SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  217
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
The Global Venture Capital
               and Private Equity
               Country Attractiveness Index
               2009/2010 annual
               Alexander Groh & Heinrich Liechtenstein



Sponsored by
The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity
Country Attractiveness Index

2009/2010 annual




Alexander Groh & Heinrich Liechtenstein




                                          Sponsored by
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Contents
         Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       6
         Sponsors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     8
         About the editors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                9
         Research team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .              9

I. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                                                                                       11
         How to measure a country’s attractiveness for limited partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                                                            12
         The 2009/2010 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                     16
         Comparisons of regions and countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                            22
         Tracking power of our index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                               28
         Summary and outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                         30

II. Legal systems, taxes and VC and PE activity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                                                                          33
         After the storm: a global view on post-recession opportunities and
         challenges for the PE and VC industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
         Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index -
         Legal Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

III. An insight into different VC and PE markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                                                                            39
         Africa: Governance, development and budding VC and PE activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
         Asia: Does vibrant entrepreneurial activity and expected growth
         compensate some weaknesses? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
         Latin America: VC and PE in Latin America after the crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

IV. Regional and country profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                                         51
         How to read the country and regional profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
         Regional profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
         Country profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

V. Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .           203
         Computation of the index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                           204
         Statistical validation of the index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                  206
         Limitations of our index and FAQs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                      207
         Table with sources and explanations of the data series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                                               208
         References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      216
Foreword
from the research team
In this annual, we want to present the results of a
comprehensive research project on how to measure the
attractiveness of a country for investors in Venture Capital
(VC) and Private Equity (PE) limited partnerships. The project
was initiated at IESE Business School in Barcelona in 2006
with a European pilot study. From the European study we
gained experience and the confidence to extend the study
globally. Since 2006 two professors, one doctoral student, and
many research assistants have worked on the project.
We selected and collected more than 300 different data series
from all kind of providers – some ranging back to 2000. We
attempted to include as many countries as possible in
the study, and handled approximately 200,000 individual
data records.

We would not have been able to realize this without the
generous financial and non financial contributions from
our sponsors, and we greatly appreciate the support of IESE
Business School, their International Center for Financial
Research (CIIF), Ernst &Young, and DLA Piper Weiss Tessbach.

This is the first edition of the Venture Capital and Private
Equity (VCPE) Country Attractiveness Index. This index will
be subject to critique and we invite constructive feedback to
help us improve future editions of the index. Selected data
series may be subject to change in future editions and new
and more appropriate data series may be used as a substitute
to existing data. The quality of data and the number of
countries covered will increase. As a result, our index will be
a dynamic product that always considers the most adequate
and recent data. We believe this index is unique in providing
the VC and PE market segment with such a broad scope. We
hope investors will appreciate the information included in this
index; politicians may utilize the index to make improvements
in their countries to attract international risk capital.

We hope that you find our 2009/2010 Venture Capital and
Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index of value.



                                             Website
                                             Please visit our website http://vcpeindex.iese.us/
                                             where you will find more information, links to literature
                                             and several analytical tools for benchmarking purposes.
Professor Josh Lerner
                                                               Jacob H. Schiff Professor of Investment Banking

Foreword                                                       Harvard Business School




Virtually every high growth business needs               Another important trend has been the
capital. Investors allocate assets to earn               professionalization of the venture capital
substantial returns. One would imagine that              industry itself. Venture capital and private
the two facts above would bring venture                  equity organizations have matured. Their
capitalists and entrepreneurs together.                  investment policies, procedures, and systems
                                                         have been refined over decades of experience,
But, in fact, a significant gap separates the two         and are becoming formalized and structured.
groups. Entrepreneurs live in great uncertainty          As a result of these two trends, it is no surprise
and assume significant risk in pursuing their             that many nations are making greater efforts to
business, whether a young start up or a                  encouraging venture capital activity with an eye
restructuring division. Venture capitalists and          to boosting innovation and entrepreneurship,
private equity investors are a special breed, who        and to counteracting the recessionary impact
seek to help entrepreneurs triumph, but have             of the global economic crisis on growth.
fiduciary responsibilities to their own investors
(whether pensions, sovereign wealth funds,               With the emergence of venture capital and
endowments, or families), which limit their              private equity investment as a professional
ability to absorb all the risk in new ventures.          practice, understanding the way in which
While venture capital and private equity                 this industry works is critically important for
has become a well developed industry in the              policymakers, practitioners, and would be
United States and Western Europe, in many                practitioners, whether they are (or aspire to be)
other parts of the world, a gap in experience            working for entrepreneurial ventures, venture
and expectations has slowed the adoption of              capital and private equity firms, or large
venture capital and private equity funds, and            institutional capital pools. I applaud Alexander
limited the success of the pioneering funds.             Groh and Heinrich Liechtenstein, who have taken
                                                         the heroic step of trying to draw together all the
But in the past few years, the venture                   information needed to assess whether a market
capital and private equity industry has been             is ready for venture capital and private equity.
globalizing at a dramatic pace. Funds are
increasingly being raised internationally and            The country attractiveness index—which builds
invested globally. More and more firms have               on academic research into the determinants
established multinational operations. There is           of these funds world wide—provides valuable
an increasing appreciation by entrepreneurs              information to investors and political leaders
world wide of the benefits that venture and               about which markets are most suited for
growth equity investors can bring. Company               private investments. The index results both
managers are increasingly setting ambitious              provide answers and raise questions—e.g., to
goals and looking to these investors to provide          what extent will the financial crisis upend
the capital, advice, and strategic partnerships          the established order of the most attractive
they need to bring their plans to fruition.              markets?—but represent an important step in
                                                         systemizing our understanding of these issues.

                                                         Enjoy the reading!




                   The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual   7
Sponsors

    We are very grateful to our sponsors IESE Business School/CIIF, Ernst & Young,
    and DLA Piper Weiss-Tessbach for the financial support, their feedback
    throughout the project and their direct contributions to the index.

    IESE Business School – University of Navarra             Business School and has established itself as a nu-
    is one of the world´s top 10 business schools and        cleus of study within the School’s activities.
    has pioneered executive education in Europe since            Sixteen years on, our chief objectives remain
    its foundation in 1958 in Barcelona. In 1964 IESE        the same:
    introduced Europe’s first full-time MBA program.          • Find answers to the questions that confront the
    IESE distinguishes itself in its general-management         owners and managers of finance companies,
    approach, extensive use of case method, interna-            and the finance director of all kind of compa-
    tional outreach, and emphasis on placing people at          nies in the performance of their duties.
    the heart of managerial decision-making. With a          • Develop new tools for financial management.
    truly global outlook, IESE currently runs executive-     • Study in depth the changes that occur in the
    education programs on four continents.                      market and their effects on the financial dimen-
        The CIIF, International Center for Financial Re-        sion of business activity.
    search, is an interdisciplinary center with an inter-    All of these activities are programmed and carried
    national outlook and a focus on teaching and re-         out with the support of our sponsoring companies.
    search in finance. It was created at the beginning        Apart from providing vital financial assistance, our
    of 1992 to channel the financial research interest        sponsors also help to define the Center’s research
    of a multidisciplinary group of professors at IESE       projects, ensuring their practical relevance.


    Ernst & Young is a global leader in assurance, tax,         Our private equity and venture capital practices
    transaction and advisory services. Worldwide, our        therefore offer a holistic, tailored approach that en-
    144,000 people are united by our shared values and       compasses the needs of funds, their M&A process
    an unwavering commitment to quality. We make a           and portfolio companies while addressing market,
    difference by helping our people, our clients and        industry and regulatory concerns and opportunities.
    our wider communities achieve their potential.              We hope that the Global VC/PE Country Attrac-
       Potential is a key word for equity capital ma-        tiveness Index proves to be a valuable tool in hel-
    nagement. Deal success doesn’t end when the deal         ping funds navigate through this uncertain time.
    closes. Acquirers know success and stakeholder           For more information please visit www.ey.com
    value lie in portfolio companies’ continued growth
    under their watch and after their exits.



                                                             including corporate, M&A, venture capital and
    DLA Piper Weiss Tessbach is part of DLA Piper,
                                                             capital markets, banking and finance, litigation
    one of the largest global legal services prac-
                                                             and regulatory, general commercial law, real es-
    tices, with over 3,500 lawyers in 67 offices in 29
                                                             tate, employment law, IT, telecoms and IP and ad-
    countries. From its offices in Asia, Europe, the
                                                             vises its clients as a full-service firm in all relevant
    Middle East and the US, legal and business ad-
                                                             areas of business law.
    visers provide a broad range of services to local,
                                                                For further information, please visit:
    regional and international clients. The firm is hi-
                                                             www.dlapiper.com.
    ghly acknowledged in its core areas of expertise




8     The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
About the editors

Prof. Alexander Groh                           Prof. Heinrich Liechtenstein                                Research team
                                                                                                           Alexander Groh
Dr. Alexander Groh is Visiting Professor at    Dr. Heinrich Liechtenstein is Professor of
                                                                                                           Visiting Professor,
IESE Business School, Barcelona – Univer-      Financial Management at IESE Business
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona
sity of Navarra, Spain. His research activi-   School, Barcelona – University of Navarra,
ties focus on VC and PE, and include va-       Spain. His areas of interest are entrepre-
                                                                                                           Heinrich Liechtenstein
luation issues, performance measurement        neurial finance, VC and PE, wealth ma-
                                                                                                           Assistant Professor,
and socio-economic determinants for the        nagement, and owners’ strategies. He is
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona
development of national markets. He is         active in several supervisory and advisory
Associate Professor of Finance at GSCM –       boards of family holdings and founda-
                                                                                                           Karsten Lieser
Montpellier Business School, France. Prior     tions, as well as a private equity firm.
                                                                                                           Visiting PhD Student,
to that, he was visiting INSEAD, Fontaine-        Dr. Liechtenstein has experience in
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona
bleau, France, and was Assistant Professor     wealth management and owners' strate-
of Corporate Finance and Entrepreneurial       gies at Liechtenstein Global Trust, a family
                                                                                                           Miriam Hesse
Finance at Darmstadt University of Tech-       holding, and as a consultant at The Boston
                                                                                                           Research Assistant,
nology, Germany. He is involved in training    Consulting Group. He has previously foun-
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona
courses for the European Venture Capital       ded and sold two companies.
and Private Equity Association (EVCA), and        Dr. Liechtenstein was born in Leoben,
                                                                                                           Renata Semmel
the Indian Venture Capital and Private         Austria, and received an MA in Business
                                                                                                           Research Assistant,
Equity Association (IVCA), and has worked      Administration from the University of
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona
for Quadriga Capital, a Frankfurt based        Graz, an MBA from IESE Business School,
Private Equity fund, since 1996.               and a Doctoral Degree of Business and
                                                                                                           Sarp Vardarizi
    Dr. Alexander Groh was born in Frank-      Economic Sciences from the University of
                                                                                                           Research Assistant,
furt, Germany. He received a joint Master’s    Vienna.
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona
Degree of Mechanical Engineering and
Business Administration from Darmstadt
                                                                                                           Matthias Wich
University of Technology, where he also
                                                                                                           Research Assistant,
gained his Doctoral Degree in Finance.
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona

                                                                                                           Tobias Götz
                                                                                                           Research Assistant,
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona

                                                                                                           Markus Grabellus
                                                                                                           Research Assistant,
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona

                                                                                                           Markus Biesinger
                                                                                                           Research Assistant,
                                                                                                           IESE Business School Barcelona




                                                The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual   9
I.




10   The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
The Global VC/PE Country
Attractiveness Index
Article written by Alexander Groh, agroh@iese.edu, and Heinrich Liechtenstein, hl@iese.edu,
both, IESE Business School Barcelona.




                          The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual   11
The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index




     How to measure a country’s attractiveness
     for limited partners

      The purpose of our index is to                                      in particular nations and will benchmark
      benchmark countries with respect to                                 them. A politician has the opportunity
      their attractiveness for institutional                              to influence the conditions that attract
      investors who decide upon international                             (or deter) international risk capital: an
      allocations in VC and PE limited                                    investor will respond to policy actions.
      partnerships. We therefore take an                                  Therefore, attempts to increase risk
      institutional investor’s point of view for                          capital market activity in a particular
      the aggregation and analyses of socio-                              country should focus on the relationship
      economic data. We want to contribute                                between the parties that deserve capital
      to solving the investor’s problem: where                            and those who provide it. Risk capital is
      to allocate the capital. However, a                                 a high liquid asset class with respect to
      politician may conclude that a vibrant                              international allocations. Funds will flow
      risk capital market supports innovation,                            quickly into regions and countries where
      entrepreneurship, economic growth,                                  investors expect opportunities. Nations
      employment, and wealth. Both the                                    (and regions) are in strong competition
      politician, who would like to increase risk                         for receiving allocations from limited
      capital market activity, and the investor,                          partners.
      who seeks adequate compensation for the
      investment risk, will observe strengths
      and weaknesses, risks and opportunities




12    The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
What are institutional investors’                            Importance of Economic Activity                  the findings are equally valid for the later
selection criteria?                                          Intuitively, the state of a country’s eco-       stage. Jeng and Wells (2000) stress that
Our index addresses the concerns of insti-                   nomy should affect the VC/PE activity.           IPO activity is the main force behind cy-
tutional investors and looks at the criteria                 An economy’s size is an indicator of the         clical swings because it reflects the poten-
they base their international VC and PE                      quantity of corporations and deal flow op-        tial return to the VC/PE funds. Kaplan and
allocation decisions upon. Their allocation                  portunities in general. Economic growth          Schoar (2005) confirm this. Analogous to
criteria will include, in the first instance,                 should lead to demand for finance. Gom-           Black and Gilson (1998), Gompers and Ler-
the expected economic opportunities of                       pers and Lerner (1998) focus on the VC           ner (2000) point out that risk capital flou-
a country or region from a macro pers-                       segment and point out that more attrac-          rishes in countries with deep and liquid
pective. However, they will also include a                   tive opportunities exist for entrepreneurs       stock markets. Likewise, Schertler (2003)
particular investment strategy of a fund                     if the economy is growing quickly. Wilken        uses either the capitalization of stock mar-
management team, the team’s compe-                           (1979) argues that a situation of econo-         kets or the number of listed companies as
tence, their track record and other para-                    mic prosperity and development facilitates       a measure for the liquidity of stock mar-
meters. The latter criteria will be addressed                entrepreneurship, as it provides a greater       kets. She finds that the liquidity of stock
as part of their fund due diligence before                   accumulation of capital for investments.         markets has a significant positive impact
limited partners consider committing to a                    The ease of start-ups is expected to be re-      on VC investments in its early stages.
particular general partner. These criteria                   lated to societal wealth, not solely due to      Alongside the disadvantages of bank-
are beyond of the scope of our index be-                     the availability of start-up financing, but       centered capital markets, Greene (1998)
cause they depend on individual cases. Our                   also to higher income among potential            emphasizes that low availability of debt
index points to the general opportunities                    customers in the domestic market. Ro-            financing is an obstacle for start-ups in
that arise from the socio-economic state                     main and van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie        many countries. Entrepreneurs need to
of a country or region and as a result, we                   (2004) find that VC/PE activity is cyclical       find backers - whether banks or VC/PE
contribute to the macro perspective of the                   and significantly related to gross domestic       funds - who are willing to bear risk. Ce-
fund due diligence. Our index provides va-                   product (GDP) growth.                            torelli and Gambera (2001) provide evi-
luable information to investors as it is the                                                                  dence that bank concentration promotes
first time that the different factors that de-                Importance of the Depth of a Capital             the growth of those industrial sectors that
termine the attractiveness of a country for                  Market                                           have a higher need for external finance by
limited partners have been summarized in                     Black and Gilson (1998) focus on the diffe-      facilitating credit access to younger com-
a composite measure. The decisive factors                    rences between bank-centered and stock           panies in said industry sectors.
that render a country attractive have been                   market-centered capital markets. They
extensively discussed in literature about the                argue that a well-developed stock mar-           Importance of Taxation
determinants of vibrant VC and PE markets.                   ket that permits venture capitalists to exit     We assume that two types of taxes affect
We give a brief overview over this literature                through an initial public offering (IPO) is      VC and PE activity; those directly related to
and group the articles into six sub-chap-                    crucial for the existence of a vibrant VC        the asset class, such as taxes on dividends
ters that already reveal the structure of our                market. In general, bank-centered capital        and capital gains, and those with an im-
index. Each heading represents one of six                    markets show less ability to produce an ef-      pact on corporations and entrepreneurship,
key drivers that we regard as important,                     ficient VC infrastructure. They affirm that        such as corporate tax rates. Gompers and
appropriate and quantifiable to determine                     it is not merely the strong stock market         Lerner (1998) stress that the capital gains
the attractiveness of a country for limited                  that is missing in bank-centered capital         tax rate influences VC/PE activity. In fact,
partners. The key drivers name and define                     markets; it is also the secondary institu-       they confirm Poterba’s finding (1989), who
a set of criteria we need to assess for our                  tions, including the bankers’ conservative       builds a decision-model to become entre-
sample countries.1                                           approach to lending and investing, and           preneur. Bruce (2000 and 2002), and Cullen
                                                             the social and financial incentives that          and Gordon (2002) prove that taxes mat-
                                                             reward entrepreneurs less richly (and pe-        ter for business entry and exit. Djankov et
1. Groh, Alexander, Liechtenstein, Heinrich and Lieser,
Karsten (2009a) : The European Venture Capital and Private   nalize failure more severely), that compro-      al. (2008) show that corporate tax rates
Equity Country Attractiveness Indices, forthcoming in the    mise entrepreneurial activity. While their       strongly affect entrepreneurship. Bruce and
Journal of Corporate Finance (Re-print). Available at
http://ssrn.com/author=330804.                               paper focuses on the early stage segment,        Gurley (2005) explain that increases in the




