E373 | Charlotte Palmer, Integra Global Advisors: The role of government institutions in VC

33:31It's called the elusive VCH because that's exactly what any LP is going to diligence you for. In the beginning, that's what they're trying to figure out. Does this manager have an edge that is so strong that I actually want to dive into the DD process, which is going to be super time consuming. So that's the answer they're trying to get to, right? But I'm then calling it the elusive VCH because every LP asks it. If you're not a super sophisticated LP, you don't really know what you're asking for. And on the GP side, you're sitting there thinking, what is this guy really asking me?

34:10And what we've tried to distill is then seven core questions that will be the answer. Those seven points will make up the answer to the question, what's your HSC VC? And that will then be, can be distilled into a 30-second answer or it can be the elevator pitch or it can be the 60 days DD, which it's really all that it's about is figuring out, does this edge really exist? And part of the edge is, of course, also that you're a good fund manager and that's all the VC 101s. But I think you're completely right that we could get a lot more best practices, core pieces of content from these places so that we don't have to pick up a book that's 15 years old or something like that by some academic author on how to build a venture fund.

35:01It's individuals like you who are going to change the face of doing that. You are publishing things and you are being helpful and you are doing these podcasts which give tips and tricks and learnings. And I think a partnering thing between you and an entity like an institution would have so much really... Yeah, I think we need to do some of that work. Note taken. Thank you. Thank you, Charlotte. More work. anything else when it comes to what these institutions could do better what would you advise one of the big ones for me and again this is i think multiple institutions there is reasons for having restricted content in there and i think every lp has their own strategy and their own way of focusing and their own way of drilling down into why they're doing what they're doing and i don't think that should ever really be questioned by another lp because everyone has their own rationale but sometimes there's very restricted criteria which can affect commercial returns and then for other lps coming in it then makes that fund less attractive so i mean speaking transparently on it there's definitely been times where i've had to reject a fund sadly they're great person's great but the terms haven't been there because their anchor unfortunately has pushed such severe terms onto them and they felt compelled to take them to get the anchor backing that it just doesn't stand up or it affects the commercial side or the alpha ability of that fund moving forward.

36:22Can you be concrete? What exactly would you say are things that LPs, so here, LPs and GPs listening, what are the terms that you really, as an LP, need to not push and as a GP need to work very hard on avoiding? It's a certain thing. So carry, for example, I think carry should be totally commercially driven and not linked to maybe any impact metrics so you shouldn't have to reduce your carry share because your founders of your companies haven't met their impact thresholds yeah that's to me maybe doesn't tie up as well if you are purely commercial focused impact funds that's maybe a different conversation and that's something you maybe should be pushing for anyway or in terms of geographical focus i find a lot of people maybe would amend their geographical regions or areas they would invest in because the anchor wants them to be plugging into a different market and you know if your network and your access to deals and your quality deals are in a different market that's where you should be investing because that's your best opportunity of investing you shouldn't just go to a different market because the anchor is telling you to do a different market and a different geography where you're maybe not best placed so i think there's certain terms on that just don't really work from another lp stance yeah it's super unfortunate so uh we spoke about at how to web BBB requiring that it's only British domicile companies.

37:49Like, you know, blows my mind that we have an as big fund as the BBB, really limiting their own returns in my view, that they have this criteria in there. We've had it in Denmark as well. IFO has had a national mandate that was quite strong. I do believe that that's softened quite a bit lately. EIF has some, then every single LP will, of course, also have one, meaning a private market LP has a portfolio where they're looking to fit in slots, so to say. So ISMR, as an example, will be saying, well, we're not looking for another manager to cover Denmark. So we're not really interested because that's what you're doing.

38:33And we have picked a team there. You wouldn't be complementary to our existing portfolio. and then the right thing, the right way for an LP to act in this situation is say, not for me. It's not, but could you maybe do X, Y, or C instead, which I do think that we are seeing from these government institutions a little too often that they're saying, I think you're a great manager. I think it's a very cool strategy, but I would like to see X, Y, or C. And that is where you're like, this manager has this manager strategy. They've built it. That's what they believe in. Don't try and incept ideas or dangle 20 million and get them to adapt to what you would like.

