Why ‘Impact Investing’ Has Lost Its Meaning

/by

In this short video, TFOA founder Marc Sharpe explains why the term ‘impact investing’ has lost its meaning — and how family offices can invest with genuine purpose.

It’s a companion to TFOA’s whitepaper on conscious capitalism and impact investing.

Transcript

Impact investing is one of the most meaningless terms in finance.

Almost any investment can be framed as impact these days. There’s no standard. No definition. No bar. When a sponsor pitches you an impact investment, ask one question. What specifically do you mean by impact? If they can’t answer with metrics, with measurement methodology, with a clear theory of change, they’re using the word as marketing. Walk. Same applies to ESG. And sustainability. The lexicon is exploding precisely because the line between for-profit business and philanthropy is becoming murky on purpose. That murkiness sells.

Real impact investing exists. It’s just rare. Real philanthropy exists too. The danger is collapsing them together, because that is how dubious deals get sold to good families. Keep the bright line and always ask the tough questions.

The Two Contradictory Laws Every Family Office Faces

/by

In this short video, TFOA founder Marc Sharpe unpacks the two contradictory laws every family office lives with: radical idiosyncrasy and the myth that wealth always vanishes within three generations.

It’s a companion to TFOA’s whitepaper on the family office industry.

Transcript

Every family office runs into two laws. They contradict each other. And they’re both true.

First law: once you’ve seen one family office, you’ve seen one family office. Every family is different. Every set of values, every asset mix, every governance structure. There’s no template.

Second law: most family wealth disappears within three generations. Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves. The pattern is documented across cultures, across centuries. So you have radical idiosyncrasy on one side and a universal failure mode on the other. That tension is the entire family office industry.

What does it mean for you? Don’t take generic advice. Don’t trust playbooks built for someone else’s family. But also don’t believe you’re so unique that the failure mode can’t touch you. It can. And without good advice and planning it often does.

The Hard Truth About the Multi-Family Office Model

/by

In this short video, TFOA founder Marc Sharpe shares the hard truth about the multi-family office model and what families should weigh before choosing one.

It’s a companion to TFOA’s whitepaper on multi-family offices.

Transcript

A Multi Family Office, viewed honestly, is a oftentimes just a Registered Investment Advisor with a worse business model.

That sounds harsh. Hear me out. An RIA charges fees on assets under management. Clean revenue model. The Multi Family Office charges the same fees, but tacks on a host of additional services. Governance. Education. Philanthropy coordination. Next-generation planning. Those services are the family office part. They’re also the part that usually doesn’t make money.

So inside every MFO there’s a tension. The investment side pays the bills. The family office services attract the families. The math creates pressure to underinvest in the very things that make the MFO worth more than a regular RIA.

If you’re evaluating a Multi Family Office, ask one question. How do they get paid for the non-investment work? If the answer is “it’s bundled,” you can guess which side gets cut when budgets get tight.

How Family Offices Can Give Without Wasting It

/by

In this short video, TFOA founder Marc Sharpe explains how family offices can give effectively — with strategy and measurable impact — rather than wasting resources.

It’s a companion to TFOA’s whitepaper on family office philanthropy.

Transcript

Giving should be joyful. The ancients knew this. Saint Paul, Seneca, every faith tradition. Give cheerfully. Give quickly. Give without hesitation.

But joy collapses fast when donations get wasted. When a gift produces no change. Or worse, gets stolen. When the family philanthropy team enters with the best of intentions and emerges jaded. The reflex is to give less. Or to give more cynically. That’s the wrong fix. The right fix is process.

Diligence isn’t the enemy of joy. It’s the protector. Define your mission. Vet recipients the way you’d vet an investment. Measure outcomes, even imperfectly. Set boundaries on what kinds of causes fit your family’s values.

When the process is right, giving becomes sustainable. The team stays energized. The family stays engaged. Joy persists. Without process, even the most generous family eventually burns out, and that loss compounds for generations.

