Values
The case for impact isn't separate from the case for returns.
Holding something for a decade or more means living with the consequences of how you got there, not just what it's worth when you leave. These aren't values stated to sound good — they're stated because a firm with this kind of time horizon has more at stake in getting them right than a firm that's gone in five years. A business solving a real, durable problem holds up better over that kind of horizon: it's part of why the underwriting and the values point in the same direction.
Impact and return — the same argument, made twice
A business solving a real, durable problem tends to have better economics over a long hold. Customers keep paying because the need is real, not because of hype. Talent stays because the work means something. It's harder for a well-funded competitor to displace something people actually depend on. The case for impact isn't separate from the case for returns — it's part of why the underwriting holds up over decades.
How we treat people, not just deals
- How we treat the founders we pass on, not just the ones we fund — reputation and deal flow compound over decades, and a clear, honest no is still an investment in the relationship.
- How we treat the people already living, working, or operating in a property before we take it on — whether we're revitalizing it or acquiring it outright — not just the return on repositioning it.
- Whether we're willing to say plainly when something didn't work, rather than only publishing the wins.