The Exchanges

Q Can I ask, as you said there, two decades, you've seen multiple booms and busts in the macro economy. How did that maybe impact your investing mentality today, especially in the current climate that we're in?

A Yeah, you know, I've been through two busts, and I say I have one more in me, so that's it. I can do one more, and then I'm out. And I can talk about each one, because they were very different. The first one was what we called the dot-com bust, and really, some of the learnings we came out of that with was two things. One is that you really needed time diversification in your investments. It used to be three to four years that people would invest a fund. It moved to something like 12 to 18 months. And then there wasn't a lot of sector diversification either. Some people just piled into just telecom companies and such, and that did not end well. So that was really the bubble. And of course, there were high valuations and there were no revenues and everything else that existed, but I think from an LP point of view, it was about time diversification and possibly sector diversification as well. After the global financial crisis, we also changed a little bit the way we invested, and that was really about J-curve mitigation and cash flows. At the time of the global financial crisis, people really didn't have cash coming back in their portfolios, and it was really problematic. So we really added secondaries and co-investments to our portfolio construction so that we could really reduce and shorten the J-curve for institutional investors. So those were kind of two things we did.

AI assessment note: “we really added secondaries and co-investments to our portfolio construction”

Q one next year, I'm like, okay, this is good. Um, I do want to discuss another element, though, that I don't know if we actually discussed it enough, and it's the element of kind of management fees and carry, and how that's approached. We see more and more two and a half, and then often kickers on carry. How do you think about and respond to that as an LP?

A So VC is not a two and 20 world. PE is, but a lot of VC isn't, and certainly when I say that, I really mean the top players. I mean, they, they have premium carry, and we are fortunate enough to have a portfolio of a lot of that. So the question is, when should somebody be able to get some type of premium fees and premium carry? I'll start with the fees first, so this two and 20. If you're raising a very small venture capital fund, having fees at two and a half percent is reasonable. I mean, you're building a team, you're building a platform. I mean, that would not be egregious, right? If you're raising your seventh, and now you're a billion dollar venture capital fund, and you're still at Two and a half percent, and you're getting a fee on fee, and you're not really adding to the team, or you're not building out a platform, because obviously the investors, the LPs, want people to be in this for the carry. That's the ups. That's really, you know, what you're working for, not to be walking around with a million dollar salary, which is in some ways where, you know, a lot of this world has gotten to, and so for fees, we're, we're okay with it, but it's about fund size and fund number, so how many different Funds are generating fees. For carry, I think you have to start at 20%. That is the base when you're getting started, and to have some type of premium carry after a return hurdl…

AI assessment note: “for fees, we're, we're okay with it, but it's about fund size”

Q I've been looking forward to this. I have said, Lisa, it is so nice to sit with an LP, and for me to be asking the questions, this is such a treat. So let's start with a little bit on you. How did you make your way into the LP world, and what was that starting point?

A I would love to tell you that it was a very meticulously thought-out career path, but in reality, this is a few decades ago. I was actually, I was working at the Federal Reserve Bank in San Francisco, and I was trying to move to Portland, Oregon. I have to admit, also, I was following a boyfriend up to Portland, Oregon. So you go into a recruiter in San Francisco, and you say, hey, um, I know you have an office in Portland. Is there any jobs up there? And they said, we think we have the perfect job for you right here in San Francisco at a fund of funds. I'm like, what? What's venture capital? What's a fund of funds? Um, so really, the rest is history. That was a, at a time where I think there was four fund of funds in the entire industry. So it was way early on, and nobody really knew how to even spell venture capital, or knew what I was doing. I told my mother that I was working for a mutual fund for non-public companies. I'm not even sure she understood that. But it's a great road, and that's really how it happened.

AI assessment note: “a recruiter in San Francisco... perfect job for you right here in San Francisco at a fund of funds”

Q Say we take the meeting, and we're in the meeting, and there's the pitch deck that they have. There's always a debate on whether you just go with the free-flowing conversation and talk about what you're doing, the fund, the structure without the deck, or the much more structured presentation. Where do you stand on the right way to take that conversation? What do you prefer?

