Not a criticism of anyone. A buyer who has to sell the company again in three years is behaving rationally. We are not that buyer, and the consequences show up in six places.
- Your people
- They stay. The familiar version is a headcount review in the first quarter, with overlapping roles removed to fund the price. We are buying a company we cannot run without, and the people who hold the customer relationships and know how the work is actually done are most of what we are paying for.
- Costs
- We expect to spend, not cut. The familiar version trims to make the numbers look better for the next buyer. Our problem is the opposite one: most companies at this stage have underinvested for years because the founder was winding down, and the first years are usually about spending, not saving.
- The name over the door
- Your name stays over the door. Absorbed into a larger group and quietly retired within two years is the common outcome. Yours stays, unless you would prefer otherwise. The company keeps its identity because its customers bought from that identity.
- Who runs it
- The buyer runs it himself. The familiar version appoints a manager and reports to a committee. Here the principal becomes the chief executive, in the building, accountable, and not going anywhere on a schedule set by a fund.
- The next sale
- There is no next sale. A fund buys knowing the date it needs to sell, and everything after completion is shaped by that date. There is no such date here, which changes what gets invested in and what gets postponed.
- Your suppliers and customers
- Nobody gets squeezed on day one. Renegotiated for terms is the familiar first move. Relationships built over thirty years do not survive being treated as line items, and they are the reason the business is worth buying.