It's easy for a General Partner (GP) to be a good partner when markets are strong and profitable. A GP's true character, integrity, and alignment with Limited Partners (LPs) are only tested when a downturn forces difficult conversations about shrinking profits and unmet expectations.
The market's liquidity crisis is driven by a fundamental disagreement. Limited Partners (LPs) suspect that long-held assets are overvalued, while General Partners (GPs) refuse to sell at a discount, fearing it will damage their track record (IRR/MOIC) and future fundraising ability. This creates a deadlock.
Limited Partners (LPs) value fund managers who are willing to listen and internalize market feedback, even if they ultimately follow their own strategy. This openness is a key positive signal, while a refusal to listen is a major red flag that often appears early in the relationship.
In a distressed scenario, simply asserting seniority as a junior capital provider is ineffective. You cannot force the majority owner and management team, whom you've just told are worthless, to run the business for your benefit. The only viable path is to renegotiate and realign incentives for all parties to work towards a recovery together.
To predict the future health of a partnership, intentionally have difficult conversations before any investment is made. If you can't productively disagree or discuss serious problems before you're formally linked, it's highly unlikely you'll be able to do so when the stakes are higher post-investment.
Venture capital returns materialize over a decade, making short-term outputs like markups unreliable 'mirages.' Sequoia instead measures partners on tangible inputs. They are reviewed semi-annually on the quality of their decision-making process (e.g., investment memos) and their adherence to core team values, not on premature financial metrics.
After working out 22 distressed joint ventures during the GFC, the key lesson was that partner quality dictates outcomes more than the deal itself. When things go wrong, good partners collaborate to find solutions, while bad partners create conflict, making even a good deal untenable.
Lara Banks suggests that emerging fund managers should proactively ask LPs about their specific criteria for success. This conversation aligns expectations early, clarifies performance benchmarks for future funds, and prevents misalignment between the GP's strategy and the LP's evaluation framework.
A rising tide lifts all boats. The true test of a founder partnership emerges during downturns. Diligence should focus on teasing out traits like adaptability, humility, and accountability, which predict how a founder will react when plans inevitably go awry.
Swell VC's Rusty Ralston shares that the most insightful LPs probe a GP's character, values, and personal history. For multi-decade investment relationships, understanding the person is foundational to establishing the trust, character, and integrity required for long-term success, surpassing the importance of typical fund metrics.
GPs are caught between two conflicting goals. They can hold assets longer, hoping valuations rise to meet their paper marks and maximize returns. Or, they can sell now at a potential discount to satisfy LPs' urgent need for liquidity, thereby securing goodwill for future fundraises. This tension defines the current market.