All the time we read newspapers and hear on the news that private equity firms are buying or selling businesses. That share holders are disgruntled and continually putting pressure on CEO for better dividends. There was an interesting article in the “Times” about CEOs. An externally appointed CEO is seven times more likely to be removed from their post in the short-term than a home-grown one. Externally appointed CEOs are great for cost savings but when this is done most have not much more to offer the article stated?
Often Private equity companies appoint board members to protect their investment and to bring highly skilled and experienced people to the business to ensure the strategy goes to plan.
Private equity firms and the stock markets can sometimes be overly focused on profit and enforce short-term strategies that are sometimes not in the best interest of the business itself in the longer term. I am asking the question is this good for a business as often it seems that there is a business within the business that has absolutely nothing to do with the customer, and the business offer but the real value is about the business valuation and creating a quick return on investment based on an exit strategy.
Examples of this are the Spirit Group and Scottish and Newcastle pub and restaurant estate merger, parts were sold to Punch taverns which are now struggling with huge debt and are looking to off load 2200 restaurants and pubs in a demerger. The Little Chef restaurants once had 435 restaurants and is now down sized to 162 due to the misguided strategy of the “people restaurant group” and the level of debt they took on to buy the restaurants meant when they dropped menu prices and expected the footfall to increase it did not making the business unviable and default going into administration.
R Capital who own Little Chef paid £10 million for what was left of the business yet the former owners paid £58 million from TLLC group holdings (Permira). I firmly believe the demise of Little Chef started because of the focus on profit over the customer trends and the customer experience.
It seems to me that some private equity and shareholder led businesses focus on business valuation , cost reduction, asset stripping and margin management at the detriment of concept / branding and the customer experience. As we can see in the Little Chef case £48 million pounds disappeared in valuation and in real terms this is physical cash, this is not unique to hospitality either if we look at the dot-com boom there are similar examples such as boo.com.
Without emotion they are good for business?
If you take the emotional element out of the way private equity firms and shareholders impact business , then this is a good thing that businesses are sold and resold for profit gained out of exit strategy valuation. For investors in most cases these opportunities are a great way to make a high return on investment and for shareholders in the short-term it means a dividend payment.
For the existing employees and the customers I think the deal sometimes is not as good as often these investments bring about significant change based around increasing the company valuation. This change impacts the business hard and usually in a short period of time. Having worked as an operator pre and post selling of several businesses, everything in the initial stages is geared up like a marketing machine, rallies for the staff explaining how best practice will prevail and that the new owners values everyone in the new company, what is often neglected to have been said is that the incumbent business owners already have decided what is going to be practice and who will stay and go and what the strategy will be going forward. The new owners can be too focused on the quick win and exit strategy.
I believe that no one person is bigger than the business but people (being the team) often are the business and the risk to the new owners could be the de-skilling and dilution of what made the business a success in the first place of which I think sometimes in not taken in to account.
Great for start-ups and poor performing businesses?
I believe Private equity companies are very good for new start-ups as they can bring about growth and business mass quickly through cash investment and of course they have a strong network of their own people who they like to put on the board to protect their investment and ensure the exit strategy remains the business focus.
These people are proven and experienced individuals at bringing about significant change, with a very good understanding of how to asset strip and target investment to bring about the required return in time with the profit ratios a normal business would struggle to achieve as a norm.
I think it would be good if these companies took the John Lewis approach which for me is one of the best business models for managing a business with staff and management teams being partners. We are about to enter a challenging time for retail so I will be watching how they manage this balance carefully. Although I believe John Lewis will continue to outperform the rest of the retail market regardless.
There definitely is a place for private equity firms and the shareholder led business model they are great for start-ups and good for businesses that are insolvent or performing badly that would other wise go bankrupt with out the expertise and cash investment private equity firms provide.
For businesses that are performing well and have a future under the right CEO and management team the business model they work with is not the best for profit alone but is better for the customer , the existing team and the actual business itself in the long run.





