In the world of finance, carried interest is the share of the profits in an investment that a manager (of said investment) earns in excess of what they may have contributed to the partnership. For example, let's say that a manager is putting in 10% of the cash that is required for a particular project. If the project goes really well, the manager, through carried interest, could earn more than their 10% share of the profits. Put another way, it is a performance fee that is intended to incentivize and reward the manager.
Today I learned (credit to Lucas Manuel) that the origins of carried interest go all the way back to the Middle Ages. The concept and term supposedly came about because the captains of European ships would take a share of the profit from the "carried goods" that they were transporting. This was to compensate them for the work and for the risk of sailing all over the place. Keep in mind that, just like today, any number of things could have gone wrong. Maybe you don't make it or maybe pirates steal all of your goodies.
In the world of finance, carried interest is the share of the profits in an investment that a manager (of said investment) earns in excess of what they may have contributed to the partnership. For example, let's say that a manager is putting in 10% of the cash that is required for a particular project. If the project goes really well, the manager, through carried interest, could earn more than their 10% share of the profits. Put another way, it is a performance fee that is intended to incentivize and reward the manager.
Today I learned (credit to Lucas Manuel) that the origins of carried interest go all the way back to the Middle Ages. The concept and term supposedly came about because the captains of European ships would take a share of the profit from the "carried goods" that they were transporting. This was to compensate them for the work and for the risk of sailing all over the place. Keep in mind that, just like today, any number of things could have gone wrong. Maybe you don't make it or maybe pirates steal all of your goodies.
There is also a compelling argument (
made here
) that this simple concept has been instrumental, since the Medieval Period, in improving the fortunes of many, but most notably those that weren't born into riches and that were starting out with limited means. Carried interest allowed Medieval merchants to (1) initiate sailing ventures for which they didn't have the requisite money and (2) earn a disproportionate amount of the profits so that they could more quickly improve their socioeconomic position.
Do good work, take on some risk, and then hopefully make a few bucks. That's still how things work today. Supposedly David Rubenstein, cofounder of The Carlyle Group, also talks about the origins of carried interest in his recent appearance on the Tim Ferriss Show. I say supposedly because podcasts generally take too long for me and I haven't listened to it.
I've written about this before on the blog, but one of my qualms about architecture school was that it was too often taboo to talk about business and money. Why? Talking about and understanding the realities of the world doesn't have to mean that you're compromising on good design. Constraints are often good for design innovation. Similarly, I've always felt that personal finance should feature more prominently in schools at an early age. It should be considered a basic life skill.
In any event, I came across this tweet thread last night by Naval Ravikant talking about how to get rich (without getting lucky). It's from 2018, but the lessons -- and there are many -- obviously haven't changed. (For those of you who may not be familiar, Naval was the co-founder of AngelList and was an early stage investor in companies like Uber, Twitter, and Opendoor.)
When you see a headline like this it's perfectly normal for your bullshit radar to go off. (In fact, it is one of his points.) But this thread is not bullshit. It's about building wealth. Owning equity instead of renting out your time. Working hard. Taking a long view. Leveraging your time and skills. Understanding compound interest. Partnering with people of integrity. Being accountable. And becoming the best at what you do because you're pursuing genuine curiosity (among many other great points).
Here are a couple of his tweets. But I would encourage you to have a full read.
) that this simple concept has been instrumental, since the Medieval Period, in improving the fortunes of many, but most notably those that weren't born into riches and that were starting out with limited means. Carried interest allowed Medieval merchants to (1) initiate sailing ventures for which they didn't have the requisite money and (2) earn a disproportionate amount of the profits so that they could more quickly improve their socioeconomic position.
Do good work, take on some risk, and then hopefully make a few bucks. That's still how things work today. Supposedly David Rubenstein, cofounder of The Carlyle Group, also talks about the origins of carried interest in his recent appearance on the Tim Ferriss Show. I say supposedly because podcasts generally take too long for me and I haven't listened to it.
I've written about this before on the blog, but one of my qualms about architecture school was that it was too often taboo to talk about business and money. Why? Talking about and understanding the realities of the world doesn't have to mean that you're compromising on good design. Constraints are often good for design innovation. Similarly, I've always felt that personal finance should feature more prominently in schools at an early age. It should be considered a basic life skill.
In any event, I came across this tweet thread last night by Naval Ravikant talking about how to get rich (without getting lucky). It's from 2018, but the lessons -- and there are many -- obviously haven't changed. (For those of you who may not be familiar, Naval was the co-founder of AngelList and was an early stage investor in companies like Uber, Twitter, and Opendoor.)
When you see a headline like this it's perfectly normal for your bullshit radar to go off. (In fact, it is one of his points.) But this thread is not bullshit. It's about building wealth. Owning equity instead of renting out your time. Working hard. Taking a long view. Leveraging your time and skills. Understanding compound interest. Partnering with people of integrity. Being accountable. And becoming the best at what you do because you're pursuing genuine curiosity (among many other great points).
Here are a couple of his tweets. But I would encourage you to have a full read.
. The thesis for this fund is pretty simple. They want to invest in companies that either provide mitigation for or adaption to the climate crisis. The thinking behind this approach is as follows. They want to invest in companies that directly attack the causes of climate change (mitigation), but they are also recognizing that the climate crisis is not some distant thing. It's already here, which is why it's important to also focus on companies that are dealing with the consequences of it (adaptation).
One of their first investments is in a company called Leap. What Leap does is provide the connective (software) tissue between local energy devices/applications and the broader energy markets. For example, let's say you have a Leap-enabled smart thermostat. If the grid is in need of power, it might automatically reduce your local energy consumption so as to help with load balancing on the broader network. In exchange for this, you would earn money for your contributions. In effect, Leap acts as a kind of virtual power plant.
Why does this matter? Well, it matters because two important things seem to be happening with energy production: (1) It's moving toward renewables and (2) production and storage are both decentralizing. Assuming this trend continues, there will be an increasing need for software to help manage energy consumption, production, load balancing, the broader energy markets, and so on. That's where companies like Leap come in. It's also why many are arguing that Tesla is so valuable. More than an EV company, it is creating a new decentralized renewable energy network through its car batteries, powerwalls, and solar panels.
. The thesis for this fund is pretty simple. They want to invest in companies that either provide mitigation for or adaption to the climate crisis. The thinking behind this approach is as follows. They want to invest in companies that directly attack the causes of climate change (mitigation), but they are also recognizing that the climate crisis is not some distant thing. It's already here, which is why it's important to also focus on companies that are dealing with the consequences of it (adaptation).
One of their first investments is in a company called Leap. What Leap does is provide the connective (software) tissue between local energy devices/applications and the broader energy markets. For example, let's say you have a Leap-enabled smart thermostat. If the grid is in need of power, it might automatically reduce your local energy consumption so as to help with load balancing on the broader network. In exchange for this, you would earn money for your contributions. In effect, Leap acts as a kind of virtual power plant.
Why does this matter? Well, it matters because two important things seem to be happening with energy production: (1) It's moving toward renewables and (2) production and storage are both decentralizing. Assuming this trend continues, there will be an increasing need for software to help manage energy consumption, production, load balancing, the broader energy markets, and so on. That's where companies like Leap come in. It's also why many are arguing that Tesla is so valuable. More than an EV company, it is creating a new decentralized renewable energy network through its car batteries, powerwalls, and solar panels.
