| Forgot your password? |
TDA I – IVCA Summary of Performance
TDA I is a success by all measures. As of September 30, 2009, nearly all of the $75 million has been committed to 18 funds. 15 of these funds are up and running and have drawn $25 million of their commitments so far; and, have invested in Illinois. (2 funds are still fundraising and have not yet deployed their capital; one fund has discontinued operations -- the TDA investment has gone back into the TDA account.) 1. First and foremost, the Fund is achieving its benchmark returns for its asset class and vintage year. It is a return-generating asset and does not cost the taxpayers. In fact, it should over time return money to the taxpayers. 2. Second, it is funding growth businesses in Illinois. 3. Third, since receiving the TDA-initiated capital, these 34 growth companies have: All this, with no cost to taxpayers. The proposed legislation for the TDA II fund (HB4819/SB 3655) would double the size of the program by:
Arguments presented against TDA I and TDA II The State shouldn’t be involved in activities better performed by the private sector. Most states recognize their role in providing assistance to the private sector in attracting additional investment capital to their states, which, in turn, provides economic and job growth. States in the Midwest, with the exception of Illinois, have comparatively robust state programs (and are continuing to develop and expand these programs) to help grow venture capital and private equity investing locally since local investors tend to invest in local companies, especially at the early stage when company and job growth is so dramatic (but also risky requiring hands-on oversight by these investors who bring not only money, but management experience and nurturing to the new growing companies). Additionally, as a January Brookings Institution report concludes, the Midwest (or as covered by the report the Great Lakes region) must have strong involvement by all potential parties, including state and local governments, to develop the infrastructure and capital necessary to develop innovative and stable/growing economies in the region, especially as these states compete with the coasts for investment dollars and talent. (Click here for BROOKINGS REPORT) The report strongly states that innovative and growing economies must have a strong venture capital sector with sufficient capital and deal-making capacity locally to focus on early stage investments. It goes on to discuss why early stage investing has significantly declined in the region while remaining robust on the coasts, adding that this is the area where state involvement is critical, partnering with the private sector to provide much needed capital to early stage venture investing. Such support should be carefully supplied – working with proven professional investors and advisors, removing politics from the equation and focusing on investment results which will provide the additional benefits of economic and job growth. TDA I investments are going out of state so why should the state support it or another fund? TDA I and TDA II first and foremost are driven by investment returns, as they should be. These are not economic development programs, although the investments do result in local economic development and job growth. These programs are focused on Illinois and the dollars do go to Illinois-based venture capital and private equity firms, which in turn first look for the best investment opportunities in the state and then elsewhere. But all TDA capital invested in Illinois-based funds has in effect gone to Illinois companies – the $25 million invested by TDA in Illinois funds and deployed by those funds has resulted in 22X additional investments here (additional investment dollars from the recipient VC/PE firms themselves as well as investments from elsewhere). State investments act as a type of endorsement that draws other investors to Illinois, providing additional funding to companies in the state to grow and increase employment here. All state programs similar to these do encourage local investing but do not mandate it recognizing that a mandate of this type would likely negatively affect investment returns.