A Yeah, if anybody in this room has ever tried to pitch to me, you know the answer here. I cannot go through a pitch deck. I just don't have, I don't have the capacity. I think I'm ADD. I don't know what it is. So I, I like to have a conversation. Now, I want you to point me to slides. I want to know the context. I want to try to understand certain things, but it's so hard to just go slide by slide, and I also have to pitch to potential LPs, given where we sit in the market, and I I'm the same way even when I'm pitching. I can kind of go through the introduction a little bit, and then I basically say, what do we want to drill down on? What do we want to focus on? What does this look like? Because to hear just the monotone or whatever it sounds like, the monotonous going through a pitch deck, it is hard. However, that's me. I think there are some places where they do want you to go through the pitch deck, and I will tell you, if you are now in the finalist presentation and you're presenting to a board or something like that, you probably are going through your slides.

AI assessment note: “I cannot go through a pitch deck. [...] I like to have a conversation.”

Q round. I do want to ask, you know, you've seen some of the best emerging fund managers really graduate in the U.S. and be the great funds that they are today. What advice and learnings do you have from watching them kind of graduate and mature for the maybe more micro generation, first generation of earlier stage managers in Europe in terms of that maturation from first fund to franchise?

A Yeah. Well, I think you really want to I mean, you could be a one-off fund and make a lot of money and maybe make a lot of money for your investors, but most institutions are looking for franchises. They're looking for the ability to continue to invest with a firm, and that, I think, really has to do with, are you building a firm to last for the future? And what that really means is to outlast yourself as well. And two pieces of this that has become really important over the years, in some ways because we had some bad behavior in our business, which most of you are probably familiar with, Is the culture, and how you think about the culture, and then how you think about the partnership dynamics, and the partnership dynamics are often about economics, but how you, as you set it up, you think about partners stepping up, what that means economically, what that means responsibility, and then stepping down and passing the baton, so the best firms really think about that a lot earlier than they need to, and maybe even at the beginning, and I wrote a paper, it's on our blog, on our website, we have a blog, and it's about Generational transitions, because it's important. It's now important in many firms in Europe. We've gone through many of it in the U.S., but it always seems to trip people up when you're doing that. And then culture. I mean, in the early days, it was really a bunch of …

AI assessment note: “two pieces of this that has become really important... Is the culture, and... partnership dynamics”

Q Can I ask, as you said there, two decades, you've seen multiple booms and busts in the macro economy. How did that maybe impact your investing mentality today, especially in the current climate that we're in?

A Yeah, you know, I've been through two busts, and I say I have one more in me, so that's it. I can do one more, and then I'm out. And I can talk about each one, because they were very different. The first one was what we called the dot-com bust, and really, some of the learnings we came out of that with was two things. One is that you really needed time diversification in your investments. It used to be three to four years that people would invest a fund. It moved to something like 12 to 18 months. And then there wasn't a lot of sector diversification either. Some people just piled into just telecom companies and such, and that did not end well. So that was really the bubble. And of course, there were high valuations and there were no revenues and everything else that existed, but I think from an LP point of view, it was about time diversification and possibly sector diversification as well. After the global financial crisis, we also changed a little bit the way we invested, and that was really about J-curve mitigation and cash flows. At the time of the global financial crisis, people really didn't have cash coming back in their portfolios, and it was really problematic. So we really added secondaries and co-investments to our portfolio construction so that we could really reduce and shorten the J-curve for institutional investors. So those were kind of two things we did.

AI assessment note: “we really added secondaries and co-investments to our portfolio construction”

Q want to kind of run today as a little bit of a process in the evaluation process itself. So if we start at the very beginning with the introduction itself, often, you know, for startups to venture, it's the warm intro. How does that look GP to LP, and what advice would you have in terms of getting in the room with the LP that you'd like to speak to?

A So a warm introduction is really the way to go. I get it if you're somewhere in some faraway place, and you have no contacts and stuff. There is always LinkedIn and some things like that, and there are a lot of meetups and different things, even being put on by things like the NVCA in the U.S. and the BVCA here in Invest Europe. But a warm introduction is the way to go, because I get so much inbound as Probably everybody does in this room, and if it comes from somebody I know, i.e. a warm introduction, I always answer. I either take a call or meeting, or I turn it over to someone on my team, so that is really the way to go.

AI assessment note: “a warm introduction is really the way to go”

Q In terms of the track, a lot of LPs actually that I've had on the 20 Minute VC say track's very important, but it's not everything. I've been through fundraising processes, and it's, It's very, very important, and it, in some cases, is everything. How do you think about the centricity of track for you and in your mind?

