42 research outputs found

    Private Equity Entities and Conglomerates: What are the Differences?

    Full text link
    We compare the characteristics of conglomerates and private equity entities. This is done by examining the differences among their business models. We analyze the relations of the two entity types to their investors on the one hand and to their investments on the other hand. The distinguishing characteristic of private equity entities is that they pursue a stand-alone-perspective with their investment policies, meaning that they treat each investment separately. Therefore, various linkages that exist in conglomerates do not occur in private equity entities. We describe these linkages in detail. We further argue that because of the lack of these linkages in private equity entities the shareholders and debtholders of a private equity entity and its portfolio companies are not faced with the following risks that are specific for a conglomerate: the asset shifting risk, the intra-group profit risk and the capital structure risk. Finally, we define crucial evaluation criteria for identifying a private equity entity and develop a way how regulators and other persons concerned with such a task could do so

    Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in Europe: adoption trends and factors influencing device utilization

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES The authors sought to examine the adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in Western Europe and investigate factors that may influence the heterogeneous use of this therapy. BACKGROUND Since its commercialization in 2007, the number of TAVR procedures has grown exponentially. METHODS The adoption of TAVR was investigated in 11 European countries: Germany, France, Italy, United Kingdom, Spain, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium, Portugal, Denmark, and Ireland. Data were collected from 2 sources: 1) lead physicians submitted nation-specific registry data; and 2) an implantation-based TAVR market tracker. Economic indexes such as healthcare expenditure per capita, sources of healthcare funding, and reimbursement strategies were correlated to TAVR use. Furthermore, we assessed the extent to which TAVR has penetrated its potential patient population. RESULTS Between 2007 and 2011, 34,317 patients underwent TAVR. Considerable variation in TAVR use existed across nations. In 2011, the number of TAVR implants per million individuals ranged from 6.1 in Portugal to 88.7 in Germany (33 ± 25). The annual number of TAVR implants performed per center across nations also varied widely (range 10 to 89). The weighted average TAVR penetration rate was low: 17.9%. Significant correlation was found between TAVR use and healthcare spending per capita (r = 0.80; p = 0.005). TAVR-specific reimbursement systems were associated with higher TAVR use than restricted systems (698 ± 232 vs. 213 ± 112 implants/million individuals ≥ 75 years; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS The authors' findings indicate that TAVR is underutilized in high and prohibitive surgical risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. National economic indexes and reimbursement strategies are closely linked with TAVR use and help explain the inequitable adoption of this therapy
    corecore