The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. The consensus here is to Keep this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:30, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FountainVest Partners[edit]

FountainVest Partners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Refs are routine business news. scope_creep^Talk 05:39, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this one from the SCMP is a portrait of FountainInvest. The sources are independent such as Reuters, the company has majority stakes in household names such as Wilson(Basketballs), Atomic (Skiing), Salomon. It has acquired (together with others) majority stakes in two of the best known ski manufacturers in the world and that's just one of their investment. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 06:49, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, not really. And they are not household names. What it looks like is a brochure advertising article similar to the ones created by Tim Templeton. scope_creep^Talk 10:11, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you show me one of Tim Templeton to compare? I tried to find him over UserːTim Templeton, but he doesn't exist. And if you ever went Skiing or have played or watched Basketball or Tennis, you'd be rather familiar with those names. The outdoor clothes (Arc'terix) they also partly own are really popular as well. Have you ever gone past a Papa John's Pizza restaurant? In China its theirs as well. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 11:34, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He was blocked and most of his stuff has been deleted. But the type of article that being created are identical to the type of stuff he used to create. What they own is not a definition of notability. scope_creep^Talk 13:00, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Paradise Chronicle. He's referring to User:Timtempleton. I think I now get why I have multiple articles flagged. One that user's latest drafts was on Stone Point Capital which I have tried working on today so he may think I am that guy. Maybe I should stop thinking of even trying to recreate articles of drafts that were previously deleted since I have gotten into bigger messes doing so. - Imcdc Contact 16:38, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, China, and Hong Kong. Shellwood (talk) 07:59, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:47, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Lets examine the references, looking at the first block of 14:

• Ref 1 [1] Profile. WP:PRIMARY.
• Ref 2 [2] Company report. Non-RS.
• Ref 3 [3] Press-release. Fails WP:SIRS
• Ref 4 [4] Interview with the founder. Fails WP:ORGIND
• Ref 5 [5] Taken from Tang speaking at a conference. Fails WP:ORGIND
• Ref 6 [6] Press-releasse. Fails WP:SIRS
• Ref 7 [7] Press-release. Fails WP:SIRS
• Ref 8 [8] Interview. Fails WP:ORGIND
• Ref 9 [9] Comes from a press-release. Same news in multiple locations. Fails WP:SIRS
• Ref 10 [10] Monied raised. Fail WP:CORPDEPTH.
• Ref 11 [sdcera.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=328&meta_id=36781] PDF. FountainVest Introduction, SDCERA Board Meeting. Fails WP:SIRS. Not independent.
• Ref 12 [11] Press-release. Not independent. Fails WP:SIRS
• Ref 13 [12] Company deal. Not idependent. Fails WP:SIRS.
• Ref 14 Same press-release as ref 13

There is not a single genuine source that confirms that the comany is notable. It fails WP:NCORP and WP:SIGCOV. All the coverage is generated from company news sources, the founder and the a conference, as with any other small private company. scope_creep^Talk 19:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Small private company? FountainVest was involved in the largest company buyout in Chinese history and co-owns three to four major and very well known sports companies that also have their own article. I believe you can watch any World Cup Skiing race and you will see their skis in the very vast majority of events if not all. They have Salomon AND Atomic. The current champion of the Ski World Cup Marco Odermatt uses Salomon shoes. And you can walk into any better sports wear store and you'll see their Arc'terix clothes. At least where I live, you see them all over and it is the well established class who wear such clothes.

And then you can watch any professional tennis tournament and you will see their rackets.

On the sources, of which you withhold their names... .we have

Wall Street Journal, on the establishment of its first fund of ca. 1 Bio.

Reuters (FountainVest declined to comment),

Reuters, (you call it interview, I call it notability, why does the founder get interviewed?),

South China Morning Post on the largest company buyout in Chinese history, which was Focus Media

FinanceAsia (no interview),

Bloomberg News (Paywall, but Bloomberg News) on the purchase of Papa John's China branch (Non-paywall link)

South China Morning Post On the eventual IPO of the sports companies Arc'Terix Atomic, Wilson etc.