A Yeah, I'll say two things about that. One is that while we might invest in first-time funds, we won't invest in first-time investors, so there must be a track, and for me, it's kind of like the starting point. You know, you have to show us that you can make a return for institutional investors or for investors. Like, sometimes it might be your own money, but generally, it's, you know, some form of institutional investors. So that's, um, always very important, and, and, you know, you want to see net, you want to understand what it is, what's included, and what's excluded, but it really is important, but there's a quantitative piece of what we do, and there's a qualitative piece. I mean, you're, it's the same way if you're a GP, and it could be, and we've done this, it could be that we're evaluating and doing our compare and contrast, as we call it, and there might be a One of the best performers in our portfolio, and we don't re-up, and the numbers would tell you all day long, you know, with your eyes closed to do it, but there's other things going on, and it's the qualitative side. It's the team. It's the, maybe team dynamics. It's the strategy. It's, it's what you think about the future, because one of the things we're doing is what we call blind pool investing. Generally, you are committing to a fund, and there's nothing in it, And so you're looking at history, you're looking…

AI assessment note: “there must be a track, and for me, it's kind of like the starting point”

Q one next year, I'm like, okay, this is good. Um, I do want to discuss another element, though, that I don't know if we actually discussed it enough, and it's the element of kind of management fees and carry, and how that's approached. We see more and more two and a half, and then often kickers on carry. How do you think about and respond to that as an LP?

A So VC is not a two and 20 world. PE is, but a lot of VC isn't, and certainly when I say that, I really mean the top players. I mean, they, they have premium carry, and we are fortunate enough to have a portfolio of a lot of that. So the question is, when should somebody be able to get some type of premium fees and premium carry? I'll start with the fees first, so this two and 20. If you're raising a very small venture capital fund, having fees at two and a half percent is reasonable. I mean, you're building a team, you're building a platform. I mean, that would not be egregious, right? If you're raising your seventh, and now you're a billion dollar venture capital fund, and you're still at Two and a half percent, and you're getting a fee on fee, and you're not really adding to the team, or you're not building out a platform, because obviously the investors, the LPs, want people to be in this for the carry. That's the ups. That's really, you know, what you're working for, not to be walking around with a million dollar salary, which is in some ways where, you know, a lot of this world has gotten to, and so for fees, we're, we're okay with it, but it's about fund size and fund number, so how many different Funds are generating fees. For carry, I think you have to start at 20%. That is the base when you're getting started, and to have some type of premium carry after a return hurdl…

AI assessment note: “for fees, we're, we're okay with it, but it's about fund size”

Q In terms of the track, a lot of LPs actually that I've had on the 20 Minute VC say track's very important, but it's not everything. I've been through fundraising processes, and it's, It's very, very important, and it, in some cases, is everything. How do you think about the centricity of track for you and in your mind?

A Yeah, I'll say two things about that. One is that while we might invest in first-time funds, we won't invest in first-time investors, so there must be a track, and for me, it's kind of like the starting point. You know, you have to show us that you can make a return for institutional investors or for investors. Like, sometimes it might be your own money, but generally, it's, you know, some form of institutional investors. So that's, um, always very important, and, and, you know, you want to see net, you want to understand what it is, what's included, and what's excluded, but it really is important, but there's a quantitative piece of what we do, and there's a qualitative piece. I mean, you're, it's the same way if you're a GP, and it could be, and we've done this, it could be that we're evaluating and doing our compare and contrast, as we call it, and there might be a One of the best performers in our portfolio, and we don't re-up, and the numbers would tell you all day long, you know, with your eyes closed to do it, but there's other things going on, and it's the qualitative side. It's the team. It's the, maybe team dynamics. It's the strategy. It's, it's what you think about the future, because one of the things we're doing is what we call blind pool investing. Generally, you are committing to a fund, and there's nothing in it, And so you're looking at history, you're looking…

AI assessment note: “there must be a track, and for me, it's kind of like the starting point.”

Q I've been looking forward to this. I have said, Lisa, it is so nice to sit with an LP, and for me to be asking the questions, this is such a treat. So let's start with a little bit on you. How did you make your way into the LP world, and what was that starting point?

A I would love to tell you that it was a very meticulously thought-out career path, but in reality, this is a few decades ago. I was actually, I was working at the Federal Reserve Bank in San Francisco, and I was trying to move to Portland, Oregon. I have to admit, also, I was following a boyfriend up to Portland, Oregon. So you go into a recruiter in San Francisco, and you say, hey, um, I know you have an office in Portland. Is there any jobs up there? And they said, we think we have the perfect job for you right here in San Francisco at a fund of funds. I'm like, what? What's venture capital? What's a fund of funds? Um, so really, the rest is history. That was a, at a time where I think there was four fund of funds in the entire industry. So it was way early on, and nobody really knew how to even spell venture capital, or knew what I was doing. I told my mother that I was working for a mutual fund for non-public companies. I'm not even sure she understood that. But it's a great road, and that's really how it happened.