                                                              The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual   13
The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index




     personal income tax raise the probability of      ting standards have a significant impact            Rigid labor market policies negatively
     becoming an entrepreneur. Hence, the dif-         on the governance of investments in the         affect the evolution of a VC/PE market.
     ference between personal income tax rates         VC/PE industry. Desai et al. (2006) show,       Lazear (1990) and Blanchard (1997) dis-
     and corporate tax rates tends to be an in-        that fairness and property rights protec-       cuss how protection of workers can reduce
     centive to create self-employment.                tion largely determine the growth and           employment and growth. Black and Gilson
                                                       emergence of new enterprises. Cumming           (1998) argue that labor market restric-
     Importance of Investor Protection                 and Johan (2007), meanwhile, highlight          tions influence VC/PE activity, though not
     and Corporate Governance                          the perceived importance of regulatory          to the same extent as the stock market.
     Legal structures and the protection of            harmonization with respect to increasing           Djankov et al. (2002) investigate the
     property rights also influence the at-             institutional investor commitments to           role of several societal burdens for start-
     tractiveness of a VC/PE market. La Porta          the asset class. La Porta et al. (2002) find     ups in different countries. They conclude
     et al. (1997 and 1998) confirm that the            a lower cost of capital for companies in        that the highest barriers and costs are
     legal environment strongly determines             countries with better investor protection,      associated with corruption, crime, a lar-
     the size and extent of a country’s capital        and Lerner and Schoar (2005) confirm             ger unofficial economy, and bureaucratic
     market and local companies’ ability to re-        these findings. Johnson et al. (1999) show       delay.
     ceive outside financing. They emphasize            that weak property rights limit the rein-
     the difference between statutory law and          vestment of profits in start-up compa-           Importance of Entrepreneurial
     the quality of law enforcement in some            nies. Finally and more broadly, Knack and       Culture and Opportunities
     countries. Roe (2006) comprehensively             Keefer (1995), Mauro (1995), and Svens-         Access to viable investments is one of the
     discusses and compares the political deter-       son (1998) demonstrate that property            most important factors for the attracti-
     minants of corporate governance rules for         rights significantly affect investments and      veness of a regional VC market, especially
     the major economies and focuses on the            economic growth.                                for early stage or start-up deals. The num-
     importance of strong minority sharehol-                                                           ber of potential investments relates to the
     der protection to develop a vibrant capital       Importance of the Human and Social              research output in an economy. Gompers
     market. Glaeser et al. (2001) and Djankov         Environment                                     and Lerner (1998) show that both indus-
     et al. (2003 and 2005) suggest that parties       Black and Gilson (1998), Lee and Peterson       trial and academic research and deve-
     in common-law countries have greater              (2000), and Baughn and Neupert (2003)           lopment (R&D) expenditure significantly
     ease in enforcing their rights from com-          argue that national culture shapes both         correlates with VC activity. Kortum and
     mercial contracts. Cumming et al. (2006)          individual orientation and environmental        Lerner (2000) highlight that the growth in
     find that the quality of a country’s legal         conditions, which lead to different levels      VC fundraising in the mid-1990s may be
     system is more closely connected to faci-         of entrepreneurial activity in particular       due to a surge of patents in the late 1980s
     litating VC/PE backed exits than the size         countries. Megginson (2004) argues that,        and 1990s. Schertler (2003) emphasizes
     of a country’s stock market. Cumming et           in order to foster a growing risk capital       that the number of both R&D employees
     al. (2009) extend this finding and show            industry, research culture plays an impor-      and patents, as an approximation of the
     that cross-country differences in lega-           tant role, especially in universities or na-    human capital endowment, has a positive
     lity, including legal origin and accoun-          tional laboratories.                            and highly significant influence on VC ac-




14     The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
tivity. Furthermore, Romain and von Pot-          For the index calculation, it would be
telsberghe de la Potterie (2004) find that      ideal to include all parameters. However,
start-up activity interacts with the R&D       some of the cited papers focus on parti-
capital stock, with technological opportu-     cular economies or regions, depending
nities, and the number of patents. Simi-       on the data available, and their datasets
lar to Djankov et al. (2002), Baughn and       are difficult to compare. Therefore, we try
Neupert (2003) argue that bureaucracy in       to find the best possible proxies for the
the form of excessive rules and procedural     aforementioned drivers of VC/PE activity,
requirements, multiple institutions from       which are available for a large number of
which approvals are needed, and cumber-        countries. From the foregoing review of
some documentation requirements may            prior research, we identified six main cri-
severely constrain entrepreneurial activity.   teria that ultimately determine the attrac-
Lee and Peterson (2000) stress that the        tiveness of an individual country for VC/
time and money required to meet such           PE investments: Economic Activity, Depth
administrative burdens may discourage          of a Capital Market, Taxation, Investor
new venture creations.                         Protection and Corporate Governance,
                                               Human and Social Environment, and En-
Summary on the determinants of                 trepreneurial Culture and Opportunities.
vibrant VC and PE markets                      We regard these criteria as “key drivers”,
The research findings discussed emphasize       confirm their choice via a survey among
the difficulty of identifying the appro-        institutional investors, reported in Groh
priate parameters for our index. There is      and Liechtenstein (2009b) and (2009c),
neither consensus about the most impor-        and base the index structure upon them.
tant parameters for VC/PE investment,          Since none of the key drivers are di-
nor any ranking. While some parameters         rectly measurable, we regard them as
are more comprehensively discussed,            “constructs” and seek for data series that
and certainly of very high relevance, it       adequately express their character.
remains unclear how these interact. For
example, it is debatable whether the VC/
PE activity in a country with a high cor-
porate governance level is more affected
by the liquidity of the national stock
market or by labor regulations. While an
IPO exit is, in principle, possible at many
stock exchanges in the world, labor mar-
ket frictions can hardly be evaded.




                                                The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual   15
The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index




     The 2009/2010 Index
     Assessing six latent key drivers                               How we disaggregate the six key                  Overall, we use 22 level 2 constructs for
     The basic and important principle of our in-                   drivers                                          our index, and hence, “1 Economic Acti-
     dex is to make use of “latent drivers”. These                  According to the principle to assess latent      vity” receives a weight of 3/22, which is
     are criteria that are not directly observable,                 drivers of VC and PE attractiveness with         0.136, while the weight of “3 Taxation” is
     but driven by others which can be measu-                       observable data we disaggregate the six          2/22 - 0.091. The advantage of this wei-
     red. For example, while we do not get data                     key drivers in sub-categories. These catego-     ghting scheme is that the key drivers that
     on the number of investment banks, law                         ries are either actual data series or further    consist of more level 2 constructs gain
     firms, accountants, or consultants to assess                    sub-constructs, and we call them “level 2        more weight. That way, we also smooth
     the infrastructure of the deal supporting                      constructs”. For example, in Table 1, we find,    outliers in individual data series.3
     institutions for the majority of our sample                    the key driver “2 Depth of a Capital Mar-
     countries, we can gather more general in-                      ket” split into five sub-categories: “2.1 Size    Separate VC and PE indices
     formation on the level of debt provided by                     and Liquidity of the Stock Market”, “2.2 IPO         To account for differences with respect
     the banking sector, or estimates about the                     Market Activity”, “2.3 M&A Market Activi-        to the two market segments, VC vs. PE, we
     soundness of banks, the sophistication of                      ty”, “2.4 Debt and Credit Market”, and “2.5      propose three alternative indices. The first
     the financial system and the ease of access                     Financial Market Sophistication”. The last       combines both segments. The second fo-
     to loans. We assume that the better these                      sub-category is a data series provided by the    cuses on early stage VC and the third on
     criteria are developed, the more deal sup-                     World Economic Forum (WEF), all the others       later stage PE only. For the VC and PE in-
     porting institutions will likewise exist to                    are constructs by themselves. For example,       dices we simply discard data series that are
     facilitate VC and PE activity. This principle                  we assess “2.1 Size and Liquidity of the Stock   less important for either market segment:
     is maintained at all individual stages for the                 Market” with three different data series (and    for the VC index, we regard the level 2
     index construction. An unobservable crite-                     call them “level 3 data”): the “2.1.1 Market     construct “2.4 Debt and Credit Market” as
     rion is assessed with several proxy parame-                    Capitalization of Listed Companies", the         relatively unimportant, and hence discard it.
     ters. In principle, we measure the attrac-                     “2.1.2 Total Trading Volume”, and “2.1.3 Lis-    When calculating the PE index, we discard
     tiveness of a country by six main criteria.                    ted Domestic Companies”. This approach has       “3.1.2 Entrepreneurship Incentive”, “3.1.3
     The choice of these criteria is based on our                   two major advantages: first, individual data      Labor and Tax Contributions”, and “3.2 Ad-
     own experience, the above review of aca-                       series do not gain too much weight when          ministrative Tax Burdens”, and further, “5.1
     demic literature and a survey we undertook                     they are grouped; second, the overall results    Education and Human Capital”, “6.1 Inno-
     among limited partners.2                                       can be traced to more granulated levels and      vation and R&D”, “6.2 Ease of Starting and
     We call them the “six key drivers” :                           hence, facilitate interpretations.               Running a Business” and “6.4 ICT Infrastruc-
      1. Economic Activity                                                                                           ture” from the criteria. The weights for the
      2. Depth of a Capital Market                                  The weighting scheme                             individual index items in the separate VC
      3. Taxation                                                   We spent a great amount of time with             and PE indices are calculated analogue to
      4. Investor Protection and Corporate                          statistical analyses and optimization ap-        the above explained procedure.
          Governance                                                proaches to determine the weights for the            Table 1 presents the structures and the
      5. Human and Social Environment                               data aggregation. Finally, we came to the        weights of the individual data series and
      6. Entrepreneurial Culture and                                conclusion not to apply a statistically so-      constructs for the combined VCPE, the VC
          Opportunities.                                            phisticated approach that deserves docu-         and the PE index. In the appendices, we
         As discussed before, these six key dri-                    mentation and discussion, but to choose          provide detailed information on the data
     vers are not directly observable. For this                     a simple, plausible, and robust weighting        series used to aggregate the index, and all
     reason, we disaggregate them, and use se-                      scheme. We apply equal weights for all           data sources. There, we also explain the
     veral proxies for their assessment.                            data series, when we aggregate them to           exact data aggregation technique.
                                                                    the level 2 constructs. Then again, we use
                                                                                                                     3. Details about the possible statistical approaches to
     2. The results of this survey are described in two academic    equal weights for the level 2 constructs         determine weights for the data series are provided in the
     working papers : Groh, Alexander and Liechtenstein,            to aggregate the six key drivers. Finally,       academic paper Groh, Alexander, Liechtenstein, Heinrich
     Heinrich (2009b) : International Allocation Determinants                                                        and Lieser, Karsten (2009a) : The European Venture
     of Institutional Investments in Venture Capital and Private    the weight of the key drivers depends            Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Indices,
     Equity Limited Partnerships, IESE Business School Working      on the number of level 2 constructs in-          forthcoming in the Journal of Corporate Finance. Available
     Paper No. 726, and in Groh, Alexander and Liechtenstein,                                                        at http://ssrn.com/author=330804.
     Heinrich (2009c) : How Attractive is Central Eastern Europe    cluded. For example, “1 Economic Acti-
     for Risk Capital Investors ? Journal of International Money    vity” consists of three level 2 constructs,
     and Finance (28), 4, p. 625 – 647. Available at http://ssrn.
     com/author=330804.                                             while “3 Taxation” consists of only two.




16      The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
Table 1: Structure of the VCPE Index, the separate VC, and PE Indices, and the weighting schemes

                                                         VCPE      VC      PE                                                          VCPE      VC      PE
                                                         Index   Index   Index                                                         Index   Index   Index
1       Economic Activity                                0.14    0.14    0.18     4.2.3   Intellectual Property Protection             0.33    0.33    0.33
1.1     Gross Domestic Product                           0.33    0.33    0.33     4.3     Quality of Legal Enforcement                 0.25    0.25    0.25
1.1.1   Total Economic Size                              0.33    0.33    0.33     4.3.1   Judicial Independence                        0.25    0.25    0.25
1.1.2   GDP per Capita                                   0.33    0.33    0.33     4.3.2   Impartial Courts                             0.25    0.25    0.25
1.1.3   Real GDP year-on-year Growth                     0.33    0.33    0.33     4.3.3   Integrity of the Legal System                0.25    0.25    0.25
1.2     Inflation                                         0.33    0.33    0.33     4.3.4   Rule of Law                                  0.25    0.25    0.25
1.3     Unemployment                                     0.33    0.33    0.33     4.4     Regulatory Quality                           0.25    0.25    0.25
2       Depth of a Capital Market                        0.23    0.19    0.29     5       Human and Social Environment                 0.18    0.19    0.18
2.1     Size and Liquidity of the Stock Market           0.20    0.25    0.20     5.1     Education and Human Capital                  0.25    0.25
2.1.1   Market Capitalization of Listed Companies        0.33    0.33    0.33     5.1.1   Quality of the Educational System            0.50    0.50
2.1.2   Total Trading Volume                             0.33    0.33    0.33     5.1.2   Quality of Scientific Research Institutions   0.50    0.50
2.1.3   Listed Domestic Companies                        0.33    0.33    0.33     5.2     Labor Market Rigidities                      0.25    0.25    0.33
2.2     IPO Market Activity                              0.20    0.25    0.20     5.2.1   Difficulty of Hiring Index                    0.25    0.25    0.25
2.2.1   Market Volume                                    0.50    0.50    0.50     5.2.2   Rigidity of Hours Index                      0.25    0.25    0.25
2.2.2   Number of IPOs                                   0.50    0.50    0.50     5.2.3   Difficulty of Firing Index                    0.25    0.25    0.25
2.3     M&A Market Activity                              0.20    0.25    0.20     5.2.4   Firing Costs                                 0.25    0.25    0.25
2.3.1   Market Volume                                    0.50    0.50    0.50     5.3     Bribing and Corruption                       0.25    0.25    0.33
2.3.2   Number of Deals                                  0.50    0.50    0.50     5.3.1   Bribing and Corruption Index                 0.33    0.33    0.33
2.4     Debt and Credit Market                           0.20            0.20     5.3.2   Control of Corruption                        0.33    0.33    0.33
2.4.1   Domestic Credit provided by Banking Sector       0.17            0.17     5.3.3   Extra Payments/Bribes                        0.33    0.33    0.33
2.4.2   Ease of Access to Loans                          0.17            0.17     5.4     Costs of Crime                               0.25    0.25    0.33
2.4.3   Credit Information Index                         0.17            0.17     5.4.1   Business Costs of Crime and Violence         0.50    0.50    0.50
2.4.4   Soundness of Banks                               0.17            0.17     5.4.2   Costs of Organized Crime                     0.50    0.50    0.50
2.4.5   Interest Rate Spread                             0.17            0.17     6       Entrepreneurial Culture and Opportunities    0.18    0.19    0.06
2.4.6   Bank Non-performing Loans to Total Gross Loans   0.17            0.17     6.1     Innovation and R&D                           0.25    0.25
2.5     Financial Market Sophistication                  0.20    0.25    0.20     6.1.1   General Innovativeness Index                 0.20    0.20
3       Taxation                                         0.09    0.10    0.06     6.1.2   Capacity for Innovation                      0.20    0.20
3.1     Tax Incentives                                   0.50    0.50    1.00     6.1.3   Company Spending on R&D                      0.20    0.20
3.1.1   Marginal Corporate Tax Rate                      0.25    0.25    0.50     6.1.4   Utility Patents                              0.20    0.20
3.1.2   Entrepreneurship Incentive                       0.25    0.25             6.1.5   Scientific and Technical Journal Articles     0.20    0.20
3.1.3   Labor Tax and Contributions                      0.25    0.25             6.2     Ease of Starting and Running a Business      0.25    0.25
3.1.4   Profit and Capital Gains Tax                      0.25    0.25    0.50     6.2.1   Number of Procedures to start of Business    0.20    0.20
3.2     Administrative Tax Burdens                       0.50    0.50             6.2.2   Time needed to start a Business              0.20    0.20
3.2.1   Number of Payments                               0.50    0.50             6.2.3   Costs of Business Start-Up Procedures        0.20    0.20
3.2.2   Time spent on Tax Issues                         0.50    0.50             6.2.4   Minimum Capital                              0.20    0.20
4       Investor Protection and Corporate Governance     0.18    0.19    0.24     6.2.5   Administrative Requirements                  0.20    0.20
4.1     Corporate Governance                             0.25    0.25    0.25     6.3     Simplicity of Closing a Business             0.25    0.25    1.00
4.1.1   Disclosure Index                                 0.20    0.20    0.20     6.3.1   Time                                         0.33    0.33    0.33
4.1.2   Director Liability Index                         0.20    0.20    0.20     6.3.2   Costs                                        0.33    0.33    0.33
4.1.3   Shareholder Suits Index                          0.20    0.20    0.20     6.3.3   Recovery Rate                                0.33    0.33    0.33
4.1.4   Legal Rights Index                               0.20    0.20    0.20     6.4     ICT Infrastructure                           0.25    0.25
4.1.5   Efficacy of Corporate Boards                      0.20    0.20    0.20     6.4.1   Broadband Subscribers                        0.25    0.25
4.2     Security of Property Rights                      0.25    0.25    0.25     6.4.2   Fixed Line and Mobile Phone Subscribers      0.25    0.25
4.2.1   Legal Enforcement of Contracts                   0.33    0.33    0.33     6.4.3    Internet Users                              0.25    0.25
4.2.2   Property Rights                                  0.33    0.33    0.33     6.4.4    Secure Internet Servers                     0.25    0.25




