're allocating low single digits.
411
00:21:40,279 --> 00:21:44,619
What are your thoughts on real estate today,
specifically for tax exempt investors?
412
00:21:44,904 --> 00:21:46,204
I'm still a believer.
413
00:21:46,265 --> 00:21:50,365
And I think there are areas that maybe are more
challenged than not.
414
00:21:50,825 --> 00:21:53,565
And I think it probably depends on the size of
the institution.
415
00:21:53,865 --> 00:21:58,444
There's different levels of scale that I think
bring different opportunities or deteriorate,
416
00:21:58,585 --> 00:22:00,490
maybe delete the opportunity set.
417
00:22:00,490 --> 00:22:06,250
In my world, I think we are small and nimble
enough that we can play in a pretty wide
418
00:22:06,250 --> 00:22:06,750
universe.
419
00:22:07,369 --> 00:22:13,769
And we tend to do a lot of things that build
portfolios that are highly desirable by really
420
00:22:13,769 --> 00:22:14,589
large institutions.
421
00:22:15,210 --> 00:22:17,924
We We still see that as a pretty nice
opportunity set.
422
00:22:18,144 --> 00:22:21,585
And there's a lot of institutions you see out
there that probably bucket in every category.
423
00:22:21,585 --> 00:22:25,765
Like, we're gonna have this much in office and
retail and storage and multifamily.
424
00:22:26,144 --> 00:22:31,190
And I do think that's a pretty challenged
concept over the very long term.
425
00:22:31,250 --> 00:22:35,330
And and we do have pretty tactical approaches
to how we think about that real estate.
426
00:22:35,330 --> 00:22:38,289
There'll be times that we're gonna be heavy in
multifamily, and there might be times that
427
00:22:38,289 --> 00:22:41,650
we're gonna be very opportunistic and and
pursue different things just based on where we
428
00:22:41,650 --> 00:22:44,934
see value and how that compares to a lot of
what we're seeing in the both the public
429
00:22:44,934 --> 00:22:47,195
markets and just, you know, fundamentals and
pricing.
430
00:22:47,335 --> 00:22:51,335
We're still pretty supportive of it and think
it it fits an important role in the an overall
431
00:22:51,335 --> 00:22:51,835
portfolio.
432
00:22:52,695 --> 00:22:57,015
And then lastly, I would say it also brings
some level of yield that depending on the
433
00:22:57,015 --> 00:23:00,154
organization and their needs can can serve a
pretty important portion.
434
00:23:00,369 --> 00:23:02,950
Let's talk about something related, the
National Debt.
435
00:23:03,250 --> 00:23:08,049
Every investor that I talk to says it's a big
problem, but not many investors actually are
436
00:23:08,049 --> 00:23:11,109
constantly thinking about it and allocating
their portfolio accordingly.
437
00:23:11,409 --> 00:23:14,549
How do you prepare for something like a
ballooning National Debt?
438
00:23:15,224 --> 00:23:19,484
National debt and the level of debt is, you
know, definitely concerning.
439
00:23:19,625 --> 00:23:23,244
I do think it can often drive, you know, this
higher level of inflation.
440
00:23:23,545 --> 00:23:26,505
4 or 5 years ago, kind of inflation kind of
fell away.
441
00:23:26,505 --> 00:23:30,130
And I think that's a lot of the questions
around oil and gas, energy, and real state.
442
00:23:30,130 --> 00:23:32,470
You know, are they really even needed for
inflation protection?
443
00:23:32,529 --> 00:23:37,329
But I think that's reared its head in in recent
years, and that that national debt can play a
444
00:23:37,329 --> 00:23:39,669
big role in kind of what the future looks like
there.
445
00:23:39,890 --> 00:23:44,769
So I think that you have to incorporate that in
your thinking of what assets you want and which
446
00:23:44,769 --> 00:23:47,404
ones may be able to support you in a different
environment.
447
00:23:47,464 --> 00:23:51,304
The National Debt, I think doing a little bit
could go a long way.
448
00:23:51,304 --> 00:23:55,464
Having some exposure to Bitcoin, having some
exposure to real estate, a lot of people don't
449
00:23:55,464 --> 00:23:58,924
realize real estate is a really great hedge
because its prices go up.
450
00:23:59,069 --> 00:24:04,210
On a relative basis, real estate stays in the
same amount because it's a fixed scarce asset.
