Investment Committee Memo · Waterfalls
Jamestown Invest 1, LLC
Jamestown · Unknown · Vintage 2010
50
Waterfalls composite LP-favorability score (0–100)
87
LP take (absolute)
15
Pref quality
50
Fee drag
20
GP alignment
15
Timing risk
Key economics
- Preferred return
- —
- Hurdle rate
- —
- LP / GP split
- —
- GP catch-up
- —
- GP clawback
- —
- GP commitment
- —
Diligence findings (15 · 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 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.
- mediumDisposition Fee (1%) is taken above the waterfallA performance- or transaction-linked fee paid above the waterfall reaches the GP before the LP's distribution priorities run, eroding the pool the pref + return-of-capital draw from. Routine asset-management fees above the line are normal; a disposition/promote-flavored fee there is a leak worth pricing.
- mediumGP earns a promote but no tier returns LP capital firstThe waterfall pays the GP a promote/carry, yet none of the extracted tiers return the LP's contributed capital before that promote runs. Either the PPM omits a return-of-capital step or the extractor missed it — either way the distribution section is worth a read.
- mediumNumeric inconsistency — Principal Shareholders - directors/officers group countThe beneficial-ownership table labels the group as '(3 persons)' but then itemizes six named directors and executive officers.
- mediumUnfilled placeholder text — [ ], 2019Cover-page offering-circular date is an unfilled template token, indicating the document was not finalized before distribution.
- lowDocument-quality defect — 5,501,000 in cash (missing $ and broken sentence)A balance-sheet figure is stated without a dollar sign and runs into the next sentence with a comma instead of a period ('cash, For information').
- lowDocument-quality defect — Christoph A. Kahl / Christopher A. KahlThe same founder/chairman is named 'Christoph A. Kahl' in his management bio but 'Christopher A. Kahl' in the Shareholders Committee disclosure.
- lowNumeric inconsistency — Sponsor private-placement share count (86,550 vs 86,500)The number of shares purchased by the sponsor in the private placement is stated as 86,550 on the cover and elsewhere but as 86,500 in the Liquidity/Results sections.
- infoSpelling / typo — being declareGrammatical error in the Results of Operations section: 'being declare' should read 'being declared'.
DDQ readiness — 38% covered
5 answered · 1 partial · 7 gaps of 13 standard questions.