Exit Planning Tools for Business Owners

economy

Too Busy to Do Business

by

Another tax filing season has passed, and the entire US accounting profession comes up for air. Of course, thousands of businesses and individuals have filed for extensions, thereby postponing the pain of calculating their final numbers for anywhere from a few days to six months.

As the CPAs emerge from their winter burrows and blink in the sun, the rest of the business community reenergizes, suddenly able to move forward with planning and analysis that has been languishing while their numbers-crunchers were busy losing sleep and feasting on ramen noodles.

I met with one firm about doing some valuation work in late February. They appeared to be excited about getting the business. When I called in mid-March with my first project they responded with “It’s tax season. Can you wait until mid-May?”

Perhaps it isn’t totally illogical to expect that an exiting business owner, having spent 30 years developing his largest single asset, should be willing to wait a few more months to begin his transition. The question isn’t so much whether it is unreasonable; it is why it should be necessary.

I have multiple clients with various needs, but all require some interface with their accountant. Some CPAs respond with quick but unsettling responses. “I think you can do this, but you’ll have to wait until after tax season for a definite answer.” Great. Business people always like making million dollar decisions based on “Maybe or maybe not.”

Others simply beg off. “I can’t even take the time to think about that until after April 15th.” Still others don’t respond at all, obviously expecting that their clients will automatically forgive what would be an unforgivable breach of professional service expectations at any other time.

Even the definition of “any other time” is narrowing. The tax rush used to be the few weeks leading to April 15th. Then the weeks leading to March 15th (the business filing deadline) moved back the start of the out-of-service CPA season. With the increasing complexity of tax laws, and the concomitant rise in extension filings, the time between September 1st and October 15th has also become a no fly zone. The week or two leading up to May 15th and June 15th are slightly better, but not by much.

shutterstock_93857353Tax complexity makes handling almost any transaction without professional advice foolhardy, but are we really supposed to just draw a line through 16 weeks, or 1/3 of the annual business cycle?

There are lots of suggestions about how to simplify the code or spread out the reporting deadlines. A flat tax is interesting, but would largely remove the ability of legislators to show favoritism to big supporters and home-state causes, so I’m skeptical of its chances.

Another proposal is to let individuals file by their birthdays, or let calendar-year businesses pick another year-end. The government’s excuse is that it would delay revenues for the year of implementation. Really? Like they were planning on a balanced budget that year? Heaven forbid they would have to borrow any more than the $1,000,000 a minute they do already.

Until we find some more sensible way to fund the public sector, business owners are subject to double indemnity. Not only do we have to pay the bill, but doing so correctly requires that we also at least partially delay our attempts to earn the income that will be taxed.

Not Just Workers…Qualified Workers

by

A few weeks ago I attended one of Trinity University’s Policy Maker breakfasts. Although living in a large city has its drawbacks, it is great for access to events such as these. It takes substantial ticket sales to justify top-rank speakers, and Trinity’s series brings the best.

The speaker was Richard W. Fisher, immediate past President and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, as well as almost 11 years on the Federal Open Market Committee, where he voted on monetary policy under Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen.

In Q&A time, I had the opportunity to ask how he could project robust growth over the next 20 years with the large number of Baby Boomers leaving the workforce and scaling back their consumerism.

Mr. Fisher had already warned the audience that he had no intention of making controversial or otherwise newsworthy statements, so his answer surprised me a bit.

He said that he remained confident that productivity gains through technology could offset much of the drop in workforce growth. The real problem, he said, was the failure of our educational system to prepare a generation of workers with the skills they need to succeed.

I’ve written previously about how small businesses are being saddled with the job of teaching young workers basic job skills. Just getting them to understand that cutting class doesn’t carry over into cutting work, that there are no unlimited extra credit assignments to make up for lack of effort, and that everyone doesn’t always get a passing grade, can be a real challenge.

Some years ago I employed a young Dutch woman who had come to the USA as a student in a top university. She also apparently had sufficient financial support that dropping out and taking a part-time job with me wasn’t a hardship. Eventually, more out of boredom than need, she enrolled again in the local state university.

She came to me one day to coordinate her class schedule with work for the semester. (I think it was her second half of sophomore year.) These were her courses:

  • Great Women in Architecture
  • Diversity in Art
  • The Sociology of Class Distinction
  • World Geography

I asked why she bothered going back to college if she wasn’t going to study anything that prepared her for a career. She laughed, and informed me that she was just catching up on the core courses required before she could declare any liberal arts major.

I’m sure each of those topics were interesting, and contributed to a well-rounded world view. What they contributed as far as preparation for the workplace, however, remains a mystery to me.

A recent survey of college students found 21% believe that the First Amendment to the Constitution should be modified to exclude free speech that is offensive.