451
00:24:04,429 --> 00:24:07,309
So doing a couple of those things, I think,
could go a long way.
452
00:24:07,309 --> 00:24:12,365
After you account for and prepare for
inflation, you kind of, in a zen way, want to
453
00:24:12,365 --> 00:24:15,085
let it go because you can't affect national
policy.
454
00:24:15,085 --> 00:24:16,865
You can't affect what's going on in Washington.
455
00:24:16,924 --> 00:24:21,005
We talked a couple weeks ago, and you mentioned
that large endowments have both economies of
456
00:24:21,005 --> 00:24:23,184
scale as well as diseconomies of scale.
457
00:24:23,244 --> 00:24:25,825
What are the economies of scale endowments?
458
00:24:26,220 --> 00:24:30,619
True economies of scale that help you be the
better investor and and put you in a position
459
00:24:30,619 --> 00:24:31,599
to perform better.
460
00:24:31,980 --> 00:24:36,299
And at the same time, I think it has a narrow
window before there you begin to see
461
00:24:36,299 --> 00:24:36,799
diseconomies.
462
00:24:37,019 --> 00:24:37,339
Right?
463
00:24:37,339 --> 00:24:41,605
I heard some of your past speakers say things
that, you know, size is the enemy of your
464
00:24:41,605 --> 00:24:42,005
performance.
465
00:24:42,005 --> 00:24:44,744
And and I do think there's some truth to that
at a level.
466
00:24:45,045 --> 00:24:49,765
And so there's this notion of getting economy
at scale to a point and what's that ideal
467
00:24:49,765 --> 00:24:52,345
platform look like and when does it start to
deplete.
468
00:24:52,565 --> 00:24:56,609
And the economies of scale I think about are
the resources you can get.
469
00:24:56,609 --> 00:24:59,109
You can get great human resources, great
talent.
470
00:24:59,330 --> 00:25:05,090
You have the means to hire great talent, and
you have outreach and technical advances and
471
00:25:05,090 --> 00:25:06,450
support that you can utilize.
472
00:25:06,450 --> 00:25:06,609
Right?
473
00:25:06,609 --> 00:25:10,945
So different systems for research and
Bloomberg's and Team and all these different
474
00:25:10,945 --> 00:25:13,684
things that really put you in a better position
to do your work.
475
00:25:13,744 --> 00:25:19,445
Our job to do it well requires a very proactive
approach to sourcing.
476
00:25:19,664 --> 00:25:25,039
And that means a lot of boots on the ground, a
lot of meetings, identification of who are
477
00:25:25,039 --> 00:25:28,660
those managers that you really want to court
and potentially invest with.
478
00:25:29,119 --> 00:25:32,960
And without those resources and team, that's a
very difficult thing to do.
479
00:25:32,960 --> 00:25:36,320
A lot of groups that are sub REIT that don't
have those resources, they end up being a lot
480
00:25:36,320 --> 00:25:37,059
more reactive.
481
00:25:37,119 --> 00:25:41,345
It's the what finds their way to them, who's
having to market, who's probably been in the
482
00:25:41,345 --> 00:25:45,684
market for a long time, or they're doing things
on more of a regional basis.
483
00:25:45,904 --> 00:25:47,184
So the resources are important.
484
00:25:47,184 --> 00:25:48,164
You want to be proactive.
485
00:25:48,625 --> 00:25:50,484
And then secondly, I do think capital.
486
00:25:50,545 --> 00:25:53,539
You want your capital to be of size that you're
a meaningful partner.
487
00:25:53,680 --> 00:25:57,220
We talked a lot earlier about that sort of
first call alpha.
488
00:25:57,519 --> 00:25:59,220
And you want to be in that position.
489
00:25:59,519 --> 00:26:04,079
Having the capital to have the real
communications, close relationships, beyond
490
00:26:04,079 --> 00:26:08,365
LPACs, all those things that are gonna help you
know that manager a lot better are very
491
00:26:08,365 --> 00:26:10,544
important and part of that scale dynamic.
492
00:26:11,085 --> 00:26:16,204
On the diseconomies of scale, I think it's all
about kind of too much capital, right?
