Peter Lacaillade

Maybe this is a catalyst.

Definitely not to meet their minimum, but maybe as a favor.

It's probably less than five.

But I think that there's- I'm interested in that.

There's a number of people that are really credible.

And so I'm pretty outspoken about this.

There's a lot of folks that are trying to do things internally.

I've been on a whole host of reference calls recently with various institutions.

And in many cases, they're trying to go directly, but they don't really know what they're doing.

And my advice to them, they don't ask me that practically, says you should probably, at least if you're committing, let's just for round numbers, say 300 million bucks a year or whatever it might be, you should put a third of that into a fund of funds and maybe or split that across a small buyout fund of funds and a venture fund of funds and then build on top of that, but not try to do it all internally working with a consultant.

So I think a number of the fund of funds are doing thoughtful work.

I think people need to be intellectually honest about what they're doing, why they have a reason to source the best, get access to the best, do the best diligence.

I'd also say the single family office world.

I mean, these people are very wealthy.

They have their own prerogative.

But I think a lot of the stuff they're doing has adverse selection and not the right portfolio construction.

Those families will be generally fine.

But maybe a hot take is I think that fund of funds are probably underrated.

Yeah, well said.

I would agree.