Matt Dickens discusses changes in the Ingenious’ model after the Autumn Budget 2017. He talks about growing opportunities of the company’s EIS media offering, focused on the production of global TV, film and video content. He explains deployment speed and exit mechanism in its media investments. Dickens also shares his insights on advisers’ mixed reaction toward EIS changes after the Patient Capital Review.
On the eve of launching a new EIS fund, founder Mark Pearson talks about his entrepreneurial journey and Fuel Ventures’ background. He stresses the potential of digital tech as a scalable opportunity and discusses the company’s selection process. Pearson also talks about his emphasis on support and involvement into the investee company’s journey. He then explains the rationale between Fuel Venture’s business model focused on investing into a small number of companies.
Louise Farley explains that the Patient Capital Review didn’t change much for Deepbridge as the company had previously had a knowledge-intensive focus. She covers the underlying investments in Deepbridge’s portfolio, deal flow and expansion into new specialist sub-sectors of tech and life science. Farley also explains the company’s support philosophy for investee companies.
Steve Harris talks about Committed Capital’s pedigree in technology investments. He discusses the company’s selection regime. He also stresses the importance of investing more in research and development as “R&D is a linchpin to serve the UK technology sector.” Speaking about Committed Capital’s USP, he believes that discipline and systematicity are two factors that set it apart from the competition.
David Craven talks about Blackfinch’s shift towards technology, innovation and growth in the EIS space after the Patient Capital Review. He discusses the company’s “aggressive” screening process and the underlying investments in the portfolio. Craven stresses Blackfinch’s commitment to support and mentor investee companies on a more personal level. Looking into the future, he would like to see more cooperation in the EIS world to attract more capital and elevate the UK’s position in the tech space.
James Faulkner comments on the market implications of the Patient Capital Review. He then discusses knowledge-intensive companies in Vala’s portfolio and its selection process. Faulkner stresses Vala’s commitment to mentoring and helping investee companies through to exit. He also signals the need for greater digitisation of the administrative process of EIS investing.
Henny Dovland discusses TIME: AIM service and the company’s “smart passive” approach, as well as TIME’s defensive strategy. She explains what the approach means for TIME’s selection criteria and how the passive element allows advisers to put a cost-effective proposition. Dovland also talks about the size and performance of the portfolio and TIME’s re-balancing regime.
Shane Gallwey talks exhaustively about Guinness’ AIM EIS product, the only EIS fund directly investing on AIM. He explains how the loss relief works in the AIM EIS and lists characteristics of EIS-eligible companies on AIM. Barton then discusses the increasing transparency and quality of AIM companies, despite the market shrinking.
Justin Waine discusses Puma’s AIM IHT Service and how the company’s model portfolio approach differs from others available on the market. He covers in-depth Puma’s three selection criteria: quality, growth and valuation. Waine also explains what it meant for the company to enter adviser platforms and talks about the company’s selling regime.
Sam Barton covers in-depth Close Brothers’ AIM IHT service and the active management approach. He discusses the challenges of selecting AIM companies and explains the rationale behind the company’s higher than average minimum investment. He also shares his perspective on key considerations FAs should take into account when entering the AIM market.