As litigation claims against portfolio companies have increased, so have accompanying claims asserted directly against funds (and their sponsors). Plaintiffs’ reasoning for including funds as defendants is no mystery: funds often have greater financial resources than the defendant portfolio company, particularly where the portfolio company is in distress, and thus represent the proverbial “deep pockets.” This is especially true where a liquidity event involving the portfolio company either recently occurred or is on the horizon. Liquidity events, which range from major portfolio company transactions to liquidation or reorganization, often lead to substantial returns for funds.
GP Disputes
The Portfolio Company Playbook – Chapter 3: Navigating Risk from Company Employee Claims
Another source of litigation risk for fund sponsors are claims brought by portfolio company employees. Sponsors should be aware of these risks, particularly when the portfolio company is in distress or is considering a sale or other transaction affecting the disposition of shares in the company. We have set forth below just a few examples of litigation that can be brought against the fund, sponsor, and board designees by portfolio company employees, likely triggering at least indemnity considerations (which need to be evaluated in connection with insurance and indemnity at the portfolio company level), and might also affect the value of the portfolio company and in turn the value of the fund’s assets.
Valuation in Times of Market Disruption
Valuation practices will continue to be the subject of disputes. Particularly in times of economic disruption and market volatility, buyers and sellers are more likely to have substantial differences of opinions on valuation, which often lead to the use of earn-outs and resulting post-closing disputes. Use of a cost basis…
The Portfolio Company Playbook – Chapter 2: Navigating Risk from Conflicts of Interest
Private funds frequently negotiate for special rights when making an investment in a portfolio company, such as the right to appoint one or more board directors, voting rights, and liquidation preferences. Fund sponsors often focus solely on the positive aspects of these special rights, such as increased control, without considering fully other implications. As the Peter Parker principle reminds us, with great power comes great responsibility. In the fund context, sponsors should remember the portfolio company corollary: with greater control comes greater exposure to liability.
The Portfolio Company Playbook – Chapter 1: A Fund Sponsor’s Guide to Navigating Risks, Conflicts, and Regulatory Concerns Arising from Portfolio Companies
Over the last few years, we have seen an uptick in litigation claims against sponsors and funds arising out of their interests in portfolio companies. A fund sponsor’s participation on a portfolio company board, in particular, is a risk factor for the entire investment structure (the GP, the Management Company, individual members of the GP and Management Company, and the Fund) due to conflicts of interest, whether real or perceived, and related competing fiduciary duties. There are, however, steps that fund sponsors can take to manage and reduce their risks. The first step is to develop a full understanding of where, and why, risks lie in the investment structure. With that understanding, sponsors can develop and implement practices to manage and reduce those risks.
Snap Judgment: Unicorns Under Pressure and Addressing Risks of Private Lawsuits
The recent IPOs of Snap, Inc. and Blue Apron indicate that while the IPO pipeline continues to flow, there may be a cautionary tale for “unicorns” – venture-backed companies with estimated valuations in excess of $1 billion.
After Snap went public in March, it posted a $2.2 billion loss in its first quarter, yielding a 20% same-day drop in stock price that erased much of the company’s gains since its IPO. A snapshot of Snap’s stock price shows the obvious risks faced by late-stage investors in unicorns. High valuations are not a guarantee of continued success, particularly where historical performance and profitability are lacking. Although one commentator recently asked: “Are Blue Apron and Snap the worst IPOs ever?”, there is plenty of time for those stock prices to recover, especially in the months after their insider lockup periods expire.