                                                         The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual         17
The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index




                                                      The countries we cover                          The VCPE country attractiveness
                                                      The selection of our sample countries is        ranking
                                                      purely driven by the availability of data.      We gathered the data from Table 1 for the
                                                      We would like to include many more na-          66 countries as far back to the past, and as
                                                      tions but the lack of data is the constraint.   recent as possible. We calculated the in-
                                                      At present, the African continent is un-        dex scores for 2009/2010 and realized, not
                                                      der-represented with only four countries,       surprisingly, that the United States is the
                                                      but we hope to expand the number of             most attractive country for VC and PE al-
                                                      countries in future editions of the index.      locations, with some remarkable distance
                                                      We consider the following 66 nations and        to its followers. Therefore, we use the US
                                                      assign them to eight different geographic       as the world benchmark: we rescale the
                                                      regions.                                        index score for the US to 100. This enables
                                                                                                      us to directly compare all other countries
                                                                                                      on a percentage scale. We explain the res-
                                                                                                      caling procedure in the appendix to this
              Africa:             Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, South Africa                               index, and first present the ranking of the
                                                                                                      2009/2010 VCPE Country Attractiveness
              Asia:               China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan,                          Index.
                                  Malaysia, Philippines, Russian Federation,                             Exhibit 1 shows the ranking of the
                                  Republic of Korea, Singapore, Taiwan,                               2009/2010 VCPE Country Attractiveness
                                  Thailand, Vietnam                                                   Index. We know that this exhibit opens
                                                                                                      room for discussion. Some readers might
              Australasia:        Australia, New Zealand                                              think that particular countries are ran-
                                                                                                      ked too high, others too low. However, we
              Eastern Europe:     Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia,                         want to stress that the index ranking is the
                                  Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania,                        result of commonly available, aggregated
                                  Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Turkey, Ukraine                          socio-economic data. The results can be
                                                                                                      traced to the level of the individual data
              Latin America:      Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico,                         series, and hence, can be confirmed. We
                                  Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela                                  want to remark that the underlying data
                                                                                                      is historical, and does not include future
              Middle East:        Egypt, Israel, Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia,                          estimates. Therefore, we show the attrac-
                                  United Arab Emirates                                                tiveness ranking as of today and want to
                                                                                                      leave it to investors and advisers to en-
              North America:      USA, Canada                                                         rich the information we prepared with
                                                                                                      own knowledge, and expectations to draw
              Western Europe: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France,                             their conclusions.
                                  Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg,
                                  Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain,
                                  Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom




18    The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
Exhibit 1: 2009/2010 VCPE Country Attractiveness Index

                                 0           10      20        30          40          50          60          70          80          90             100

        United States (1.)           100,0
                Canada (2.)          85,8
      United Kingdom (3.)            84,3
              Australia (4.)         81,9
           Hong Kong (5.)            79,5
             Singapore (6.)          78,5
                   Japan (7.)        76,5
          Switzerland (8.)           76,3
          Netherlands (9.)           70,1
            Germany (10.)            69,1
              Sweden (11.)           69,0
            Denmark (12.)            67,7
   Republic of Korea (13.)           67,5
              Norway (14.)           66,3
              Finland (15.)          65,9
                France (16.)         65,2
             Belgium (17.)           61,1
        New Zealand (18.)            60,0
               Austria (19.)         58,6
                 Spain (20.)         58,3
               Ireland (21.)         58,3
                  Israel (22.)       55,8
               Taiwan (23.)          55,3
        Luxembourg (24.)             54,6
             Malaysia (25.)          54,4
United Arab Emirates (26.)           51,7
             Portugal (27.)          49,5
                 China (28.)         48,5
                   Italy (29.)       47,5
        Saudi Arabia (30.)           46,4
               Poland (31.)          45,8
                  Chile (32.)        45,8
             Slovenia (33.)          45,6
     Czech Republic (34.)            45,5
               Estonia (35.)         44,5
             Thailand (36.)          41,4
             Hungary (37.)           41,1
                  India (38.)        40,9
               Greece (39.)          40,7
            Lithuania (40.)          40,4
             Slovakia (41.)          40,3
               Kuwait (42.)          40,1
        South Africa (43.)           39,5
                Turkey (44.)         39,1
               Croatia (45.)         38,6
                 Oman (46.)          38,1
             Romania (47.)           38,1
  Russian Federation (48.)           38,0
               Mexico (49.)          35,8
                 Latvia (50.)        35,6
                 Brazil (51.)        34,6
             Uruguay (52.)           33,4
                   Peru (53.)        32,4
           Indonesia (54.)           30,7
             Bulgaria (55.)          30,6
             Morocco (56.)           30,3
                 Egypt (57.)         30,1
            Colombia (58.)           29,4
           Argentina (59.)           29,1
             Vietnam (60.)           27,1
          Philippines (61.)          26,1
               Nigeria (62.)         24,4
              Ukraine (63.)          23,6
                Kenya (64.)          19,3
            Paraguay (65.)           14,9
           Venezuela (66.)           8,9




                                                      The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual         19
The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index




                                                      Rankings according to the separate              For the PE index, we discard all constructs
                                                      VC and PE indices                               that are related to innovations, and foun-
                                                      Exhibit 2 combines the prior results and        ding or running a business in early stages.
                                                      the ranking according to the separate VC        We realize that Brazil, India, China, France,
                                                      and PE indices. The red squares mark the        Spain and Malaysia gain many ranks with
                                                      VCPE index ranks. The white squares desi-       respect to their attractiveness for PE in-
                                                      gnate the VC index, and the grey squares        vestments. The rationale is simple: the
                                                      the PE index ranks. The VC index country        aforementioned countries show relative
                                                      ranking does not change greatly. The ran-       liquid and developed capital markets. As
                                                      king remains because we only discard the        the measure for the depth of a capital
                                                      level 2 construct to assess the “Debt and       market gains a higher weight in the PE
                                                      Credit Market” from the VC index. Howe-         index, these countries rank on superior le-
                                                      ver, we receive a stronger ranking varia-       vels, consequently.
                                                      tion if we focus on the PE segment only.




20    The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
Exhibit 2: Rankings of the three different indices



        United States (1.)
                Canada (2.)
      United Kingdom (3.)
              Australia (4.)
           Hong Kong (5.)
             Singapore (6.)
                   Japan (7.)
          Switzerland (8.)
          Netherlands (9.)
            Germany (10.)
              Sweden (11.)
            Denmark (12.)
   Republic of Korea (13.)
              Norway (14.)
              Finland (15.)
                France (16.)
             Belgium (17.)
        New Zealand (18.)
               Austria (19.)
                 Spain (20.)
               Ireland (21.)
                  Israel (22.)
               Taiwan (23.)
        Luxembourg (24.)
             Malaysia (25.)
United Arab Emirates (26.)
             Portugal (27.)
                 China (28.)
                   Italy (29.)
        Saudi Arabia (30.)
               Poland (31.)
                  Chile (32.)
             Slovenia (33.)
     Czech Republic (34.)
               Estonia (35.)
             Thailand (36.)
             Hungary (37.)
                  India (38.)
               Greece (39.)
            Lithuania (40.)
             Slovakia (41.)
               Kuwait (42.)
        South Africa (43.)
                Turkey (44.)
               Croatia (45.)
                 Oman (46.)
             Romania (47.)
  Russian Federation (48.)
               Mexico (49.)
                 Latvia (50.)
                 Brazil (51.)
             Uruguay (52.)
                   Peru (53.)
           Indonesia (54.)
             Bulgaria (55.)
             Morocco (56.)
                 Egypt (57.)
            Colombia (58.)
           Argentina (59.)
             Vietnam (60.)
          Philippines (61.)
               Nigeria (62.)
              Ukraine (63.)
                Kenya (64.)
            Paraguay (65.)
           Venezuela (66.)



                                 PE 2009/10   VC 2009/10      VCPE 2009/10




                                                     The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual   21
The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index




     Comparisons of regions and countries
     The general pattern: What renders                 enforcement possibilities with respect to       More details
     the US so attractive?                             investor protection and corporate gover-        We can brake-down our analysis to the le-
     Next, we break down the index scores to           nance. This pattern becomes even more           vel 2 constructs and provide more details
     the level of the six key driving forces, and      obvious in the analyses presented in the        to support the general pattern we detect.
     further down to the level 2 constructs to         appendix, where we benchmark every in-             Exhibit 4 points to the remarkable dis-
     enhance the discussion about the ranking.         dividual country with the US: there are         tance between the scores of the US, Slo-
     We find a typical pattern with respect to          many economically strong nations with           venia and Venezuela with respect to the
     the dominating attractiveness of the US           vibrant entrepreneurial cultures and op-        level 2 constructs that assess the capital
     for VC and PE allocations. We can de-             portunities, with excellent human capi-         market, investor protection and corporate
     monstrate this pattern by comparing the           tal and social environment. However, the        governance.
     first ranked with the medial ranked, and           finally decisive criteria are the financial
     the final ranked country, the US, Slovenia,        markets, and investor protection and cor-
     and Venezuela. Exhibit 3 presents the key         porate governance. That finding points to
     driver scores of Slovenia and Venezuela           the discussion about the competition of
     relative to the scores of the US (which           legal systems, and the relation between
     scores 100 for each key driver).                  law and finance: all strong countries show
        Exhibit 3 reveals that the US ranks            high scores for the Investor Protection
     ahead of Slovenia and Venezuela with res-         and Corporate Governance key drivers.
     pect to all key drivers but Taxation. Emer-       This likewise spurs the development of a
     ging economies often attract investors            national capital market, which is required
     with tax incentives. The criteria that really     for the establishment of VC and PE deal
     make the difference are the depth of the          supporting institutions.
     US capital market and its legislation and




22     The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
Exhibit 3: Six key driving forces. Comparison of the US, Slovenia and Venezuela

                                1. Economic Activity
                                       125

                                       100
 6. Entrepreneurial
                                        75                        2. Depth of a
     Culture &
    Opportunities                       50
                                                                  Capital Market

                                        25




     5. Human &                                                  3. Taxation
  Social Environment


                                                                       United States
                               4. Investor Protection &
                                                                       Slovenia
                                Corporate Governance
                                                                       Venezuela




Exhibit 4: Level 2 constructs - Comparison of the US, Slovenia and Venezuela

               1.1 Gross Domestic Product
                                1.2 Inflation
                         1.3 Unemployment
2.1 Size and Liquidity of the Stock Market
                   2.2 IPO Market Activity
                 2.3 M&A Market Activity
                 2.4 Debt & Credit Market
       2.5 Financial Market Sophistication
                          3.1 Tax Incentives
           3.2 Administrative Tax Burdens
                4.1 Corporate Governance
           4.2 Security of Property Rights
         4.3 Quality of Legal Enforcement
                      4.4 Regulatory Quality
           5.1 Education & Human Capital
               5.2 Labor Market Rigidities
                 5.3 Bribing & Corruption
                          5.4 Costs of Crime
                      6.1 Innovation & R&D
 6.2 Ease of Starting & Running a Business
       6.3 Simplicity of Closing a Business                                                                                             United States
                                                                                                                                        Slovenia
                       6.4 ICT Infrastructure                                                                                           Venezuela

                                                0      20         40              60   80      100       120       140      160




                                                          The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual   23
The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index




                                                      Regional comparison                             included sample countries only. Hence,
                                                      Beside the analyses for the individual          especially for Africa, where we cover only
                                                      countries, we can benchmark geographic          four countries, the results should be inter-
                                                      regions against each other. We are aware        preted with caution.
                                                      that we should interpret regional compa-             Exhibit 5 presents the regional ranking.
                                                      risons with special care and want to hi-        Again, the score of the US is rescaled to 100.
                                                      ghlight that many of our sample countries       It is in line with the contemporary use of the
                                                      already represent somehow geographic            terms emerging regions and developed mar-
                                                      regions. The point is that within large         kets. Braking-down the index scores to the
                                                      countries, such as the US, Russia, China,       six key driving forces reveals the same pat-
                                                      India, or Brazil the internal socio-econo-      tern as described before. First, we compare
                                                      mic differences might be larger than those      the four leading regions North America,
                                                      between e.g., some European countries.          Australasia, Western Europe, and Asia.
                                                      Therefore, the scores of these large                 Exhibit 6 highlights that only the
                                                      countries represent averages. We know           common-law Australasian countries can
                                                      that California attracts more VC and PE         compete with North America with res-
                                                      than Montana, but we cannot control for         pect to investor protection and corporate
                                                      small clusters, and the US still receives one   governance. It also shows that, compared
                                                      single average country score. Hence, we         to the North America, all other regional
                                                      also keep our approach to calculate the         capital markets can be considered minis-
                                                      index scores for the different geographic       cule. A closer look to the emerging regions
                                                      regions rather simple: we calculate either      confirms this.
                                                      GDP-weighted, population-weighted, or                Exhibit 7 compares the emerging re-
                                                      arithmetic averages of the different data       gions Middle East, Eastern Europe, Latin
                                                      series, and aggregate the regional scores       America, and Africa. It reveals weaknesses
                                                      with these values. We use GDP-weighted          especially with respect to entrepreneurial
                                                      averages for the data series that are rela-     cultures and opportunities. Attempts to
                                                      ted to the size of the economy, we use po-      attract investors simply by tax incentives
                                                      pulation weighted averages for those that       will probably not be fruitful as long as
                                                      are related to people and we use arith-         the obstacle of missing deal opportuni-
                                                      metic averages for the rest. We highlight       ties remains.
                                                      that, of course, these averages base on the




24    The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
Exhibit 5: Ranking of geographic regions

 North America                                                         97
     Australasia                                       76
Western Europe                                    67
         World                             55
           Asia                            54
    Middle East                       46
 Eastern Europe                      42
  Latin America                35
         Africa               33
                   0   20       40         60          80             100




Exhibit 6: Key driver scores of geographic regions                                    Exhibit 7: Key driver scores of geographic regions

                        1. Economic Activity                                                                 1. Economic Activity
                                                                                                                    125
                               125
                                                                                                                    100
                               100
6. Entrepreneurial                                                                    6. Entrepreneurial             75
                                75                          2. Depth of a                                                              2. Depth of a
    Culture &                                                                             Culture &
                                                            Capital Market                                                             Capital Market
   Opportunities                50
                                                                                         Opportunities               50

                                                                                                                     25
                                25




   5. Human &                                               3. Taxation                   5. Human &                                   3. Taxation
Social Environment                                                                     Social Environment


                                                              North America (I.)                                                       Middle East (V.)
                       4. Investor Protection &                                                             4. Investor Protection &   Eastern Europe (VI.)
                                                              Australasia (II.)
                        Corporate Governance                                                                 Corporate Governance      Latin America (VII.)
                                                              Western Europe (III.)
                                                              Asia (IV.)                                                               Africa (VIII.)




                                                   The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual              25
The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index




                                                      Historic comparison – improvements                 Exhibit 8 underscores what we are used
                                                      of VCPE investment conditions                   to learning from daily news about China,
                                                      We can calculate back the index to the          and India. Additionally, Poland impro-
                                                      past, as far as 2005/2006. Thereby, we          ved its attractiveness for limited partners
                                                      should note that some of the data series        quite substantially during the last four
                                                      used (e.g., the General Innovation Index        years. For details, we refer to the indivi-
                                                      [GII]) do not date back to 2005. However,       dual country analyses in the appendix of
                                                      we assume that indicators like this one         this index. On the left axis of Exhibit 8, we
                                                      did not change to a large extent over the       find the countries’ current ranks and the
                                                      period of interest, and hence, keep them        bars document the rank changes between
                                                      constant. The calculation of the 2005/2006      the 2005/2006 and the 2009/2010 index
                                                      index allows interesting insights, and re-      versions. Kuwait, Latvia, and Oman are
                                                      veals the development and rank changes          the countries that decreased remarkably
                                                      of particular countries.                        in their rankings. Kuwait lost many ranks
                                                                                                      because of a tax reform with increasing
                                                                                                      corporate tax rates and deteriorating
                                                                                                      conditions regarding the protection of in-
                                                                                                      vestors and corporate governance. Latvia
                                                                                                      and Oman were both exposed to worse-
                                                                                                      ning economic conditions with high in-
                                                                                                      flation during the observed period. Howe-
                                                                                                      ver, it should be stressed that the index
                                                                                                      scores are always calculated relative to
                                                                                                      the other countries. That means that all
                                                                                                      the countries that lost ranking positions
                                                                                                      did not necessarily deteriorate their in-
                                                                                                      vestment conditions in absolute terms.
                                                                                                      They might just have been outperformed
                                                                                                      by others in the international competition
                                                                                                      for capital resources.




