Caltier Fund I LP

Key economics

Preferred return

—

Hurdle rate

—

LP / GP split

—

GP catch-up

—

GP clawback

—

GP commitment

—

Diligence findings (15 · 6 high/critical)

• high
  DDQ gap: Does the fund engage an independent auditor?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Governance). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• high
  DDQ gap: Does the fund have a GP clawback provision?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• high
  DDQ gap: What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• high
  DDQ gap: What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• high
  Document-quality defect — Forbix loan maturity date predates originationThe Forbix loan is described as entered into on November 16, 2021, but its stated maturity date of May 15, 2021 precedes the origination date by six months, a logically impossible date.
• high
  Unfilled placeholder text — commencement date blankSales commencement date left as an unfilled blank line in the body text, indicating the document was not finalized before distribution.
• medium
  DDQ gap: Does the fund use a third-party fund administrator?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Governance). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• medium
  DDQ gap: Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• medium
  DDQ gap: What distribution-waterfall structure does the fund use?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Structure). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• medium
  DDQ gap: What is the GP's capital commitment (skin in the game)?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• medium
  Numeric inconsistency — emerging growth company revenue thresholdThe annual revenue threshold for losing emerging growth company status is stated as '$1.07 billion' on page 6 but restated as '$1 billion' in a near-identical paragraph on page 7.
• medium
  Numeric inconsistency — Net Assets as of June 30, 2022 column mismatchThe Statement of Changes in Net Assets shows NET ASSETS AS OF JUNE 30, 2022 as $1,053,501 in the Total column but $1,053,901 in the Member Interests column — a $400 discrepancy within the same table row.
• medium
  Numeric inconsistency — total offering expensesCover page footnote (2) states offering expenses are estimated at $9.54 million for a fully-subscribed offering, but the Use of Proceeds section states estimated offering expenses of $10,800,000 for the same scenario.
• medium
  Spelling / typo — $72,0000,000The maximum offering amount is misprinted as '$72,0000,000' (with an extra zero) instead of '$72,000,000' in the Use of Proceeds narrative.
• low
  Numeric inconsistency — 325 vs 375 7th AvenueAudited financial Note 5 refers to the condominium as '375 7th Avenue' but the property address is consistently stated as '325 7th Avenue' throughout the rest of the Offering Circular.

DDQ readiness — 38% covered

5 answered · 0 partial · 8 gaps of 13 standard questions.