"We should change the cadence of general meetings to 18 months or more and GPs should visit LPs more frequently." - I put that advice in an email yesterday and I'm curious what other LPs think about it? Annual meetings are a lot of work and cost. Do they accomplish their goals?

The stated goal is to report on fund investments to LPs. The meetings are also a way to build and maintain important relationships for future fundraising. They also serve as institutional rigor that is healthy for the GPs to evaluate a portfolio and strategy in total.

LPs use general meetings to network & reference, forming community amongst themselves too. Small meetings are so much better on all dynamics whereas some of the large funds have a giant ballroom and no personal connections. Those feel empty.

We @foundrygroup are direct investors first & only invest in small funds where we really know the GPs. So I could be way off base relative to others but...I often feel that GPs are holding AGMs b/c they are obligated to do so and LPs are showing up b/c they feel pressure as well

I'm not saying that we should do away with general meetings. It's the cadence and format I question. Would all be better served by a similar frequency of interaction but a different format? 18 months between general meetings and more frequent individual interactions?

Individual LP representatives are turning over a lot and it's become more important to get into their offices and meet the broader teams so you have general support. https://www.ldeakman.com/archives/2019/02/a-churning-lp-landscape-and-a-bunch-of-great-jobs.html

A couple of our funds don't hold formal general meetings but instead call it a "traveling general meeting" where they go to visit their institutional LPs. I think this could be a good off-year substitute for in-person general meetings with deeper individual connects for LPs/GPs

So - What do you think @CendanaCapital @Samirkaji @cdouvos @Beezer232 @TTCP_SF @LP2LP2VC #openLP Should we change the cadence of annual meetings? Could 18 months reduce the cost/headache of logistics and still meet the goals of a general meeting? I think so.