Luke Johnson

I spoke with Christien Louviere of BDE Capital about his journey from a $330mm exit to becoming an independent sponsor. Christien shared excellent insights for folks looking to partner with business owners, rather than buy sellers out completely. Below are a few of the topics we covered: - Why he moved from “zero-to-one” startups to a buy-then-build strategy - How Christien's background shaped a focus on growth vs. cost-cutting - Why 20–40% rolled equity is central to his deal structures—and how it builds trust with sellers - Using scenario analysis with AI tools to evaluate management teams and uncover hidden key-person risks - How to identify when a $3–5M EBITDA company truly has a middle management layer—or is still founder-reliant For anyone investing in or buying small businesses, Christien’s approach provides a fresh lens on growth, alignment, and deal structuring. 🎥 Watch the full interview here → https://lnkd.in/ekfkaiej 🎧 Listen on Spotify: https://lnkd.in/e86Agx6V

33

8 Comments

🥾 #bootstrapping as a mindset should be ephemeral, one that requires a deliberate transition away from as a business enters sustained growth Appointing an established auditor is often regarded as a luxury and not part of bootstrapping Audits discipline a business - to be methodical, thorough and deliberate - traits that acquirers often seek in due diligence After all, "What gets inspected, gets respected," Anon We will share the traits of venture businesses sought and respected by MNC acquirers, join us if your business is out of the #bootstrapping mindset #fulfillingpotential #hepmil #oobmil

24

1 Comment

ASVLP 2026 | EMERGING FUND MANAGERS ROUNDTABLE Navigating the 2026 VC Cycle: Opportunities, Constraints & Competitive Edge for Emerging Fund Managers Raising and deploying capital as an emerging fund manager in 2026 is no longer about momentum. It’s about positioning, credibility, and structural advantage. LP expectations have tightened. Capital formation is slower and more selective. And differentiation is no longer declared — it’s demonstrated. At ASVLP — Africa Startup & VC Landscape Preview, this high‑signal roundtable brings together experienced investors, capital allocators, and ecosystem leaders to unpack what it truly takes to compete — and survive — as a new fund manager in the current cycle. This is not a discussion about starting funds. It is a candid examination of how capital is actually being allocated, where emerging managers face real constraints, and what separates those who scale institutional credibility from those who stall. Speakers Emmie van Halder — @/MPower Netherlands Varun Turlapati — Chaanakya Capital Abiola Adediran, MBA, FCA, FIMC, CMC, M.CIoD — GENEA FAMILY OFFICE Emmanuel Adegboye — Madica Mope Abudu — AfriGloCal VC Zachariah George — Launch Africa Ventures Amb. Dr. Dunston P. — Private Office of H.H. Sheikh Ahmed Bin Faisal Al‑Qassimi Moderator Maha M. — COREangels MEA The conversation will explore: • What LPs are truly underwriting in emerging managers today • Where structural constraints — not talent — limit fund performance • How new managers can build defensible edge in portfolio construction, signalling, and partnerships • What must change for emerging funds to graduate into durable institutions Who should attend Emerging fund managers, LPs, DFIs, and ecosystem builders focused on shaping Africa & MENA’s next generation of venture capital — with discipline, not hype. ASVLP 2026 Participation is FREE but strictly by invitation. To join: Repost and comment #ASVLP2026 — your registration link will be sent via DM. This Session is Powered by COREangels MEA

40

12 Comments

💡Emerging GP Fundraising Insight #8: Rolling Closes Keep You Moving Small funds can't always afford to sit still until the target is hit. Rolling closes let you start deploying earlier, build a track record, and show momentum to prospective LPs. One GP told me that for Fund I ($5M target), he took capital as it came, signed, wired, and got to work. It wasn't perfect, but it kept the lights on and the deals moving. Sometimes the "sign and wire as it comes" approach is the only way to get moving. Takeaway: Momentum is a fundraising asset and rolling closes can help you keep it. Has anyone here used rolling closes as a strategic advantage?