A widely circulated essay on Vox.com expresses a liberal professor’s fear of violating the “safe place” of university learning by teaching offensive literature such as the writings of Mark Twain.

bright studentUniversities now publish their 6-year graduation rates (fewer than half graduate a majority of students in 4 years.) Students with failing grades receive almost daily emails as final exams loom, reminding them that they can drop classes without penalty (except, of course to their parents’ wallets — refunds aren’t offered.)

It may be helicopter parents, politically correct coursework or just a general corruption in the education system driven by billions in student loans that require no accountability. Whatever the cause or causes, a college education no longer seems to carry with it an assumption of career-readiness.

There are certainly many good colleges, and an excellent education is still a great beginning for a successful career. As an employer, however, I’ve long since stopped assuming that a six-figure degree is, by itself, any sort of qualification for a job.

Is Your Business in the “Neutral Zone?”

by

As Baby Boomers business owners approach retirement (the youngest of them turned 50 this year) they face a unique challenge. The market for small businesses is increasingly a buyer’s smorgasbord A shrinking middle-aged population, corporate competition for talent and less interest in the long hours associated with many traditional small businesses combine to make selling many Boomer enterprises a more difficult proposition.

The best-of-class companies on both the smaller and larger end of the spectrum will still stand out as appealing propositions to buyers. On the main street side (companies selling for less than $3 million or so) there are still plenty of aspiring entrepreneurs who seek a lucrative opportunity.

The mid-market (companies with over $1 million of pre-tax income) has more money chasing fewer target prospects. Current estimates calculate over $1.6 trillion (about the GDP of Japan) allocated by Private Equity Groups and corporate M&A departments for purchasing those businesses.

stuck in betweenWhat about the companies in the middle? As in the Star Trek “Neutral Zone,” the place where neither the Federation nor the Romulans travel, these businesses have a special challenge when their owners seek to transition, and especially when they want to exit with the value of what they’ve built.

A generic history of these Neutral Zone companies applies to thousands of them. A Boomer entrepreneur bootstrapped a business thirty years ago. Badly undercapitalized, he or she struggled for years to make a decent living. As time passed, a four decade long expanding economy, driven by the influx of workers and consumers from the same generation, helped to grow the business until it provided a comfortable living.

Now in their 50s or 60s, those owners have achieved their life goals. Their labors have resulted in an enterprise that employs between 15 and 50 people, and puts between 300,000 and a million dollars to the bottom line above and beyond their own salaries. Compared to 95% of Americans, they are “rich.”

But they are too big to sell easily in the small business (main street) markets, and too small to attract mid-market buyers. They are in the Neutral Zone.

In main street sales (as I’ve explained here before) solid companies sell for an upper limit of around three times the pre-tax profit combined with the owner’s salary and benefits. As that pricing exceeds $3 million, and certainly above $4 million, it becomes difficult to find an individual entrepreneur who can leverage that purchase price.

In the mid-market, where the cost of a transaction limits targets to those with $1 million and more in EBITDA, many Neutral Zone owners would have to grow the business by 30% to 70% just to make the entry level numbers.

A Boomer entrepreneur who is in the “harvesting” phase of business ownership; enjoying the benefits that come from decades of dedication to the business, is often not interested in another big push. It may require more investment, more risk, and probably a lot more effort.

He or she built the company with a belief that it would fund a certain post-business lifestyle upon sale. Now they are finding out that a well run organization with solid and sustained profitability may not be enough.

I typically work with between 15 and 25 of these owners at any given time. For many, the solution can be to “hire a buyer.” Their companies are financially capable of recruiting top management talent. That talent should first be capable of taking the day-to-day management duties from the owner, but in addition, be entrepreneurial enough to eventually assume ownership in turn.

The secret to realizing the full value of a Neutral Zone company may not lie in bringing it up to another level (or, perish the thought, down to a lower level) of prospective buyers. Instead, consider using the organizational strength and profitability you’ve created to engineer an internal sale on your own terms, in your own time, and under your control.

 

Do you enjoy “Awake at 2 o’clock?” Please share it with other business owners.

Owners Live in Two Different Worlds

by

Business owners live in two different worlds. If you are a Baby Boomer, the title of this column might bring memories of any one of the many covers of the song by the same name. (Everyone from Nat King Cole to Roger Williams, and from Jerry Vale to Englebert Humperdinck recorded it.)

My application of it in business refers to the chasm between those owners who plan to sell a business valued at less than $3 million, and those who have companies valued at more than that. In M&A parlance; “main street” and “mid-market” businesses.

business presentationSome background is in order. I spent the week at two conferences. At the Business Enterprise Institute’s Exit Planners’ Conference we talk mostly about the complexities and structures of mid-market transfers. From there, I attended The Alternative Board’s International Conference for advisors who run peer advisory groups and provide coaching, principally for the owners of main street companies.

