Exit Planning Exchange

By Rob Edwards

I. OVERVIEW OF LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

A. An Employee Stock Ownership Plan (“ESOP”) is usually structured as a tax-qualified “stock

bonus” plan. Properly designed, an ESOP can offer significant financial benefits to the

sponsoring corporation while also providing employees with a valuable stock ownership benefit

at no cost to them.

1. An ESOP must cover a nondiscriminatory classification of employees who have attained

age 21 and completed a year of service (2 years if the plan provides for 100% vesting).

Employees may not otherwise be excluded solely by reason of age or service. Effective in

2007, an ESOP must provide for either graduated vesting of participant accounts, with full

vesting required after 6 years of service, or cliff vesting of participant accounts, with full

and immediate vesting after 3 years of service. Nonvested benefits are subject to

forfeiture if the employee quits or is fired before normal retirement age.

2. Employer contributions to an ESOP can be made in the form of employer stock (valued at

fair market value) or cash. ESOP contributions are tax-deductible within prescribed limits

and may be made under a formula or in the employer’s discretion.

3. Assets held in an ESOP may include employer stock and other investments. ESOP plan

assets must be held in a trust. The ESOP trustee may be an individual or individuals

affiliated with the employer.

4. The ESOP must provide for allocating contributions among participants and for

distributing benefits upon a participant’s retirement, death, disability, or separation from

service.

5. Assets held in the ESOP must be valued at least annually.

6. Benefits may be distributed in the form of employer stock or cash. The participant must

have the right to receive a distribution of stock, unless the employer is an S corporation, or

a bank prohibited from repurchasing its own shares, or the employer’s charter or by-laws

restrict ownership of substantially all employer stock to current employees or to a trust

under a qualified plan. Generally, an ESOP participant must be permitted to elect to begin

receiving ESOP benefits not later than one year after the participant’s death or retirement,

or six (6) years after the participant separates from service for any other reason.

7. If ESOP benefits are distributed in employer stock that is not readily tradable on an

established market, the participant must have a limited right (the “put option”) to require

the employer to repurchase the stock at fair market value. The future cost of repurchasing

employer stock distributed from the ESOP under the put option is referred to as the

employer’s “repurchase liability”. Distributed shares may be subject to a right of first

refusal in favor of the employer and the ESOP.

8. Voting rights with respect to employer stock of a company that is registered under the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 must be “passed through” on all shares that are allocated

to participants’ accounts. For employer stock that is not publicly traded, pass-through

voting is required for shares allocated to participants only on mergers, recapitalizations,

liquidations, dissolutions or similar major transactions. Unallocated shares, and allocated

shares voted on matters for which pass-through voting is not required may be voted by the

2

ESOP fiduciary, on a pass through basis, or as provided in the plan document. An ESOP

established by a nonpublicly traded company may also provide for per capita voting (1

person 1 vote). If per capita voting applies, the percentage of votes cast will govern the

voting of all employer stock (both allocated and unallocated shares) held in the ESOP.

9. If the employer is a member of a controlled group of corporations, the ESOP may be

established by one member with respect to the stock of another controlled group member.

10. Since 1998, ESOPs have been permitted to invest in S corporation stock without adverse

tax consequences.

11. State law often restricts the ownership of shares in a corporation which is authorized to

carry on certain professional practices (e.g., architecture, engineering, accounting,

medicine, etc.) to individuals who hold professional licenses. While ESOPs are prohibited

under the laws of most states from owning stock in such a corporation, the corporation

may be able to establish an ESOP if it qualifies to do business under the general business

corporation act of the state in which it is incorporated, if a “grandfathered” charter is

available, or if incorporation under the laws of another state is possible.

12. An ESOP may be part of a 401(k) plan or arrangement (a KSOP). KSOPs are common in

publicly-held companies. Some nonpublic companies have also adopted KSOPs to fund

matching contributions to their 401(k) plans in the form of employer stock, and to help

create a market for their stock. KSOPs which allow participants to elect to invest their own

salary reduction contributions in employer securities must comply with federal and state

securities laws.

