Related Posts
What's everyone doing for the 4th?🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸
Additional Posts in Partner One
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
That was just a preview…
Sign Up to see all discussions
Sign Up to see all discussions
- Discover what it’s like to work at companies from real professionals
- Get candid advice from people in your field in a safe space
- Chat and network with other professionals in your field
Sign up in seconds to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
"" is an unusual email domain. If correct, please proceed to the next step
Messaging rates may apply
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Share
Embed this post
Copy and paste embed code on your site
Preview
Download the
Fishbowl app
Scan your QR code to download
Fishbowl app on your mobile
Sign up for free to view this conversation on Fishbowl
Sign up for free to continue using Fishbowl
Messaging rates may apply
Like all capitalism post Nixon it’s a way for the rich to get richer quicker by selling out the future
Bad trend.
It’s a generation (mix of boomers / gen x) throwing the apprenticeship model out the window to have a few extra pennies during their retirement.
The single most selfish partner classes in the history of any firms would follow PE models like this. Take PwC for example, it / its legacy firms have been privately held for 200 years.
Who gives some old guy making 7 figures a year with a perfectly fine pension the right to chuck that centuries old model in the trash for a few extra dollars because they own the firm temporarily and it’s for a transient point in time “his / hers”.
My view is I’m a legal caretaker of any shares earned. Not an “owner” or “master” of them. I could very well be the 10th generation that’s had these shares.
Well, partnerships were already an MLM, why are you surprised there’s more cash grabbing?
No, you’re not
I’ll give you the contrarian view. PE does the dirty work that equity partners can’t do for a variety of reasons (internal politics, founding partner opposition, or optics). Having PE to take the fall allows the business as a whole to align cost models, expand into new areas, upgrade internal software for efficiency, and lift all boats.
The flip side that everyone fears is that PE won’t invest, maximize short term profits at the expense of long term stability and profitability, and not promote staff to equity partners. All valid points but it depends on the PE firm operating model. Not all PE is bad, a few bad apples ruin it for all.
I agree with your first point, and thats the reason I also left, it was often not deals good for the firm but deals good for the individual.
I’ve know “salaried” partners that get the title but not the equity because existing equity partners aren’t cutting it sales wise. The existing equity partners don’t want more equity partners because it dilutes the profit pool.
Similarly I’ve seen instances where partners going for retirement did a max sale because they knew they would not be there to see delivery through for the next 5 years, but their bonus was based of the sale.
Could someone explain the context of the post ?
Senior partners at MM and smaller accounting firms have been selling partnership stake to PE for a quick cash grab disguised under needing the cash to invest in growing the firm and improving operations
I just find it funny you qualified senior partners as greedy.
I wasn’t implying that all partners aren’t greedy, I’m just implying it is the senior partners whose greed is causing this PE trend.