Private Equity Deals That Defined the Decade: What GPs Can Learn from Successes, Misfires, and Strategic Reversals

There’s a tendency in private equity to focus on fund performance in aggregate—vintage returns, DPI benchmarks, portfolio diversification ratios. But ask any seasoned GP or LP where the real insight lies, and they’ll point to individual deals. Not just the wins, but the ones that changed strategy, exposed blind spots, or required full-on reversals to salvage value. Because at the end of the day, private equity is a deal-driven business. Each transaction is a high-stakes thesis test—structured, risked, and executed over a multi-year arc.

The past decade has delivered no shortage of signature moments: blockbuster take-privates, tech platform roll-ups, ESG pivots, failed integrations, pandemic pivots, and sector rotations that caught entire portfolios off guard. Some deals defined a fund’s reputation. Others exposed structural weaknesses that LPs still haven’t forgotten. In a tightening cycle where capital discipline and thesis rigor are under renewed scrutiny, GPs would be wise to look backward, not nostalgically, but strategically.

This article unpacks the private equity deals that shaped the last ten years—what worked, what didn’t, and what today’s investors can learn if they’re paying attention.

Table of Contents

Private Equity Deals That Rewrote the Playbook: Value Creation Beyond the Model

Some deals don’t just return capital—they reset how the industry thinks about execution. These aren’t just high IRR outcomes. They’re transactions that proved new playbooks could work in scale, complexity, or sectors previously considered too nuanced for traditional PE.

Vista Equity’s 2014 acquisition of Mindbody is one of those benchmark moments. Instead of cutting costs or chasing a quick flip, Vista leaned into product investment, pricing redesign, and vertical integration of ancillary wellness services. The deal didn’t just grow EBITDA—it turned a sleepy SaaS niche into a defensible ecosystem. When the firm re-sold Mindbody in a partial exit at a reported $1.9B valuation, GPs across the sector started looking harder at software businesses with embedded service layers.

Another standout: EQT’s long-term bet on digital infrastructure, including its 2018 investment in IP-Only. Rather than treat the deal as a yield play, EQT took an aggressive expansion stance—deploying capital into fiber buildouts and rural broadband that most infra funds viewed as capex-heavy and too slow to monetize. By anchoring the strategy in societal digitization (and layering ESG metrics in early), they built a thesis that was both LP-aligned and structurally differentiated. When IP-Only was folded into GlobalConnect for a larger Nordic platform, EQT demonstrated that value creation wasn’t just in cost takeout, but in patient asset aggregation with macro tailwinds.

In consumer, L Catterton’s investment in Peloton (pre-IPO) highlighted how brand-driven health and wellness could scale rapidly, if paired with the right GTM and supply chain investment. While Peloton’s later volatility on public markets is well-documented, the original PE deal showed how to blend growth equity DNA with operational discipline, resulting in a 10x+ return before public valuation peaked.

What unites these deals isn’t timing luck. It’s conviction. Each was underwritten with a differentiated lens on how to create value beyond traditional levers. These weren’t just well-executed LBOs—they were thesis-led bets that changed how GPs and LPs evaluated future sectors.

When Private Equity Deals Went Sideways: Overpaying, Overpromising, Underdelivering

Not every high-profile deal ends with a headline exit. Some stall, restructure, or quietly exit at markdowns—and when they do, the root cause usually isn’t just bad luck. It’s a misalignment between deal structure, strategic intent, and operational execution.

The $4.3B acquisition of PetSmart by BC Partners in 2015, followed by the purchase of Chewy, was initially hailed as a smart omnichannel strategy. But Chewy’s high burn rate, combined with PetSmart’s legacy retail footprint, created an integration challenge that quickly escalated. Although Chewy eventually IPO’d, the structure left BC Partners with complicated debt dynamics, limited cash flow, and no clean way to capture upside without divesting portions under pressure. It became a textbook example of thesis drift—where deal logic changes post-close, but structure doesn’t adapt fast enough.

Another cautionary tale came from Apollo’s 2011 buyout of McGraw-Hill Education. The firm aimed to transform a traditional publishing asset into a digital learning leader. But execution lagged, digital adoption was slower than projected, and operational improvements were hampered by culture clash and legacy systems. Apollo eventually exited via IPO, but not at the return levels originally underwritten, illustrating that even when the macro thesis is sound, transformation risk inside slow-moving businesses can cap returns.