26    The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
Exhibit 8: Rank changes between index version 2005/2006 and 2009/2010

                                       -15         -10        -5         0         5         10        15
              United States (1.)
                      Canada (2.)
            United Kingdom (3.)
                    Australia (4.)
                 Hong Kong (5.)
                   Singapore (6.)
                         Japan (7.)
                Switzerland (8.)
                Netherlands (9.)
                  Germany (10.)
                    Sweden (11.)
                  Denmark (12.)
         Republic of Korea (13.)
                    Norway (14.)
                    Finland (15.)
                      France (16.)
                   Belgium (17.)
              New Zealand (18.)
                     Austria (19.)
                       Spain (20.)
                     Ireland (21.)
                        Israel (22.)
                     Taiwan (23.)
              Luxembourg (24.)
                   Malaysia (25.)
      United Arab Emirates (26.)
                   Portugal (27.)
                       China (28.)
                         Italy (29.)
              Saudi Arabia (30.)
                     Poland (31.)
                        Chile (32.)
                   Slovenia (33.)
           Czech Republic (34.)
                     Estonia (35.)
                   Thailand (36.)
                   Hungary (37.)
                        India (38.)
                     Greece (39.)
                  Lithuania (40.)
                   Slovakia (41.)
                     Kuwait (42.)
              South Africa (43.)
                      Turkey (44.)
                     Croatia (45.)
                       Oman (46.)
                   Romania (47.)
        Russian Federation (48.)
                     Mexico (49.)
                       Latvia (50.)
                       Brazil (51.)
                   Uruguay (52.)
                         Peru (53.)
                 Indonesia (54.)
                   Bulgaria (55.)
                   Morocco (56.)
                       Egypt (57.)
                  Colombia (58.)
                 Argentina (59.)
                   Vietnam (60.)
                Philippines (61.)
                     Nigeria (62.)
                    Ukraine (63.)
                      Kenya (64.)
                  Paraguay (65.)
                 Venezuela (66.)




                                             The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual   27
The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index




     Tracking power of our index


     The idea of our index is to assess the at-        the actual VC and PE activity in the va-           The statistical measure for such a com-
     tractiveness of a country to receive VC/          rious countries. We use data from Thom-         parison is the Pearson Correlation Coeffi-
     PE allocations from institutional investors       son Financial on VC and PE activity. Our        cient. It ranges between 0 and 1, where 0
     based on socio-economic parameters that           activity measure is the natural logarithm       signals “no” and 1 “perfect tracking”. The
     we regard relevant. The composite measure         of an average of all VC and PE invest-          coefficient for our index is 0.8104, signa-
     can deviate from the actual risk capital          ments made by the general partners in a         ling that the index excellently(!) tracks
     market activity, and deviations between           certain country over the last three years.      a country’s capacity to actually “absorb”
     our attractiveness score and actual acti-         We use the natural logarithm to account         the committed capital. If we compare the
     vity might either point to under- or over-        for the large activity divergence (e.g., ac-    results of our VC index with VC activity,
     funding of particular countries, or to the        tivity in the US vs. Venezuela), and we use     analogue to the above defined activity
     fact that our chosen criteria are not rele-       an average over three years to smooth           measure, the correlation is 0.8100. The
     vant for VC and PE investors. Experience          fluctuations. Especially for some emer-          correlation of our PE index with actual
     reveals that investors are often influenced        ging countries, annual activity fluctuates       PE activity is 0.7807. Both results are still
     by herding behavior and follow trends to          strongly from peak levels to zero in sub-       confirmative. However, the slightly de-
     invest in certain countries or regions. The       sequent years. We chose the criterion lo-       crease of the tracking power regarding the
     countries might not have the “infrastruc-         cation of the general partners - and not        two separate indices is partly due to inho-
     ture” to absorb the investments, leading          of the investments - for the following          mogeneous definitions of the two market
     to over-funding. The “infrastructure” is          reason: some financial centers serve as          segments in different parts of the world.
     exactly what we aim to measure: can we            hubs and channel VC and PE investments          In other words, in some cases, VC transac-
     expect sufficient deal opportunities resul-        abroad. Investors allocate their capital in     tions in emerging countries might rather
     ting from the entrepreneurial culture in a        these hubs because they rely on the effi-        be called infrastructure investments, or
     country, from its economic soundness, or          ciency of the financial community there.         project financing (but not VC transac-
     from innovations? Are potential transac-          This is exactly what we measure with our        tions) in more developed economies.
     tions sufficiently supported by the finan-          index. In fact, we focus on the demand for
     cial community? Are the stock and M&A             VC and PE in a particular economy, and          Does the global financial crisis have
     markets sufficiently liquid to facilitate          likewise on the state of the professional       an impact on the robustness of our
     divestments? Are investors’ concerns le-          financial community to support the supply        index?
     gally taken care of? We do not claim that         side. Therefore, investments, according to      We have seen the biggest crisis since the
     our index provides the correct answers            the location of the general partners, cor-      great depression and the question remains
     to these questions. But, we claim that            respond best with the idea of our index.        whether this has an impact on the robus-
     our index is very helpful in this respect.        Additionally, we use investments - and not      tness of our index. The data for the last
     Therefore, we expect deviations between           raised funds - because our index targets        quarter of the year 2008 (where quar-
     our attractiveness measure and actual VC          the “absorption-capacity” (either caused        terly data is available) and later captures
     and PE activity in the particular countries.      by direct local demand or by channeling         the major consequences of the financial
     However, these deviations should not be           funds abroad) of the particular econo-          crisis. We realize that the impact on eco-
     great on average. If they are great we            mies. Funds raised might deviate from this      nomic activity and the depth of the ca-
     would doubt the reliability of our index.         capacity due to herding behavior of inves-      pital market is large for many countries,
     Hence, we compare our index scores with           tors or negligence.                             especially for those that had high ran-




28     The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
kings with respect to these two key drivers    we expect several emerging countries to
before the financial crisis. IPO and M&A        strongly improve their position over the
activity has come down significantly. The       course of 2009/2010. However, we have to
size and liquidity of the stock markets        wait for the following edition, to provide
melted down. The access to loans deterio-      evidence for our expectations.
rated and interest rates increased to peak
levels. It became clear that the fraction      How our index differs from
of non-performing loans is probably the        other, more general indices on
highest seen in banking history, and the       competitiveness
soundness of banks might be doubted in         Some institutions provide competitiveness
several countries. These are all data series   indices or assess the general conditions
we use for our index construction, and we      for making business in various countries.
believe that the financial crisis will have     These indices have a broader scope and do
a strong impact on all of them. However,       not focus on the particularities of the VC
the data series are not yet updated for all    and PE capital market segment. Therefore,
countries, and hence, we are not able to       their rankings usually differ from ours and
draw conclusions for the quality of our        their tracking power to explain VC and
index at that time.                            PE activity is lower. For example, the Glo-
   We assume that these effects will move      bal Competitiveness Index from the WEF
several emerging countries to higher ranks     tracks VC and PE activity with 0.69, while
for one simple reason. The rationale is the    the IMD World Competitiveness Index
typical pattern we discussed above: the        correlates with 0.57 only. This reveals that
high ranked countries are particularly         our index is the more precise indicator
strong with respect to their capital mar-      for VC and PE country attractiveness. The
kets. They will be affected most by the fi-     reason for the superior tracking power of
nancial crisis because they lose dispropor-    our index is simply that it is tailor-made,
tionally their competitive advantage by        according to the particular determinants
the deteriorated capital market conditions.    for vibrant VC and PE markets. There is no
Several emerging countries with sound          other indicator tracking the actual VC and
growth opportunities, but negligible ca-       PE activity over the 66 countries, and over
pital markets will benefit (in terms of in-     time as good as our index.
dex scores) from the crisis. It is said that
their economic growth will be affected to
a minor extend, only. The crisis will har-
dly impact their scores with respect to the
other key drivers such as Taxation, Inves-
tor Protection and Corporate Governance,
the Human and Social Environment, or
their Entrepreneurial Culture. Therefore,




                                                The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual   29
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009
Iese vcpe index_annual_2009

Contenu connexe

Tendances

2008 evalueserve venture capital research mahaveer
2008 evalueserve venture capital research mahaveer2008 evalueserve venture capital research mahaveer
2008 evalueserve venture capital research mahaveerMahaveer Singh Bisht
 
Cpuc financing report_hb&c_jul8v2
Cpuc financing report_hb&c_jul8v2Cpuc financing report_hb&c_jul8v2
Cpuc financing report_hb&c_jul8v2HarcourtBrownEF
 
Integrating developing countries’ SMEs into Global Value Chain.
Integrating developing countries’ SMEs into Global Value Chain.Integrating developing countries’ SMEs into Global Value Chain.
Integrating developing countries’ SMEs into Global Value Chain.Ira Tobing
 
agilent 2005Proxy
agilent  2005Proxyagilent  2005Proxy
agilent 2005Proxyfinance38
 
Strategic Enrolment Intelligence book
Strategic Enrolment Intelligence bookStrategic Enrolment Intelligence book
Strategic Enrolment Intelligence bookJim Black
 
Inkijkexemplaar alternative credit handboek nnip
Inkijkexemplaar alternative credit handboek nnipInkijkexemplaar alternative credit handboek nnip
Inkijkexemplaar alternative credit handboek nnipNN Investment Partners
 
Strategy Package for Higher Growth & Structural Change Human Capital for a Hi...
Strategy Package for Higher Growth & Structural Change Human Capital for a Hi...Strategy Package for Higher Growth & Structural Change Human Capital for a Hi...
Strategy Package for Higher Growth & Structural Change Human Capital for a Hi...Ghazally Spahat
 
The approach to alternative credit inkijk
The approach to alternative credit inkijkThe approach to alternative credit inkijk
The approach to alternative credit inkijkNN Investment Partners
 
AMR 2007 Proxy Statement
AMR 	2007 Proxy StatementAMR 	2007 Proxy Statement
AMR 2007 Proxy Statementfinance11
 
Aid_for_Trade_Manual_2015
Aid_for_Trade_Manual_2015Aid_for_Trade_Manual_2015
Aid_for_Trade_Manual_2015Johanna Polvi
 
Halifax: Hub City for the Maritime Provinces
Halifax: Hub City for the Maritime ProvincesHalifax: Hub City for the Maritime Provinces
Halifax: Hub City for the Maritime ProvincesHalifax Partnership
 
Survey apex sidi
Survey apex sidiSurvey apex sidi
Survey apex sidiPatrickTanz
 
Poverty in a rising Africa
Poverty in a rising AfricaPoverty in a rising Africa
Poverty in a rising AfricaJohan Westerholm
 
2009 Botswana Banking & Financial Sector Review (Capital Securities)
2009  	Botswana Banking & Financial Sector Review (Capital Securities)2009  	Botswana Banking & Financial Sector Review (Capital Securities)
2009 Botswana Banking & Financial Sector Review (Capital Securities)econsultbw
 
entergy 2007 final IG
entergy 2007 final IGentergy 2007 final IG
entergy 2007 final IGfinance24
 
agilent Proxy08
agilent  Proxy08agilent  Proxy08
agilent Proxy08finance38
 
Gii 2012 france innovation profile
Gii 2012   france innovation profileGii 2012   france innovation profile
Gii 2012 france innovation profileAmaury de Buchet
 

Tendances (20)

UCT THESIS
UCT THESISUCT THESIS
UCT THESIS
 
2008 evalueserve venture capital research mahaveer
2008 evalueserve venture capital research mahaveer2008 evalueserve venture capital research mahaveer
2008 evalueserve venture capital research mahaveer
 
Cpuc financing report_hb&c_jul8v2
Cpuc financing report_hb&c_jul8v2Cpuc financing report_hb&c_jul8v2
Cpuc financing report_hb&c_jul8v2
 
Integrating developing countries’ SMEs into Global Value Chain.
Integrating developing countries’ SMEs into Global Value Chain.Integrating developing countries’ SMEs into Global Value Chain.
Integrating developing countries’ SMEs into Global Value Chain.
 
agilent 2005Proxy
agilent  2005Proxyagilent  2005Proxy
agilent 2005Proxy
 
Strategic Enrolment Intelligence book
Strategic Enrolment Intelligence bookStrategic Enrolment Intelligence book
Strategic Enrolment Intelligence book
 
RAND_Aff_housing
RAND_Aff_housingRAND_Aff_housing
RAND_Aff_housing
 
Inkijkexemplaar alternative credit handboek nnip
Inkijkexemplaar alternative credit handboek nnipInkijkexemplaar alternative credit handboek nnip
Inkijkexemplaar alternative credit handboek nnip
 
20060123_ey_submission
20060123_ey_submission20060123_ey_submission
20060123_ey_submission
 
Strategy Package for Higher Growth & Structural Change Human Capital for a Hi...
Strategy Package for Higher Growth & Structural Change Human Capital for a Hi...Strategy Package for Higher Growth & Structural Change Human Capital for a Hi...
Strategy Package for Higher Growth & Structural Change Human Capital for a Hi...
 
The approach to alternative credit inkijk
The approach to alternative credit inkijkThe approach to alternative credit inkijk
The approach to alternative credit inkijk
 
AMR 2007 Proxy Statement
AMR 	2007 Proxy StatementAMR 	2007 Proxy Statement
AMR 2007 Proxy Statement
 
Aid_for_Trade_Manual_2015
Aid_for_Trade_Manual_2015Aid_for_Trade_Manual_2015
Aid_for_Trade_Manual_2015
 
Halifax: Hub City for the Maritime Provinces
Halifax: Hub City for the Maritime ProvincesHalifax: Hub City for the Maritime Provinces
Halifax: Hub City for the Maritime Provinces
 
Survey apex sidi
Survey apex sidiSurvey apex sidi
Survey apex sidi
 
Poverty in a rising Africa
Poverty in a rising AfricaPoverty in a rising Africa
Poverty in a rising Africa
 
2009 Botswana Banking & Financial Sector Review (Capital Securities)
2009  	Botswana Banking & Financial Sector Review (Capital Securities)2009  	Botswana Banking & Financial Sector Review (Capital Securities)
2009 Botswana Banking & Financial Sector Review (Capital Securities)
 
entergy 2007 final IG
entergy 2007 final IGentergy 2007 final IG
entergy 2007 final IG
 
agilent Proxy08
agilent  Proxy08agilent  Proxy08
agilent Proxy08
 
Gii 2012 france innovation profile
Gii 2012   france innovation profileGii 2012   france innovation profile
Gii 2012 france innovation profile
 

En vedette

IdT slideshow group c
IdT slideshow group cIdT slideshow group c
IdT slideshow group cMorgan
 
Essential things that should always be in your car
Essential things that should always be in your carEssential things that should always be in your car
Essential things that should always be in your carEason Chan
 
4 Biggest Challenges for Creative Teams
4 Biggest Challenges for Creative Teams4 Biggest Challenges for Creative Teams
4 Biggest Challenges for Creative TeamsWrike
 
Classroom Management Tips for Kids and Adolescents
Classroom Management Tips for Kids and AdolescentsClassroom Management Tips for Kids and Adolescents
Classroom Management Tips for Kids and AdolescentsShelly Sanchez Terrell
 
The Buyer's Journey - by Chris Lema
The Buyer's Journey - by Chris LemaThe Buyer's Journey - by Chris Lema
The Buyer's Journey - by Chris LemaChris Lema
 

En vedette (6)

IdT slideshow group c
IdT slideshow group cIdT slideshow group c
IdT slideshow group c
 
Essential things that should always be in your car
Essential things that should always be in your carEssential things that should always be in your car
Essential things that should always be in your car
 
Back-to-School Survey 2016
Back-to-School Survey 2016Back-to-School Survey 2016
Back-to-School Survey 2016
 
4 Biggest Challenges for Creative Teams
4 Biggest Challenges for Creative Teams4 Biggest Challenges for Creative Teams
4 Biggest Challenges for Creative Teams
 
Classroom Management Tips for Kids and Adolescents
Classroom Management Tips for Kids and AdolescentsClassroom Management Tips for Kids and Adolescents
Classroom Management Tips for Kids and Adolescents
 
The Buyer's Journey - by Chris Lema
The Buyer's Journey - by Chris LemaThe Buyer's Journey - by Chris Lema
The Buyer's Journey - by Chris Lema
 

Similaire à Iese vcpe index_annual_2009

A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN ASIA Policies and Practices in In...
A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN ASIA Policies and Practices in In...A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN ASIA Policies and Practices in In...
A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN ASIA Policies and Practices in In...Oswar Mungkasa
 
