Talk:Francisco Partners

Potential conflict of interest

Wikipedia guidelines: WP:COI

I am an employee of Metaswitch Networks, a company Francisco Partners has invested in. Editing Wikipedia is in no way a part of my job, and I receive no reward from either Metaswitch or Francisco for anything I do on Wikipedia. I don't think any edits I make will be particularly controversial, but if you think an edit I've made is due to a conflict of interest, feel free to revert first and ask questions later. If you do this, I'd appreciate being notified on my talk page. me_and (talk) 16:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Update of Grass Vally Acquisition

Hello all! I have added Grass Valley to their investments... see the announcement from their website Francisco Partners Completes Acquisition of Grass Valley. Best regards, Stephan 2011-01-25 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.197.136.53 (talk) 13:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Is this company run by Pope Francis

You know I'm kidding, right.148.240.83.89 (talk) 20:55, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Request edit on 20 October 2015

Please update Aesynt's either now:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/omnicell-inc-to-acquire-aesynt-for-275-million-2015-10-29

or when the deal closes.

Perhaps you need an exiting status?

_{(The above requested edit was made by clicking on a link in an automatically added notice.)}

I'm sorry, I don't understand. There isn't a single mention of Francisco Partners in the source you gave, what does this have to do with the Wikipedia article? Yes, if Francisco Partners has exited Aesynt, I need a source that explicitly states that. Altamel (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Edit made. A later article referenced Francisco Partners' ownership of Aesynt. https://pitchbook.com/newsletter/francisco-partners-to-sell-aesynt-for-275m Chrysalism (talk) 21:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)chrysalism

Portfolio updates

Hello editors, I'm Janice, a paid employee of Francisco Partners. I'm here to collaborate with editors to update the live article, but understand that I must not edit it myself in-line with Wikipedia's rules about conflict of interest (or paid COI). In finding my bearings on the site, I have become aware of the edit request template and applied it above this post. Please let me know if there is another way I should go about posting requests like this. Glancing at the current article, the List of current investments section stands out as very long compared to other articles about equity firms, and it is out-of-date. Also, it heavily references primary sources such as the Francisco Partners website and stray press releases, which I understand are not acceptable for verification on Wikipedia. If editors agree, based on WP:LISTCRITERIA and WP:LISTN, I propose to:

• remove the outdated, comprehensive, bullet-style list of portfolio companies
• rename the section "Investments portfolio" or similar
• update the remaining claim, as follows with recent sources provided:

Investments portfolio (draft)

Ranked above average in 2020 among tech specialist private equity firms, Francisco Partners has a list of portfolio companies that changes frequently. As of March 2021, recent investments include an agreement in February 2021 to acquire MyHeritage,, and the October 2020 acquisition of Forcepoint from Raytheon Technologies.

References

I'm open to thoughts and feedback from editors and I'm more than happy to collaborate further as necessary. Respecting COI guidelines as mentioned above, I ask for a volunteer to make these suggested changes for me within the article. Thanks ahead! Janice at FP (talk) 23:30, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello Janice at FP. Thank you for engaging so well with our policy on paid editing. My concern here is that notability is not temporary, meaning that claiming that these entries should be removed just because they are outdated does not seem to me to be a valid line of argument. However, I do agree that the list may be overly detailed and condensing it might improve article flow. Further to this, my concern is that second part of your proposed edit is a case of recentism as you introduce mentions of specific investment decisions that are likely to change with the ebb and flow of world's markets, and that this may set up an expectation in your company to come over every year or two and demand that we update this space with your latest set of investment decisions. Finally, choice of industry adjacent sourcing such as privateequitywire.co.uk concerns me a little bit because with those industry adjacent sources it can be quite difficult to determine their degree of independence from the subject and native advertising can be quite common.
Thus if you can rewrite your proposed draft with following feedback in mind, I will be happy to implement your changes:

• change the wording to be more general and timeless, such as "Francisco Partners portfolio focuses on technology" (this is an example, not actual wording proposal)
• if you use any specific companies as examples, make sure that you're ok with them remaining mentioned even if you cease your investment relationship, such as "Francisco Partners has invested in Google" (an example, I don't know if FP has any relationship with Google)
• you try to find more mainstream sources, or at least less industry adjacent sources. If you cannot, multiple sources per claim would be helpful.

