In this paper, we provide a theoretical foundation for the controversial debate on the investment behaviour of private equity investors. We separately consider six major characteristics that typically distinguish private equity investors from standard investors. Applying a simple model framework, we compare both the maximum acquisition prices paid by private equity and standard investors for the takeover of a target firm, as well as the subsequent optimal investment volumes. This analysis intends to uncover why private equity investors do (or do not) acquire a company even though they later invest less than standard investors would. We find that most of the usual arguments against private equity transactions, such as higher target return, short-term investment perspective, lower risk aversion, and operational improvements, cannot explain lower investment volume following a successful takeover by private equity firms, in contrast to other arguments, such as high level of leverage and informational advantages.