20090712 commodities in the if study undp exeuctive summarywith covers
20090712 commodities in the if study undp exeuctive summarywith covers20090712 commodities in the if study undp exeuctive summarywith covers
20090712 commodities in the if study undp exeuctive summarywith coversLichia Saner-Yiu
 
Nvca yearbook 2013
Nvca yearbook 2013Nvca yearbook 2013
Nvca yearbook 2013Mila Rocha
 
NVCA Yearbook 2013: US National Venture Capital Association's Yearbook 2013
NVCA Yearbook 2013: US National Venture Capital Association's Yearbook 2013NVCA Yearbook 2013: US National Venture Capital Association's Yearbook 2013
NVCA Yearbook 2013: US National Venture Capital Association's Yearbook 2013Lucas Wyrsch
 
Investment review policy zambia
Investment review policy    zambiaInvestment review policy    zambia
Investment review policy zambiaBamature Paz
 
Kosovo Mid-Term KCBS Evaluation Report
Kosovo Mid-Term KCBS Evaluation ReportKosovo Mid-Term KCBS Evaluation Report
Kosovo Mid-Term KCBS Evaluation Reportnsegura85
 
National venture capital association yearbook 2013
National venture capital association yearbook 2013National venture capital association yearbook 2013
National venture capital association yearbook 2013Steve Hu
 
The_Security_Development_Lifecycle.pdf
The_Security_Development_Lifecycle.pdfThe_Security_Development_Lifecycle.pdf
The_Security_Development_Lifecycle.pdfsagayalavanya2
 
Investingfor socialandenvimpact fullreport_004
Investingfor socialandenvimpact fullreport_004Investingfor socialandenvimpact fullreport_004
Investingfor socialandenvimpact fullreport_004jaybowne
 
Financing for development Post 2015
Financing for development Post 2015Financing for development Post 2015
Financing for development Post 2015Dr Lendy Spires
 
Infrastructure financing-india
Infrastructure financing-indiaInfrastructure financing-india
Infrastructure financing-indiaMahesh Gujrathi
 
Developing the global_guide_to_what_counts_webpdf
Developing the global_guide_to_what_counts_webpdfDeveloping the global_guide_to_what_counts_webpdf
Developing the global_guide_to_what_counts_webpdfRussian Donors Forum
 
Bryant AIF Fall 2016 - Annual Report
Bryant AIF Fall 2016 - Annual ReportBryant AIF Fall 2016 - Annual Report
Bryant AIF Fall 2016 - Annual ReportPeter Davies
 
Ethical Corp Report Summary Csr Initiatives
Ethical Corp Report Summary   Csr InitiativesEthical Corp Report Summary   Csr Initiatives
Ethical Corp Report Summary Csr InitiativesEthical Corporation
 
Financing for Development: Progress and Prospects 2018
Financing for Development: Progress and Prospects 2018Financing for Development: Progress and Prospects 2018
Financing for Development: Progress and Prospects 2018Dr Lendy Spires
 

Similaire à Iese vcpe index_annual_2009 (20)

National Venture Capital Association
National Venture Capital AssociationNational Venture Capital Association
National Venture Capital Association
 
A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN ASIA Policies and Practices in In...
A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN ASIA Policies and Practices in In...A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN ASIA Policies and Practices in In...
A RAPID ASSESSMENT OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN ASIA Policies and Practices in In...
 
20090712 commodities in the if study undp exeuctive summarywith covers
20090712 commodities in the if study undp exeuctive summarywith covers20090712 commodities in the if study undp exeuctive summarywith covers
20090712 commodities in the if study undp exeuctive summarywith covers
 
Nvca yearbook 2013
Nvca yearbook 2013Nvca yearbook 2013
Nvca yearbook 2013
 
NVCA Yearbook 2013: US National Venture Capital Association's Yearbook 2013
NVCA Yearbook 2013: US National Venture Capital Association's Yearbook 2013NVCA Yearbook 2013: US National Venture Capital Association's Yearbook 2013
NVCA Yearbook 2013: US National Venture Capital Association's Yearbook 2013
 
Investment review policy zambia
Investment review policy    zambiaInvestment review policy    zambia
Investment review policy zambia
 
Kosovo Mid-Term KCBS Evaluation Report
Kosovo Mid-Term KCBS Evaluation ReportKosovo Mid-Term KCBS Evaluation Report
Kosovo Mid-Term KCBS Evaluation Report
 
Nvca report 2013
Nvca report 2013Nvca report 2013
Nvca report 2013
 
National venture capital association yearbook 2013
National venture capital association yearbook 2013National venture capital association yearbook 2013
National venture capital association yearbook 2013
 
The_Security_Development_Lifecycle.pdf
The_Security_Development_Lifecycle.pdfThe_Security_Development_Lifecycle.pdf
The_Security_Development_Lifecycle.pdf
 
Investingfor socialandenvimpact fullreport_004
Investingfor socialandenvimpact fullreport_004Investingfor socialandenvimpact fullreport_004
Investingfor socialandenvimpact fullreport_004
 
Bankensektor
BankensektorBankensektor
Bankensektor
 
Gender_TCB_Guide
Gender_TCB_GuideGender_TCB_Guide
Gender_TCB_Guide
 
Investing for Social and Env Impact
Investing for Social and Env ImpactInvesting for Social and Env Impact
Investing for Social and Env Impact
 
Financing for development Post 2015
Financing for development Post 2015Financing for development Post 2015
Financing for development Post 2015
 
Infrastructure financing-india
Infrastructure financing-indiaInfrastructure financing-india
Infrastructure financing-india
 
Developing the global_guide_to_what_counts_webpdf
Developing the global_guide_to_what_counts_webpdfDeveloping the global_guide_to_what_counts_webpdf
Developing the global_guide_to_what_counts_webpdf
 
Bryant AIF Fall 2016 - Annual Report
Bryant AIF Fall 2016 - Annual ReportBryant AIF Fall 2016 - Annual Report
Bryant AIF Fall 2016 - Annual Report
 
Ethical Corp Report Summary Csr Initiatives
Ethical Corp Report Summary   Csr InitiativesEthical Corp Report Summary   Csr Initiatives
Ethical Corp Report Summary Csr Initiatives
 
Financing for Development: Progress and Prospects 2018
Financing for Development: Progress and Prospects 2018Financing for Development: Progress and Prospects 2018
Financing for Development: Progress and Prospects 2018
 

Plus de Jose Gonzalez

Why i believe in angels atlantic business magazine 01 09_0
Why i believe in angels   atlantic business magazine 01 09_0Why i believe in angels   atlantic business magazine 01 09_0
Why i believe in angels atlantic business magazine 01 09_0Jose Gonzalez
 
Userguide fundingapplication-forgroups-a1
Userguide fundingapplication-forgroups-a1Userguide fundingapplication-forgroups-a1
Userguide fundingapplication-forgroups-a1Jose Gonzalez
 
Thefundedsick 1226521688868759-8
Thefundedsick 1226521688868759-8Thefundedsick 1226521688868759-8
Thefundedsick 1226521688868759-8Jose Gonzalez
 
Thebeststartuppitchdeckhowtopresenttoangelsvcs 130706124526-phpapp01
Thebeststartuppitchdeckhowtopresenttoangelsvcs 130706124526-phpapp01Thebeststartuppitchdeckhowtopresenttoangelsvcs 130706124526-phpapp01
Thebeststartuppitchdeckhowtopresenttoangelsvcs 130706124526-phpapp01Jose Gonzalez
 
Svca presentation eng 081205
Svca presentation eng 081205Svca presentation eng 081205
Svca presentation eng 081205Jose Gonzalez
 
Startup fundraising checklist (1)
Startup fundraising checklist (1)Startup fundraising checklist (1)
Startup fundraising checklist (1)Jose Gonzalez
 
Sr us 10_draft_programme_eb_site
Sr us 10_draft_programme_eb_siteSr us 10_draft_programme_eb_site
Sr us 10_draft_programme_eb_siteJose Gonzalez
 
Foundup manifesto and o!f manual v1.5 intro
Foundup manifesto and o!f manual v1.5 introFoundup manifesto and o!f manual v1.5 intro
Foundup manifesto and o!f manual v1.5 introJose Gonzalez
 
Due diligencechecklist
Due diligencechecklistDue diligencechecklist
Due diligencechecklistJose Gonzalez
 
Capital raisingscenarioform
Capital raisingscenarioformCapital raisingscenarioform
Capital raisingscenarioformJose Gonzalez
 
Bloom crowdfunding ebook
Bloom crowdfunding ebookBloom crowdfunding ebook
Bloom crowdfunding ebookJose Gonzalez
 
2013 housing-market-forecast
2013 housing-market-forecast2013 housing-market-forecast
2013 housing-market-forecastJose Gonzalez
 
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012x
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012x350 veterans assistance-application_04262012x
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012xJose Gonzalez
 
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012350 veterans assistance-application_04262012
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012Jose Gonzalez
 
25 steps-fundraising-guide (1)
25 steps-fundraising-guide (1)25 steps-fundraising-guide (1)
25 steps-fundraising-guide (1)Jose Gonzalez
 
10 ways-to-secure-business-funding
10 ways-to-secure-business-funding10 ways-to-secure-business-funding
10 ways-to-secure-business-fundingJose Gonzalez
 

Plus de Jose Gonzalez (20)

Why i believe in angels atlantic business magazine 01 09_0
Why i believe in angels   atlantic business magazine 01 09_0Why i believe in angels   atlantic business magazine 01 09_0
Why i believe in angels atlantic business magazine 01 09_0
 
V3i3 sample
V3i3 sampleV3i3 sample
V3i3 sample
 
Userguide fundingapplication-forgroups-a1
Userguide fundingapplication-forgroups-a1Userguide fundingapplication-forgroups-a1
Userguide fundingapplication-forgroups-a1
 
Untangling the web
Untangling the webUntangling the web
Untangling the web
 
Thefundedsick 1226521688868759-8
Thefundedsick 1226521688868759-8Thefundedsick 1226521688868759-8
Thefundedsick 1226521688868759-8
 
Thebeststartuppitchdeckhowtopresenttoangelsvcs 130706124526-phpapp01
Thebeststartuppitchdeckhowtopresenttoangelsvcs 130706124526-phpapp01Thebeststartuppitchdeckhowtopresenttoangelsvcs 130706124526-phpapp01
Thebeststartuppitchdeckhowtopresenttoangelsvcs 130706124526-phpapp01
 
Svca presentation eng 081205
Svca presentation eng 081205Svca presentation eng 081205
Svca presentation eng 081205
 
Startup fundraising checklist (1)
Startup fundraising checklist (1)Startup fundraising checklist (1)
Startup fundraising checklist (1)
 
Sr us 10_draft_programme_eb_site
Sr us 10_draft_programme_eb_siteSr us 10_draft_programme_eb_site
Sr us 10_draft_programme_eb_site
 
Gd fundraising (1)
Gd fundraising (1)Gd fundraising (1)
Gd fundraising (1)
 
Foundup manifesto and o!f manual v1.5 intro
Foundup manifesto and o!f manual v1.5 introFoundup manifesto and o!f manual v1.5 intro
Foundup manifesto and o!f manual v1.5 intro
 
Due diligencechecklist
Due diligencechecklistDue diligencechecklist
Due diligencechecklist
 
Capital raisingscenarioform
Capital raisingscenarioformCapital raisingscenarioform
Capital raisingscenarioform
 
Bloom crowdfunding ebook
Bloom crowdfunding ebookBloom crowdfunding ebook
Bloom crowdfunding ebook
 
2013 housing-market-forecast
2013 housing-market-forecast2013 housing-market-forecast
2013 housing-market-forecast
 
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012x
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012x350 veterans assistance-application_04262012x
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012x
 
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012350 veterans assistance-application_04262012
350 veterans assistance-application_04262012
 
25 steps-fundraising-guide (1)
25 steps-fundraising-guide (1)25 steps-fundraising-guide (1)
25 steps-fundraising-guide (1)
 
10 ways-to-secure-business-funding
10 ways-to-secure-business-funding10 ways-to-secure-business-funding
10 ways-to-secure-business-funding
 
Visiontoactiongoals
VisiontoactiongoalsVisiontoactiongoals
Visiontoactiongoals
 

Dernier

Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..dlewis191
 
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISINGUNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISINGlokeshwarmaha
 
Amazon ppt.pptx Amazon about the company
Amazon ppt.pptx Amazon about the companyAmazon ppt.pptx Amazon about the company
Amazon ppt.pptx Amazon about the companyfashionfound007
 
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking ApplicationsUpgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking ApplicationsIntellect Design Arena Ltd
 
Trauma Training Service for First Responders
Trauma Training Service for First RespondersTrauma Training Service for First Responders
Trauma Training Service for First RespondersBPOQe
 
Graham and Doddsville - Issue 1 - Winter 2006 (1).pdf
Graham and Doddsville - Issue 1 - Winter 2006 (1).pdfGraham and Doddsville - Issue 1 - Winter 2006 (1).pdf
Graham and Doddsville - Issue 1 - Winter 2006 (1).pdfAnhNguyen97152
 
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003believeminhh
 
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...Brian Solis
 
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyAnyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyHanna Klim
 
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for BusinessQ2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for BusinessAPCO
 
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and FestivalsFabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and FestivalsWristbands Ireland
 
Entrepreneurship & organisations: influences and organizations
Entrepreneurship & organisations: influences and organizationsEntrepreneurship & organisations: influences and organizations
Entrepreneurship & organisations: influences and organizationsP&CO
 
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptxHELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptxHelene Heckrotte
 
NewBase 25 March 2024 Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
NewBase  25 March  2024  Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...NewBase  25 March  2024  Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
NewBase 25 March 2024 Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...Khaled Al Awadi
 
Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet- 2024
 Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet-  2024 Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet-  2024
Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet- 2024Stephan Koning
 
Plano de marketing- inglês em formato ppt
Plano de marketing- inglês  em formato pptPlano de marketing- inglês  em formato ppt
Plano de marketing- inglês em formato pptElizangelaSoaresdaCo
 
MoneyBridge Pitch Deck - Investor Presentation
MoneyBridge Pitch Deck - Investor PresentationMoneyBridge Pitch Deck - Investor Presentation
MoneyBridge Pitch Deck - Investor Presentationbaron83
 
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...IMARC Group
 
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptxIntroduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptxJemalSeid25
 
Project Brief & Information Architecture Report
Project Brief & Information Architecture ReportProject Brief & Information Architecture Report
Project Brief & Information Architecture Reportamberjiles31
 

Dernier (20)

Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
 
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISINGUNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
 
Amazon ppt.pptx Amazon about the company
Amazon ppt.pptx Amazon about the companyAmazon ppt.pptx Amazon about the company
Amazon ppt.pptx Amazon about the company
 
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking ApplicationsUpgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
 
Trauma Training Service for First Responders
Trauma Training Service for First RespondersTrauma Training Service for First Responders
Trauma Training Service for First Responders
 
Graham and Doddsville - Issue 1 - Winter 2006 (1).pdf
Graham and Doddsville - Issue 1 - Winter 2006 (1).pdfGraham and Doddsville - Issue 1 - Winter 2006 (1).pdf
Graham and Doddsville - Issue 1 - Winter 2006 (1).pdf
 
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
 
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
 
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyAnyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
 
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for BusinessQ2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
 
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and FestivalsFabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
 
Entrepreneurship & organisations: influences and organizations
Entrepreneurship & organisations: influences and organizationsEntrepreneurship & organisations: influences and organizations
Entrepreneurship & organisations: influences and organizations
 
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptxHELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
 
NewBase 25 March 2024 Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
NewBase  25 March  2024  Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...NewBase  25 March  2024  Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
NewBase 25 March 2024 Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
 
Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet- 2024
 Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet-  2024 Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet-  2024
Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet- 2024
 
Plano de marketing- inglês em formato ppt
Plano de marketing- inglês  em formato pptPlano de marketing- inglês  em formato ppt
Plano de marketing- inglês em formato ppt
 
MoneyBridge Pitch Deck - Investor Presentation
MoneyBridge Pitch Deck - Investor PresentationMoneyBridge Pitch Deck - Investor Presentation
MoneyBridge Pitch Deck - Investor Presentation
 
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
 
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptxIntroduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
 
Project Brief & Information Architecture Report
Project Brief & Information Architecture ReportProject Brief & Information Architecture Report
Project Brief & Information Architecture Report
 