13. An ESOP must comply with all Internal Revenue Service and Department of Labor rules

and requirements applicable generally to qualified employee benefit plans.

B. Special qualification requirements apply to “leveraged” ESOPs. A leveraged ESOP is designed to

use borrowed funds (an “exempt loan”) to purchase employer stock, with the loan repaid from

future employer contributions to the ESOP, plus dividends on the shares purchased with the

exempt loan proceeds. An exempt loan almost always involves a guarantee or extension of credit

(this may take the form of an installment purchase obligation) between the ESOP and a

“disqualified person” (usually the sponsoring employer and/or its shareholders) that would be

prohibited in any other kind of employee benefit plan.

1. A leveraged ESOP must be designed to invest primarily in “qualifying employer

securities”. This generally means either voting common stock with full dividend rights, or

preferred stock that is readily convertible into voting common.

2. A leveraged ESOP must provide for the release of financed shares that are held in the

ESOP’s suspense account as the exempt loan is repaid. The release of employer stock

under the ESOP must be made under one of two alternative methods. One method allows

the release of employer stock in proportion to the repayment of principal and interest on

the exempt loan. The other method allows for employer stock to be released in proportion

to the amount of principal only repaid on the exempt loan.

3. Employer stock of a company that is not publicly traded held in a leveraged ESOP must be

valued annually by an independent appraiser.

3

4. A participant age 55 or older with 10 or more years of participation in a leveraged ESOP

must be offered the option to “diversify” his or her ESOP account. The option is

exercisable annually over a period of 5 years, and allows a qualified participant to direct

the investment of 25% of the employer stock that has ever been allocated to the

participant’s ESOP account (including any stock diversified under prior elections) into

investments other than employer stock. If the leveraged ESOP does not offer at least three

investment options inside the ESOP, the participant must be allowed to cash out the

diversified amount or to have the diversified portion of the account transferred to another

qualified plan which offers three or more investment options. In the sixth and final year of

the option period, the participant must receive a similar one-time option covering 50% of

the account. Cashout distributions are eligible to be rolled over into an IRA. KSOP

arrangements which allow investment in publicly traded stock are subject to more rapid

diversification requirements.

5. Leveraged ESOPs benefit from certain favorable rules:

(i) Effective for plan years beginning in 2002, the general limit on deductible

contributions to individual account plans was increased from 15% of covered

compensation to 25% of covered compensation. However, an employer taxable as a C

corporation may deduct all contributions to a leveraged ESOP which are used to pay

interest on an exempt loan, plus loan principal payments up to 25% of covered

compensation. S corporation deductible contributions are limited to 25% of covered

compensation

(ii) Dividends paid on employer stock held in a leveraged ESOP are tax deductible if they

are distributed currently to participants in cash, used to repay an exempt loan the proceeds

of which were used to acquire the employer securities with respect to which the dividend

is paid, or at the election of the participant, invested in the plan in employer stock.

Distributed dividends are also exempt from the 10% penalty tax on early distributions to

employees under age 59 1/2. Distributions with respect to employer stock of an S

corporation are not deductible, and are subject to the 10% penalty tax if the recipient is

under age 59 1/2.

(iii) Dividends on C corporation stock and S corporation distributions may also be used to

repay an exempt loan, provided that employer stock equal in value to the dividends (or

distributions) paid on allocated shares is allocated to the participants’ accounts.

(iv) A leveraged C corporation ESOP is permitted to allocate forfeitures and interest on an

exempt loan under a special provision of Section 415 of the Internal Revenue Code, if not

more than one-third of employer contributions for the year are allocated to highlycompensated

employees. If this special rule applies, the only amount taken into account

for Section 415 purposes is the principal reduction on the exempt loan. Interest on the

exempt loan, deductible dividends and forfeitures of employer stock acquired with an

exempt loan are not included in calculating the maximum permissible allocation. A stock

bonus or profit-sharing plan, in contrast, must include all allocations of principal, interest

and forfeitures in computing the Section 415 limitations.

