![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This template should be applied to articles relating to private equity and venture capital concepts
See also:
I noticed that the link labeled "
Bootstrap funding" points to the (differently "named") article on
Entrepreneurship. ("[[Entrepreneurship|Bootstrap funding]]
"). I understand that there may be some story behind this -- (such as, perhaps there used to be an article on "
Bootstrap funding", which no longer exists?) (and, it now "re-directs" to the article on
Entrepreneurship); but I have not taken the time to study the history thereof.
Anyone care to clue me in? TIA, -- Mike Schwartz ( talk) 15:28, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Should the top section be sub-divided to accommodate strategies (there are large, mid and small-cap strategies; also buyout, growth, minority, pipe etc; also different investment theses e.g. distress, operational alpha, financial engineering, tax engineering etc). Also worth thinking about where tactics (?) like operating groups / partners, tied advisors etc sit in the taxonomy. Super useful to have these though ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.92.241.89 ( talk) 20:09, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This template should be applied to articles relating to private equity and venture capital concepts
See also:
I noticed that the link labeled "
Bootstrap funding" points to the (differently "named") article on
Entrepreneurship. ("[[Entrepreneurship|Bootstrap funding]]
"). I understand that there may be some story behind this -- (such as, perhaps there used to be an article on "
Bootstrap funding", which no longer exists?) (and, it now "re-directs" to the article on
Entrepreneurship); but I have not taken the time to study the history thereof.
Anyone care to clue me in? TIA, -- Mike Schwartz ( talk) 15:28, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Should the top section be sub-divided to accommodate strategies (there are large, mid and small-cap strategies; also buyout, growth, minority, pipe etc; also different investment theses e.g. distress, operational alpha, financial engineering, tax engineering etc). Also worth thinking about where tactics (?) like operating groups / partners, tied advisors etc sit in the taxonomy. Super useful to have these though ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.92.241.89 ( talk) 20:09, 10 September 2016 (UTC)