Thats just some, in the references are more. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 01:38, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so sure about this analysis. Ref 3 (the Reuters piece) says "FountainVest declined to comment" – you're saying they declined to comment in their own press release? —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 03:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of that seems to be branding and advertising. How does that make the company notable, exactly? Companies advertise their products, that is what they do, to make profit. Society, modern civilization is soaked in advertisement and its never been cheaper in history to advertise on a global scale. Its very easy and cheap to do. I can't see how that is a criteria for being notable. When you look at these references, for example, taking the Bloomberg "FountainVest to Buy Papa John’s Pizza China Franchisee From EQT" It states in the headline "FountainVest to Buy Papa John’s Pizza China Franchisee From EQT". When you do a search on that term, it comes up in multiple locations, with the exact same text, indicating its a press-release from the company. Press-releases are the lingua franca of company's. So its not unique, some journalists doing the hard of going out and find the facts. Social media did for them in their business in big way from 2008 onwards, although paywalls are enabling real journalism to take place now, but not for this lazy way of reporting. On the WSJ one it is a similar outcome. Its a press-release. The WSJ that has been comprehensively debunked for showing it takes advertising dollar as much as anybody else. And it the same with all the rest. They are poor. Lastly, notability is not inherited. I may have made a mistake on size, for which I apologize for (I'll score it out), but there is nothing of real quality in the sources here. They're mostly generic second-hand information from the company news desk. scope_creep^Talk 07:33, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many of the sources are authored articles from perennial reliable sources not random press releases like from Reuters Staff or from the company itself. Then per the Establishing Notability linked by Imcdc below, FountainVest has way larger funds than 750 Million Dollars and closed its first around 1 Bio, and its fourth in 2022 at 2.9 Bio Dollars. It also holds by far more assets than the 1 Bio mentioned there. Besdie the aformentioned assests, it invested in 2009 in Sino, that launched Weibo the same year and which in 2017 overtook Twitter in market capitalization and by now is worth about 25 Bio. Dollars. FountainVests founder is Member of the Board at Weibo. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:56, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No they are not. The amount of money that organisation has hasn't been a criteria for notability since at least 2008. Your completly ignoring the type of references. Per WP:SIRS, they must be independent from the company. It is another debunked argument, that for example, if it comes from Reuters then its cast in platinum reliable. It is not and hasn't been for a long time. The quality of the references matter, where the information is coming from, whether or not its independent. If its coming from the company, then its not independent. A simple search shows the same. The same headlines appear in multiple locations, on multiple news sites, with the same wording, indicating its comes from the company and is not independent, failing WP:SIRS. scope_creep^Talk 11:48, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How are they not authored.

The Wall Street Journal is authored, by Nisha Gopalan and Ellen Sheng

The Wall Street Journal again by John Stoll on the purchase of the Auo Industry supplier Key Safety Systems

The first Reuters in authored by Kane Wu

The second an interview by George Chen

The Bllomberg news on the Papa Johns China branch purchase by Vinicy Chan und Cathy Chan

The Finacial Times on the largest buy out in Chinese history by Josh Noble

Variety by Patrick Fraser in 2022

The Hollywood Reporter by Rebecca Sun in 2016

The New York Times by Neil Gough on the Sale of Focus Media for 7.4 Bio.

On that next one I am not sure if they are a perennial reliable source. But the Financial Review and three authors seems a fairly researched.

The Australien Finance Review on a purchase and eventual IPO of the Australian Loscam has even three authors, Anthony Macdonald, Sarah Thompson and Kanika Sood.

Every each one is written by authors of agency, outlet known to be independent to FVP. If FVP bought shares of any of those it can be mentioned in Perennial sources as it is done in the case the South China Morning Post which is owned by Alibaba Paradise Chronicle (talk) 16:50, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you have not responded to my point about ref 3, which does not seem to be a press release as far as I can tell. I've also checked the second ref you labeled as a press release (ref 6) and cannot find any evidence that it's a press release either. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 02:09, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Wikipedia:WikiProject Private Equity#Establishing Notability. For further reference. - Imcdc Contact 01:54, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the sources listed above. I've checked a few, which seem to be independent reporting, not press releases. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 02:09, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Here are three of the sources discussed by Paradise Chronicle that establish notability:
  1. Wu, Kane (2020-12-17). Feast, Lincoln (ed.). "China's FountainVest reaches first-close in new private equity fund - source". Reuters. Archived from the original on 2023-07-02. Retrieved 2023-07-02.

     The article notes: "Founded in 2007, FountainVest has been an avid investor in China’s media and entertainment, sports and consumer-related sectors. In June, it led a $750 million fundraising of online tutoring startup Zuoyebang as the COVID-19 crisis spurs investor interest in education technology. In 2018, the firm teamed up with China’s ANTA Sports and internet giant Tencent Holdings to buy Finland’s Amer Sports, which owns a range of sports brands including Wilson and Arc’teryx, for $5.2 billion."

  2. Rovnick, Naomi (2011-06-11). "Picking China's next winners". South China Morning Post. EBSCOhost 875105615. Archived from the original on 2023-07-02. Retrieved 2023-07-02.

     The article notes: "Frank Tang, chief executive of FountainVest Partners, a US$1 billion Hong Kong-based private equity fund, has bet the farm on China making its long-heralded transformation from the world's workshop into a consumer-driven economy. Tang founded FountainVest Partners in 2007 with a group of former colleagues at Singapore's sovereign-wealth fund Temasek Holdings, which was an anchor shareholder. Today, FountainVest Partners holds stakes in nine mainland companies, most of which Tang believes will profit from Beijing's plan to retool the economy."

  3. Gopalan, Nisha; Sheng, Ellen (2008-11-14). "FountainVest launches China fund". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on 2023-07-02. Retrieved 2023-07-02.

     The article notes: "FountainVest Partners raised around $950 million for its first fund, a China-focused private-equity fund, despite the turmoil in financial markets. In addition to Singapore's state-owned investment company, Temasek Holdings Pte. Ltd., FountainVest's backers include the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan and other investors from Asia, Europe and North America."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow FountainVest Partners (traditional Chinese: 方源資本; simplified Chinese: 方源资本) to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 05:17, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.