Triangle 9 Real Estate, Inc.

Key economics

Preferred return

—

Hurdle rate

—

LP / GP split

—

GP catch-up

—

GP clawback

—

GP commitment

—

Diligence findings (18 · 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: 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.
• high
  Numeric inconsistency — Selling agents' commissions / Proceeds to CompanyCover-page offering table states a $750,000 selling-agent commission and $67,500,000 proceeds, but the Use of Proceeds table (100% sold) states $7,500,000 commissions and $67,470,000 net proceeds — the commission is off by 10x and the net proceeds figures disagree.
• 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 distribution-waterfall structure does the fund use?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
  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
  Defined-term defect — Steven Berg RSU grant attributed to 'Thomas'In the paragraph describing Steven Berg's employment arrangement, the RSU grant is attributed to 'Thomas' rather than Berg — a wrong-name substitution that appears in both the Executive Compensation and Related-Transactions sections.
• medium
  Document-quality defect — Audit vs. review reportThe accountant's report is titled 'INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REVIEW REPORT' yet its body repeatedly states the firm 'audited' the statements and 'conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB' — review and audit are distinct engagement types.
• medium
  Document-quality defect — Offering termination dateTwo conflicting offering-termination provisions: the cover says the offering terminates one year after qualification, while the next page fixes a hard termination date of April 15, 2023.
• medium
  Unfilled placeholder text — Convertible note conversion price clause (a)The Senior Secured Line of Credit Convertible Promissory Note conversion-price formula is missing the dollar figure for clause (a) — it reads 'the lesser of (a) per share' with no amount filled in.
• low
  Broken cross-reference — Plan of Distribution page referenceThe same 'Plan of Distribution' section is cross-referenced to inconsistent pages — page 13 on the cover and again later, but page 15 in the body — and the table of contents lists it at page 13.
• low
  Document-quality defect — Financial statement notes period headerThe recurring header on the Notes to Financial Statements reads 'FOR YEAR PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2021', but the reporting period is inception (June 16, 2021) through December 31, 2021 — June 30, 2021 is a wrong date.
• low
  Document-quality defect — Statement of Operations inception dateThe Statement of Operations column header labels inception as '(December 31, 2021)', but the company's inception date stated throughout the document is June 16, 2021.
• info
  Spelling / typo — Table of contents heading 'MANAGEMEN'Table-of-contents heading misspells 'MANAGEMENT' as 'MANAGEMEN'.
• info
  Spelling / typo — Table of contents heading 'PRUCHASES'Table-of-contents heading misspells 'PURCHASES' as 'PRUCHASES'.

DDQ readiness — 38% covered

5 answered · 0 partial · 8 gaps of 13 standard questions.