Waterfalls
Default
Score model

Pick how composites are weighted for you. Affects every score across the app.

Sign in to save models →
Sign in

Connect Invest III LLC

Sponsored by Connect Invest·

Unknown· Debt· LLC · 2 classes· ● Low· PPM v1· Updated 26d ago
6 data notes▶
Unscored: pref_qualityUnusual structureUnusual structureUnusual structureUnscored: absolute lp takeUnscored: pref quality
Run the numbers
Composite
50.0
median 35 +15
Pref Returnⓘ
—
—
LP Take (Base)ⓘ
—
median 42.6% · Other / Specialty
GP Commitⓘ
0.0%
median 0.0% +0.0%
Min Investment
$500
ticket size
Offering Size
$50M
target raise
Cascade · Distributions

Where each dollar goes

$875K
LP $850K · Fees $25K · GP $0
GROSS PROCEEDS$875KGPFFees to Manager$25,000 · 2.9% of grossLPT1Return of Capital$500,000 · 57.1% of grossLPGPT4Residual Split (100% / 0%) · 40.0%Limited Partners · $350KGeneral Partner · $0pool fully distributed
Standard scenario · $500K equity · 5y hold · 1.75× exitRun your own cascade →
Class structure · 2 classes

How Connect Invest III LLC divides the cap table

The cascade above models the blended LP view. Click a class below to view per-class economics.

Deal diligence19 findings · worst high

Automated checks across the fund's extracted PPM. Every finding is shown with the evidence it's based on — proven numbers or a verbatim quote and page.

Document quality

Drafting defects found in the PPM prose — numeric inconsistencies, broken cross-references, unfilled placeholders, and defined-term problems. Each is shown with the offending quote and its page.

Document-quality defect — Manager identification — I-Management Group LLC vs. Connect Invest Corp.

High

The cover page states the Company is 'externally managed by I-Management Group LLC,' but the body consistently identifies 'Connect Invest Corp.' as the Manager — these are two different legal entities, creating an ambiguity about who actually manages the fund.

“The Company is externally managed by I-Management Group LLC. [cover page] ... The Company is managed by Connect Invest Corp., while Ignite is managed by I-Management Group LLC [body p. 6]”
PPM p.197% confidence

Unfilled placeholder text — December __, 2027

High

Offering expiration date contains an unfilled blank day ('December __, 2027') shipped to investors in both the cover page and the Plan of Distribution.

“the earliest of (1) the date on which $50,000,000 in aggregate principal amount of the Notes, the Maximum Offering Amount, has been purchased, (2) December __, 2027, or (3) the date on which we terminate the Offering”
PPM p.1100% confidence

Numeric inconsistency — Loan maturity minimum — three months vs. six months

Medium

The Offering Circular Summary states real estate loan maturities range from three months to three years, but the Standard Terms section states six months to three years.

“maturities ranging from three months to three years [Summary p. 7] ... maturities ranging from six months to three years [Standard Terms p. 30]”
PPM p.795% confidence

Numeric inconsistency — Management fee — 1/12 of 1% monthly vs. 1.00% per annum calculated quarterly

Medium

The Manager Compensation section states the fee is 'one-twelfth (1/12) of 1%' of outstanding Notes each calendar month, implying a monthly calculation. Note 3 to the financial statements describes the same fee as '1.00% per annum... as of the last day of the calendar quarter or fiscal year' — a different calculation period and basis description.

“management fee equal to one-twelfth (1/12) of 1% of the aggregate principal amount of the Notes outstanding at the end of each calendar month [p. 45-46] ... Monthly fees will be equal to 1.00% per annum of the aggregate principal amount notes outstanding as of the last day of the calendar quarter or fiscal year for which the asset management fee is being calculated [Note 3, p. 54]”
PPM p.4590% confidence

Unfilled placeholder text — May __, 2025

Medium

Offering Circular cover page date is incomplete — day of month left as a blank placeholder.

“The date of this Offering Circular is May __, 2025”
PPM p.2100% confidence

Numeric inconsistency — 2022 Acquisition Loans dollar amount — '$198,086,900,00'

Low

The 2022 Acquisition Loans figure in the historical loan table is formatted '$198,086,900,00' — an extra comma renders the number unreadable and inconsistent with the formatting of surrounding figures.

“Acquisition Loans (1) $ 207,390,900 $ 198,086,900,00 $ 127,112,800.00”
PPM p.3498% confidence

Spelling / typo — We have has entered

Low

Doubled/garbled verb ('have has') in a material sentence describing the Servicing Agreement.

“We have has entered into a Servicing Agreement with Ignite, under which Ignite will service the real estate loans funded or otherwise acquired in whole or in part by the Company”
PPM p.7100% confidence

Spelling / typo — we have has provided

Low

Second instance of the same doubled/garbled verb ('have has') in a material sentence about loan-modification approval thresholds.

