Private Equity Using New Technologies, Tactics to Deliver Investor Returns Despite Decrease in Global Dealmaking


PE M&A Professionals Expect Due Diligence to Speed Up in Next Five Years

Despite a decrease in global mergers and acquisitions (M&A) year to date, private equity (PE) professionals, especially in North America, are leaning into new tactics and technologies, including the use of artificial intelligence, to deliver investor returns. This is according to findings from the Invest in Insight: Private Equity Market Brief report from Datasite®, a leading cloud-based technology provider for the M&A industry, and PitchBook, a financial data and software company.

The report, which is based on market data and a survey of over 500 global PE professionals, shows that PE professionals are actively investing by using new tactics, such as providing credit lines, engaging in private investments in public equities (PIPEs) and contributing to special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs) to capitalize on opportunities to buy publicly listed companies. Additionally, the report highlights the potential for emerging technologies, including AI, to speed up the due diligence process, which more than two thirds of respondents see as the most important success factor, yet also the most time-consuming phase, of the M&A process. In fact, most PE professionals (61%) expect AI to shorten the average time to complete due diligence to one month or less by 2025 compared to the one to three months it takes today.

PE firms are deploying more equity and paring back debt in their portfolio companies to shore up business stability and survival rates. Given this focus on flexibility, dealmakers are also adapting their approaches to due diligence.

“The pandemic has dramatically disrupted deals, yet PE dealmakers have increased adoption of remote due diligence processes to continue investing,” said Rusty Wiley, Chief Executive Officer of Datasite. “To further set themselves up for success, PE firms should evaluate solutions that can support workflow and due

Facebook’s China Tactics Backfire – The New York Times


This article is part of the On Tech newsletter. You can sign up here to receive it weekdays.

Instagram’s boss had a message this week for the White House and the world: It was counterproductive for the United States to try to ban TikTok, the popular video app from China.

It’s bad for U.S. tech companies and people in the United States, Adam Mosseri, the head of Instagram, told Axios, if other countries take similar steps against technology from beyond their borders — including Facebook and its Instagram app. (He and Mark Zuckerberg have said this before, too.) “It’s really going to be problematic if we end up banning TikTok and we set a precedent for more countries to ban more apps,” he said.

Mosseri has a point. What he didn’t say, though, was that Facebook has itself partly to blame. The company helped fan the fears about TikTok that Facebook is now worried will blow back on the company. This is bonkers.

Facebook complaining about a bad policy that Facebook helped initiate might seem like an eye-rolling joke, but it’s more than that. It’s the latest evidence that the company’s executives are incapable of foresight. Facebook not predicting how its own actions might cause harm later on is partly why we have sprawling conspiracies and autocrats harassing their own citizens.

I genuinely wonder what Facebook expected to happen with its TikTok fearmongering. Over and over again for at least a year, Zuckerberg and other top Facebook executives privately and publicly spoke out against censorship by TikTok and other Chinese technology companies and complained that Chinese government support for domestic technology companies gave them a leg up over American companies.

They weren’t wrong. There are reasons to be worried about TikTok and other Chinese technology operating in the United

House investigation faults Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google for engaging in anti-competitive monopoly tactics


Congressional investigators faulted Facebook for gobbling up potential competitors with impunity, and they concluded Google improperly scraped rivals’ websites and forced its technology on others to reach its pole position in search and advertising. The lawmakers’ report labeled both of those firms as monopolies while faulting the federal government for failing to crack down on them sooner.

Amazon and Apple, meanwhile, exerted their own form of “monopoly power” to protect and grow their corporate footprints. As operators of two major online marketplaces — a world-leading shopping site for Amazon, and a powerful App Store for Apple — the two tech giants for years set rules that essentially put smaller, competing sellers and software developers at a disadvantage, the report found.

The House investigation stopped short of calling on the Trump administration to break up any of the companies. Instead, it proposed the most sweeping overhaul of U.S. antitrust law in decades, a series of legislative proposals that could empower the government to battle bigness in the tech industry and prevent future problematic mergers. Any such retooling would require approval from Congress, and they would affect not only Silicon Valley but the entire economy — essentially turning the House’s efforts into a broader assault against corporate consolidation.

“You look at farms and agriculture; you look at big banks, of course; you look at the housing market; you look at retail,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), one of the committee’s members. “Our focus is on tech, but there’s no question this would help strengthen competition and rein in anti-monopoly behavior across industries, which would benefit consumers.”

In the meantime, the House’s findings threaten to carry considerable legal weight, lending fresh evidence to state and federal officials as they actively investigate Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google for potential violations of antitrust rules. The