493
00:26:16,204 --> 00:26:21,799
We talked about the idea of I can't go do an
amazing 75 or $100,000,000 fund when at the end
494
00:26:21,799 --> 00:26:26,380
of the day your check size minimums are
$100,000,000 So you just get to a point where
495
00:26:26,440 --> 00:26:31,634
the universe of opportunity that you can invest
in becomes too small, and it can be at a
496
00:26:31,634 --> 00:26:34,375
detriment with that scale and a detriment to
performance.
497
00:26:34,835 --> 00:26:38,194
I do think, you know, sometimes you can have
agency issues creep in and, you know, you have
498
00:26:38,194 --> 00:26:41,255
a really large organization with many asset
classes.
499
00:26:41,394 --> 00:26:43,539
All of a sudden, you've got specialists coming
in.
500
00:26:43,539 --> 00:26:45,880
You have a lot of some silos that can form.
501
00:26:46,180 --> 00:26:50,039
And each of those silos might start building
their they might optimize their own portfolios
502
00:26:50,500 --> 00:26:53,559
and that may not be the optimal portfolio for
the full corpus.
503
00:26:53,859 --> 00:26:57,105
So again, I get to this Goldilocks scenario of
scale.
504
00:26:57,105 --> 00:26:58,404
There's a scale that's optimal.
505
00:26:58,865 --> 00:27:04,144
And if you kind of think about it, the PT boats
of the world are, they're really small and
506
00:27:04,144 --> 00:27:06,085
nimble, but they have a lot of vulnerabilities.
507
00:27:07,184 --> 00:27:11,430
The big aircraft carriers that are less nimble,
they're really hard to turn, they're hard to
508
00:27:11,430 --> 00:27:12,410
put in the right direction.
509
00:27:12,549 --> 00:27:15,369
And they're kind of limited to just being in
these big open waters.
510
00:27:15,830 --> 00:27:20,230
And flip is if you found the the battleship
that's fast and nimble and has lots of
511
00:27:20,230 --> 00:27:23,444
capabilities, that kind of feels like an ideal
world to try to operate in.
512
00:27:23,524 --> 00:27:23,764
You know,
513
00:27:23,764 --> 00:27:25,284
I'm gonna have to put you on a number.
514
00:27:25,284 --> 00:27:32,585
So whether it's asset size or check size, what
is the ideal endowment size or ideal check size
515
00:27:32,644 --> 00:27:36,609
that puts you in the position of getting the
most amount of calls while also being able to
516
00:27:36,609 --> 00:27:37,509
deploy effectively?
517
00:27:37,569 --> 00:27:38,529
I think it's a range.
518
00:27:38,529 --> 00:27:40,609
And I think it's still a little bit to be
determined.
519
00:27:40,609 --> 00:27:44,929
But I've always been enamored by the idea of
having a $5,000,000,000 to $10,000,000,000 pool
520
00:27:44,929 --> 00:27:47,750
of capital to invest in an optimal way.
521
00:27:48,130 --> 00:27:55,204
To me, the ability to invest $10,000,000 to
$30,000,000 in funds is probably a pretty good
522
00:27:55,204 --> 00:27:58,884
sweet spot to not limit you too much in what
you can invest in.
523
00:27:58,884 --> 00:28:01,044
Venture capital is probably the limiting
factor.
524
00:28:01,044 --> 00:28:03,224
And on occasion, you might drill lower.
525
00:28:03,444 --> 00:28:09,029
If I've run the math on that in, you know, some
scale of doing, you know, 5 to $600,000,000 a
526
00:28:09,029 --> 00:28:13,750
year across alternatives and what that builds
to, then you assume you're kind of 40 to 50
527
00:28:13,750 --> 00:28:14,649
percent of liquid.
528
00:28:14,789 --> 00:28:19,115
You get to, you know, somewhere north of
5,000,000,000, but it's probably less than 10.
529
00:28:19,255 --> 00:28:19,335
Yeah.
530
00:28:19,335 --> 00:28:24,295
I had Tom Lovera from IVP, and he said, it's
not that your fund size is your strategy.
531
00:28:24,295 --> 00:28:27,894
It's that your strategy is your fund size,
which is the right way to think about it, which
532
00:28:27,894 --> 00:28:32,315
is how many checks what's your check size, and
then what's your portfolio construction versus
533
00:28:32,849 --> 00:28:35,589
setting a arbitrary fund size and then coming
up with a strategy.
534
00:28:35,970 --> 00:28:38,309
So tell me about Capital Creek Partners.
535
00:28:38,529 --> 00:28:42,069
So Capital Creek Partners, we were formed in,
2018.