(v) An ESOP participant who receives a lump sum distribution of employer stock will

only be taxed on the ESOP’s cost basis for the stock. The “net unrealized appreciation”

(the difference between its fair market value at the date of distribution and its cost to the

ESOP) is not taxable until the stock is sold. This favorable tax treatment extends to

distributions from stock bonus and profit-sharing plans.

4

6. To guard against the possibility of self-dealing, leveraged ESOP transactions are subject to

special regulatory scrutiny to ensure that the transaction is primarily for the benefit of

ESOP participants and their beneficiaries. Purchases and sales of employer stock held in a

leveraged ESOP are subject to fiduciary rules enforced by the Department of Labor,

including the requirement that the ESOP cannot pay more than “adequate consideration”

for employer stock.

7. For newly formed ESOPs, and existing ESOPs after 2004, severe tax penalties are

imposed on S corporation ESOP sponsors for any year in which “disqualified persons”

collectively own or are deemed to own 50% or more of the corporation. A “disqualified

person” is a person who (i) individually owns 10% or more of the S corporation’s

“deemed-owned” shares, or (ii) collectively with other family members owns 20% or more

of its deemed-owned shares. Deemed-owned shares are the individual’s allocated ESOP

shares, a proportionate share of any unallocated ESOP shares, and any “synthetic equity”

owned by disqualified persons. Synthetic equity is broadly defined to include the right to

acquire stock of the corporation or to share in the corporation’s value or growth through

equity-based compensation. These rules are complex, but will generally preclude small S

corporations with ten or fewer employees from adopting an ESOP. Corporations with up

to 50 (or more) participating employees will also need to carefully monitor their ESOP

program to ensure compliance.

II. ADVANTAGES OF LEVERAGED ESOP FINANCING

A. Section 1042 Rollover for Selling Shareholder. If a leveraged ESOP owns at least 30% of the

company after purchasing employer stock, a selling shareholder who has held (for at least 3 years)

employer stock that was not acquired in a distribution from a qualified plan or in an employmentrelated

transfer, may qualify for nonrecognition of gain under Section 1042 of the Internal

Revenue Code if the seller reinvests in “qualified replacement property”. Qualified replacement

property includes stocks, bonds, notes and other evidence of indebtedness issued by active U.S.

operating companies. In order to qualify for the rollover, the qualified replacement property must

be purchased within a 15-month period beginning 3 months before the sale, and the employer must

consent to the nonrecognition treatment and agree to pay a 10% excise tax in case of certain

premature dispositions of the acquired securities within 3 years after the sale. In addition, the

seller, the seller’s family members and 25% or more shareholders are prohibited (or restricted in

certain cases involving a selling shareholder’s lineal descendants) from receiving allocations of

acquired shares. Sales of S corporation stock are not eligible for the tax free rollover.

B. Tax Benefits for ESOP Sponsor. Because the ESOP sponsor can deduct its entire ESOP

contribution, principal as well as interest paid on the ESOP loan becomes, in effect, tax-deductible.

This affords ESOP financing an immediate advantage over a conventional loan, although the

liquidity necessary to fund the employer’s future repurchase liability (see I.A. 7.) needs to be

considered. In addition, the increased contribution and allocation limits, and deductible dividends

available to leveraged C corporation ESOPs (See I.B.5) add even more flexibility to leveraged

ESOP financing.

5

III. PRINCIPAL REASONS FOR A COMPANY TO ADOPT AN ESOP

A. Business Succession. A leveraged ESOP creates an immediate market for the sale of a founder’s

stock. The founder benefits by deferring income tax on the sale proceeds, and the employees

benefit by acquiring a significant interest in the employer without any cost to them.

B. Financing Vehicle. A leveraged ESOP can be used as a vehicle to obtain financing for the

employer, with a full tax deduction allowed for ESOP contributions used to repay principal as

well as interest.

C. Employee Productivity. An ESOP can serve as a means of enhancing employee productivity by

providing substantially all employees with an economic stake in the financial success of their

employer. A sound ESOP communications program is essential to help ensure that this benefit is

realized.

