No, but they shouldn't be allowed to not act as fiduciaries, and do what they do now, which is to load debt, do bolloxed sell-lease contracts, and basically take money from all sides, and screw everyone else into a pulp.
It's a garbage model out of a Dicken's novel and is a huge reason why a groundswell of anti-capitalistic sentiment keeps growing. It's a case study in "worst practices" of venality.
> which is to load debt ... and screw everyone else into a pulp
Individuals are just as capable of doing this, just look at Twitter and there are plenty of adequately run companies owned by PE. We just don't pay attention to them.
But yeah somehow severely limiting debt funded acquisitions (when the debt is offloaded to the company which is being acquired) would probably be a very good idea.
Yes, but fiduciaries aren't (and even VCs generally try not to).
" there are plenty of adequately run companies owned by PE
Define "adequate" and which ones are they? I've certainly experienced directly and indirectly enough to know I'm quite burned on them, and I have yet to meet a single person who enjoyed dealing with one, that wasn't one; anyone on the receiving end of endless cost cutting, sell leasebacks, forced vendor changes to more closely align with portfolio choices regardless of sense, etc.
No, the people who seem to love PEs are either Ayn Rand's fluffer contingent, adjacently or are making money off one already without having to be subjected to their profoundly absent graces.
It's a garbage model out of a Dicken's novel and is a huge reason why a groundswell of anti-capitalistic sentiment keeps growing. It's a case study in "worst practices" of venality.