RODIN GLOBAL PROPERTY TRUST, INC.

Key economics

Preferred return

—

Hurdle rate

—

LP / GP split

—

GP catch-up

—

GP clawback

—

GP commitment

—

Diligence findings (16 · 5 high/critical)

• high
  DDQ 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.
• high
  DDQ 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.
• high
  DDQ gap: Is the fund's fee schedule disclosed (management fee, etc.)?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Fees & Expenses). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• high
  DDQ 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.
• high
  DDQ 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.
• medium
  DDQ 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.
• medium
  DDQ 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.
• medium
  DDQ 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.
• medium
  DDQ gap: What is the target offering size?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.
• medium
  Unfilled placeholder text — [•] execution date / unfilled template tokensOperative text ships with unfilled [•] placeholders for the execution date, formation date, the Partnership's specified office and registered agent address, and throughout Exhibit A's contribution/interest figures.
• low
  Broken cross-reference — Section 8.5(c)(1)Section 8.5(c)(iii) refers to 'the affidavit required by Section 8.5(c)(1)', but the subsections of 8.5(c) are enumerated with roman numerals (i)-(iv), so there is no '(1)'.
• low
  DDQ gap: What is the minimum LP investment?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.
• low
  Document-quality defect — Independent Directors definition — missing numeralThe Independent Directors definition omits a number: 'service as a director or trustee of more than REITs organized by the Sponsor' is missing the threshold count after 'more than'.
• low
  Document-quality defect — Sponsor definition — duplicated clause '(vii)'The Sponsor definition labels two consecutive clauses '(vii)'; the second should be '(viii)', leaving the list mis-enumerated.
• low
  Unfilled placeholder text — [ ] office and registered agentSection 2.2 leaves the Partnership's specified office and registered agent as empty bracketed blanks ('[ ]' and '[ , Delaware]') in operative text rather than completed values.
• info
  Spelling / typo — accessible / assessableSection 8.5(b) reads 'fully paid and accessible REIT Shares' where the standard term — and the Agreement's own usage in Section 4.5(b) — is 'fully paid and non-assessable'.

DDQ readiness — 15% covered

2 answered · 1 partial · 10 gaps of 13 standard questions.