Investment Committee Memo · Waterfalls
Hall Structured Finance II, LLC
HALL Group · Unknown · Debt · Vintage 2008
57
Waterfalls composite LP-favorability score (0–100)
—
LP take (absolute)
85
Pref quality
90
Fee drag
28
GP alignment
25
Timing risk
Key economics
- Preferred return
- —
- Hurdle rate
- —
- LP / GP split
- —
- GP catch-up
- —
- GP clawback
- —
- GP commitment
- —
Diligence findings (12 · 4 high/critical)
- highDDQ 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.
- highDDQ 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.
- highDDQ 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.
- highDDQ 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.
- mediumDDQ 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.
- mediumDDQ 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.
- mediumDDQ 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.
- mediumDDQ 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.
- mediumSpelling / typo — Minimum Purchase Requirements sentenceBroken/garbled sentence in the minimum purchase requirements; 'at least four $20,000' is incomplete and nonsensical (the minimum is $20,000 in $5,000 increments).
- lowNumeric inconsistency — Ft. Lauderdale Bank Loan maximum amountThe same Ft. Lauderdale loan maximum is shown as '$27,926,00' (missing a digit) in the nine-month notes but '$27,926,000' in the year-end notes.
- infoSpelling / typo — it's Manager / underwriting principalsTwo errors in one sentence: 'it's Manager' should be possessive 'its Manager', and 'core underwriting principals' should be 'core underwriting principles'.
- infoSpelling / typo — less from $75 millionGrammatical error in distribution covenant risk factor: 'net equity to be less from $75 million' should read 'less than $75 million'.
DDQ readiness — 38% covered
5 answered · 0 partial · 8 gaps of 13 standard questions.