536
00:28:42,529 --> 00:28:46,214
And I like to say we're a little bit of a
hybrid between a multifamily office and an
537
00:28:46,214 --> 00:28:46,954
outsourced CIO.
538
00:28:47,015 --> 00:28:50,454
And what we are building and what we're solving
for is twofold.
539
00:28:50,454 --> 00:28:54,855
I think one is what we want to build towards
this ideal investment platform.
540
00:28:54,855 --> 00:28:57,563
And so we think a lot about what is the
platform end game, what do we want to build to,
541
00:28:57,563 --> 00:29:02,390
what are the platform end game, what do we
wanna build to, what are the resources we need
542
00:29:02,390 --> 00:29:03,049
for that.
543
00:29:03,269 --> 00:29:07,929
And so that's one component, is we want we want
to build an ideal investment platform.
544
00:29:08,470 --> 00:29:15,164
Secondly, in everything we think about on how
we charge our fees, how we're building our team
545
00:29:15,164 --> 00:29:18,065
is all sort of with that guide of like, here's
where we're headed.
546
00:29:18,365 --> 00:29:23,884
We want to bring that to smaller institutions
and and large families that otherwise can't be
547
00:29:23,884 --> 00:29:25,565
in an in that ideal situation.
548
00:29:25,565 --> 00:29:29,424
So we wanna have a collective that we're
providing that that resource to to.
549
00:29:29,910 --> 00:29:31,670
And really, it's about helping them compete.
550
00:29:31,670 --> 00:29:35,509
These families and smaller endowments and
foundations do amazing things.
551
00:29:35,509 --> 00:29:41,029
The groups that we work with are they're deep
into philanthropy, heavy education, heavy on
552
00:29:41,029 --> 00:29:46,355
homelessness, heavy in inner city youth, heavy
in, you know, no kill pet shelters.
553
00:29:46,355 --> 00:29:49,095
So they're doing all sorts of things that
they're passionate about.
554
00:29:49,315 --> 00:29:53,174
And we just think about, like, how do we help
them maximize their their capabilities?
555
00:29:53,394 --> 00:29:57,359
And and we wanna have that platform in place
that they can leverage and and sort of invest
556
00:29:57,359 --> 00:29:57,519
through.
557
00:29:57,519 --> 00:30:00,720
I know every LP is going to have a slightly
different construction.
558
00:30:00,720 --> 00:30:02,319
But what's your view on portfolio construction?
559
00:30:02,319 --> 00:30:03,940
What's the optimal portfolio construction?
560
00:30:04,160 --> 00:30:09,859
We believe every individual, every institution
has a different risk tolerance.
561
00:30:10,255 --> 00:30:15,775
They have different liquidity needs, they have
different uses of the capital, and they have
562
00:30:15,775 --> 00:30:17,315
different existing exposure.
563
00:30:17,694 --> 00:30:22,680
So just based on those things, you necessarily
have to maintain true customization for them.
564
00:30:22,840 --> 00:30:28,440
And so we think about how do we individualize
and customize each client's asset allocation
565
00:30:28,440 --> 00:30:28,940
framework.
566
00:30:29,559 --> 00:30:34,039
However, on the other end, we want to build,
again, this optimal investment platform and we
567
00:30:34,039 --> 00:30:35,420
want to invest as a firm.
568
00:30:35,615 --> 00:30:40,755
And so we are channeling everybody's needs into
a collective that we're investing out of.
569
00:30:40,894 --> 00:30:45,615
And so that means, you know, every year we do
asset allocation, we do their budgeting across,
570
00:30:45,615 --> 00:30:49,695
you know, particularly in alternatives and, you
know, venture and real estate, energy and
571
00:30:49,695 --> 00:30:52,269
buyouts and credit, and we aggregate all that.
572
00:30:52,269 --> 00:30:54,049
And that's what we're investing out of.
573
00:30:54,269 --> 00:31:00,750
Within each of those 5 series, we think about 3
to 5 funds annually, and then reserve about 8
574
00:31:00,750 --> 00:31:03,250
to 20% for co investments and directs.
575
00:31:03,315 --> 00:31:04,674
I mentioned everybody's different.
576
00:31:04,674 --> 00:31:08,294
And from an asset allocation level, they're all
very different.
