A Thillai Rajan

Private financing of infrastructure projects is commonly seen in many countries today. In recent years, many private infrastructure projects have also attracted investment from Private Equity (PE) firms. Though there have been instances of PE investment in infrastructure even in the past, the growth has been substantial in recent years. This paper analyses the role of PE investments in infrastructure financing. The findings are based on an analysis of 2821 infrastructure projects that were announced during 1990-2009. It was found that projects with PE investment were larger when compared to projects that did not have PE investment, indicating that that PE investment helped in successfully financing larger projects. Our analysis also indicated that PE investment in infrastructure is more frequently seen in developed countries as compared to developing countries. In developing countries, the number of sponsors is higher in projects with PE investment without any corresponding increase in project size. This indicates that PE investors have helped in sharing the project risk among a larger group of investors, thereby reducing the risk faced by the individual sponsors. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd.

Subject area: Infrastructure finance. Study level/applicability: II MBA/Executive MBA (Project Finance, Infrastructure Finance). Case overview: It is generally believed that the economy of India is on the threshold of achieving significant growth in the coming years. The availability of adequate infrastructure facility will play a key role in realizing this growth potential. To accelerate the process of creating infrastructure capacity, the Government of India has opened up many infrastructure sectors for private sector investment. Creation of international standard airport facilities is an important component of such new infrastructure creation. This case study presents the initial development and financing closure of Bengaluru International Airport Limited (BIAL), the first major private sector airport in India. In retrospect, it is generally felt that BIAL was an important milestone in the privatization of airports in India. The blueprint for the greenfield PPP airport in Hyderabad was closely modelled on the BIAL project. The experience gained in the development of BIAL also played a major role in subsequent brownfield PPP airport expansion projects in Mumbai and Delhi. Expected learning outcomes: The goal of this case study is to illustrate the complexities that exist in the process of infrastructure development and financing. This following are the expected learning outcomes: The importance of using an appropriate project structure. The prevalence of early returns to project sponsors as compared to lenders. The process of achieving financial closure. Analyzing project risks and returns. Supplementary materials: Teaching notes.

This article presents an analysis of Private Equity (PE) syndication in infrastructure projects. Previous studies on syndication have been largely in developed countries, with few studies synthesizing the findings of research to support decisions at a sector level. The sample for this study was 358 worldwide deals with PE investments in energy, transport, and water and utilities sectors. First, we identify differences between infrastructure deals that have PE syndication with those that do not. Second, we analyze the drivers of PE syndication. Third, we understand the extent of PE syndication. Our findings indicated that PE syndication was driven by the need for local knowledge—which was critical due to the site-specific nature of infrastructure assets, translating into syndication with local partners. As round number increased, diversity of experience took precedence over level of experience, indicating that PE firms syndicated with other PE firms to achieve a varied set of skills.

This paper examines the staging of investments when private equity (PE) invests in the infrastructure sector. This sector is characterized by large upfront investment requirements and non-recourse deal structures. Over the last two decades, it has witnessed increasing PE investment activity. PE firms have the option to finance infrastructure project by infusing capital at once, or by staging infusions through multiple investments. In case the PE firm decides to disburse the capital in multiple investments, it creates the staging function, a mechanism successfully used in the past to combat risk and uncertainty. This study hypothesizes that the decision to stage investment is a response to the factors that influence infrastructure deals including institutional and financial environments, project structure, and reputation of the PE firm. This paper examines 358 worldwide infrastructure deals from 1990 to 2009 with PE investments of US$9.74 billion to analyze the choice for, the motives behind, the duration between, and the determinants of staging. We find that developing/transition economies and markets characterized by high inflation and interest rates increases PE propensity to stage. Further deals with larger investment sizes and younger investee companies pose increased risks, and PE firms seem to use their prior infrastructure experience and bargaining power to stage financing. Our results also confirm that long-term relationships between the PE firm and the investee company are advantageous to both parties. We believe that the positive results acquired through the PE staging strategy will help perpetuate it as one of the best tools available for PE investing in the infrastructure sector.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to understand the trends and contribution of private equity (PE) investors in real estate development in India because the real estate sector in India had witnessed significant investments from PE firms in recent years. Design/methodology/approach – The study focused on residential segment of real estate development, as it is the largest among all the segments. Two types of analyses have been done in this paper: first was to compare residential projects with PE investment with those that did not have any PE investment. The results were based on an analysis of 453 residential projects. The second was an analysis of only those projects that had PE investment. This paper studied if there were differences in investment patterns between domestic and foreign PE investors, and dedicated and diversified PE investors. Findings – Projects with PE investment were larger, as compared to projects that did not have any PE investment. The results of this paper also showed that PE firms preferred to invest with developers who had significant experience in undertaking larger-sized projects. PE investments significantly happened in projects that were located in metro cities. While PE firms as a whole preferred to invest in project mode, domestic investors were more inclined to invest in a project structure as compared to foreign PE firms. Though foreign PE firms invested more amounts per deal on average, there was a negative relationship between foreign PE firms and the extent of their shareholding in the investment. Practical implications – Encouraging PE investment in real estate projects would contribute toward to increasing the transparency in the sector. Strengthening the domestic PE industry would increase investment flow for real estate projects. PE investors who are able to add value to their investments are able to obtain higher shareholding. Originality/value – Empirical research on Indian real estate industry is scarce because of the lack of transparency and availability of reliable data. This is one of the initial studies on the Indian real estate sector based on a robust dataset.