I am closing this edit request as declined, pending your response. However, this just means that I am declining this specific version you proposed. If you respond further, with or without the revised draft I requested, please feel free to reopen this request. Thanks Melmann 11:25, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Melmann. Thanks for your thoughts above. You make a good point about recentism and I agree that it makes sense for any remaining list to be more "timeless", as you say. I'm returning to reopen this request and share an updated draft, incorporating your above points of feedback.

Investments portfolio (updated draft)

Top-ranked in 2020 among tech specialist private equity firms, Francisco Partners has a list of portfolio companies that changes frequently. Though not a comprehensive list, noteworthy acquisitions and investments include GoodRx, BeyondTrust, Renaissance Learning, MyHeritage, Forcepoint, Redis Labs, and Verifone.

References

You'll notice that I retained a few from the current list that both have their own Wikipedia pages and also cite references that are more widely distributed than those "industry-adjacent" ones that present concerns. If you agree that this list is more relevant and timeless, I ask for you to incorporate these updates in the live article on my behalf. I will not do so due to my conflict of interest. Thanks again, Janice at FP (talk) 23:02, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

See changes. I think this addresses the current and future changes. Ferkjl (talk) 13:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Updates to introduction

Hello! Thanks to User:Ferkjl's help with my related request above, content within the article's List of investments section is now more current and timeless. As such, I noticed that the introduction is now similarly out-of-date where it says "The firm currently has five active funds and roughly 50 current portfolio companies, including Verifone, Renaissance Learning, Bomgar, GoodRx, Quest, BluJay (formerly Kewill), ClickSoftware Technologies, SmartBear Software, and SonicWall." If editors agree, is a volunteer willing to assist by replacing this sentence with relevant details from the List of investments section? Ferkjl, thanks again for your help with my other request, I'm pinging you here in case you would care to weigh in on the best handling of this, or aid with its implementation as an extension of your last edit. A reminder: I will not make my own updates to the page as I respect the rules in place for my conflict of interest as an employee of Francisco Partners. Thank you all for any consideration, please let me know if other information is needed and I'll happily collaborate further. Janice at FP (talk) 21:47, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

I'll take a quick look. In general, not a fan of "currently," so I'll replace with "As of" clauses. --FeldBum (talk) 18:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Janice at FP, I'd like to update the intro with something like "As of April 2021, Francisco Partners has XX active funds and YY portfolio companies, including A, B, C, D and E." Wanna help me find the numbers and nouns to fill in those letters? And some sources for those (although I'm pretty good at that and can help). This is the intro, so I don't think you should list all investments--and I'd lean to investments that exist on Wikipedia, instead of redlinks or unlinked companies. --FeldBum (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi FeldBum, I'm returning to help with the "numbers and nouns" of your proposed content framework, as requested.

• I want to start off by noting that Francisco Partners has more than $25 billion in assets under management and it has invested in more than 300 technology companies, which you see here in our press release. However, I know that press releases like this are not ideal, so I found this U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing that verifies more than $25 billion in assets under management and a 2020 Chicago Business Journal source that says Francisco Partners has invested in "more than 300 technology companies."
• The List of investments section was recently updated, with User:Ferkjl's help, to add sources and include a more relevant and timeless sampling of the portfolio. This update replaced a comprehensive list that was difficult to keep current. As well, the section now only lists examples that have their own Wikipedia articles, as you suggest for the introduction.
• I understand from the MOS:LEAD that the introduction should summarize details (and sources) that are most important from within the main body of the article. I believe the most relevant examples and sources may be found in the current List of investments section of the current article.