AI assessment note: “they said, we think we have the perfect job for you right here in San Francisco”

Q Say we take the meeting, and we're in the meeting, and there's the pitch deck that they have. There's always a debate on whether you just go with the free-flowing conversation and talk about what you're doing, the fund, the structure without the deck, or the much more structured presentation. Where do you stand on the right way to take that conversation? What do you prefer?

A Yeah, if anybody in this room has ever tried to pitch to me, you know the answer here. I cannot go through a pitch deck. I just don't have, I don't have the capacity. I think I'm ADD. I don't know what it is. So I, I like to have a conversation. Now, I want you to point me to slides. I want to know the context. I want to try to understand certain things, but it's so hard to just go slide by slide, and I also have to pitch to potential LPs, given where we sit in the market, and I I'm the same way even when I'm pitching. I can kind of go through the introduction a little bit, and then I basically say, what do we want to drill down on? What do we want to focus on? What does this look like? Because to hear just the monotone or whatever it sounds like, the monotonous going through a pitch deck, it is hard. However, that's me. I think there are some places where they do want you to go through the pitch deck, and I will tell you, if you are now in the finalist presentation and you're presenting to a board or something like that, you probably are going through your slides.

AI assessment note: “I cannot go through a pitch deck. I just don't have, I don't have”

Q I do want to touch on the secondaries element, though, because I was chatting to Sam El-Shah the other day, and he said the best micro-managers in the next decade will be able to really navigate the secondaries market, especially with the extension and privatization period. How do you think about in coming years for secondaries, the secondary market, and how early-stage managers should be navigating it?

A Well, way back in the day, it was thought of as a bad thing to, even for an LP to sell a position in a fund, and certainly for an entrepreneur to be selling shares of their company. I mean, that was an absolute no-no, and it really never happened. Now it's kind of par for the course. The early founders needed to get a little bit of liquidity, and so there are secondary transactions. We participate in that. We actually have a very active direct into company secondary activity. We buy LP positions, we'll buy company positions, and so I do think The seed managers need to figure out how to do that as well. You know, some of them will sell a strip of their portfolio, so sell a little piece of each company to a secondary buyer, and there's tons of secondary buyers, and they're global. There's a number in Europe, plenty in the UIS that will do that, so I would agree with that. I would absolutely agree with Semmel.

AI assessment note: “I do think The seed managers need to figure out how to do that as well.”

Q want to kind of run today as a little bit of a process in the evaluation process itself. So if we start at the very beginning with the introduction itself, often, you know, for startups to venture, it's the warm intro. How does that look GP to LP, and what advice would you have in terms of getting in the room with the LP that you'd like to speak to?

A So a warm introduction is really the way to go. I get it if you're somewhere in some faraway place, and you have no contacts and stuff. There is always LinkedIn and some things like that, and there are a lot of meetups and different things, even being put on by things like the NVCA in the U.S. and the BVCA here in Invest Europe. But a warm introduction is the way to go, because I get so much inbound as Probably everybody does in this room, and if it comes from somebody I know, i.e. a warm introduction, I always answer. I either take a call or meeting, or I turn it over to someone on my team, so that is really the way to go.

AI assessment note: “So a warm introduction is really the way to go.”

Q I do want to touch on the secondaries element, though, because I was chatting to Sam El-Shah the other day, and he said the best micro-managers in the next decade will be able to really navigate the secondaries market, especially with the extension and privatization period. How do you think about in coming years for secondaries, the secondary market, and how early-stage managers should be navigating it?

A Well, way back in the day, it was thought of as a bad thing to, even for an LP to sell a position in a fund, and certainly for an entrepreneur to be selling shares of their company. I mean, that was an absolute no-no, and it really never happened. Now it's kind of par for the course. The early founders needed to get a little bit of liquidity, and so there are secondary transactions. We participate in that. We actually have a very active direct into company secondary activity. We buy LP positions, we'll buy company positions, and so I do think The seed managers need to figure out how to do that as well. You know, some of them will sell a strip of their portfolio, so sell a little piece of each company to a secondary buyer, and there's tons of secondary buyers, and they're global. There's a number in Europe, plenty in the UIS that will do that, so I would agree with that. I would absolutely agree with Semmel.