Iese vcpe index_annual_2009

  • 1. The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index 2009/2010 annual Alexander Groh & Heinrich Liechtenstein Sponsored by
  • 2. The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index 2009/2010 annual Alexander Groh & Heinrich Liechtenstein Sponsored by
  • 4. Contents Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Sponsors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 About the editors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Research team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 I. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 How to measure a country’s attractiveness for limited partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 The 2009/2010 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Comparisons of regions and countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Tracking power of our index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Summary and outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 II. Legal systems, taxes and VC and PE activity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 After the storm: a global view on post-recession opportunities and challenges for the PE and VC industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - Legal Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 III. An insight into different VC and PE markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Africa: Governance, development and budding VC and PE activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Asia: Does vibrant entrepreneurial activity and expected growth compensate some weaknesses? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Latin America: VC and PE in Latin America after the crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 IV. Regional and country profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 How to read the country and regional profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Regional profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Country profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 V. Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 Computation of the index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 Statistical validation of the index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 Limitations of our index and FAQs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 Table with sources and explanations of the data series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
  • 5. Foreword from the research team In this annual, we want to present the results of a comprehensive research project on how to measure the attractiveness of a country for investors in Venture Capital (VC) and Private Equity (PE) limited partnerships. The project was initiated at IESE Business School in Barcelona in 2006 with a European pilot study. From the European study we gained experience and the confidence to extend the study globally. Since 2006 two professors, one doctoral student, and many research assistants have worked on the project. We selected and collected more than 300 different data series from all kind of providers – some ranging back to 2000. We attempted to include as many countries as possible in the study, and handled approximately 200,000 individual data records. We would not have been able to realize this without the generous financial and non financial contributions from our sponsors, and we greatly appreciate the support of IESE Business School, their International Center for Financial Research (CIIF), Ernst &Young, and DLA Piper Weiss Tessbach. This is the first edition of the Venture Capital and Private Equity (VCPE) Country Attractiveness Index. This index will be subject to critique and we invite constructive feedback to help us improve future editions of the index. Selected data series may be subject to change in future editions and new and more appropriate data series may be used as a substitute to existing data. The quality of data and the number of countries covered will increase. As a result, our index will be a dynamic product that always considers the most adequate and recent data. We believe this index is unique in providing the VC and PE market segment with such a broad scope. We hope investors will appreciate the information included in this index; politicians may utilize the index to make improvements in their countries to attract international risk capital. We hope that you find our 2009/2010 Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index of value. Website Please visit our website http://vcpeindex.iese.us/ where you will find more information, links to literature and several analytical tools for benchmarking purposes.
  • 6. Professor Josh Lerner Jacob H. Schiff Professor of Investment Banking Foreword Harvard Business School Virtually every high growth business needs Another important trend has been the capital. Investors allocate assets to earn professionalization of the venture capital substantial returns. One would imagine that industry itself. Venture capital and private the two facts above would bring venture equity organizations have matured. Their capitalists and entrepreneurs together. investment policies, procedures, and systems have been refined over decades of experience, But, in fact, a significant gap separates the two and are becoming formalized and structured. groups. Entrepreneurs live in great uncertainty As a result of these two trends, it is no surprise and assume significant risk in pursuing their that many nations are making greater efforts to business, whether a young start up or a encouraging venture capital activity with an eye restructuring division. Venture capitalists and to boosting innovation and entrepreneurship, private equity investors are a special breed, who and to counteracting the recessionary impact seek to help entrepreneurs triumph, but have of the global economic crisis on growth. fiduciary responsibilities to their own investors (whether pensions, sovereign wealth funds, With the emergence of venture capital and endowments, or families), which limit their private equity investment as a professional ability to absorb all the risk in new ventures. practice, understanding the way in which While venture capital and private equity this industry works is critically important for has become a well developed industry in the policymakers, practitioners, and would be United States and Western Europe, in many practitioners, whether they are (or aspire to be) other parts of the world, a gap in experience working for entrepreneurial ventures, venture and expectations has slowed the adoption of capital and private equity firms, or large venture capital and private equity funds, and institutional capital pools. I applaud Alexander limited the success of the pioneering funds. Groh and Heinrich Liechtenstein, who have taken the heroic step of trying to draw together all the But in the past few years, the venture information needed to assess whether a market capital and private equity industry has been is ready for venture capital and private equity. globalizing at a dramatic pace. Funds are increasingly being raised internationally and The country attractiveness index—which builds invested globally. More and more firms have on academic research into the determinants established multinational operations. There is of these funds world wide—provides valuable an increasing appreciation by entrepreneurs information to investors and political leaders world wide of the benefits that venture and about which markets are most suited for growth equity investors can bring. Company private investments. The index results both managers are increasingly setting ambitious provide answers and raise questions—e.g., to goals and looking to these investors to provide what extent will the financial crisis upend the capital, advice, and strategic partnerships the established order of the most attractive they need to bring their plans to fruition. markets?—but represent an important step in systemizing our understanding of these issues. Enjoy the reading! The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 7
  • 7. Sponsors We are very grateful to our sponsors IESE Business School/CIIF, Ernst & Young, and DLA Piper Weiss-Tessbach for the financial support, their feedback throughout the project and their direct contributions to the index. IESE Business School – University of Navarra Business School and has established itself as a nu- is one of the world´s top 10 business schools and cleus of study within the School’s activities. has pioneered executive education in Europe since Sixteen years on, our chief objectives remain its foundation in 1958 in Barcelona. In 1964 IESE the same: introduced Europe’s first full-time MBA program. • Find answers to the questions that confront the IESE distinguishes itself in its general-management owners and managers of finance companies, approach, extensive use of case method, interna- and the finance director of all kind of compa- tional outreach, and emphasis on placing people at nies in the performance of their duties. the heart of managerial decision-making. With a • Develop new tools for financial management. truly global outlook, IESE currently runs executive- • Study in depth the changes that occur in the education programs on four continents. market and their effects on the financial dimen- The CIIF, International Center for Financial Re- sion of business activity. search, is an interdisciplinary center with an inter- All of these activities are programmed and carried national outlook and a focus on teaching and re- out with the support of our sponsoring companies. search in finance. It was created at the beginning Apart from providing vital financial assistance, our of 1992 to channel the financial research interest sponsors also help to define the Center’s research of a multidisciplinary group of professors at IESE projects, ensuring their practical relevance. Ernst & Young is a global leader in assurance, tax, Our private equity and venture capital practices transaction and advisory services. Worldwide, our therefore offer a holistic, tailored approach that en- 144,000 people are united by our shared values and compasses the needs of funds, their M&A process an unwavering commitment to quality. We make a and portfolio companies while addressing market, difference by helping our people, our clients and industry and regulatory concerns and opportunities. our wider communities achieve their potential. We hope that the Global VC/PE Country Attrac- Potential is a key word for equity capital ma- tiveness Index proves to be a valuable tool in hel- nagement. Deal success doesn’t end when the deal ping funds navigate through this uncertain time. closes. Acquirers know success and stakeholder For more information please visit www.ey.com value lie in portfolio companies’ continued growth under their watch and after their exits. including corporate, M&A, venture capital and DLA Piper Weiss Tessbach is part of DLA Piper, capital markets, banking and finance, litigation one of the largest global legal services prac- and regulatory, general commercial law, real es- tices, with over 3,500 lawyers in 67 offices in 29 tate, employment law, IT, telecoms and IP and ad- countries. From its offices in Asia, Europe, the vises its clients as a full-service firm in all relevant Middle East and the US, legal and business ad- areas of business law. visers provide a broad range of services to local, For further information, please visit: regional and international clients. The firm is hi- www.dlapiper.com. ghly acknowledged in its core areas of expertise 8 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 8. About the editors Prof. Alexander Groh Prof. Heinrich Liechtenstein Research team Alexander Groh Dr. Alexander Groh is Visiting Professor at Dr. Heinrich Liechtenstein is Professor of Visiting Professor, IESE Business School, Barcelona – Univer- Financial Management at IESE Business IESE Business School Barcelona sity of Navarra, Spain. His research activi- School, Barcelona – University of Navarra, ties focus on VC and PE, and include va- Spain. His areas of interest are entrepre- Heinrich Liechtenstein luation issues, performance measurement neurial finance, VC and PE, wealth ma- Assistant Professor, and socio-economic determinants for the nagement, and owners’ strategies. He is IESE Business School Barcelona development of national markets. He is active in several supervisory and advisory Associate Professor of Finance at GSCM – boards of family holdings and founda- Karsten Lieser Montpellier Business School, France. Prior tions, as well as a private equity firm. Visiting PhD Student, to that, he was visiting INSEAD, Fontaine- Dr. Liechtenstein has experience in IESE Business School Barcelona bleau, France, and was Assistant Professor wealth management and owners' strate- of Corporate Finance and Entrepreneurial gies at Liechtenstein Global Trust, a family Miriam Hesse Finance at Darmstadt University of Tech- holding, and as a consultant at The Boston Research Assistant, nology, Germany. He is involved in training Consulting Group. He has previously foun- IESE Business School Barcelona courses for the European Venture Capital ded and sold two companies. and Private Equity Association (EVCA), and Dr. Liechtenstein was born in Leoben, Renata Semmel the Indian Venture Capital and Private Austria, and received an MA in Business Research Assistant, Equity Association (IVCA), and has worked Administration from the University of IESE Business School Barcelona for Quadriga Capital, a Frankfurt based Graz, an MBA from IESE Business School, Private Equity fund, since 1996. and a Doctoral Degree of Business and Sarp Vardarizi Dr. Alexander Groh was born in Frank- Economic Sciences from the University of Research Assistant, furt, Germany. He received a joint Master’s Vienna. IESE Business School Barcelona Degree of Mechanical Engineering and Business Administration from Darmstadt Matthias Wich University of Technology, where he also Research Assistant, gained his Doctoral Degree in Finance. IESE Business School Barcelona Tobias Götz Research Assistant, IESE Business School Barcelona Markus Grabellus Research Assistant, IESE Business School Barcelona Markus Biesinger Research Assistant, IESE Business School Barcelona The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 9
  • 9. I. 10 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 10. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index Article written by Alexander Groh, agroh@iese.edu, and Heinrich Liechtenstein, hl@iese.edu, both, IESE Business School Barcelona. The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 11
  • 11. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index How to measure a country’s attractiveness for limited partners The purpose of our index is to in particular nations and will benchmark benchmark countries with respect to them. A politician has the opportunity their attractiveness for institutional to influence the conditions that attract investors who decide upon international (or deter) international risk capital: an allocations in VC and PE limited investor will respond to policy actions. partnerships. We therefore take an Therefore, attempts to increase risk institutional investor’s point of view for capital market activity in a particular the aggregation and analyses of socio- country should focus on the relationship economic data. We want to contribute between the parties that deserve capital to solving the investor’s problem: where and those who provide it. Risk capital is to allocate the capital. However, a a high liquid asset class with respect to politician may conclude that a vibrant international allocations. Funds will flow risk capital market supports innovation, quickly into regions and countries where entrepreneurship, economic growth, investors expect opportunities. Nations employment, and wealth. Both the (and regions) are in strong competition politician, who would like to increase risk for receiving allocations from limited capital market activity, and the investor, partners. who seeks adequate compensation for the investment risk, will observe strengths and weaknesses, risks and opportunities 12 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 12. What are institutional investors’ Importance of Economic Activity the findings are equally valid for the later selection criteria? Intuitively, the state of a country’s eco- stage. Jeng and Wells (2000) stress that Our index addresses the concerns of insti- nomy should affect the VC/PE activity. IPO activity is the main force behind cy- tutional investors and looks at the criteria An economy’s size is an indicator of the clical swings because it reflects the poten- they base their international VC and PE quantity of corporations and deal flow op- tial return to the VC/PE funds. Kaplan and allocation decisions upon. Their allocation portunities in general. Economic growth Schoar (2005) confirm this. Analogous to criteria will include, in the first instance, should lead to demand for finance. Gom- Black and Gilson (1998), Gompers and Ler- the expected economic opportunities of pers and Lerner (1998) focus on the VC ner (2000) point out that risk capital flou- a country or region from a macro pers- segment and point out that more attrac- rishes in countries with deep and liquid pective. However, they will also include a tive opportunities exist for entrepreneurs stock markets. Likewise, Schertler (2003) particular investment strategy of a fund if the economy is growing quickly. Wilken uses either the capitalization of stock mar- management team, the team’s compe- (1979) argues that a situation of econo- kets or the number of listed companies as tence, their track record and other para- mic prosperity and development facilitates a measure for the liquidity of stock mar- meters. The latter criteria will be addressed entrepreneurship, as it provides a greater kets. She finds that the liquidity of stock as part of their fund due diligence before accumulation of capital for investments. markets has a significant positive impact limited partners consider committing to a The ease of start-ups is expected to be re- on VC investments in its early stages. particular general partner. These criteria lated to societal wealth, not solely due to Alongside the disadvantages of bank- are beyond of the scope of our index be- the availability of start-up financing, but centered capital markets, Greene (1998) cause they depend on individual cases. Our also to higher income among potential emphasizes that low availability of debt index points to the general opportunities customers in the domestic market. Ro- financing is an obstacle for start-ups in that arise from the socio-economic state main and van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie many countries. Entrepreneurs need to of a country or region and as a result, we (2004) find that VC/PE activity is cyclical find backers - whether banks or VC/PE contribute to the macro perspective of the and significantly related to gross domestic funds - who are willing to bear risk. Ce- fund due diligence. Our index provides va- product (GDP) growth. torelli and Gambera (2001) provide evi- luable information to investors as it is the dence that bank concentration promotes first time that the different factors that de- Importance of the Depth of a Capital the growth of those industrial sectors that termine the attractiveness of a country for Market have a higher need for external finance by limited partners have been summarized in Black and Gilson (1998) focus on the diffe- facilitating credit access to younger com- a composite measure. The decisive factors rences between bank-centered and stock panies in said industry sectors. that render a country attractive have been market-centered capital markets. They extensively discussed in literature about the argue that a well-developed stock mar- Importance of Taxation determinants of vibrant VC and PE markets. ket that permits venture capitalists to exit We assume that two types of taxes affect We give a brief overview over this literature through an initial public offering (IPO) is VC and PE activity; those directly related to and group the articles into six sub-chap- crucial for the existence of a vibrant VC the asset class, such as taxes on dividends ters that already reveal the structure of our market. In general, bank-centered capital and capital gains, and those with an im- index. Each heading represents one of six markets show less ability to produce an ef- pact on corporations and entrepreneurship, key drivers that we regard as important, ficient VC infrastructure. They affirm that such as corporate tax rates. Gompers and appropriate and quantifiable to determine it is not merely the strong stock market Lerner (1998) stress that the capital gains the attractiveness of a country for limited that is missing in bank-centered capital tax rate influences VC/PE activity. In fact, partners. The key drivers name and define markets; it is also the secondary institu- they confirm Poterba’s finding (1989), who a set of criteria we need to assess for our tions, including the bankers’ conservative builds a decision-model to become entre- sample countries.1 approach to lending and investing, and preneur. Bruce (2000 and 2002), and Cullen the social and financial incentives that and Gordon (2002) prove that taxes mat- reward entrepreneurs less richly (and pe- ter for business entry and exit. Djankov et 1. Groh, Alexander, Liechtenstein, Heinrich and Lieser, Karsten (2009a) : The European Venture Capital and Private nalize failure more severely), that compro- al. (2008) show that corporate tax rates Equity Country Attractiveness Indices, forthcoming in the mise entrepreneurial activity. While their strongly affect entrepreneurship. Bruce and Journal of Corporate Finance (Re-print). Available at http://ssrn.com/author=330804. paper focuses on the early stage segment, Gurley (2005) explain that increases in the The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 13