And in Europe, Permira’s investment in Dr. Martens drew headlines for its fashion revival, but was also scrutinized post-IPO for limited growth in Asia and margin compression in wholesale. While the brand had momentum, some analysts questioned whether the valuation at exit reflected durable growth or just cyclical brand heat.

These deals weren’t disasters, but they show how fast a private equity deal can veer off-course when execution realities collide with overbuilt models. They also underscore a hard truth: overpaying can be absorbed if execution outpaces expectations. But if both slip, even strong assets can underdeliver.

Strategic Reversals: How Private Equity Firms Repositioned Assets That Missed the Mark

Even the best GPs misfire. But what distinguishes a strong manager isn’t a flawless batting average—it’s how they respond when the deal veers off-script. Strategic reversals, reframing theses mid-hold, and managing through turbulence without losing the asset’s core value—all of that defines the resilience of a private equity platform.

Example: Carlyle’s Adaptive Exit Strategy with Axalta When Carlyle acquired Axalta Coating Systems from DuPont in 2013, the plan was straightforward: streamline operations, improve margins, and grow in emerging markets. But global auto production cooled, and raw material costs surged. Rather than force the original script, Carlyle pivoted. They doubled down on industrial coatings, leaned into R&D partnerships, and gradually repositioned the company for a dual-track exit. By the time they listed Axalta in a 2014 IPO and exited entirely by 2015, the firm still delivered a strong return, just not the way they originally mapped it.

In another example, TPG’s acquisition of Chobani didn’t follow a linear growth story. The Greek yogurt brand faced slowing U.S. growth and margin pressure from private-label competitors. Instead of forcing expansion, TPG worked with management to pivot toward new categories—non-dairy, ready-to-drink, and international retail. The valuation plateaued, but the long-term brand equity held. While a blockbuster exit didn’t materialize, TPG’s ability to hold and reshape the asset rather than push for an artificial exit preserved capital and reputation.

There are also examples of firms extending hold periods to let the market catch up to the asset. Advent’s investment in Laird, an electronics components manufacturer, stretched well past the typical timeline. Instead of pushing for a discount sale, Advent patiently restructured the company, carved out underperforming divisions, and ultimately executed a partial exit through trade sale while retaining value upside through remaining stakes.

These aren’t headline-making home runs, but they show how firms protect downside and retool strategy. In a cycle where exits are slowing and capital is stickier, these reversals may become more common, not as failures, but as pivots that extend optionality and protect long-term IRR.

Key Lessons for GPs Structuring Private Equity Deals in the Next Cycle

Looking ahead, the next cycle won’t reward the same playbooks. Capital is more expensive. Exit paths are less predictable. And LPs are asking sharper questions about what actually drives value inside the hold period. The best GPs will adjust, not by abandoning bold deals, but by being more surgical in how they structure and stress-test them.

Here are three principles that stand out from the decade’s defining deals:

Structure follows strategy: The best-performing deals aligned capital structure with operational timing. That means not over-levering businesses with long transformation arcs, or under-levering assets primed for bolt-ons and margin expansion.
Conviction beats consensus: The standout returns came from deals with a differentiated thesis—ones that leaned into discomfort or misunderstood sectors. Playing defense in consensus categories often led to flat outcomes.
Flexibility protects returns: Firms that adapted mid-hold—via pivots, re-underwriting, or hybrid exit paths—preserved more value than those who forced premature exits or clung to original theses.

We’re entering a period where execution will matter more than timing. Fundraising cycles are tighter, and GPs need to show LPs not just that they can find good companies, but that they can build, adapt, and exit with discipline.

Private equity is a long game built deal by deal. Over the past decade, the most instructive transactions weren’t always the ones with the biggest multiples—they were the ones that revealed how GPs think, adapt, and deliver under pressure. Whether it’s doubling down on digital infra, salvaging brand equity in a crowded consumer market, or extending a hold to earn an extra turn of EBITDA, the lessons are there. For firms that want to outperform in the next cycle, studying the anatomy of these deals isn’t optional—it’s strategy. Success leaves a trail. So do missteps. The smart GPs are following both.