AI assessment note: “seed managers need to figure out how to do that as well”

Q Can I ask, in the many decks that you see, where do you instantly like to drill down in terms of the presentation structure? Is it the track? Is it the vertical specialization? Is it the team itself? Where's your go-to straight away?

A I always try to figure out who they are and why they're different or uniquely qualified to do this, so I'm always trying to put things in context, so that's probably where I really drill down to really understand who the people are and what they're trying to do, so maybe people's strategy. The thing about performance is You need to have it. You need to have net. You need to have full track. You know, people need to understand what that is, but in a first meeting, which is obviously going to be different than a second meeting, so first meeting, it's more context. Who are you? What are you doing? Why is it different? Second meeting is generally drilling a little bit further into companies because you, you probably have some, a track record of some sort.

AI assessment note: “I always try to figure out who they are and why they're different”

Q Is it, or is it also about paper returns?

A This is one, one moment where I will agree with my, uh, good buddy Chris It is, you know, we call it the DPI. It's very important to show the ability to return capital back to the investors. So for some small seed funds, that might be what we call selling up the food chain, getting some liquidity through a secondary transaction, maybe not selling your whole position in a company, but certainly showing the ability to get capital back, and it is really important. And as I said, for us, even after the global financial crisis, we now think about that even in our fund of funds. We use secondaries, We had two fund-to-funds that didn't even have a J-curve. I mean, think about it. Venture capital only, fund-to-funds, no J-curve.

AI assessment note: “It's very important to show the ability to return capital back to the investors.”

Q Can I ask, in the many decks that you see, where do you instantly like to drill down in terms of the presentation structure? Is it the track? Is it the vertical specialization? Is it the team itself? Where's your go-to straight away?

A I always try to figure out who they are and why they're different or uniquely qualified to do this, so I'm always trying to put things in context, so that's probably where I really drill down to really understand who the people are and what they're trying to do, so maybe people's strategy. The thing about performance is You need to have it. You need to have net. You need to have full track. You know, people need to understand what that is, but in a first meeting, which is obviously going to be different than a second meeting, so first meeting, it's more context. Who are you? What are you doing? Why is it different? Second meeting is generally drilling a little bit further into companies because you, you probably have some, a track record of some sort.

AI assessment note: “really drill down to really understand who the people are and what they're trying to do”

Q Is it, or is it also about paper returns?

A This is one, one moment where I will agree with my, uh, good buddy Chris It is, you know, we call it the DPI. It's very important to show the ability to return capital back to the investors. So for some small seed funds, that might be what we call selling up the food chain, getting some liquidity through a secondary transaction, maybe not selling your whole position in a company, but certainly showing the ability to get capital back, and it is really important. And as I said, for us, even after the global financial crisis, we now think about that even in our fund of funds. We use secondaries, We had two fund-to-funds that didn't even have a J-curve. I mean, think about it. Venture capital only, fund-to-funds, no J-curve.

AI assessment note: “It's very important to show the ability to return capital back to the investors.”

Q round. I do want to ask, you know, you've seen some of the best emerging fund managers really graduate in the U.S. and be the great funds that they are today. What advice and learnings do you have from watching them kind of graduate and mature for the maybe more micro generation, first generation of earlier stage managers in Europe in terms of that maturation from first fund to franchise?

A Yeah. Well, I think you really want to I mean, you could be a one-off fund and make a lot of money and maybe make a lot of money for your investors, but most institutions are looking for franchises. They're looking for the ability to continue to invest with a firm, and that, I think, really has to do with, are you building a firm to last for the future? And what that really means is to outlast yourself as well. And two pieces of this that has become really important over the years, in some ways because we had some bad behavior in our business, which most of you are probably familiar with, Is the culture, and how you think about the culture, and then how you think about the partnership dynamics, and the partnership dynamics are often about economics, but how you, as you set it up, you think about partners stepping up, what that means economically, what that means responsibility, and then stepping down and passing the baton, so the best firms really think about that a lot earlier than they need to, and maybe even at the beginning, and I wrote a paper, it's on our blog, on our website, we have a blog, and it's about Generational transitions, because it's important. It's now important in many firms in Europe. We've gone through many of it in the U.S., but it always seems to trip people up when you're doing that. And then culture. I mean, in the early days, it was really a bunch of …

AI assessment note: “two pieces of this that has become really important... Is the culture, and... partnership dynamics”

Q A lot of GPs that I talked to today also talk about Capital calls, how frequently they do them, and actually how they communicate that back to their LP base. What advice would you have to LPs on the capital call cadence itself, and then also how you communicate that effectively?