39:22I do think that you're absolutely right. That is a very dangerous strategy. And other LPs will not be informed that the reason why we have a 70 % allocation to Romania or to Italy or whatever is because EIF told us to, we would have actually built this 50-50. That is so detrimental. A really good point on it is, back to the paragraph before, knowing your story and articulating it well. You have to believe in yourself. That's first and foremost as a GP for me. Believe in what you're putting out there and believe in your strategy. And if it doesn't match your anchor, that's fine. You will find, hopefully, if you're good enough, other LPs that will invest in you and you can do your strategy.

40:02You shouldn't jump ship on what you're planning to do because of someone else and their methodology. And you're right. If you go through that process and then you're talking to our peers for a later conversation, they may come in for the last close. They're probably not going to be transparent on, we were going to do this, but then we decided to do this instead because it had 50 million attached to it. We decided we were going to be great at that. Suddenly, after the 50 million. Don't take the money influence. Please just back yourselves and please just say you are strong enough to kind of, and your thesis is believed enough by yourself so that you can do it without that.

40:37And there is going to be instances where those two things correlate, right? Where you're maybe a fund on BBB's principles where there's so many funds that just focus on the UK. Perfect for BBB. That's, you know, extremely great match. If you're maybe wanting to do European, you're not going to be good for BBB and that's absolutely fine. There's going to be other investors to back you. BBB do not want you to change your thesis for them. that's not something that they would want in their criteria for you to just amend everything but not a sign of a good thesis or strategy or anything you've kind of concreted down yeah do you from your experience have you ever seen it happen that a manager would tailor their pitch so to say to the bbb oh hundreds of times post yeah yeah hundreds of times you're Right, you either get it on an initial call, you say, this doesn't fit, absolutely fine that it doesn't fit, wish you all the best.

41:35And then they come six months later and they say, we've had a rethink. And actually, we're going to do what fits your criteria. And we're back around and you think, well, you're saying you were really great at this before. And now you're suddenly not doing that. so this is a bit of a again difficult conversation of do you amend your pitch to where whichever lp you're talking to and yeah and before we sound like snobbish idiots here that are not the ones asking for money and for that reason it's super simple for us to just sit here on our high horse saying no no you be you and i be me like uh it's not we get you and we know why you would want to do this and we're not saying don't do it we're saying be very thoughtful if you do it and and be aware the ramifications because because obviously sometimes the wise choice like for a vc manager you don't have a runway that will run out like a founder and for that reason you'll use you take on a crabby angel or a bad actor VC fund just because you need the money.

42:49But here, it's just sometimes you need a big anchor or you need to get off the ground or whatever, right? And then you can end up having to do these types of things. So we get to 100%. I just would say it would be great. I think this is more of a message, honestly, to the LPs than it is to the ABCs. It's a message to the LPs, stop this behavior. And you can have it as a soft criteria that we do try and invest in funds that do primarily the UK. And then it's kind of like, you know, you can, what's it called when you're weighing it, right? You can say, okay, well, it's probably, this will work kind of like a private market actually.

43:33Would I say, well, well, we prefer to have 70 % in Europe, but you're incredible and would maybe make sense even though you have a little more US or something, right? That can be okay. It's when it's these super restrictive, clear, no, we're not going to do it. Or you have a similar one, I think, with when the EIF has just concluded, we don't take single GP risk. Like, what the fuck? So you're not ever going to back a solo GP because you're afraid that dude will fall over dead. That doesn't make sense. That is a genuine thing of almost how it's drilled into you of these criteria are so restrictive.

44:15It really does amend your thought process on solo GPs or people that are doing different missions. And on the court, you're almost looking for those red flags in LP. You're getting on there and it's like, it sounds terrible. you are finding reasons to reject rather than reasons to like, because that's an easier way of going around it. People are amazing when they fly through with all green flags. So don't kind of fall into the trap of doing that, I guess, as an advice point. And to probably contradict myself, I'm not mad if people amend their pitch to different LPs. I think that's maybe a necessity in this market.

