Companion files
A Practical Playbook for Building, Operating and Scaling an Institutional Platform
These are the four Excel workbooks that go with the book. Between them they reproduce every figure the book prints — the waterfall of section 6.11, the build-to-core of 8.7, the proceeds gap of 10.10 — and turn the frameworks that surround those figures into working files. Each workbook ends with a checks sheet that sets what it computes beside what the book says. Every number is a live formula. Nothing is locked, protected or watermarked.
Free to download. No sign-up, no email address, nothing to fill in.
Chapter 6
The worked example of section 6.11, live: $100 million of capital, $170 million of distributions, an 8% preferred return and a 100% catch-up, arriving at $152.8 million to the LPs and $17.2 million to the GP. Fifteen printed figures, all reproduced. The section observes that the GP ends up with 24.6% of profit rather than the nominal 20%, and attributes it to the treatment of the preferred return. The arithmetic is worth being precise about: the example pays the GP a catch-up of $14.0M — its full 20%-of-profit target — and then still gives it 20% of the $16.0M that remains. A catch-up that genuinely stopped at 20% would pay $10.0M. The second sheet computes all three readings of "a 20% promote" side by side: $17.2M, $14.0M and $6.0M out of the same $70M of profit. The third builds the five-asset sequencing case of 6.12 and prices the clawback at $4.8M.
DownloadXLSX · 20 KBChapter 8
A trailing-twelve statement taken to an underwritten NOI through the four quality tests of 8.2, then scored on the six-criterion rubric, which feeds a required yield premium rather than sitting there decoratively. A rent roll that separates leased occupancy from operating occupancy — 92.9% against 60.3% on the worked example, which is the phantom-occupancy case of 8.3 in one line. The industrial build-to-core of 8.7 at a 7.0% yield on cost against a 5.75% market cap and $97.4M of implied value, with the 10% cost overrun that costs 64bps. The two-dimensional exit grid 8.8 asks for, with the cash flows shown rather than hidden behind a data table. The office repositioning of 8.9 in base, upside and a downside built to the four conditions that section names. And the 30-point pre-IC gate and nine LP red flags as a working document.
DownloadXLSX · 35 KBChapter 10
Proceeds computed under all four tests of 10.3 at once, with the binding test named and the headroom to the next one shown — which is the whole discipline of that chapter in one cell. A credit-box comparison across four lender types returns four different binding tests on the same asset, with $7.1M between the widest and the tightest. A rate-shock sheet where the cap holds the index at its strike but the DSCR after the cap premium still falls below 1.00x at +300bps, because the premium is an economic input and not a footnote. The debt dashboard of 10.8 with the four triage categories of 10.10 attached to each loan. And the proceeds-gap case in full: a $60M bridge, $48M of proceeds, a $12M gap, $6M of paydown and $6M of preferred equity — with the debt yield, not the LTV, as the test that binds.
DownloadXLSX · 27 KBChapters 11–14
A budget built from the rent roll up and driven by units and rates rather than by last year plus a percentage, with in-place operations separated from value creation. A variance sheet using the five-way taxonomy of 11.3 and its $10,000-or-3% threshold, which reconciles exactly to the change in NOI and produces a reforecast carrying only the structural variance. The 31-step quarterly close of Chapter 12. The 15-line risk register and the sequenced 90-day programme of 13.13. And the readiness scorecard of 14.12, with the decisive indicator handled separately because it is a judgement and not a score.
DownloadXLSX · 29 KB| Blue text | a hardcoded input — you may edit these |
| Black text | a formula — do not overtype these |
| Green text | a link to another sheet |
| Yellow fill | the assumptions that carry the answer |
The book notices that the GP lands at 24.6% of profit rather than 20%, and says the catch-up "was structured to bring GP up to 20% of total profits". If it had been, the GP would have finished at exactly $14.0M. What the example actually does is pay the catch-up in full and then run the residual split on top of it.
Both constructions appear in real documents, so this is a question of wording rather than an error of principle — and it is exactly the question the section closes by telling you to ask. The workbook puts the three readings in three columns so the wording has a price attached: on this fund, $11.2 million between the most and least GP-friendly.
Which is why "20% promote" settles nothing on its own, and why an LP model will always test the definition rather than the headline rate.
The workbooks open in Microsoft Excel, LibreOffice Calc, Google Sheets and Numbers. They use no macros and no add-ins, so nothing needs to be enabled or trusted. If your spreadsheet asks to update links on opening, decline — there are none.
The other books with companion files. The full list of titles is on the author page.