  • 13. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index personal income tax raise the probability of ting standards have a significant impact Rigid labor market policies negatively becoming an entrepreneur. Hence, the dif- on the governance of investments in the affect the evolution of a VC/PE market. ference between personal income tax rates VC/PE industry. Desai et al. (2006) show, Lazear (1990) and Blanchard (1997) dis- and corporate tax rates tends to be an in- that fairness and property rights protec- cuss how protection of workers can reduce centive to create self-employment. tion largely determine the growth and employment and growth. Black and Gilson emergence of new enterprises. Cumming (1998) argue that labor market restric- Importance of Investor Protection and Johan (2007), meanwhile, highlight tions influence VC/PE activity, though not and Corporate Governance the perceived importance of regulatory to the same extent as the stock market. Legal structures and the protection of harmonization with respect to increasing Djankov et al. (2002) investigate the property rights also influence the at- institutional investor commitments to role of several societal burdens for start- tractiveness of a VC/PE market. La Porta the asset class. La Porta et al. (2002) find ups in different countries. They conclude et al. (1997 and 1998) confirm that the a lower cost of capital for companies in that the highest barriers and costs are legal environment strongly determines countries with better investor protection, associated with corruption, crime, a lar- the size and extent of a country’s capital and Lerner and Schoar (2005) confirm ger unofficial economy, and bureaucratic market and local companies’ ability to re- these findings. Johnson et al. (1999) show delay. ceive outside financing. They emphasize that weak property rights limit the rein- the difference between statutory law and vestment of profits in start-up compa- Importance of Entrepreneurial the quality of law enforcement in some nies. Finally and more broadly, Knack and Culture and Opportunities countries. Roe (2006) comprehensively Keefer (1995), Mauro (1995), and Svens- Access to viable investments is one of the discusses and compares the political deter- son (1998) demonstrate that property most important factors for the attracti- minants of corporate governance rules for rights significantly affect investments and veness of a regional VC market, especially the major economies and focuses on the economic growth. for early stage or start-up deals. The num- importance of strong minority sharehol- ber of potential investments relates to the der protection to develop a vibrant capital Importance of the Human and Social research output in an economy. Gompers market. Glaeser et al. (2001) and Djankov Environment and Lerner (1998) show that both indus- et al. (2003 and 2005) suggest that parties Black and Gilson (1998), Lee and Peterson trial and academic research and deve- in common-law countries have greater (2000), and Baughn and Neupert (2003) lopment (R&D) expenditure significantly ease in enforcing their rights from com- argue that national culture shapes both correlates with VC activity. Kortum and mercial contracts. Cumming et al. (2006) individual orientation and environmental Lerner (2000) highlight that the growth in find that the quality of a country’s legal conditions, which lead to different levels VC fundraising in the mid-1990s may be system is more closely connected to faci- of entrepreneurial activity in particular due to a surge of patents in the late 1980s litating VC/PE backed exits than the size countries. Megginson (2004) argues that, and 1990s. Schertler (2003) emphasizes of a country’s stock market. Cumming et in order to foster a growing risk capital that the number of both R&D employees al. (2009) extend this finding and show industry, research culture plays an impor- and patents, as an approximation of the that cross-country differences in lega- tant role, especially in universities or na- human capital endowment, has a positive lity, including legal origin and accoun- tional laboratories. and highly significant influence on VC ac- 14 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 14. tivity. Furthermore, Romain and von Pot- For the index calculation, it would be telsberghe de la Potterie (2004) find that ideal to include all parameters. However, start-up activity interacts with the R&D some of the cited papers focus on parti- capital stock, with technological opportu- cular economies or regions, depending nities, and the number of patents. Simi- on the data available, and their datasets lar to Djankov et al. (2002), Baughn and are difficult to compare. Therefore, we try Neupert (2003) argue that bureaucracy in to find the best possible proxies for the the form of excessive rules and procedural aforementioned drivers of VC/PE activity, requirements, multiple institutions from which are available for a large number of which approvals are needed, and cumber- countries. From the foregoing review of some documentation requirements may prior research, we identified six main cri- severely constrain entrepreneurial activity. teria that ultimately determine the attrac- Lee and Peterson (2000) stress that the tiveness of an individual country for VC/ time and money required to meet such PE investments: Economic Activity, Depth administrative burdens may discourage of a Capital Market, Taxation, Investor new venture creations. Protection and Corporate Governance, Human and Social Environment, and En- Summary on the determinants of trepreneurial Culture and Opportunities. vibrant VC and PE markets We regard these criteria as “key drivers”, The research findings discussed emphasize confirm their choice via a survey among the difficulty of identifying the appro- institutional investors, reported in Groh priate parameters for our index. There is and Liechtenstein (2009b) and (2009c), neither consensus about the most impor- and base the index structure upon them. tant parameters for VC/PE investment, Since none of the key drivers are di- nor any ranking. While some parameters rectly measurable, we regard them as are more comprehensively discussed, “constructs” and seek for data series that and certainly of very high relevance, it adequately express their character. remains unclear how these interact. For example, it is debatable whether the VC/ PE activity in a country with a high cor- porate governance level is more affected by the liquidity of the national stock market or by labor regulations. While an IPO exit is, in principle, possible at many stock exchanges in the world, labor mar- ket frictions can hardly be evaded. The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 15
  • 15. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index The 2009/2010 Index Assessing six latent key drivers How we disaggregate the six key Overall, we use 22 level 2 constructs for The basic and important principle of our in- drivers our index, and hence, “1 Economic Acti- dex is to make use of “latent drivers”. These According to the principle to assess latent vity” receives a weight of 3/22, which is are criteria that are not directly observable, drivers of VC and PE attractiveness with 0.136, while the weight of “3 Taxation” is but driven by others which can be measu- observable data we disaggregate the six 2/22 - 0.091. The advantage of this wei- red. For example, while we do not get data key drivers in sub-categories. These catego- ghting scheme is that the key drivers that on the number of investment banks, law ries are either actual data series or further consist of more level 2 constructs gain firms, accountants, or consultants to assess sub-constructs, and we call them “level 2 more weight. That way, we also smooth the infrastructure of the deal supporting constructs”. For example, in Table 1, we find, outliers in individual data series.3 institutions for the majority of our sample the key driver “2 Depth of a Capital Mar- countries, we can gather more general in- ket” split into five sub-categories: “2.1 Size Separate VC and PE indices formation on the level of debt provided by and Liquidity of the Stock Market”, “2.2 IPO To account for differences with respect the banking sector, or estimates about the Market Activity”, “2.3 M&A Market Activi- to the two market segments, VC vs. PE, we soundness of banks, the sophistication of ty”, “2.4 Debt and Credit Market”, and “2.5 propose three alternative indices. The first the financial system and the ease of access Financial Market Sophistication”. The last combines both segments. The second fo- to loans. We assume that the better these sub-category is a data series provided by the cuses on early stage VC and the third on criteria are developed, the more deal sup- World Economic Forum (WEF), all the others later stage PE only. For the VC and PE in- porting institutions will likewise exist to are constructs by themselves. For example, dices we simply discard data series that are facilitate VC and PE activity. This principle we assess “2.1 Size and Liquidity of the Stock less important for either market segment: is maintained at all individual stages for the Market” with three different data series (and for the VC index, we regard the level 2 index construction. An unobservable crite- call them “level 3 data”): the “2.1.1 Market construct “2.4 Debt and Credit Market” as rion is assessed with several proxy parame- Capitalization of Listed Companies", the relatively unimportant, and hence discard it. ters. In principle, we measure the attrac- “2.1.2 Total Trading Volume”, and “2.1.3 Lis- When calculating the PE index, we discard tiveness of a country by six main criteria. ted Domestic Companies”. This approach has “3.1.2 Entrepreneurship Incentive”, “3.1.3 The choice of these criteria is based on our two major advantages: first, individual data Labor and Tax Contributions”, and “3.2 Ad- own experience, the above review of aca- series do not gain too much weight when ministrative Tax Burdens”, and further, “5.1 demic literature and a survey we undertook they are grouped; second, the overall results Education and Human Capital”, “6.1 Inno- among limited partners.2 can be traced to more granulated levels and vation and R&D”, “6.2 Ease of Starting and We call them the “six key drivers” : hence, facilitate interpretations. Running a Business” and “6.4 ICT Infrastruc- 1. Economic Activity ture” from the criteria. The weights for the 2. Depth of a Capital Market The weighting scheme individual index items in the separate VC 3. Taxation We spent a great amount of time with and PE indices are calculated analogue to 4. Investor Protection and Corporate statistical analyses and optimization ap- the above explained procedure. Governance proaches to determine the weights for the Table 1 presents the structures and the 5. Human and Social Environment data aggregation. Finally, we came to the weights of the individual data series and 6. Entrepreneurial Culture and conclusion not to apply a statistically so- constructs for the combined VCPE, the VC Opportunities. phisticated approach that deserves docu- and the PE index. In the appendices, we As discussed before, these six key dri- mentation and discussion, but to choose provide detailed information on the data vers are not directly observable. For this a simple, plausible, and robust weighting series used to aggregate the index, and all reason, we disaggregate them, and use se- scheme. We apply equal weights for all data sources. There, we also explain the veral proxies for their assessment. data series, when we aggregate them to exact data aggregation technique. the level 2 constructs. Then again, we use 3. Details about the possible statistical approaches to 2. The results of this survey are described in two academic equal weights for the level 2 constructs determine weights for the data series are provided in the working papers : Groh, Alexander and Liechtenstein, to aggregate the six key drivers. Finally, academic paper Groh, Alexander, Liechtenstein, Heinrich Heinrich (2009b) : International Allocation Determinants and Lieser, Karsten (2009a) : The European Venture of Institutional Investments in Venture Capital and Private the weight of the key drivers depends Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Indices, Equity Limited Partnerships, IESE Business School Working on the number of level 2 constructs in- forthcoming in the Journal of Corporate Finance. Available Paper No. 726, and in Groh, Alexander and Liechtenstein, at http://ssrn.com/author=330804. Heinrich (2009c) : How Attractive is Central Eastern Europe cluded. For example, “1 Economic Acti- for Risk Capital Investors ? Journal of International Money vity” consists of three level 2 constructs, and Finance (28), 4, p. 625 – 647. Available at http://ssrn. com/author=330804. while “3 Taxation” consists of only two. 16 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 16. Table 1: Structure of the VCPE Index, the separate VC, and PE Indices, and the weighting schemes VCPE VC PE VCPE VC PE Index Index Index Index Index Index 1 Economic Activity 0.14 0.14 0.18 4.2.3 Intellectual Property Protection 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.1 Gross Domestic Product 0.33 0.33 0.33 4.3 Quality of Legal Enforcement 0.25 0.25 0.25 1.1.1 Total Economic Size 0.33 0.33 0.33 4.3.1 Judicial Independence 0.25 0.25 0.25 1.1.2 GDP per Capita 0.33 0.33 0.33 4.3.2 Impartial Courts 0.25 0.25 0.25 1.1.3 Real GDP year-on-year Growth 0.33 0.33 0.33 4.3.3 Integrity of the Legal System 0.25 0.25 0.25 1.2 Inflation 0.33 0.33 0.33 4.3.4 Rule of Law 0.25 0.25 0.25 1.3 Unemployment 0.33 0.33 0.33 4.4 Regulatory Quality 0.25 0.25 0.25 2 Depth of a Capital Market 0.23 0.19 0.29 5 Human and Social Environment 0.18 0.19 0.18 2.1 Size and Liquidity of the Stock Market 0.20 0.25 0.20 5.1 Education and Human Capital 0.25 0.25 2.1.1 Market Capitalization of Listed Companies 0.33 0.33 0.33 5.1.1 Quality of the Educational System 0.50 0.50 2.1.2 Total Trading Volume 0.33 0.33 0.33 5.1.2 Quality of Scientific Research Institutions 0.50 0.50 2.1.3 Listed Domestic Companies 0.33 0.33 0.33 5.2 Labor Market Rigidities 0.25 0.25 0.33 2.2 IPO Market Activity 0.20 0.25 0.20 5.2.1 Difficulty of Hiring Index 0.25 0.25 0.25 2.2.1 Market Volume 0.50 0.50 0.50 5.2.2 Rigidity of Hours Index 0.25 0.25 0.25 2.2.2 Number of IPOs 0.50 0.50 0.50 5.2.3 Difficulty of Firing Index 0.25 0.25 0.25 2.3 M&A Market Activity 0.20 0.25 0.20 5.2.4 Firing Costs 0.25 0.25 0.25 2.3.1 Market Volume 0.50 0.50 0.50 5.3 Bribing and Corruption 0.25 0.25 0.33 2.3.2 Number of Deals 0.50 0.50 0.50 5.3.1 Bribing and Corruption Index 0.33 0.33 0.33 2.4 Debt and Credit Market 0.20 0.20 5.3.2 Control of Corruption 0.33 0.33 0.33 2.4.1 Domestic Credit provided by Banking Sector 0.17 0.17 5.3.3 Extra Payments/Bribes 0.33 0.33 0.33 2.4.2 Ease of Access to Loans 0.17 0.17 5.4 Costs of Crime 0.25 0.25 0.33 2.4.3 Credit Information Index 0.17 0.17 5.4.1 Business Costs of Crime and Violence 0.50 0.50 0.50 2.4.4 Soundness of Banks 0.17 0.17 5.4.2 Costs of Organized Crime 0.50 0.50 0.50 2.4.5 Interest Rate Spread 0.17 0.17 6 Entrepreneurial Culture and Opportunities 0.18 0.19 0.06 2.4.6 Bank Non-performing Loans to Total Gross Loans 0.17 0.17 6.1 Innovation and R&D 0.25 0.25 2.5 Financial Market Sophistication 0.20 0.25 0.20 6.1.1 General Innovativeness Index 0.20 0.20 3 Taxation 0.09 0.10 0.06 6.1.2 Capacity for Innovation 0.20 0.20 3.1 Tax Incentives 0.50 0.50 1.00 6.1.3 Company Spending on R&D 0.20 0.20 3.1.1 Marginal Corporate Tax Rate 0.25 0.25 0.50 6.1.4 Utility Patents 0.20 0.20 3.1.2 Entrepreneurship Incentive 0.25 0.25 6.1.5 Scientific and Technical Journal Articles 0.20 0.20 3.1.3 Labor Tax and Contributions 0.25 0.25 6.2 Ease of Starting and Running a Business 0.25 0.25 3.1.4 Profit and Capital Gains Tax 0.25 0.25 0.50 6.2.1 Number of Procedures to start of Business 0.20 0.20 3.2 Administrative Tax Burdens 0.50 0.50 6.2.2 Time needed to start a Business 0.20 0.20 3.2.1 Number of Payments 0.50 0.50 6.2.3 Costs of Business Start-Up Procedures 0.20 0.20 3.2.2 Time spent on Tax Issues 0.50 0.50 6.2.4 Minimum Capital 0.20 0.20 4 Investor Protection and Corporate Governance 0.18 0.19 0.24 6.2.5 Administrative Requirements 0.20 0.20 4.1 Corporate Governance 0.25 0.25 0.25 6.3 Simplicity of Closing a Business 0.25 0.25 1.00 4.1.1 Disclosure Index 0.20 0.20 0.20 6.3.1 Time 0.33 0.33 0.33 4.1.2 Director Liability Index 0.20 0.20 0.20 6.3.2 Costs 0.33 0.33 0.33 4.1.3 Shareholder Suits Index 0.20 0.20 0.20 6.3.3 Recovery Rate 0.33 0.33 0.33 4.1.4 Legal Rights Index 0.20 0.20 0.20 6.4 ICT Infrastructure 0.25 0.25 4.1.5 Efficacy of Corporate Boards 0.20 0.20 0.20 6.4.1 Broadband Subscribers 0.25 0.25 4.2 Security of Property Rights 0.25 0.25 0.25 6.4.2 Fixed Line and Mobile Phone Subscribers 0.25 0.25 4.2.1 Legal Enforcement of Contracts 0.33 0.33 0.33 6.4.3 Internet Users 0.25 0.25 4.2.2 Property Rights 0.33 0.33 0.33 6.4.4 Secure Internet Servers 0.25 0.25 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 17
  • 17. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index The countries we cover The VCPE country attractiveness The selection of our sample countries is ranking purely driven by the availability of data. We gathered the data from Table 1 for the We would like to include many more na- 66 countries as far back to the past, and as tions but the lack of data is the constraint. recent as possible. We calculated the in- At present, the African continent is un- dex scores for 2009/2010 and realized, not der-represented with only four countries, surprisingly, that the United States is the but we hope to expand the number of most attractive country for VC and PE al- countries in future editions of the index. locations, with some remarkable distance We consider the following 66 nations and to its followers. Therefore, we use the US assign them to eight different geographic as the world benchmark: we rescale the regions. index score for the US to 100. This enables us to directly compare all other countries on a percentage scale. We explain the res- caling procedure in the appendix to this Africa: Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, South Africa index, and first present the ranking of the 2009/2010 VCPE Country Attractiveness Asia: China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Index. Malaysia, Philippines, Russian Federation, Exhibit 1 shows the ranking of the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, 2009/2010 VCPE Country Attractiveness Thailand, Vietnam Index. We know that this exhibit opens room for discussion. Some readers might Australasia: Australia, New Zealand think that particular countries are ran- ked too high, others too low. However, we Eastern Europe: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, want to stress that the index ranking is the Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, result of commonly available, aggregated Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Turkey, Ukraine socio-economic data. The results can be traced to the level of the individual data Latin America: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, series, and hence, can be confirmed. We Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela want to remark that the underlying data is historical, and does not include future Middle East: Egypt, Israel, Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, estimates. Therefore, we show the attrac- United Arab Emirates tiveness ranking as of today and want to leave it to investors and advisers to en- North America: USA, Canada rich the information we prepared with own knowledge, and expectations to draw Western Europe: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, their conclusions. Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom 18 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 18. Exhibit 1: 2009/2010 VCPE Country Attractiveness Index 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 United States (1.) 100,0 Canada (2.) 85,8 United Kingdom (3.) 84,3 Australia (4.) 81,9 Hong Kong (5.) 79,5 Singapore (6.) 78,5 Japan (7.) 76,5 Switzerland (8.) 76,3 Netherlands (9.) 70,1 Germany (10.) 69,1 Sweden (11.) 69,0 Denmark (12.) 67,7 Republic of Korea (13.) 67,5 Norway (14.) 66,3 Finland (15.) 65,9 France (16.) 65,2 Belgium (17.) 61,1 New Zealand (18.) 60,0 Austria (19.) 58,6 Spain (20.) 58,3 Ireland (21.) 58,3 Israel (22.) 55,8 Taiwan (23.) 55,3 Luxembourg (24.) 54,6 Malaysia (25.) 54,4 United Arab Emirates (26.) 51,7 Portugal (27.) 49,5 China (28.) 48,5 Italy (29.) 47,5 Saudi Arabia (30.) 46,4 Poland (31.) 45,8 Chile (32.) 45,8 Slovenia (33.) 45,6 Czech Republic (34.) 45,5 Estonia (35.) 44,5 Thailand (36.) 41,4 Hungary (37.) 41,1 India (38.) 40,9 Greece (39.) 40,7 Lithuania (40.) 40,4 Slovakia (41.) 40,3 Kuwait (42.) 40,1 South Africa (43.) 39,5 Turkey (44.) 39,1 Croatia (45.) 38,6 Oman (46.) 38,1 Romania (47.) 38,1 Russian Federation (48.) 38,0 Mexico (49.) 35,8 Latvia (50.) 35,6 Brazil (51.) 34,6 Uruguay (52.) 33,4 Peru (53.) 32,4 Indonesia (54.) 30,7 Bulgaria (55.) 30,6 Morocco (56.) 30,3 Egypt (57.) 30,1 Colombia (58.) 29,4 Argentina (59.) 29,1 Vietnam (60.) 27,1 Philippines (61.) 26,1 Nigeria (62.) 24,4 Ukraine (63.) 23,6 Kenya (64.) 19,3 Paraguay (65.) 14,9 Venezuela (66.) 8,9 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 19