IV. ILLUSTRATION OF ESOP BENEFITS

A. Leveraged ESOP. Assume that DEF Engineering, a C corporation, is valued at $2,000,000 and

that D, the principal owner, wants to sell a 70% interest in the company to an ESOP for

$1,400,000. The ESOP will borrow the funds and repay the loan in level annual installments over

7 years at 9%. The following table illustrates the potential ESOP tax savings in this transaction

compared with a stock redemption:

COMPANY

REDEMPTION ESOP

1. TOTAL INTEREST AND PRINCIPAL PAYMENT $2,013,018 $2,013,018

2. TAX DEDUCTIBLE PORTION $613,018 $2,013,018

3. TAX BENEFIT AT 34% $208,426 $684,426

4. NET AFTER-TAX COST (1 – 3) $1,804,592 $1,328,592

As illustrated above, the potential federal tax savings to the Company in this example is $476,000, which

represents the difference between the after-tax cost of a stock redemption loan versus an ESOP loan.

B. Additional Rollover Benefits. If D makes a qualifying Section 1042 rollover, the total tax

benefits in the transaction are significantly increased. If D had only a nominal tax basis in his

stock of DEF, his federal tax savings could be as much as $280,000. The total federal tax

benefits for the employer and the selling shareholder in the $1,400,000 transaction illustrated

could amount to as much as $756,000, or 54% of the sale proceeds. Additional tax savings for

both the employer and the selling shareholder may be available under state law.

C. Nonleveraged ESOP Financing Alternative. As an alternative to the leveraged ESOP illustrated

in IV. A. above, it is possible to obtain many of the ESOP’s financing advantages with a

nonleveraged ESOP or even a profit-sharing plan in conjunction with a loan to the company.

This technique involves a redemption of stock by the company which then makes tax-deductible

contributions of employer stock to a qualified plan each year in an amount equal to the principal

6

value paid down on the loan during the year. Because the fair market value of contributed stock

is tax-deductible, the company has, in effect, obtained a deduction for the principal repaid on its

loan. This alternative method has some advantages and some limitations in comparison with

leveraged ESOP financing:

1. Advantages.

(i) Avoids prohibited transactions problems.

(ii) Allows use of a profit-sharing or traditional stock bonus plan.

(iii) If the value of stock increases over the loan period, the number of contributed

shares is reduced. This results in less dilution of shareholders’ equity, and spreads

dilution over a greater period.

(iv) Greater flexibility.

2. Limitations

(i) A selling shareholder cannot obtain a tax-free rollover.

(ii) Financing may be more difficult to obtain for a stock redemption than for an

ESOP.

(iii) Higher deduction limits apply to a leveraged ESOP, so larger deductible

contributions are permitted.

(iv) A leveraged ESOP may have a greater effect on employee productivity.

Rob Edwards is a partner with Steiker, Fischer, Edwards & Greenapple, P.C.

The Foundry Corporate Office Center

235 Promenade Street, Ste. 497,

Providence, RI 02908

tel. – 401/632-0480

By William S. Andronico and Craig Eaton

As the U.S. emerges from the recession that has plagued the economy during the past 18 months, private equity firms that have been entrenched in their investments are beginning to evaluate exit options in the hopes of earning what is now a long overdue return on their investments. However, there is still a lot of uncertainty on the horizon and as a result, transactions are being subjected to deeper scrutiny as buyers seek out companies with a compelling growth story that can withstand today’s prolonged due diligence process.

In this market, there is no guarantee that any exit will be as timely or profitable as fund investors would hope or require, but market ready businesses can still be sold quickly and at a solid multiple. The key to success? Strategically preparing for an exit. Not only will exit readiness enable the efficient execution of a sale, but it will also maximize its value.

How Important Is Exit Readiness?

As credit markets have tightened, it has become even more critical that companies looking to sell anticipate risks and issues that might arise and potentially disrupt, or lower the value of a deal. Buyers will undoubtedly uncover any hidden problems during the buy-side due diligence process; therefore, it’s important that the seller is aware of any “hidden gems” and has that knowledge available when negotiating sale price.