With all of the above in mind, I tried to complete your proposed framework, with appropriate sourcing, as follows:

As of 2020, Francisco Partners had more than $25 billion in assets under management and invested in over 300 companies in the technology sector. Though not a comprehensive list, noteworthy acquisitions and investments include GoodRx, BeyondTrust, Renaissance Learning, MyHeritage, Forcepoint, Redis Labs, and Verifone.

References

Does this provide what you need to update the article introduction on my behalf? Please let me know if there's any more I can do to help. Thanks for collaborating! Janice at FP (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

It's reasonable. I went ahead and implemented it. Ferkjl (talk) 08:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Ferkjl, thank you for your assistance! The introduction is a more current and effective summary for readers, thanks to your help to apply these edits. I see there is one other piece of outdated information in the lead, specifically "Founded in August 1999 and based in San Francisco and London, Francisco Partners Management L.P. has raised approximately USD $14 billion in committed capital." That sentence is missing our New York office and the committed capital now equals $24b following a fundraiser last year. For ease, I'm again including a proposed draft, with sourcing, for what might replace the above outdated details:

DRAFT: Founded in August 1999 and based in San Francisco with offices in London and New York, Francisco Partners Management L.P. has raised approximately USD $24 billion in committed capital as of June 2020 when the firm raised nearly $10 billion for tech company investments. At the time it was noted as one of the largest capital pools gathered among private equity firms that year.

References

You will notice that I removed the Forbes citation from this part of the intro. That is because the Forbes piece only confirmed that Francisco Partners has bases in San Francisco and London. The source I used from San Francisco News has more updated information. It is worth pointing out that removing the Forbes source from the intro does not remove it from the article altogether, as that piece is cited later in this Wikipedia entry. Using both The Wall Street Journal and San Francisco News sources allows this article to cite something other than Francisco Partners' website.

As always, I welcome input from others. Also, some of these suggested details might be better suited for the body of the article. Perhaps an experienced editor can determine which details should be included in the lead and which should be included in the body as well, if any. Also, is there a volunteer who is willing to incorporate these changes into the live article for me? Once again, I'm mindful of rules about my conflict of interest and will not do so myself. Thanks for any consideration. Janice at FP (talk) 21:36, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Ferkjl and FeldBum, I wanted to notify you of this most recent request in case you are still interested. Thanks for considering. Janice at FP (talk) 19:23, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Janice at FP: Partially implemented The last sentence is too promotional for my taste, but I would not oppose it if another editor chose to implement it. Melmann 11:53, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Janice at FP: Agreed. I updated the infobox with the new AUM #, but that other line is both too promotional and not encyclopedic enough for me. --FeldBum (talk) 17:27, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Melmann and FeldBum, thank you both for your assistance! Janice at FP (talk) 19:16, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Additional updates

Hello! I am here with a request for two more updates to this article. A reminder: I will not make my own updates to the page as I respect the rules in place for my conflict of interest as an employee of Francisco Partners. There are two major developments that are not yet reflected in this article, so I wanted to request their inclusion. If editors agree, I propose to:

• add Francisco Partners' acquisition of Boomi to Francisco_Partners#2021

DRAFT: In May 2021, Francisco Partners and TPG Capital agreed to acquire cloud-based integration business Boomi from Dell for $4 billion.

• add GoodRx's IPO to Francisco_Partners#2020

DRAFT: GoodRx went public on the Nasdaq in September 2020, with a market cap of about $19.4 billion.

References

Melmann and FeldBum, I wanted to notify you of this most recent request in case you are still interested. Thank you all for any consideration, please let me know if other information is needed and I'll happily collaborate further. Janice at FP (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey Janice at FP, made those edit requests. --FeldBum (talk) 22:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

FeldBum, thank you for your assistance! Janice at FP (talk) 23:12, 17 August 2021 (UTC)