Default
Score model

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

Sign in to save models →
Sign in

Red Mountain Ventures Limited Partnership

Sponsored by Red Mountain Resort·

Unknown· Other · 6 classes· ● Low· PPM v1· Updated 26d ago
2 data notes
Unusual structureUnscored: absolute lp take
Run the numbers
Composite
45.0
median 45 +0
Pref Return
LP Take (Base)
at 1.75× exit
GP Commit
0.0%
median 0.0% +0.0%
Min Investment
$1K
ticket size
Offering Size
$8M
target raise
Cascade · Distributions

Where each dollar goes

$875K
LP $875K · Fees $0 · GP $0
GROSS PROCEEDS$875KLPT1Return of Capital$500,000 · 57.1% of grossLPGPT4Residual Split (100% / 0%) · 42.9%Limited Partners · $375KGeneral Partner · $0pool fully distributed
Standard scenario · $500K equity · 5y hold · 1.75× exitRun your own cascade →
Class structure · 6 classes· viewing as Class C2 Units

How Red Mountain Ventures Limited Partnership divides the cap table

The cascade above is filtered to Class C2 Units. Reset to blended view.

Deal diligence15 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.

Numeric inconsistency — Residual Distribution example - Class D allocation denominator

High

In the Residual Distribution worked example the Class A/B/C/C2 allocations all divide by the stated Aggregate Participation Total of CDN$63,104,977, but the Class D allocation divides by a different figure (CDN$62,604,977), so the same total is stated two ways and the percentages cannot all be correct.

for an Aggregate Participation Total of CDN$63,104,977; (B) the Class A Units will be allocated 3.57% of the Residual Distribution (CDN$2,250,000/CDN$63,104,977 X 100%); ... and (F) the Class D Units will be allocated 15.85% of the Residual Distribution (CDN$10,000,000/CDN$62,604,977 X 100%)
PPM p.3295% confidence

Numeric inconsistency — Fiscal 2017 depreciation expense

Medium

Fiscal 2017 depreciation expense is stated as $635,882 in one paragraph and $653,882 in the immediately following paragraph on the same page; the audited Statement of Operations confirms $653,882, so the $635,882 figure is a transposition error.

Depreciation expense for fiscal 2017, was $635,882, a 5% decrease compared to $664,590 for fiscal 2016. ... The loss includes depreciation expense of $653,882, which is a non-cash item and therefore not a typical operating expense.
PPM p.2190% confidence

Defined-term defect — Offering Memorandum

Low

The document is captioned and consistently referred to as an 'Offering Circular', but the SIDIT discussion refers to 'the date of this Offering Memorandum', an inconsistent term for the same document.

As of the date of this Offering Memorandum, SIDIT has made a non-binding commitment to extend the maturity date of the SIDIT Credit Facility to April 18, 2024 and reduce the interest rate to 6%.
PPM p.2470% confidence

Numeric inconsistency — Jeff Busby - director tenure start date

Low

The directors table lists Jeff Busby's term of office as a director beginning 'June 2004', but his bio on the following page states he has served as a director 'since 2008'; the two start dates for the same fact conflict.

Jeff Busby Director June 2004 - Present ... Jeff Busby , has a served as a Director of the General Partner since 2008.
PPM p.2585% confidence

Unfilled placeholder text — _____ (cover-page offering circular date)

Low

The cover page carries an unfilled blank where the offering-circular date should appear.

PRELIMINARY OFFERING CIRCULAR DATED _____, 2017
PPM p.170% confidence

Unfilled placeholder text — _____ (estimated sale commencement date)

Low

The estimated date on which the sale of securities will commence is left as an unfilled blank line.

We currently estimate that the sale of the securities will commence on approximately _____________________.
PPM p.280% confidence

Spelling / typo — LIMTED

Info

The fund's own name is misspelled 'LIMTED PARTNERSHIP' (missing the 'I' in LIMITED) in the financial-statements cover heading.

RED MOUNTAIN VENTURES LIMTED PARTNERSHIP
PPM p.4390% confidence

Spelling / typo — RED MOUNTAN

Info

The fund's own name is misspelled 'RED MOUNTAN VENTURES' (missing the 'I' in MOUNTAIN) in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows heading.

RED MOUNTAN VENTURES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
PPM p.4690% 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 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 answered1 partial7 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?6 distribution tier(s) extracted; structure type not classified.Partial
  • What is the fund's investment strategy / asset class?UnknownAnswered
  • What is the fund's vintage year?Vintage 2017.Answered
  • What is the target offering size?Target offering of $8,000,000.Answered
  • What is the minimum LP investment?Minimum investment of $1,000.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

Fee scheduletaken before LP distributions

Total load 4.00%
Fee
Trigger
Basis
Rate
Platform Fee (StartEngine)
Per investor subscription through StartEngine.com
$50.00 per investor for hosting the Class D Unit offering on the StartEngine platform, plus a warrant to purchase Class D Units
0.00%
Escrow and Technology Services Fee (FundAmerica / Prime Trust)
Offering and closing administration
One-time escrow fee $500; $395 bad actor checks; $500/month service setup; $25/month escrow fee; $12.50/transaction accounting API; $2 per domestic AML check ($5 UK, up to $60 international); 0.0025% cash management fee; ACH $0.50, check $10, wire $15/$35 per fund transfer
0.00%
Credit Card Processing Fee
Credit card subscription payment
Approximately 4% of subscription amount if credit card payments are accepted, plus approximately 6% holding reserve for approximately 6 months
4.00%
General Partner Expense Reimbursement
Monthly, ongoing operations
Reimbursement of all costs and expenses incurred by the General Partner in operation of the business, including administrative, overhead, professional, technical, and advisory expenses, plus interest at the General Partner's banking rate on any advances
0.00%
Province Operating Agreement Fee
Annual gross revenue
1.3% of annual gross revenue payable to the Province of British Columbia for the right to use Crown land (current rate after terrain expansion; subject to potential increases up to 2% of gross revenue)
0.00%

Service providers3 gaps

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.

No threads yet. Be the first →

Reviews

No reviews yet

Be the first allocator to leave a take.

Funds you might also likesame Unknown