“provided that our approval is required for all waivers or modifications to the terms of the real estate loans for which we have has provided at least 51% of the funding.”
PPM p.7100% confidence

Spelling / typo — earlies maturity date

Info

Misspelling of 'earliest' as 'earlies' in the redemption plan section describing note priority.

“those Notes with the earlies maturity date will be redeemed first.”
PPM p.39100% confidence

Spelling / typo — inital

Info

Misspelling of 'initial' as 'inital' in substantive text describing the Class A-2 Note rollover election.

“unless the holder thereof elects to receive repayment at the inital maturity date.”
PPM p.2100% confidence

Spelling / typo — Jay Cunnigham

Info

Director name misspelled in the officer/director table ('Cunnigham') but spelled correctly ('Cunningham') in the bio paragraph immediately following.

“Jay Cunnigham [table] ... Jay Cunningham [bio text]”
PPM p.42100% confidence

Diligence gaps

Questions a standard diligence questionnaire would ask that the PPM leaves unanswered.

DDQ gap: Does the fund engage an independent auditor?

High

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: Does the fund have a GP clawback provision?

High

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?

High

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?

High

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: Does the fund use a third-party fund administrator?

Medium

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?

Medium

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: What distribution-waterfall structure does the fund use?

Medium

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: What is the GP's capital commitment (skin in the game)?

Medium

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.

90% confidence

DDQ readiness

How much of a standard institutional due-diligence questionnaire this fund's offering documents answer out of the box. Gaps are questions an allocator will ask directly.

38%
Coverage
5 answered0 partial8 gaps13 questions
Economics
  • What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?Gap
  • What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?Gap
  • Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?Gap
  • Does the fund have a GP clawback provision?Gap
  • What is the GP's capital commitment (skin in the game)?Gap
Structure
  • What distribution-waterfall structure does the fund use?Gap
  • What is the fund's investment strategy / asset class?Debt · UnknownAnswered
  • What is the fund's vintage year?Vintage 2025.Answered
  • What is the target offering size?Target offering of $50,000,000.Answered
  • What is the minimum LP investment?Minimum investment of $500.Answered
Fees & Expenses
  • Is the fund's fee schedule disclosed (management fee, etc.)?5 fee line item(s) extracted from the offering documents.Answered
Governance
  • Does the fund engage an independent auditor?Gap
  • Does the fund use a third-party fund administrator?Gap
Generate IC memo →

Fee scheduletaken before LP distributions

Total load 1.00%
Fee
Trigger
Basis
Rate
Management Fee
Monthly, in arrears, payable by the 10th calendar day of the subsequent month
1% per annum (1/12 of 1% per calendar month) of aggregate principal amount of Notes outstanding at end of each calendar month
1.00%
Loan Servicing Fee
Per loan originated/serviced
0.50% of the original principal amount of each real estate loan; paid by borrowers to Ignite Funding, LLC; subject to adjustment to reflect market conditions
0.00%
Early Redemption Fee
Noteholder elects early redemption prior to maturity
Greater of (1) 0.5% of then-outstanding principal amount multiplied by the number of calendar quarters (or pro-rated portion) remaining until maturity, or (2) $25.00 per Note; applies only to voluntary early redemption under the Noteholder Redemption Plan
0.00%
Selling Commission
Note sale
No selling commissions; offered on best-efforts basis by company officers without compensation by commission
0.00%
Collection Agency Fee
Borrower loan default; referral to third-party collection agency
Up to 6% of recoveries obtained on defaulted loans referred to a third-party collection agency, plus legal fees and transaction fees associated with payment processing; discretionary, incurred only in default/collection scenarios
0.00%

Service providers3 gaps

Provider network →
Legal Counsel
Gap
Not disclosed
No independent counsel named for investors. Common in small syndications where Manager and Fund share counsel — reduces independence. Verify during diligence.
Auditor
Gap
Not disclosed
Audit intent not stated in PPM. Ask the sponsor: will the fund be audited, by whom, and on what frequency?
Fund Administrator
Gap
Not disclosed
No third-party fund administrator referenced. Manager likely handles admin internally — common for <$10M raises but reduces independence.
Placement Agent
OK
No placement agent engaged
No placement agent engaged. Direct placement by Manager — no placement fees eat your invested capital.

Community threads0 active

What allocators are saying. Diligence notes, open questions, attached scenarios.

⚛ RSSStart a thread →
No threads yet. Be the first →

Reviews

No reviews yet

Be the first allocator to leave a take.

Funds you might also likesame Unknown

Jamestown Invest 1, LLC
Jamestown
—
2010
87%
49.7
Auor Capital Fund V LLC
Auor Capital
—
2018
—
50.6
Red Oak Capital Intermediate Income Fund, LLC
Red Oak Capital
Debt
2015
—
50.9
Tuscan Gardens Secured Income Fund LLC
Tuscan Gardens
—
2015
—
48.8
Property Income Trust LLC
Mascia Development
—
2018
90%
48.6