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.
“offering, on a 'best-efforts' basis up to $75,000,000 in principal amount (the 'Offering') of unsecured, non-convertible, fixed-rate promissory notes (the 'Notes') of PFG Fund V.”— PPM p. 2
“For organizing the Company, business plan development, putting together this Offering, initial capitalization, and other related services, the Manager of our Company has been awarded 100% of the LLC Interests in our Company.”— PPM p. 57
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.
Per-Note maximum broker/affiliate commission is stated as $550 in the cover-page offering summary but $700.00 in the Plan of Distribution commission table for the same $10,000 Note; only the $550 figure (5.5% of $10,000) reconciles to the stated 5.5% / $4,125,000 cap.
“Maximum broker & affiliate commissions and fees $ 550 ... Maximum broker and affiliate commissions and fees, $ 700.00”
Amendment No. 2's stated purpose says it provides 'updated financial data as of December 31, 2023,' but the same page bases the update on the Form 1-K 'for the year-end December 31, 2022' and is headed 'Reporting Date 12-31-2022' — inconsistent financial-data dates.
“Provide updated information consistent with the most issuer's most recent Form 1-K filing together with updated financial data as of December 31, 2023. ... This Offering Circular Amendment No. 2 incorporates updated information and financial data previously disclosed in the issuer's Form 1-K filing for the year-end December 31, 2022.”
The same prior-performance statistic is stated two different ways in back-to-back near-identical paragraphs on the Description of Business page: 26 properties out of 1,690 loans for a 1.54% default rate versus 39 properties out of 2143 loans for a 2.15% default rate.
“Pine Financial has only taken 26 properties, out of the 1,690 loans originated, back through foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure for a default rate of 1.54% ... Pine Financial has only taken 39 properties, out of the 2143 loans originated, back through foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure for a default rate of 2.15%”
Equity-template boilerplate refers to investors purchasing 'the Common Stock' in what is an offering of 8% Unsecured Promissory Notes, with no common stock being offered.
“the Offering Statement has been qualified by the Commission, the Company will accept tenders of funds to purchase the Common Stock.”
The document refers to 'the Company and the selling stockholders' although this is a primary Notes offering by the Company with no selling stockholders, indicating carried-over equity-offering language.
“to the Company and the selling stockholders for their use.”
Financial-statement column header reads 'Period Ended Dec. 30, 2022' — a logically wrong fiscal period-end (Dec 30) where the companion columns correctly read Dec. 31, 2021 and Dec. 31, 2020.
“Period Ended Dec. 30, 2022 Period Ended Dec. 31, 2021 Period Ended Dec. 31, 2020”
The Minnesota foreclosure cost range is stated as '$3,500 and $4,000' in one paragraph and '$3,500 and $4,500' in the parallel paragraph on the same/next page.
“the owner redemption period and will cost the company between $3,500 and $4,000 ... the owner redemption period and will cost the company between $3,500 and $4,500”
Headcount is stated as 'nine (9) full time employees, three (4) independent contractors and two (2) offices' (internally inconsistent: word 'three' with numeral '4'), contradicting 'three full time employees, three independent contractors and two offices' stated later in the same document.
“Financial Group, Inc has nine (9) full time employees, three (4) independent contractors and two (2) offices.”
Broken verb agreement in substantive fee-disclosure text: 'does not currently taking a management fee.'
“Pine Financial Group, Inc does not currently taking a management fee in connection with its management duties with Pine Investments.”
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.