44:51You should. And you definitely should, because not all LPs are the same and they're not looking for the same thing. however I think as long as you need to ensure your core story stays the same you know you're still doing everything you were saying you're going to do it still stands up it's materially the exact same strategy process team it does mean different things that emphasize to different LPs and I think that's maybe a definite skill you need in the ecosystem to succeed that's not a bad thing I'm not saying you need to exactly stick to one pitch deck and that meets all criteria because it multiple pitch decks are fine no no it's that it's that where you where you end up having you know adapting your core strategy suddenly we do only do UK

45:40why okay so let me go to another part of this DD off-boarding call whatever we want to call it from your time with BBB. I'd love to ask you, where do you see the institutions, the government institutions distorting the market? I think it's come from a positive stance of they can distort depending on where their strategy really sits. So if they decide suddenly they want to pack a specific sector, plug managers in that sector, plug startups in that sector, that sector is going to significantly increase in funding. I think globally, government-backed LPs make up 10 % to 15 % of overall VC finance.

46:23That's distorted in Europe to a significantly higher percentage than globally. They have mass opportunity to move sectoral vertical focus managers. If one of them decided to suddenly back loads of solo GPs, I imagine more solo GPs would be matched. They have an incredible ability to distort the market and power in the market to do that. I actually do think they are handling that power extremely well in terms of, you know, there's a big sector agnostic focus. A lot of managers, they ensure that portfolio diversification comes through. There's not a massive distorting feature because of the power that they hold.

47:02But instead, it is tried to be spread equally across all managers or all sectors or people doing different things. I think that's a probably hard thing to do. And I think the BBB in Venice do do that extremely well. Yeah, I just asked my French at GBT here about the percentage in Europe that comes from the government institutions. And we're looking at 20 to 30 % in Europe. And then I asked for specifics for each region. And I don't actually get the percentages here, which is a bit annoying. because clearly the Southern and Eastern European parts of Europe have a higher skew to public funding, and that's also why we've seen some of the issues there.

47:45I think many private market VCs would say, we maybe have a bit too much capital coming from these institutions that have overfunded GPs that maybe shouldn't have been funded. And that's just the development horizon, on the development curve of any ecosystem. It is what it is. What's your take on that? When you're looking at a VC market, do you think at all about the weight of the public funding in these markets or not at all? That's not in your consideration. I mean, back to the point on Integra being very data-driven, definitely something we would look at. I think it's important to understand who's influencing the market, how could that be impacted in future, where did that influence go would it materially affect my decision to do it or not I'm unsure I think it depends what would come out of the information and how much reliability and accountability that those institutions are holding and their influence on that but it's definitely something we would investigate and I think just the message to GPs fundraising is to be aware of the reputation of these government institutions if you're bringing them on and the ramifications that their funding comes with, because there's definitely been markets that have been perversely skewed or incentivized as a consequence of these.

49:16Okay, now let's shift the tempo of this conversation and talk about your learnings from joining a global LP, which is Integral. That's a very different beast from the BBB. Very different beast. And actually, one of the nice things I found, Evan and I sat down with a big whiteboard and we both did, you know, how would you design the VC strategy? And I'd obviously taken my learning from BBB, who I do think has an incredible lens on how to do it. And it was almost matched to a T, you know, and I think both of them are very data driven. Both of them are market led, research driven. I think there is a really good way of investing in managers.

49:56And, yeah, Integra just does that exceptionally well in terms of their focus, their strategy, how they're doing it. It's slightly different in terms of lens of doing it. So BBB is obviously taxpayer capital that's utilized to fund. Integra is looking at more of the private side and looking at families that support Integra, incredible families in there. So I think that's probably a nuance on it. And you feel even more responsibility somehow, I think, coming to the private side. But it's been a fantastic place to work in the short time I've been there. And I think they've done an amazing job at making me feel very involved in the culture and belonging, even though I am overseas and they're all over in the States.