What Groucho Marx Got Right About Family Office Networks

/by

In this short video, TFOA founder Marc Sharpe draws on a Groucho Marx quip to explain what really makes a family office network valuable.

It’s a companion to TFOA’s whitepaper on family office networks.

Transcript

Groucho Marx was right about family office networks.

His line. I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member. Self-deprecating humor. Also a powerful filter. There are thousands of family office networks now. Conferences. Peer groups. Investment clubs. Some are valuable. Many are not.

The ones that pursue you most aggressively are usually the ones with the worst alignment. Why? Because they need members to justify their business model. The for-profit networks need attendees for their sponsors. The deal platforms need families to fill their pipeline. Their incentive isn’t your education or your community. It’s your presence.

Treat every family office network like a private equity investment. Diligence the business model first. Ask: how does this organization make money? Who pays whom? If the answer makes your alignment uncomfortable, Groucho’s rule applies. Refuse membership.

8 in 10 Family Offices Do Direct Investing. Most Aren’t Equipped.

/by

In this short video, TFOA founder Marc Sharpe breaks down why eight in ten family offices do direct investing, yet most aren’t properly equipped for it.

It’s a companion to TFOA’s whitepaper on the family office direct investing survey.

Transcript

According to a recent TFOA survey of members, eight in ten family offices say they do direct investing. Many admit they are not really equipped to.

. The data is clear. Patient capital, off-market access, a few investment professionals. Families hope those ingredients are enough. They aren’t.

A real direct investing program needs three things. A pipeline that brings deals fitting your thesis, not whatever crosses your desk. A team large enough to do diligence without burning out. The discipline to say no nine times out of ten. Without those, what you have isn’t a program. It’s a few opportunistic deals plus a lot of analyst tuition. Some work. Most don’t.

The driver is FOMO. Every family office hears about another’s home run, feels behind, jumps in. The question to ask before your next direct deal isn’t “is this a good company?” It’s “are we built for this?”

Why a Reactive Venture Capital Strategy Fails Family Offices

/by

In this short video, TFOA founder Marc Sharpe explains why a reactive venture capital strategy quietly burns through a family office’s time and talent — and how flipping to a proactive, criteria-first model leads to better deals and a protected investment team.

It’s a companion to TFOA’s whitepaper on family office venture capital investing.

Transcript

If your venture capital strategy is reactive, you’re losing. Here’s what happens. A deal comes in from a friend or someone in your network. The investment team allocates resources. An analyst spends weeks modeling J-curves into something that approximates reality. By the time everyone agrees it’s not a good fit, you’ve burned precious hours on a deal that never had a chance. Multiply that by every email that lands in the inbox. That’s a venture program built on noise.

The fix is to flip the model. Define your criteria first. What stage? What sectors do you actually understand? What check size? What exit profile? Then go find deals that match.

A proactive process protects your team. It also gets you to better deals, because the discipline of saying “we only look at X” creates room to actually evaluate X well. Reactive teams chase. Proactive teams choose.

Why “Shirtsleeves to Shirtsleeves” Is Fear Marketing

/by

In this short video, TFOA founder Marc Sharpe explains why the ‘shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations’ maxim is largely fear-based marketing — and what the data actually says about whether wealthy families stay wealthy.

It’s a companion to TFOA’s whitepaper on family wealth in three generations.

Transcript

Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations. Everyone repeats it. The data is thin.

The phrase traces back to a study of Illinois manufacturers from the 1980s. It’s been in books and marketing decks ever since. The Harvard Business Review questioned its validity in 2021. Recent studies suggest wealthy families actually tend to stay wealthy. So why is the phrase so universal? Because the estate planning and private wealth industry frequently use it as fear-based marketing. The implication: if you don’t hire us, your grandchildren end up poor.

That doesn’t mean wealth transition is easy. Families do splinter. Wealth does fracture. Good governance and next-generation education matter.

But fear is the wrong starting point. Build a family office because you want to steward your wealth well, not because you’ve been scared into thinking you’ll lose it. The first frame produces better decisions than the second.