A Well, we're an institutional investor, and a lot of the people that invest in us, we're a fund to fund, so our investors are generally institutional investors, and they're kind of used to capital calls. There is this notion of just-in-time capital calls, and what people are using now is really subscription finance. Where you're actually borrowing a little bit to help smooth those capital calls as well. But generally, there's a whole back office that's dealing with those cash flows that's absolutely separate from the people that are doing the investing, so they often don't even know until they get the quarterly numbers what the DPI and the TVPI and stuff like that is. It's different, obviously, if you're talking about family offices and high net worth. I mean, that cash is coming right from their checking account in some level, so it's a different animal.

AI assessment note: “what people are using now is really subscription finance. Where you're actually borrowing a little”

Q Can I ask, what does the reinvestment process look like, and how does that compare to the initial investment decision making?

A Yeah, it's very different, and I was thinking about this, actually somebody asked me this last night, about the time period from beginning to investment, and what that takes, and then the question is, do you know the person, is it a spin out, like, you know, you and your partner, we, we, we know you, versus somebody who we really don't know very well, so I'm going to talk about the latter. In the case, the most recent one I did, which now was probably a couple years ago, to be honest, it was, I think, exactly 13 months from the day that our partners first met them, and of course, they're, they're soft marketing, and first-time funds, I mean, often, it's 18 to 24 months, and you just have to expect that. I mean, that is very usual, and so we met him in February, and we ended up investing in March of the following year, so sometimes it takes It's that long. Sometimes it can be faster. It depends on the interaction and the knowledge, and it's very unusual for an LP, and if any of you have been in a meeting like this, any of the GPs in the room have been in a meeting like this, you are lucky, where you come in and you do a pitch, and the LP says, hallelujah, I've been looking just for what you're offering, right? I mean, that's not the way they work. We don't work that way. It's not check the box. We need this. So it's a long process. It's a get-to-know-you process. Re-ops Are a di…

AI assessment note: “Re-ops Are a different story. Now, what I always tell people is all things being equal”

Q A lot of GPs that I talked to today also talk about Capital calls, how frequently they do them, and actually how they communicate that back to their LP base. What advice would you have to LPs on the capital call cadence itself, and then also how you communicate that effectively?

A Well, we're an institutional investor, and a lot of the people that invest in us, we're a fund to fund, so our investors are generally institutional investors, and they're kind of used to capital calls. There is this notion of just-in-time capital calls, and what people are using now is really subscription finance. Where you're actually borrowing a little bit to help smooth those capital calls as well. But generally, there's a whole back office that's dealing with those cash flows that's absolutely separate from the people that are doing the investing, so they often don't even know until they get the quarterly numbers what the DPI and the TVPI and stuff like that is. It's different, obviously, if you're talking about family offices and high net worth. I mean, that cash is coming right from their checking account in some level, so it's a different animal.

AI assessment note: “our investors are generally institutional investors, and they're kind of used to capital calls.”

Q Can I ask, what does the reinvestment process look like, and how does that compare to the initial investment decision making?

A Yeah, it's very different, and I was thinking about this, actually somebody asked me this last night, about the time period from beginning to investment, and what that takes, and then the question is, do you know the person, is it a spin out, like, you know, you and your partner, we, we, we know you, versus somebody who we really don't know very well, so I'm going to talk about the latter. In the case, the most recent one I did, which now was probably a couple years ago, to be honest, it was, I think, exactly 13 months from the day that our partners first met them, and of course, they're, they're soft marketing, and first-time funds, I mean, often, it's 18 to 24 months, and you just have to expect that. I mean, that is very usual, and so we met him in February, and we ended up investing in March of the following year, so sometimes it takes It's that long. Sometimes it can be faster. It depends on the interaction and the knowledge, and it's very unusual for an LP, and if any of you have been in a meeting like this, any of the GPs in the room have been in a meeting like this, you are lucky, where you come in and you do a pitch, and the LP says, hallelujah, I've been looking just for what you're offering, right? I mean, that's not the way they work. We don't work that way. It's not check the box. We need this. So it's a long process. It's a get-to-know-you process. Re-ops Are a di…

AI assessment note: “Re-ops Are a different story. Now, what I always tell people is all things”