29

13 Comments

Boards are supposed to help founders. Over the past 19 years, I've watched many trap them instead. As companies scale, many boards turn from insight to oversight and stop doing what founders actually need: Help making big, hard decisions. Early boards tend to be small, the board members are close to the business and highly invested in it. They argue from first principles. They help founders think. Later-stage boards often look more impressive on paper - they have more independent directors, committees and process. Somewhere along the way, collective problem solving gets replaced with oversight. The board shifts from helping the CEO make better decisions to monitoring decisions that have already been made. Strategy discussions get safer, real debate gets rarer and meetings become more about risk management than judgment. This usually coincides with the introduction of more professional board members. For better or worse, they often optimize for governance, optics, and liability management. That’s their job. But it’s not always what the company needs in moments of real uncertainty. Then, CEOs stop using them as thought partners. That’s a problem. So what should founders do? A few principles that help: • Keep the board as small as you can for as long as you can • Add directors for new insight they bring, not what boxes they check • Treat board seats like senior hires, not trophies • Design meetings for debate rather than reporting • Be explicit about when you want input vs approval Good boards should improve decision-making. If your board isn’t making you think harder, it’s probably not doing its job.

79

12 Comments

Are we witnessing the VC/PE model get rewritten in real time? For decades, the hierarchy was fixed: Institutional LPs sat at the top. Retail barely counted. Big LPs got fee breaks, “free” co-invests, and leverage over fund terms simply because of their size. But the FT just reported that EQT, the Nordic investment giant is for the 1st time in its history actively considering charging co-invest fees to its largest LPs, partly because of a surge in retail inflows. https://lnkd.in/ecPkhytx To me, this signals something bigger: Retail capital has become powerful enough that even top-tier managers are rethinking where their true pricing power sits. If this continues, the entire GP–LP dynamic starts to shift: • co-invests may no longer come “free” • fee structures rebalance • institutional dominance may erode • emerging managers with community-driven LP bases suddenly gain an edge The real story isn’t EQT’s fee tweak. It’s that retail power is now strong enough to bend a VC/PE model institutions dominated for decades. Is this a one-off… or the first visible sign of a deeper structural shift?

26

2 Comments

FORCING CHANGE IN SITE OF CARE McKinsey & Company's recent paper on the forces pressuring healthcare, including the possibility of margin compression of up to 13 percentage points for health systems, does a good job of putting numbers around what most operators already feel. Two of the biggest drivers they mention are policy shifts in reimbursement and rising utilization driven by an aging population. The cohort of 70+ year old Americans will grow the fastest over the next 5 years, and it is well established that older patients have more complex needs, more chronic disease, and more touchpoints within the healthcare system. Layer that on top of continued clinical workforce shortages, and the supply-demand gap widens further. From my perspective, optimizing for site of care is the most important lever we have to address this challenge. We can’t quickly reduce how much care older patients need, but we can change where and how services are delivered. Supporting aging patients in lower-cost settings like the home, ambulatory sites, and virtual environments is no longer just a preference or convenience, it’s a necessity. This is where the conversation around site-neutral payments becomes so relevant. CMS is moving quickly in this direction, and hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs) are squarely in the crosshairs. The shift will undoubtedly clamp down further on hospital margins, but it shouldn’t be surprising. We’ve been talking about the demise of HOPD reimbursement for years, and the health systems that will fare best are the ones who are working towards aligning their approach with where patients can be treated safely, efficiently, and at lower cost, rather than relying on legacy reimbursement structures to fill the gap. And just like it doesn’t make sense to try to replicate a hospital or nursing home environment in a patient’s home, we also shouldn’t try to carry the same clinical staffing model into every care setting. Yes, there are non-negotiables when it comes to patient safety and clinical expertise, but there’s also a meaningful opportunity to rethink how teams are built. That means clinicians at every level working at the top of their licenses, thoughtfully involving family members and community resources, and using technology to surround these sites of care with non-clinical operational support. From my health system days, I understand why rising costs, margin pressure, and site-neutral payments feel like threats. While painful, I’m hopeful they can also serve as a positive forcing function, pushing us toward care models that are better aligned with our aging population and the realities of today’s workforce.

23

1 Comment