577
00:31:08,674 --> 00:31:13,174
We do have kind of a sharp optimal model
portfolio that ends up looking pretty endowment
578
00:31:13,234 --> 00:31:15,974
like and probably where most of our families
gravitate.
579
00:31:16,514 --> 00:31:22,079
And what that looks like is generally, you
know, it's about 45% illiquid across those 5
580
00:31:22,079 --> 00:31:23,220
those 5 categories.
581
00:31:23,599 --> 00:31:27,539
We have a fairly heavy amount of fixed income,
upwards of 25%.
582
00:31:28,400 --> 00:31:31,279
Usually, they have a little bit more of a
liquidity needs.
583
00:31:31,279 --> 00:31:36,035
Their distributions might look like 4 to 5%,
But they may just have needs that come up that
584
00:31:36,035 --> 00:31:39,815
maybe endowments might be protected from having
to distribute on.
585
00:31:40,035 --> 00:31:43,075
So we do maintain a little bit level higher
level there.
586
00:31:43,075 --> 00:31:46,275
And that growth has also been because of just
where rates have gone.
587
00:31:46,275 --> 00:31:50,500
A lot of the dollars we would otherwise had in
hedge funds and the like, we've moved to fixed
588
00:31:50,500 --> 00:31:51,000
income.
589
00:31:51,140 --> 00:31:53,380
Where's your edge when it comes to sourcing
managers?
590
00:31:53,380 --> 00:31:54,820
Talk to me about how you source managers.
591
00:31:54,820 --> 00:31:57,059
I think there's 4 core pillars for us.
592
00:31:57,059 --> 00:32:00,920
This is probably helpful for a lot of the GPs
out there to think about how do they approach
593
00:32:01,299 --> 00:32:02,200
different institutions.
594
00:32:02,815 --> 00:32:06,494
And there's some of these avenues that just
won't be feasible for them and then others that
595
00:32:06,494 --> 00:32:08,174
are going to be right up their alley.
596
00:32:08,174 --> 00:32:14,095
So for us, the 4 pillars, we have the first
one, which I'd say probably is our highest
597
00:32:14,095 --> 00:32:16,115
probability, is rationalizing old
relationships.
598
00:32:16,414 --> 00:32:21,970
We've got folks here from UTIMCO and Stanford
and Texas Teachers and other family offices
599
00:32:21,970 --> 00:32:24,950
that have prior relationships they feel
strongly about.
600
00:32:25,409 --> 00:32:29,650
And as those groups come back to market, a good
number of them may find their way into our
601
00:32:29,650 --> 00:32:30,150
portfolio.
602
00:32:30,515 --> 00:32:32,134
So that's number 1.
603
00:32:32,195 --> 00:32:35,095
2, it's really about utilizing our network.
604
00:32:35,394 --> 00:32:38,674
We have tremendous relationships with many
great managers.
605
00:32:38,674 --> 00:32:42,755
And they are often our best source of
recommendations and referrals for other groups
606
00:32:42,755 --> 00:32:43,920
that we want to talk to.
607
00:32:44,240 --> 00:32:49,119
Similarly, we've been, you know, on LPACs and
different LP sort of communities over time and
608
00:32:49,119 --> 00:32:50,640
have a lot of close relationships there.
609
00:32:50,640 --> 00:32:53,940
We share ideas and, you know, gravitate to
certain investments together.
610
00:32:54,000 --> 00:32:58,974
So anywhere we can really sort of have that
comfort level of the relationship and some
611
00:32:58,974 --> 00:33:03,294
depth in in knowing these partners that are
either spinning out or getting referred to by
612
00:33:03,294 --> 00:33:07,714
groups that we know and trust, that's a really
important part of what we do.
613
00:33:08,015 --> 00:33:13,289
And then perhaps the one that's more
interesting for the new managers out there or
614
00:33:13,289 --> 00:33:18,829
groups that maybe don't have that connectivity
in the same way is we have grassroots approach.
615
00:33:18,890 --> 00:33:22,109
Sometimes we'll say, this is a strategy we're
really interested in.
616
00:33:22,170 --> 00:33:25,930
Let's go figure out, do the landscape of the
market, and really figure out who we wanna go
617
00:33:25,930 --> 00:33:26,265
target.
618
00:33:26,424 --> 00:33:31,144
That's where that's this big part of this
proactive approach to investing is that need.