In addition, there is an ever-present “need for speed” during any transaction, particularly given the drain on management’s time and energy associated with preparing for and executing a sale. In order to quickly and effectively execute a transaction, it’s critical that the seller is fully prepared to exit when the business is taken to market. If not, the seller risks exposing the company to the buyer, prolonging the deal and ultimately lowering the sale price.

Sell-side Due Diligence: Readying For An Exit

Sell-side due diligence is a valuable component of any exit strategy, particularly in today’s uncertain economic environment. Sophisticated bidders have advisors on hand to find any problems within the business and therefore, it’s important that the seller has taken an in-depth look at the company in advance to prevent any unwanted surprises. Sell-side due diligence allows the seller to proactively address any risk areas of the deal and can even expedite the transaction process. Well executed sell-side due diligence includes a thorough assessment of the financial health of the company, as well as an evaluation of all operational, technological and human resource issues. A thorough sell-side due diligence partner assists with five critical phases of the deal:

1. Pre-sale planning. The seller and its due diligence partner must identify any potential issues in order to avoid broken deals or decreased valuations. Pre-sale planning includes performing due diligence and preparing an analysis of the business positioning, providing support and insight for the information memorandum and assessing the baseline valuations range, among other activities.
2. Data room and management presentations. It’s critical to develop financial data and schedules on a basis of accounting consistent with the information memorandum.
3. Negotiation and execution. Sell-side due diligence enables the seller to anticipate the purchaser’s challenges to valuation, support negotiations from a fact-based position of strength and avoid any delays to the transaction process.
4. Operational separation. The seller and its due diligence partner must proactively identify any stand-alone issues including commercial and customer risks, and analyze the cost of those issues.
5. Post-closing issues. Once the deal is closed, the information garnered via thorough sell-side due diligence can help with purchase price adjustments and other post-closing issues that might arise.

Sell-side due diligence allows sellers to counter transactional risks by taking a proactive approach to mitigate potential deal breaking issues. Before moving forward with a potential deal, sellers should:

• Evaluate the financial health of the company by assessing the quality of earnings and identifying any non-recurring charges or credits to maximize the company’s value;
• Develop realistic budgets and forecasts;
• Assess trends in revenues and EBITDA to identify key business drivers;
• Appraise the quality of assets to be sold and liabilities that would be assumed;
• Evaluate trends in required working capital and develop a target working capital level in advance of the purchase agreement;
• Appraise the impacts of fixed versus variable costs, capital expenditure requirements and the importance of certain administrative activities;
• Identify internal management and operational weaknesses, as well as any potential transitional issues;
• Identify tax risks including federal, state and sales tax obligations;
• Determine the optimal tax structure of the seller before the deal and for the deal, and evaluate the impact on potential buyers;
• Consider related party activities and the related transfer pricing or intercompany activities;
• Define key terms and expectations in purchase agreements;
• Mind the GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles)

Tax Pitfalls and Opportunities

Whether the exit involves an IPO, a strategic/financial acquisition, or another exit option, tax matters can and do drive valuation, specifically when valuable tax assets such as net operating losses and tax credits exist. Two primary areas that require attention are the deal structure and the optimization of the underlying tax assets residing within the target.

From the seller’s perspective, it is essential to:

• Negotiate whether the sale will be an asset sale or a sale of stock. From a tax standpoint, a stock sale will generally benefit the seller and therefore, if it is an asset sale, it’s important to get a premium on the asset sale to put the seller in the same after-tax cash position.
• Consider state tax exposures prior to sale and to mitigate any concerns that might arise. For example, the seller should look at how to structure the sale from a state income tax perspective, evaluating ways to allocate income to low-tax states.
• Look at items such as tax accounting methods that might trigger income on an asset or stock sale, and evaluate how to mitigate the impact on the sale.
• Look for the possibility of tax-free reorganizations, particularly if dealing with a public strategic buyer.

An agreement between the parties related to taxes on a pre- and post- transaction basis should be drafted. Issues related to taxes such as documentation related to basis, net operating losses and credits come up several years after transactions are completed and it is important to identify the responsibilities of both the seller and buyer. This includes taxes triggered through change-of-control payments.

