Taaleri as an investment

[Kermit]

I want to be a bit difficult for a moment and push back.

@mutu_sijoittaja

• The scale here is still small (NSI ~1 MEUR revenue and earnings around zero), but if the next fund can be scaled to the 100–200 MEUR range, the leverage starts to be in a completely different class. So in a way, this is looking for an option for the future, not results yet.

This “if” is exactly the problem here. Where is the money coming from? It is certainly not a given.

@mutu_sijoittaja

• It is also positive that this isn’t exactly a “generic VC expansion”, but rather a research-led angle. It stands out quite well in the Finnish field, where the traditional PE/fund-of-funds setup is already quite crowded.

To me, this is exactly a rather generic VC expansion. All early-stage investors are looking for research-based targets to find the next Iceye or IQM. It then depends on the team whether they can find and win the best targets.

@mutu_sijoittaja

• Personally, I don’t see this as such a person-driven business as many might think at first reaction. Taaleri already has larger funds and distribution channels → if these can be combined with early-stage activities, it could become a quite functional “pipeline”.

See the previous bullet. It is very much people-driven. Of course, the distribution channel should help, but the fact that there is already a large infra fund in the same house doesn’t necessarily mean much for this. I suppose there could be some of the same investors (does Tesi invest in energy?), but none of them invest just because it’s Taaleri. Instead, they look at the team they would be giving their money to. Some foundation-types, if there are good relationships with them, are probably the most likely group.