50:34Let me ask you, why did you pick IntraGraph specifically? In a really nice, not to shoot my own trumpet, egotistical way. But I left the bank and I think for someone with LP experience of that nature, there was a lot of opportunities on the market, which is fantastic. it again I think you have to really reflect on what is the right opportunity to go to next you know what's my next career move I'd like to stay at my next place for you know a longevity of time and really get involved in that environment I'd had the experience of the big entity the red tape which obviously is going to come I think I wanted something smaller and I think some of the characteristics I was really looking for and some of the other entities I was I was looking at and discussing with it needed to be a place that had you know pride in their reputation and what they were putting out and what they were giving to the market mainly because i want to work for somewhere i feel i can be proud of and i can take pride in it had to be somewhere that had really good performance on good picks why they'd pick those funds where those funds are going somewhere that shared the same ethos and alignment of you know my personal investing appetite you know emerging managers, really changing that face of the ecosystem, pushing things forward, doing things that are a little bit more innovative instead of just doing what I call the FOMO investing and just following where every other investor had gone.

51:58And I think from stemming from my ability to diligence quite thoroughly at BBB, someone who really sense checked the managers and got deep into the diligence and got to know the people behind the entities, I think that was really important as well. you're gonna be the only person on the ground in europe am i not right that is right yes how do you think about uh being like uh the only person on the ground here just a personal question i think it's a personality thing um we went back a lot back and forth a lot on you know how would i get would i be comfortable with that am i okay being i don't feel on my own over here which sounds strange i think integra does an amazing job it makes me feel so entirely involved with the team that it feels an extension i think everyone probably got very good at working virtually from our covet experience of working virtually i actually started at the bank um in the beginning of covid so i was used to working that distance from not meeting my other employees for about a year and year and a half before we were back in the offices so fortunately i've had the niceness of going to the US and meeting everyone in person before I joined.

53:08But, yeah, I think it comes with its own challenges of how do you develop that trust in that employee overseas and how do you ensure they're doing what they say they're doing and they're working hard. And I think that, yeah, comes down to a personality thing of this is a lifestyle, I think, as an LP. This is not something you do nine to five and you log off. And it's the same with GPs. You are living your fund. You are part of it. Yeah, and Integrity is about somewhere I could really grow and belong and feel involved with. And yeah, again, just living it so far. I'd love to ask you, because you have a sentence in our preparatory notes for this, which says, when I ask you about the challenges of being the first hire in a new country, you're saying balancing global firm expectations with local market realities.

53:56That's an interesting sentence. It's also something that we have often picked on when we're talking to VCs that are part of a US or global team. And then they're representing Europe in that big machine. And they're always like, so how do you deal with European allocations versus the big boys in the US? And what are the conversations like in IC? Do you have your own allocation that own part of the overall fund that's allocated to your market and you're kind of the SAR on that? Or how does that work? How are you thinking about this inside Integra and how do you deal with it so far? I mean, this has been a really good learning curve for me in a different lens to my prior experience of everyone's almost in the same bucket.

54:46So you're comparing apples with apples. At Integra, you almost have to stand up against all the other geographies. So instead of being on the local market, you are expanding to a global comparison. So your apples to oranges in effect, of how do you compare someone who is so on the ground? And I think that comes with a really good understanding of each geography and each region. And to that point, somewhere like Integra, 20 % of our overall AUM goes to VC, 15 % to 20%. 80 % of capital goes to other means. Why should that capital be put into a manager instead of going to other hedge fund investment or a private credit investment, et cetera?

55:27So you almost have to stand upon even more pedestal as a VC manager to receive that funding. And I think Evan's done a fantastic job today of backing some incredible managers in the ecosystem. Really exciting investment strategies, great teams in there. And I think it's just continuing that high quality bar and pushing that forward from a global stance. Also really acknowledging how the local markets work and who's the best players in each of those markets to do that. How do you think about Europe? Do you think about wanting pan-European coverage Or do you think about picking 10 allocators that are the best and then two might be in London and two might be in Berlin?