The choice of entity and whether the sale is structured as the sale of stock, a straight asset sale or a deemed asset sale can have many variables that should be considered prior to sale.

Looking Ahead…

As markets and exit multiples continue to stabilize and investor demand for liquidity continues, private equity firms are seizing the opportunity for potential exit strategies – looking to maximize the return on their investments. However, planning how to exit an investment is just as important as completing the transaction. Companies should be sure they’ve considered all options and invest proactively in presale diligence to expedite the sale process, maintain control and credibility, and enhance exit value.

By William S. Andronico

By Andrew Crain and Rod Robertson

The knockdown wave that paralyzed merger & acquisition activity in the lower- and middle-market since September 2008 has rapidly receded, promising a rising tide of dealmaking in 2011.  All the components for an active M&A market are in place:  pent-up deal supply, as frustrated sellers adjust valuation expectations and private equity funds seek to realize long-held portfolio investments; pent-up buyer demand, as corporations replace their recent fixation on cost cutting and liquidity preservation with an increased focus on top-line revenue growth and as private equity groups put uninvested funds to work; and increased capital availability, as credit is once again available at favorable rates and companies once again have healthy balance sheets and cash to invest.

M & A TRENDS AT 2010 YEAR-END

Dealmaking began to rebound in the second half of 2010.  Thomson Reuters reports that “as of December 14, dealmakers have announced 7,258 U.S. transactions worth $773.5 billion this year though some may not be completed.  Last year, 6,503 deals worth $731.5 billion were completed.”   PriceWaterhouse Coopers found a similar trend in the middle market, “logging 724 deals worth a combined $240 billion in disclosed value, up 54% over 2009.  Average deal size also grew, elevating to $247 million, compared to $219 million last year, a trend PwC attributes to the availability of debt, strategic buyer optimism and the substantial private equity overhang,” as reported in Mergers Unleashed on December 10.

Our conversations with buyers and sellers indicate that many more deals were pushing to close by 2010 yearend, but sellers motivated to close for tax reasons paused for breath once the Bush tax cuts were extended and those deals will now kick off a strong 2011 instead.

SELLERS RELUCTANTLY RETURN

The decade-long run up to the recession, with both earnings and valuations (as multiples of earnings) growing year after year, set sellers’ expectations at levels reminiscent of the internet bubble.  The downturn paralyzed most M&A activity as the new playing field was met with dismay by owners of small- and medium-sized businesses.  Depressed valuations, the return of in-depth due diligence, and the disappearance of covenant-lite purchase & sale agreements all combined to drive patient sellers to the sidelines.  Those left to sell in 2009 and early 2010 were, typically, distressed companies selling at distressed prices in bankruptcy or liquidations.

As the economy steadied and credit loosened in mid-2010, valuations began their return to pre-recession levels.  According to GF Data Resources, which tracks private equity deals ranging in value from $10 – $250 million, enterprise valuations across that size range averaged 6.0X in the third quarter of 2010, and even the smallest size subset ($10 – $25 million) reached an average of 5.8X EBITDA.

Sellers today have reconciled to the fact that valuations have rebounded to sustainably sensible levels, and they are no longer sitting on the sidelines in hope of higher returns.  Many owners who plowed ahead funding losses, counting on an economic rebound for rescue, now see economic forecasts for slow growth at best.  Aging owners who postponed retirement are now ready to sell.  Private equity owners who held portfolio companies beyond planned time horizons are now rushing to realize their investments, especially those who will be fundraising in 2011 and 2012. Thus we foresee a steady flow of sellers coming into the M&A market this year.

A FIELD DAY FOR BUYERS

Well-capitalized strategic buyers remained active acquiring distressed competitors throughout the recession and, armed with inexpensive credit and abundant cash, continue to be opportunistic.  Other companies are entering the fray as confidence returns and leaders shift their focus from preservation to acquisition.  Others, faced with a sluggish recovery and prospects for slow growth, seek acquisitions to drive growth externally.  The combined impact of these motivations will be substantial, as a recent mergermarket.com survey showed that 82% of US business executives expect increased M&A activity over the next 6 to 12 months.