  • 19. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index Rankings according to the separate For the PE index, we discard all constructs VC and PE indices that are related to innovations, and foun- Exhibit 2 combines the prior results and ding or running a business in early stages. the ranking according to the separate VC We realize that Brazil, India, China, France, and PE indices. The red squares mark the Spain and Malaysia gain many ranks with VCPE index ranks. The white squares desi- respect to their attractiveness for PE in- gnate the VC index, and the grey squares vestments. The rationale is simple: the the PE index ranks. The VC index country aforementioned countries show relative ranking does not change greatly. The ran- liquid and developed capital markets. As king remains because we only discard the the measure for the depth of a capital level 2 construct to assess the “Debt and market gains a higher weight in the PE Credit Market” from the VC index. Howe- index, these countries rank on superior le- ver, we receive a stronger ranking varia- vels, consequently. tion if we focus on the PE segment only. 20 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 20. Exhibit 2: Rankings of the three different indices United States (1.) Canada (2.) United Kingdom (3.) Australia (4.) Hong Kong (5.) Singapore (6.) Japan (7.) Switzerland (8.) Netherlands (9.) Germany (10.) Sweden (11.) Denmark (12.) Republic of Korea (13.) Norway (14.) Finland (15.) France (16.) Belgium (17.) New Zealand (18.) Austria (19.) Spain (20.) Ireland (21.) Israel (22.) Taiwan (23.) Luxembourg (24.) Malaysia (25.) United Arab Emirates (26.) Portugal (27.) China (28.) Italy (29.) Saudi Arabia (30.) Poland (31.) Chile (32.) Slovenia (33.) Czech Republic (34.) Estonia (35.) Thailand (36.) Hungary (37.) India (38.) Greece (39.) Lithuania (40.) Slovakia (41.) Kuwait (42.) South Africa (43.) Turkey (44.) Croatia (45.) Oman (46.) Romania (47.) Russian Federation (48.) Mexico (49.) Latvia (50.) Brazil (51.) Uruguay (52.) Peru (53.) Indonesia (54.) Bulgaria (55.) Morocco (56.) Egypt (57.) Colombia (58.) Argentina (59.) Vietnam (60.) Philippines (61.) Nigeria (62.) Ukraine (63.) Kenya (64.) Paraguay (65.) Venezuela (66.) PE 2009/10 VC 2009/10 VCPE 2009/10 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 21
  • 21. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index Comparisons of regions and countries The general pattern: What renders enforcement possibilities with respect to More details the US so attractive? investor protection and corporate gover- We can brake-down our analysis to the le- Next, we break down the index scores to nance. This pattern becomes even more vel 2 constructs and provide more details the level of the six key driving forces, and obvious in the analyses presented in the to support the general pattern we detect. further down to the level 2 constructs to appendix, where we benchmark every in- Exhibit 4 points to the remarkable dis- enhance the discussion about the ranking. dividual country with the US: there are tance between the scores of the US, Slo- We find a typical pattern with respect to many economically strong nations with venia and Venezuela with respect to the the dominating attractiveness of the US vibrant entrepreneurial cultures and op- level 2 constructs that assess the capital for VC and PE allocations. We can de- portunities, with excellent human capi- market, investor protection and corporate monstrate this pattern by comparing the tal and social environment. However, the governance. first ranked with the medial ranked, and finally decisive criteria are the financial the final ranked country, the US, Slovenia, markets, and investor protection and cor- and Venezuela. Exhibit 3 presents the key porate governance. That finding points to driver scores of Slovenia and Venezuela the discussion about the competition of relative to the scores of the US (which legal systems, and the relation between scores 100 for each key driver). law and finance: all strong countries show Exhibit 3 reveals that the US ranks high scores for the Investor Protection ahead of Slovenia and Venezuela with res- and Corporate Governance key drivers. pect to all key drivers but Taxation. Emer- This likewise spurs the development of a ging economies often attract investors national capital market, which is required with tax incentives. The criteria that really for the establishment of VC and PE deal make the difference are the depth of the supporting institutions. US capital market and its legislation and 22 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 22. Exhibit 3: Six key driving forces. Comparison of the US, Slovenia and Venezuela 1. Economic Activity 125 100 6. Entrepreneurial 75 2. Depth of a Culture & Opportunities 50 Capital Market 25 5. Human & 3. Taxation Social Environment United States 4. Investor Protection & Slovenia Corporate Governance Venezuela Exhibit 4: Level 2 constructs - Comparison of the US, Slovenia and Venezuela 1.1 Gross Domestic Product 1.2 Inflation 1.3 Unemployment 2.1 Size and Liquidity of the Stock Market 2.2 IPO Market Activity 2.3 M&A Market Activity 2.4 Debt & Credit Market 2.5 Financial Market Sophistication 3.1 Tax Incentives 3.2 Administrative Tax Burdens 4.1 Corporate Governance 4.2 Security of Property Rights 4.3 Quality of Legal Enforcement 4.4 Regulatory Quality 5.1 Education & Human Capital 5.2 Labor Market Rigidities 5.3 Bribing & Corruption 5.4 Costs of Crime 6.1 Innovation & R&D 6.2 Ease of Starting & Running a Business 6.3 Simplicity of Closing a Business United States Slovenia 6.4 ICT Infrastructure Venezuela 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 23
  • 23. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index Regional comparison included sample countries only. Hence, Beside the analyses for the individual especially for Africa, where we cover only countries, we can benchmark geographic four countries, the results should be inter- regions against each other. We are aware preted with caution. that we should interpret regional compa- Exhibit 5 presents the regional ranking. risons with special care and want to hi- Again, the score of the US is rescaled to 100. ghlight that many of our sample countries It is in line with the contemporary use of the already represent somehow geographic terms emerging regions and developed mar- regions. The point is that within large kets. Braking-down the index scores to the countries, such as the US, Russia, China, six key driving forces reveals the same pat- India, or Brazil the internal socio-econo- tern as described before. First, we compare mic differences might be larger than those the four leading regions North America, between e.g., some European countries. Australasia, Western Europe, and Asia. Therefore, the scores of these large Exhibit 6 highlights that only the countries represent averages. We know common-law Australasian countries can that California attracts more VC and PE compete with North America with res- than Montana, but we cannot control for pect to investor protection and corporate small clusters, and the US still receives one governance. It also shows that, compared single average country score. Hence, we to the North America, all other regional also keep our approach to calculate the capital markets can be considered minis- index scores for the different geographic cule. A closer look to the emerging regions regions rather simple: we calculate either confirms this. GDP-weighted, population-weighted, or Exhibit 7 compares the emerging re- arithmetic averages of the different data gions Middle East, Eastern Europe, Latin series, and aggregate the regional scores America, and Africa. It reveals weaknesses with these values. We use GDP-weighted especially with respect to entrepreneurial averages for the data series that are rela- cultures and opportunities. Attempts to ted to the size of the economy, we use po- attract investors simply by tax incentives pulation weighted averages for those that will probably not be fruitful as long as are related to people and we use arith- the obstacle of missing deal opportuni- metic averages for the rest. We highlight ties remains. that, of course, these averages base on the 24 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 24. Exhibit 5: Ranking of geographic regions North America 97 Australasia 76 Western Europe 67 World 55 Asia 54 Middle East 46 Eastern Europe 42 Latin America 35 Africa 33 0 20 40 60 80 100 Exhibit 6: Key driver scores of geographic regions Exhibit 7: Key driver scores of geographic regions 1. Economic Activity 1. Economic Activity 125 125 100 100 6. Entrepreneurial 6. Entrepreneurial 75 75 2. Depth of a 2. Depth of a Culture & Culture & Capital Market Capital Market Opportunities 50 Opportunities 50 25 25 5. Human & 3. Taxation 5. Human & 3. Taxation Social Environment Social Environment North America (I.) Middle East (V.) 4. Investor Protection & 4. Investor Protection & Eastern Europe (VI.) Australasia (II.) Corporate Governance Corporate Governance Latin America (VII.) Western Europe (III.) Asia (IV.) Africa (VIII.) The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 25
  • 25. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index Historic comparison – improvements Exhibit 8 underscores what we are used of VCPE investment conditions to learning from daily news about China, We can calculate back the index to the and India. Additionally, Poland impro- past, as far as 2005/2006. Thereby, we ved its attractiveness for limited partners should note that some of the data series quite substantially during the last four used (e.g., the General Innovation Index years. For details, we refer to the indivi- [GII]) do not date back to 2005. However, dual country analyses in the appendix of we assume that indicators like this one this index. On the left axis of Exhibit 8, we did not change to a large extent over the find the countries’ current ranks and the period of interest, and hence, keep them bars document the rank changes between constant. The calculation of the 2005/2006 the 2005/2006 and the 2009/2010 index index allows interesting insights, and re- versions. Kuwait, Latvia, and Oman are veals the development and rank changes the countries that decreased remarkably of particular countries. in their rankings. Kuwait lost many ranks because of a tax reform with increasing corporate tax rates and deteriorating conditions regarding the protection of in- vestors and corporate governance. Latvia and Oman were both exposed to worse- ning economic conditions with high in- flation during the observed period. Howe- ver, it should be stressed that the index scores are always calculated relative to the other countries. That means that all the countries that lost ranking positions did not necessarily deteriorate their in- vestment conditions in absolute terms. They might just have been outperformed by others in the international competition for capital resources. 26 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 26. Exhibit 8: Rank changes between index version 2005/2006 and 2009/2010 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 United States (1.) Canada (2.) United Kingdom (3.) Australia (4.) Hong Kong (5.) Singapore (6.) Japan (7.) Switzerland (8.) Netherlands (9.) Germany (10.) Sweden (11.) Denmark (12.) Republic of Korea (13.) Norway (14.) Finland (15.) France (16.) Belgium (17.) New Zealand (18.) Austria (19.) Spain (20.) Ireland (21.) Israel (22.) Taiwan (23.) Luxembourg (24.) Malaysia (25.) United Arab Emirates (26.) Portugal (27.) China (28.) Italy (29.) Saudi Arabia (30.) Poland (31.) Chile (32.) Slovenia (33.) Czech Republic (34.) Estonia (35.) Thailand (36.) Hungary (37.) India (38.) Greece (39.) Lithuania (40.) Slovakia (41.) Kuwait (42.) South Africa (43.) Turkey (44.) Croatia (45.) Oman (46.) Romania (47.) Russian Federation (48.) Mexico (49.) Latvia (50.) Brazil (51.) Uruguay (52.) Peru (53.) Indonesia (54.) Bulgaria (55.) Morocco (56.) Egypt (57.) Colombia (58.) Argentina (59.) Vietnam (60.) Philippines (61.) Nigeria (62.) Ukraine (63.) Kenya (64.) Paraguay (65.) Venezuela (66.) The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 27
  • 27. The Global VC/PE Country Attractiveness Index Tracking power of our index The idea of our index is to assess the at- the actual VC and PE activity in the va- The statistical measure for such a com- tractiveness of a country to receive VC/ rious countries. We use data from Thom- parison is the Pearson Correlation Coeffi- PE allocations from institutional investors son Financial on VC and PE activity. Our cient. It ranges between 0 and 1, where 0 based on socio-economic parameters that activity measure is the natural logarithm signals “no” and 1 “perfect tracking”. The we regard relevant. The composite measure of an average of all VC and PE invest- coefficient for our index is 0.8104, signa- can deviate from the actual risk capital ments made by the general partners in a ling that the index excellently(!) tracks market activity, and deviations between certain country over the last three years. a country’s capacity to actually “absorb” our attractiveness score and actual acti- We use the natural logarithm to account the committed capital. If we compare the vity might either point to under- or over- for the large activity divergence (e.g., ac- results of our VC index with VC activity, funding of particular countries, or to the tivity in the US vs. Venezuela), and we use analogue to the above defined activity fact that our chosen criteria are not rele- an average over three years to smooth measure, the correlation is 0.8100. The vant for VC and PE investors. Experience fluctuations. Especially for some emer- correlation of our PE index with actual reveals that investors are often influenced ging countries, annual activity fluctuates PE activity is 0.7807. Both results are still by herding behavior and follow trends to strongly from peak levels to zero in sub- confirmative. However, the slightly de- invest in certain countries or regions. The sequent years. We chose the criterion lo- crease of the tracking power regarding the countries might not have the “infrastruc- cation of the general partners - and not two separate indices is partly due to inho- ture” to absorb the investments, leading of the investments - for the following mogeneous definitions of the two market to over-funding. The “infrastructure” is reason: some financial centers serve as segments in different parts of the world. exactly what we aim to measure: can we hubs and channel VC and PE investments In other words, in some cases, VC transac- expect sufficient deal opportunities resul- abroad. Investors allocate their capital in tions in emerging countries might rather ting from the entrepreneurial culture in a these hubs because they rely on the effi- be called infrastructure investments, or country, from its economic soundness, or ciency of the financial community there. project financing (but not VC transac- from innovations? Are potential transac- This is exactly what we measure with our tions) in more developed economies. tions sufficiently supported by the finan- index. In fact, we focus on the demand for cial community? Are the stock and M&A VC and PE in a particular economy, and Does the global financial crisis have markets sufficiently liquid to facilitate likewise on the state of the professional an impact on the robustness of our divestments? Are investors’ concerns le- financial community to support the supply index? gally taken care of? We do not claim that side. Therefore, investments, according to We have seen the biggest crisis since the our index provides the correct answers the location of the general partners, cor- great depression and the question remains to these questions. But, we claim that respond best with the idea of our index. whether this has an impact on the robus- our index is very helpful in this respect. Additionally, we use investments - and not tness of our index. The data for the last Therefore, we expect deviations between raised funds - because our index targets quarter of the year 2008 (where quar- our attractiveness measure and actual VC the “absorption-capacity” (either caused terly data is available) and later captures and PE activity in the particular countries. by direct local demand or by channeling the major consequences of the financial However, these deviations should not be funds abroad) of the particular econo- crisis. We realize that the impact on eco- great on average. If they are great we mies. Funds raised might deviate from this nomic activity and the depth of the ca- would doubt the reliability of our index. capacity due to herding behavior of inves- pital market is large for many countries, Hence, we compare our index scores with tors or negligence. especially for those that had high ran- 28 The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual
  • 28. kings with respect to these two key drivers we expect several emerging countries to before the financial crisis. IPO and M&A strongly improve their position over the activity has come down significantly. The course of 2009/2010. However, we have to size and liquidity of the stock markets wait for the following edition, to provide melted down. The access to loans deterio- evidence for our expectations. rated and interest rates increased to peak levels. It became clear that the fraction How our index differs from of non-performing loans is probably the other, more general indices on highest seen in banking history, and the competitiveness soundness of banks might be doubted in Some institutions provide competitiveness several countries. These are all data series indices or assess the general conditions we use for our index construction, and we for making business in various countries. believe that the financial crisis will have These indices have a broader scope and do a strong impact on all of them. However, not focus on the particularities of the VC the data series are not yet updated for all and PE capital market segment. Therefore, countries, and hence, we are not able to their rankings usually differ from ours and draw conclusions for the quality of our their tracking power to explain VC and index at that time. PE activity is lower. For example, the Glo- We assume that these effects will move bal Competitiveness Index from the WEF several emerging countries to higher ranks tracks VC and PE activity with 0.69, while for one simple reason. The rationale is the the IMD World Competitiveness Index typical pattern we discussed above: the correlates with 0.57 only. This reveals that high ranked countries are particularly our index is the more precise indicator strong with respect to their capital mar- for VC and PE country attractiveness. The kets. They will be affected most by the fi- reason for the superior tracking power of nancial crisis because they lose dispropor- our index is simply that it is tailor-made, tionally their competitive advantage by according to the particular determinants the deteriorated capital market conditions. for vibrant VC and PE markets. There is no Several emerging countries with sound other indicator tracking the actual VC and growth opportunities, but negligible ca- PE activity over the 66 countries, and over pital markets will benefit (in terms of in- time as good as our index. dex scores) from the crisis. It is said that their economic growth will be affected to a minor extend, only. The crisis will har- dly impact their scores with respect to the other key drivers such as Taxation, Inves- tor Protection and Corporate Governance, the Human and Social Environment, or their Entrepreneurial Culture. Therefore, The Global Venture Capital and Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index - 2009/2010 annual 29