Questions about syndicators

[Joon Kim]

I am a passive investor and only have participated in a handful of deals so my question might be uninformed or basic.  

Ive been pitched by various people calling themselves "syndicators" but I find their supposed deals are just repackaged deals from other true syndicators who actually acquire, manage and dispose the asset.     

Is there any reason to invest with these people rather than just investing directly through the real operator?  I find the way they present themselves to be disingenuous when they are really just middle men getting a cut of the GP shares to handle raising capital and investor relations. I also dont find any improvement in terms on the fees asssessed or on the waterfall promote on the backend? If anything I find that there are more fees assessed going through the PPMs.

Please educate me on why anyone would do this unless you were just informed.  

[Brian Burke]

@TJ Park the scenario is essentially this:  Let's say I'm a syndication sponsor/operator and I want to buy a property and have investors fund the deal.  But I don't know enough investors, so I go to a "syndicator," and they raise the equity instead of me doing it myself.  In exchange, I give this "syndicator" a piece of the fees/promote or whatever.  It's commonly done out there and, I would think, most often with operators that have less experience or track record, else they'd have the investors already and wouldn't need the help of the "syndicators."

Having laid that foundation, the term "syndicator" has multiple uses.  

I consider myself to be a "syndicator," but I'm also an operator--I (or to be more specific, me and my entire team at the firm) find the assets to acquire, are the sponsor of the offering, are the guarantor on the loan (and source the loan), and operate the asset, and raise the money from our own investors directly.  We don't use the help of others to raise capital because we've been doing this a long time, and so far, knock on wood, we've never fallen short of raising all of the equity ourselves.  We've bought thousands of units and if you look at our deeds and mortgages, it is my signature on them.

Another use of the term is those who raise capital for other people's deals.  These folks have built a network of investors and raise capital to invest in deals put out by operators, or as @Joon Kim called it "repackaged."  Investors need to know who is operating the deal because they need to do extensive due diligence on the operator.  This operator can make or break the investment.  I'd like to think that all of these syndicators are disclosing who is on the team, but I suspect there might be some who are not.

I have seen some take it a step further, touting that they are sponsors of X thousand units or whatever.  I've seen a few comments on the BP forums related to this practice, with many posters describing it as "shady."  As a sponsor who has worked his whole life engaged in the struggle that it takes to buy, operate, and sell thousands of multifamily units, I too see the practice of saying that they've syndicated thousands of units, when their signature isn't on a single deed and they've never bought, operated, and sold property, as questionable.  

The bottom line is investors should be aware of the differences and invest with full disclosure.  "Capital Raising" syndicators will state their case regarding the value they add to the equation, and I don't want to take that from them--I'm sure some of them do add value.  Others, however, add nothing.  So just like anything else, do your due diligence and select who you invest with carefully.