619
00:33:31,144 --> 00:33:35,704
And we have managers in that bucket that I'd
say we've been courting for 18 to 24 months
620
00:33:35,704 --> 00:33:41,144
with the idea of when you come back and you're
gonna add that 1 or 2 new LPs to the mix, we'd
621
00:33:41,144 --> 00:33:42,240
love to be a part of that.
622
00:33:42,640 --> 00:33:44,319
And that's a big part of this grassroots.
623
00:33:44,319 --> 00:33:45,519
Or it's strategy driven.
624
00:33:45,519 --> 00:33:50,799
You know, we did one in e game you know, gaming
and esports a few years ago where we kinda
625
00:33:50,799 --> 00:33:54,400
landscape the full market and we said, let's go
figure out who the best in that market is.
626
00:33:54,400 --> 00:33:55,920
We don't care who's in the market today.
627
00:33:55,920 --> 00:33:58,984
We wanna make sure we know who it is so that
when they're they're in the market, we can
628
00:33:58,984 --> 00:33:59,724
approach them.
629
00:33:59,944 --> 00:34:01,224
So that's a little bit of the grassroots.
630
00:34:01,224 --> 00:34:03,404
And then the last piece is the over the
transom.
631
00:34:03,544 --> 00:34:07,404
And that's literally the and I coined that
phrase also from Lindell.
632
00:34:07,784 --> 00:34:12,239
This is the one where the BPM just finds its
way to you and they do direct outreach.
633
00:34:12,320 --> 00:34:15,599
And there's something about it that's really
unique and interesting that makes you wanna
634
00:34:15,599 --> 00:34:16,320
spend time on it.
635
00:34:16,320 --> 00:34:19,760
I talked about the real estate group that was
sort of the the Jerry Maguire memo.
636
00:34:19,760 --> 00:34:23,039
We spent time with them, really liked them, and
and we jumped on board.
637
00:34:23,039 --> 00:34:24,579
We're looking at a unique.
638
00:34:24,775 --> 00:34:26,954
And really great managers can come out of that.
639
00:34:27,175 --> 00:34:29,594
My case in point one is was Union Square.
640
00:34:29,735 --> 00:34:33,514
Again, Lindell, he that was a truly over the
transom, just something that was different.
641
00:34:34,054 --> 00:34:35,014
And Syndonna too.
642
00:34:35,014 --> 00:34:35,494
Right?
643
00:34:35,494 --> 00:34:35,815
No.
644
00:34:35,815 --> 00:34:41,349
Syndonna was, I got introduced to Michael Kim
through one of my classmates at Stanford
645
00:34:41,410 --> 00:34:41,890
originally.
646
00:34:41,890 --> 00:34:43,489
So that was the beginning of that relationship.
647
00:34:43,489 --> 00:34:44,449
So that was a little bit more It's
648
00:34:44,449 --> 00:34:45,969
not trying to take credit from you.
649
00:34:45,969 --> 00:34:46,469
Apologies.
650
00:34:47,969 --> 00:34:48,469
Yeah.
651
00:34:48,530 --> 00:34:48,930
No.
652
00:34:48,930 --> 00:34:49,730
You know, but yeah.
653
00:34:49,730 --> 00:34:50,369
Lyndall yeah.
654
00:34:50,369 --> 00:34:52,449
Lyndall closed it and, yeah, had nurtured that.
655
00:34:52,449 --> 00:34:53,090
Well, added that.
656
00:34:53,170 --> 00:34:57,535
Right when I was going to the right when I was
going over to the the real estate side.
657
00:34:57,535 --> 00:35:01,775
Well, Mark, I'm always afraid to show
favoritism, but I think what you've built and
658
00:35:01,775 --> 00:35:05,775
what you're continuing to scale is a very
unique platform in terms of endowment style,
659
00:35:05,775 --> 00:35:06,815
but at the right size.
660
00:35:06,815 --> 00:35:09,055
It's been an absolute pleasure to jump on the
podcast.
661
00:35:09,055 --> 00:35:10,079
Thank you for jumping on.
662
00:35:10,239 --> 00:35:10,400
Yeah.
663
00:35:10,400 --> 00:35:14,880
I really appreciate the opportunity and, really
enjoyed the conversation and, hope that we can
664
00:35:14,880 --> 00:35:16,180
do it again before tomorrow.
665
00:35:18,000 --> 00:35:22,099
For more ideas on how to raise venture capital
in this market, make sure to subscribe below.
