<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Private equity&#8217;s &#8220;Purgatory Age&#8221;</title>
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/01/18/private-equitys-purgatory-age/</link>
	<description>Behind the deals and deal-makers</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2008 10:29:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Cov lite hangover a headache for LBO lenders - Reuters DealZone</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/01/18/private-equitys-purgatory-age/#comment-332951</link>
		<dc:creator>Cov lite hangover a headache for LBO lenders - Reuters DealZone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 23:52:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/01/18/private-equitys-purgatory-age/#comment-332951</guid>
		<description>[...] equity&#8217;s &#8220;golden age&#8221; is looking a little less shiny for lenders behind the LBO [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] equity&#8217;s &#8220;golden age&#8221; is looking a little less shiny for lenders behind the LBO [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/01/18/private-equitys-purgatory-age/#comment-332890</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:09:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/01/18/private-equitys-purgatory-age/#comment-332890</guid>
		<description>2jesse anderson, Why money is not the reason?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>2jesse anderson, Why money is not the reason?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jesse  anderson</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/01/18/private-equitys-purgatory-age/#comment-332884</link>
		<dc:creator>jesse  anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:45:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/01/18/private-equitys-purgatory-age/#comment-332884</guid>
		<description>well that might be the case, but what about the people that care about the people who live the home, who's have the heart and not deep pocket? Money should not be the reason why.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>well that might be the case, but what about the people that care about the people who live the home, who&#8217;s have the heart and not deep pocket? Money should not be the reason why.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NewsVisual</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/01/18/private-equitys-purgatory-age/#comment-332876</link>
		<dc:creator>NewsVisual</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:55:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/01/18/private-equitys-purgatory-age/#comment-332876</guid>
		<description>The SEIU labor group might have a valid concern when one considers how the drive to make profits could affect patient care in nursing homes.  However, I don’t see why this union’s members believe this is more of a concern when a private-equity firm owns a healthcare institution than when it is owned by a publicly traded company.  After all, the latter would certainly want to show good returns on its investment from quarter to quarter so that share value would remain high.  If I had to guess, I would assume that a private-equity company would be more likely to take a long-term view regarding its investment and take patient care more seriously out of a concern for the company’s reputation, since it’s not bound by the need to produce financial results on a quarterly basis.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The SEIU labor group might have a valid concern when one considers how the drive to make profits could affect patient care in nursing homes.  However, I don’t see why this union’s members believe this is more of a concern when a private-equity firm owns a healthcare institution than when it is owned by a publicly traded company.  After all, the latter would certainly want to show good returns on its investment from quarter to quarter so that share value would remain high.  If I had to guess, I would assume that a private-equity company would be more likely to take a long-term view regarding its investment and take patient care more seriously out of a concern for the company’s reputation, since it’s not bound by the need to produce financial results on a quarterly basis.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
