M&A Strategies

Owner’s compensation is a key feature that is addressed in various ways in a CIM. Some variables affect how owner’s compensation is treated in a CIM. Some of these variables include how much salary the owner is receiving, the role of the owner in the business currently, and the owner's role following a transaction. Combining these variables will determine how owner’s compensation is addressed in the CIM. A key point that must be known is that distributions do not affect adjustments to owner’s compensation. Distributions do not affect the income statement of the business, so they are not to be considered when making adjustments for owner’s compensation adjustments.Owner Exiting the Business Post-Transaction

An IPO is an initial public offering (IPO), which is the first limited public stock sale by a private company. IPOs are a strategy often used by smaller businesses to raise capital from public investors in order to facilitate expansion and growth. Once public, the company can be traded on the open market. There are both upsides and downsides to taking a company public. 

Handover Process

The global fintech market was valued at $6.5 trillion in 2021 and is estimated to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 13.9% between 2022 and 2028 to reach $16.65 trillion.

If you are considering selling your business, you undoubtedly need to understand its value. Unfortunately, arriving at that answer can entail many different methodologies, and it often involves the familiar valuation formula of applying a multiple of Earnings Before Interest, Tax, Depreciation, and Amortization (EBITDA). For example, if a company boasts EBITDA of $1 million, and a five times EBITDA multiple is applied, the company’s estimated value is $5 million. But how do we know what multiple applies to your business? And how do we know if the EBITDA number is even accurate? After all, EBITDA will not be the same for every business.

2021 was a strong market for business owners looking to sell their companies. The market remains ideal and will do so as we move into the first quarter of 2022. As we are in the middle of this year, there is no better time to consider putting your business on the market.

If you are considering selling your business, you will need to have a clear understanding of its type of customer revenue because it can significantly impact the value of your business. Sometimes people confuse recurring revenue with repeat revenue, but it is essential to understand how they are not the same thing. Recurring RevenueRecurring revenue stems from a contractually bound legal agreement for a solution delivered over time. It is usually contractual over one or multiple years, and because it may carry penalties or fees if the customer leaves, it can be counted on into the future. This makes it highly valued by prospective acquirers because of its predictability and lower risk. However, recurring revenue does not have to be contractual to be valuable. Depending on the business and the services offered, it can be too costly or too much of a hassle for a customer to leave or switch providers. An excellent example of this is customer relationship marketing companies that collect large amounts of valued data over time, making it more beneficial for clients to stick with their services. Below is a list of the different types of recurring revenue.

Is the bull market for privately held companies over? No, that’s not (yet) the reality. But one of the hallmarks of the glorious decade for selling businesses is no more. And unfortunately, many of the acquirers’ gatekeepers weren’t around the last time there was a bull market that looked like this one.

Selling your business can be an emotional experience. You certainly don’t want to be left at the end of the process with a sinking feeling that you have made a bad deal or sold to a buyer who doesn’t appreciate the value and legacy of the company you have built. However, there are things that you can do to avoid seller’s remorse; we will discuss several of them in this article for you to consider.

We have all heard the horror stories from lower middle market business owners. Private Equity buyers will come in and get rid of all of my employees, borrow an absurd amount of money to finance the acquisition, thereby straining my company’s balance sheet and income statement, and then, light a match Goodfellas-style when they are done extracting value from it. But, I’ll let you in on a little secret? The days of financially engineering a path to outsized profits are long gone. While there certainly was an era where Private Equity funds looked to lock in a guaranteed “win” by over-levering the balance sheet, stripping the Income Statement of “fat”- read, people- and quickly flipping to monetize the win, those days are largely behind us. Today, most professional buyers value the team in place more so than any perceived competitive advantage with the product or service offering. I’ll say that again, buyers often view the team as the most important determinant of success- more so even than the core product or service offered by the business. Let’s rewind a bit. The perception of private equity by most of society is pretty negative. And to be frank, that reputation, although dated, is well-earned. Many have read or seen (it was first a book and later adapted for film) Barbarians at the Gate. The book details the leveraged buyout of RJR Nabisco by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (KKR) in the late 1980s. While there are many takeaways from the book, the one most recalled is the impact that the use of junk bonds to finance the transaction and degree of leverage overall had on the business. Several thousand jobs were eliminated as a result. This deal wasn’t a standalone incident but rather emblematic of a strategy of the times; Finance the transaction largely through debt, thereby requiring only a relatively small equity investment by the buyer and reducing headcount to service the debt and prop up profitability. This is one example of how one might financially engineer their way to a profit. The cost to the business is often catastrophic; still, by the time the downstream issues present themselves, the fund has either sold or doesn’t care as they’ve extracted enough out of the company to more than satisfy their investors (LPs of Limited Partners). So, this negative perception is certainly well-earned. But why is it dated?