In a very real sense, this barrier lurks in the background of others. In the preceding text, allusions have already been made to the formative effect of bad experiences in the 1980s, particularly in the middle and venture capital markets (the same holds true for others, such as real estate), on the attitudes and behaviours of many Canadian pension fiduciaries. Though some pension funds, such as HOOPP, OMERS and those associated with the the Caisse de dépôt, have not been ultimately deterred by possible institutional memory of this period - for some, the experience was not bad - others have been so deterred and are resolved not to return. For this reason, this is an obstacle unto itself. Conclusions drawn by veterans may weigh less with funds that have only recently entered such markets or are considering first-time entry.Endnote 150
A total of 55 percent of PIAC respondents rated this barrier as important (21 percent) or very important (34 percent). Large pension funds gave it still greater emphasis (61 percent important/very important).
PIAC respondents expressed divergent viewpoints on this topic. As expected, several respondents made note of their own bad experiences in a number of different private capital markets in the 1980s, while others expressed awareness of what their peers had encountered during that period. Some re-iterated explanations for such outcomes (for example, see Pension Funds and Venture Investing). For many such PIAC members, institutional memory (e.g., long-serving governing and managing fiduciaries) of a recent experience that was, on balance, decidedly negative, remains an impediment to future participation. Still others attested to a very positive and profitable experience, both historically and at the present time. For these PIAC members, staying with private equity and other markets over the long-term, and dealing openly with short-term expenditures, initial losses or volatility, has made a difference.