Sponsor vs syndicator vs operator

[Litan Yahav]

I've been investing in RE and PE funds / syndications for the past 7 years. But I still feel like the terminology isn't clear when it comes to the titles of people I invest with. Would love for someone to shed some light on this to help clear things up for me (and hopefully people like me)

What's the difference between a sponsor/syndicator/operator and can any or all of them be GPs in a deal?

Thanks!

[John Sayers]

I align with Evan on "operator" and I see your point on clarity.

Conceptually it is vague and intentionally misused by some syndicators who try to represent themselves as hands-on operators, but yet they don't source/secure deals nor asset manage them. They do syndicate them and may give some general GP input to theoretically stay legal. They tend to use "we" this and "we" that, but it's not a deal they themselves acquired, negotiated nor will directly manage. They mainly signon to raise $ on deals they like, which is fine and useful. The "we" thing however is a bad practice and can lack full upfront transparency which helps to fuel the confusion.

I tend to think of syndication/syndicator in the legal SEC sense and would still need to ask some of them if they are also the operator and asset manager/decision maker.

Some syndicators of course are 100% clear on their role and are much appreciated for the variety of options and insight they bring to the table via their connections.

Whisky vs bourbon in some sense. Almost everyone is a syndicator these days, not all are operators.

"sponsor" I tend to think of as generally anyone in the GP but the role could be anything, everything or 1 thing like signing the loan.

In the end, I always what to know who the  "day-to-day" asset manager and decision maker is. Shot caller. I tend to think of them as the operator.  Regardless, who really runs the day-to-day is maybe the thing to know for sure since terms are used loosely, interchangeable and even maybe incorrectly; myself included.