56:06Or do you say, no, we want to cover all of Europe. We want to have our bets so that we feel we have broad exposure. It's fair to say that we have in London a very high density of very strong managers. But they do also all, except for maybe very few players, lean heavy. UK, maybe UK, Nordics, but they don't reach the East, right? As an example, East and South. So how do you think about this? I think it's incredibly important to look at Europe as a whole. And there's amazing talent coming out of all sort of pockets across Europe. This is not just very much concentrated into specific countries like the UK or Germany or France, where you may be more expecting of getting emerging managers coming forward who are going to get that funding so i think europe for us expands further talking of you know reasons we were at how to web and representing at how to web eastern europe has some incredible talent coming through especially on that tech scene i learned an immense amount and talked to some amazing gps whilst i was there I think we would love to have a wider European base of managers rather than really focusing it in our specific regions.

57:24And from a diversity perspective, that's also incredibly important. So definitely an appetite to go further afield and back managers, which maybe wouldn't have been backed by others. It's a super interesting question, I think. I'm such a good moderator. I ask such good questions. No, I think it's so interesting because what you said is exactly, Europe should be considered as a whole. Well, what does that mean? Does that mean that you need to have coverage? Or does that mean, no, no, Europe is one whole, so I'll just pick the 10 best. I want 10 that I allocate to a 15 or whatever, and I don't care really where they're from.

58:02I'm actually very much in this bucket of saying, well, I just pick the best opportunities, and if they then turn out to be all across Europe, that's all good and great. If they are more London heavy, they're more London heavy. I do, of course, also think a lot about where do I have exposure to reach-wise? And is there a reason why I don't see anything from one specific region, which you should always think about? But I do think in the end, whether you end up having skewness heavily towards London or you're more widely across Europe, I think it's actually not as important because it's such a big ecosystem, pick the 10 best managers or whatever number you can handle and then let them be wherever they might be.

58:49That's probably how I think about your, unless you're building a huge strategy like Isomers with 50 managers, okay, that's a different ballgame. No, and I agree with you. I think to my prior point, this should all be quality driven on the first and foremost. You can't just pack a manager because they're in a geography that you're not exposed to and they're not as good as the rest of your portfolio or they're maybe not the next exciting thing. I think you should always be backing your next manager because they stand higher than the previous manager. And you're always looking for that next thing that's still really good and still driving that quality.

59:23If that happens to be all in one region, it happens to be all in one region. And that's probably unfortunate. And there needs to be more developments elsewhere that's beyond my capabilities as an LP to do. But you have to go with quality at the end of the day in terms of the managers you're backing and that's your duty to your clients and their capital and what you're putting that in for. Okay, so now once again, we're shifting pace. I want to ask you, are there people in the ecosystem that might, as you have just done, wanting to shift to another firm on the LP side? What do you think is super important for someone junior or aspiring LP profile to do, to position themselves for a role in a global firm like Integra?

1:00:10I think on the LP front, these roles are difficult to find and they are few and far between. And I think if you're wanting to find an entity that you really want to work for, you need to have a global look. I think there's some fantastic LPs out there who are doing really great things for the ecosystem and market and as mentioned really pushing forward innovative ideas and different ways of looking from an advice perspective wherever you are now if that's either in an lp role or not is taking those opportunities if you are an lp role what really benefited me and the bank's fantastic at this is just giving you all the opportunities yeah i was 24 and sat on an alpac taking a challenging position and you know actively pursuing opportunities and being you know a support and then a co-lead and then a lead as I worked my way for those ranks and they were really great at giving me opportunities to run and I used to you know do all the reporting for my funds I was responsible for I was a relationship lead I would just say yes to everything that came along because that's now given me the experience to pivot to somewhere like Integra where they're looking for someone who can do the sourcing do the diligence do an ic pitch and if you're not getting involved in all those aspects at your current place you should be asking for that experience and pushing for that because that really helps you when you're pivoting out and that really gives you a skill set and a differentiated look at all the different aspects it may be that your workplace has you know outsourced teams and they may have a kyc team or they may do different things i would get to know those other teams i spent a little bit of time working with portfolio operations at the bank.