Private equity buyers are equally motivated to do deals.  With the “overhang” of uninvested PE funds reaching a reported $500 Billion, there is urgency to put those funds to work.  PE managers are also cognizant that acquisitions done during and after economic downturns historically yield higher returns than those completed during boom years.  As a result, according to GF Data Resources, “private equity groups are becoming less discriminating in their choice of targets given the pressure on them to invest funds.  There are more B and B+ properties on the market now and sponsors are willing to pay a little more for them.”

Entrepreneurial buyers, driven to the sidelines in the boom years by larger and better-financed financial and strategic buyers paying high valuations, are now re-entering the game.  The recession flushed many senior- and middle-management executives into the job market through downsizing and corporate closures.  Many of these talented executives are taking matters into their own hands, using their strategic skills to identify and acquire companies with favorable investment characteristics.  However, many entrepreneurs find that they must rely on seller financing or private equity backing in order to credibly pursue and close acquisitions of even modest size.

THE TIPPING POINT

We believe that this confluence of events will lead to a resurgence of M&A activity in 2011.  Orphaned companies and firms mortally stricken during the recession have been purchased, cannibalized or are seeking a buyer as we write.  Sellers realize that if they want to exit, now is the time as the economy rebounds and as favorable tax rates have been extended for another two-year window.  Strategic, private equity and entrepreneurial buyers have returned to the market and enterprise valuations have rebounded to pre-recession levels.  Commercial banks and mezzanine lenders are permitting buyers to place more debt on pragmatic deals.  In sum, sellers, buyers and lenders have all returned to the M&A market and are converging on common ground where excesses have been curbed and sensibility should reign once again, permitting dealflow to flourish in 2011.

by The Bigelow Company

Owners thinking like managers . . . managers second guessing owners . . . one thinking about tomorrow and the other obsessed with today. Enough of a conflict, but what if they are the same person? When is the last time that you “wore your owner’s hat” and thought about your business exclusively as the owner of it, not from the perspective of simply managing it?

Most CEO’s who are also the principal owners of a business they manage don’t distinguish between their dual roles and responsibilities so as to optimize their professional performance. The owner’s perspective asks tough questions like: How good is this investment? Is it in the right kind of assets? Are they as productive as they ought to be for me? How are my managers doing in implementing our business plan (especially if one of them is me!)?

It is difficult to be of two minds, to think like an owner and as a manager when you are in fact both. But how many of us would make an investment in securities, for example, and then not bother to measure the performance of the investment that we own? Yet, that is usually the case with CEO’s who both own and manage.

Of course, background and education shape us to think primarily as managers. We ask: What is the plan? Who are the target customers? Is the pricing right? Can we collect the receivables more swiftly? Et cetera. Accordingly, most Owner-CEO’s are not in the habit of thinking like investors, but successful entrepreneurs are best recognized by the way that they wear their two hats. It is required if a successful enterprise is to increase shareholder value.

As managers, we have a vested interest in keeping the status quo (what made us successful in the past), keeping the peace, not being disruptive, and fighting change until it is forced upon us. As owners or investors, we are determined that the companies that we invest in must change to address an ever-changing external market with a differentiated thrust.

Owner-managers often have no regular forum in which to think exclusively about their businesses as the owners of them, not (just) as the managers of them. So every ownership decision (as opposed to management decision) comes as a surprise to the rest of the management team, because it is an unusual occurrence, a special situation. Often, owner influenced decisions are put off and only made when forced by a significant outside event.

It is axiomatic that 80% of business success is a result of picking the right strategy for a given situation. In owner-managed businesses, it is in the role as business owners that there is the responsibility for strategy . . . for allocation of (finite) resources – people, cash, and time. Businesses, their owners, and other stakeholders benefit when there is a regular forum for the owners to think about resource allocation relative to strategy and performance. We call it a Board of Directors.

© The Bigelow Company LLC - www.bigelowco.com