Pick how composites are weighted for you. Affects every score across the app.
Sponsored by PFG Capital·
The cascade above models the blended LP view. Click a class below to view per-class economics.
“Pine Financial Group, Inc. 100% 100% 100%”— PPM p. 29
“The Notes are non-negotiable and will be issued in the minimum amount of $25,000 and in any amount greater than $25,000. The Notes will be offered with minimum 60-month terms from the date of issue, with a fixed interest rate of 8%.”— PPM p. 27
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.
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.
MD&A states the target raise as $20,000,000, contradicting the $15,000,000 maximum offering amount stated on the cover and throughout the body.
“offering, on a 'best-efforts' basis up to $15,000,000 in principal amount (the 'Offering') ... The Company hopes to raise $20,000,000 in this Offering.”
In the 100% scenario the Total Use of Proceeds reads $14,400,000 but its components (14,700,000 + 250,000 + 50,000) sum to $15,000,000 and Net Proceeds is $15,000,000.
“Funding Real Estate Loans/Lending Activities 3 $ 23,500 $ 1,470,000 $ 3,710,000 $ 7,375,000 $ 11,000,000 $ 14,700,000 Working Capital 4 $ 500 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 100,000 $ 200,000 $ 250,000 Legal and Accounting $ 1,000 $ 5,000 $ 15,000 $ 25,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Total Use of Proceeds $ 25,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 3,750,000 $ 7,500,000 $ 11,250,000 $ 14,400,000”
Loans-funded amount is written with a decimal point ($3,685.231) where elsewhere the document states $3,685,231, producing a figure off by three orders of magnitude.
“As of this date, we have $3,685.231 loans funded.”
The cover states the Offering will continue for two (2) years, while the Plan of Distribution states it shall remain open for one year following the Qualification Date.
“shall continue for a period of two (2) years, unless further extended by the Officers of Issuer ... This Offering shall remain open for one year following the Qualification Date of this Offering.”
The Manager's lifetime origination track record is stated two different ways: 1,331 loans worth $375,250,000 in one section and 649 loans worth $124,881,950 in the bios section.
“To date Pine Financial has originated 1,331 loans worth $375,250,000.00. ... To date Pine Financial has originated 649 loans worth $124,881,950.00.”
The Index to Exhibits mis-numbers the second subscription agreement as '4,2' (comma instead of a period), breaking the 4.1 / 4.2 exhibit numbering sequence.
“4.1 Subscription Agreement* 4,2 Subscription Agreement*”
The officer table lists Kevin Amolsch as age 38, but the narrative immediately below states his age as 35.
“Kevin Amolsch 38 President, Treasurer, and CEO of Pine Financial Group, Inc. ... Kevin Amolsch, Age 35, Sole Principal and Owner of Pine Financial Group, Inc., Manager”
The financial-statement footnote header misspells 'ACCOUNTING' as 'ACOUNTING'.
“NOTE 1: SUMMARY OF ORGANIZATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACOUNTING POLICIES”
Questions a standard diligence questionnaire would ask that the PPM leaves unanswered.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
What allocators are saying. Diligence notes, open questions, attached scenarios.
Be the first allocator to leave a take.