1:01:54How does drawdowns work? What's the process for that? Is there a recycle to it? You need to know the fundamentals of running this before I think you really go out and pivot to somewhere that's more global or maybe in the US where they're really looking for that top tier talent. And then maybe if I turn this question on its head, what can your PNLPs do to make themselves more attractive for candidates in the US or even in Europe? So the hiring level here, we're talking employer branding, basically. What do you think are super important for the LPs to do to get the very best talent? I think they need to be active at being out at events and in the market.

1:02:35I think there's a lot of LPs who are inaccessible. And I think you need to really push yourself out there and be out there and connect and contribute to whether that's panels or events or talking or hosting yourselves and push that brand in the market as who you are. I think that's really imperative of getting kind of more opportunities coming towards you. And I think from LPs, just talking to LPs, I think you need to be running in those circles a lot more. I mean, I have a great list of LPs who I would call friends, who I can call up from a deal sharing perspective as well. I think one of the most important things about this is, and I hadn't realised until I'd left the bank, your network is imperative like you are really like who you know i think this kind of comes through on the gp side as well who can you connect with and who can you share deal play with who can you get the best you know inbound from who's looking at different things how do you know you know who's doing things differently to how you're doing who can build on your strategy etc and i think that's one of those really important things to reflect on and maybe that's something you should build up before you pivot maybe if you're looking to employ it's how those individuals position from that network perspective.

1:03:46I always describe VC as high school. If you know how high school works in terms of hierarchy, who's the cool kids and how do you move up the hierarchy, you know how venture works. And same thing goes for LP land when it comes to VC, of course, maybe even more than in venture land. Okay, now I want to pick on a topic that you mentioned earlier, and this will be our final and concluding topic. And it's a feisty one, potentially because we're talking going to talk about impact VC funds and you said something provocative before someone because you said you know and I'm saying it's provocative because many European LPs have pioneered the work around impact impact metrics driving carrier performance and and you said earlier well maybe not the best idea at least if you want to be considered a pure play VC.

1:04:41So maybe let's start by that, asking you to clarify that a little bit. And then I would ask you to comment on the bigger questions of impact VC in Europe versus in the US and how it's considered and all that. I think they're two very different lenses. And I like both lenses to be transparent on this. And I am not saying one is better than the other or anything. You also have some amazing institutions like Venture ESG who are running fantastic programs on this and training on this and really pushing the conversation forward on this from my experience the europe is significantly more focused on impact and i think you can see that from a helicopter view as mentioned before it's top down institutions are loving it everyone to see it i think that's a very good thing i think you know i've taken an exam personally at my own initiative to learn more about impact climate investing etc because i think it's so important for future learning however i think there's maybe a negative of institutions when they push impact on funds that aren't impact by nature and i think that's the twofold question of are you an impact investor and if impact bc and you're focusing on impact that's great and that's the lane you're kind of running in then there's completely non-impact and then there's that gray area in the middle i think the gray area in the middle is maybe impacted by institutions who are pushing down on policies that maybe don't fit with that management mandate or they maybe wouldn't fall into that bucket and I think there needs to be a almost grace period right where not all the institutions have pinned down what they want to see and they know they may not got concrete on this is our yes criterion this is our no criterion it's where you fall I think if funds are showing a ability to acknowledge impact or ESG and they're acknowledging the progressiveness of that and they may be considering that, that should be fine as a baseline and you shouldn't push that into the commercial side of it.

1:06:37E.g. if they're not an impact fund that shouldn't impact the carry terms. You know that fund should just be able to stand on its own and run as a commercial venture. If they're an impact fund and they're seeing a lot of impact things they should be held accountable of that and that maybe should be going to the carry terms. So I think it's kind of a different conversation. Comparing Europe to the US I think there's far more focus on it being in fact being a secondary thing from my understanding of the US market it's not perceived as much as a priority it's maybe not even a conversation probably not on their due diligence as much as it is on a European stance and I think just as advice for GPs it's maybe understanding where you sit on that spectrum and not pushing yourself to be an impact investor if you're not being an impact investor because you think it will get you funding I think that's the whole point to bring through this conversation you should just really get to know what you're good at your story your strategy and just back yourself to believe in that and not feel pressured either way to kind of sit on that impact fence or not impact fence do you say that for the u.s or do you say that also for european lp land because i do i do think so i this is based only on a feeling and vibe stuff so don't anyone listening and take this to heart too much.

1:07:56But my feeling is that there are definitely a lot of LPs in Europe that are rather driven by impact because when you're looking at venture in their portfolio, venture is very much this small thing that they do for the... That's why we often have patriotic funds, so to say. Even private market LPs that like to say, I only invest in stuff that only does Denmark because this money is basically giving back money. And then for that reason, they want to take both. Yes, my local deal. And yes, its impact is actually for good. So what you just said, does that go for Europe as much as for the US? Yeah, I think it does.

1:08:40I think it's an incredibly difficult topic to talk about in terms of who's really driving the conversation here. Is it GPs really wanting to do it? Or is it the LPs really wanting the GPs to do it? and I think that's maybe the part you have to figure out and then kind of the conversation stems from that. I think it's something that we are going to see change dramatically maybe in the next few years. I think maybe the US might change their stance on it. I don't know. Don't quote me on that. But I think it's definitely a conversation that needs to come to the forefront and I think there is maybe an educational piece for the US from Europe and pushing that conversation forward of why is it so focused on Europe and why is it not in the US?

1:09:20And is there a little bit more of a correlation between the two? Do you think it's kosher for VCs to have a deck, so to say, that they use for the impact-driven LPs and one they use for the less impact-driven LPs? Like a pitch deck and materials, like Data Room? Maybe not Data Room. You might use the same, but at least deck-wise that you're distinguishing for the impact LPs and the non-impact LPs? This is a difficult one. Back to our point earlier of do you have different materials for different LPs you're talking to? It depends how ingrained impact is to your overall philosophy as an investor, as a GP investor or VC fund.

1:10:09If it is the core, you should not be removing it from your deck if you're talking to a non-impact LP. I guess you're going to include it anyway if you're an impact LP. Equally, if it's not called to you, you should not include it for an impact LP. I think, yeah, again, to the point of the underlying theme here, stick to your story and filing those LPs that align with you. You're going to have them on the table for 10 years. So why would you not want people that are correlated to what you're doing instead of maybe someone who never really fully understood your strategy and is always going to oppose it because you sent them a pitch deck that wasn't fully aligned with your mission and your values?

1:10:47Charlotte we made it through almost 90 minutes of conversation about LP land is there anything that you wish that we touched on that we haven't yet I don't think so but we have a lot of topics in the pipeline I think that would be super interesting to bring to a further podcast so I'm excited for that yeah so we actually we actually do have a long pipeline of uh of topics that we want to talk to you guys at Instagram about um Charlotte thank you so much for joining for the podcast. This was truly a deep dive that I enjoyed. It's been a pleasure. Thank you so much for having me. Here's a few words from our beloved sponsor.

1:11:25Introducing the Cult Tech Summit, a two-day celebration of culture and technology. Carefully selected startups, unique workshops, lectures, theater shows, investment opportunities, and more. At Cult Tech Association, we enrich culture with technology because we think culture is essential for human growth. That's why we want to make it accessible to everyone. Invest with us, found with us, make art with us, and come to the Cult Tech Summit. We're on a journey to make culture a personal matter, and we would like to share this journey with you. See you at the summit. This is what they're finding down.

1:12:02Tear down this wall. It's more than just an alliance. This is a union of values. Let's start acting. Acting, acting, acting.