At the latter, I had the privilege of being on a panel with Bo Burlingham of Inc. Magazine, the author of Small Giants and Finish Big, and John Warrillow, the Founder ofBurlingham Warrilow Dini the Value Builder System and author of  Built to Sell. It would be challenging to find three people in the country who have spent more combined time studying how small businesses sell, and what determines their value to a buyer.

Even with two audiences of savvy professionals who are focused on the flood of business owners transitioning from their businesses, in many sessions the presenters had to explain the difference between the two markets. As an owner, it’s critical that you understand what the market is for your company. Using data from the other side of the fence is only destined to frustrate you.

Mid-Market

These are companies with a value (not revenue!) of greater than $3,000,000. To garner the interests of financial buyers (private equity groups), they have to generate pre-tax earnings of at least a million dollars a year. To attract strategic buyers, they must have some real differentiation in their industry or market. Those who are truly scalable and have already grown to over 100 employees are the hottest commodity; but according to Doug Tatum, the author of No Man’s Land, they presently account for about 30,000 of the 6.5 million private employers (2-500 employees) in the marketplace.

The acquisition outlook for these companies is wonderful. The financial market is blazing hot, with 7,000 private equity players and publicly traded acquirers chasing those 30,000 businesses, or at least any among them who will still take a phone call. Valuations  are growing quickly, with multiples in the upper end of the market up over 20% in the last two years, and well over a trillion dollars of “dry powder” waiting to be spent on buying them.

Main Street

Clearly, the odds are pretty high that you are one of the 6,470,000 owners whose company does not fit the description above. Welcome to Main Street, where differentiation is difficult or impossible to quantify. (Sorry, but in all but the rarest cases,  “service” is not a competitive differentiation.) The business exists primarily for the purpose of providing financial security for the owner and the employees.  Likely acquirers include individuals seeking to purchase an income, small competitors, or if you are close to the million dollar pre-tax mark, perhaps a private equity group looking for a “tuck-in” or “bolt-on” to an existing similar acquisition.

The news for these owners could not be more starkly different than for the chosen few in the mid-market. According to Burlingham, somewhere between 1.3 and 2 million of these businesses will come up for sale in the coming decade. According to both IBBA (the business broker’s association) and the US Chamber of Commerce, only about 20% of them will successfully sell to a third party. With the much lower population of Generation X, who have little in the way of liquid savings and eschew 50 hour work weeks, the pre-tax multiples in Main Street values are contracting, and the shrinkage grows worse the farther down the food chain you are.

The message is clear. As John Warrillow said, if you are anywhere close to the magic numbers that attract mid-market buyers, the most important thing you can do is drive your company over the top. The difference can mean double, or even triple the proceeds you receive. Here’s an exercise. A company making $700,000 a year with a valuation of 3x earnings can sell for $2,100,000. If they grow to $1,100,000 in profits with a value of 5x earnings they’d get $5,500,000 at sale. That’s 57% growth in profits for 161% growth in price.

Any questions?

Even the measurement of earnings between the two types of business is different. We’ll discuss that next week.

 

 

Ageing Boomer Entrepreneurs: Fearful or Smart?

by

Do we become more cautious with age?

Startups are usually associated with younger entrepreneurs. By the time they reach their 50s or 60s business owners tend to tackle fewer big new ideas. Those that do tend to be successful enough that they can segregate the risk in a way that won’t threaten their core livelihood. Are they smarter, or just more fearful of failure?

There are any number of business axioms about the value of experience. “Experience is what you get when you don’t get what you want.” or “Good decisions come from experience. Experience comes from bad decisions.” Does the caution that accompanies age come from experience, or just from a natural reduction in adrenalin?

The youngest Baby Boomers turn 50 this year. Collectively, they represent over half the small business ownership in the United States. There is an important macroeconomic issue attached to the general ageing of owners. If risk-aversion is a biologic phenomenon, then we can expect millions of small employers to drift into “harvest mode,” maintaining their businesses as vehicles for current cash flow and retirement security. They will leave growth and innovation to a younger, but substantially smaller group of entrepreneurs.

Some of their caution is due to external influence. As companies grow and founders age, they become far more conscious of their responsibility to employees’ families and children. Putting everything on the line has potential impact not only on workers, but the extended small economy that depends on their wages. Greater responsibility generates greater caution.

danger aheadWhen you are starting out, have fewer people depending on you, and mistakes have fewer consequences (see my 2014 post The Luxury of No Resources),  it’s easier to take a leap. If you fail, you’re not much worse off than you were before. But there are costs to learning by trial and error. After a while, going back to the drawing board becomes tiresome.

Ideally, the caution that comes with age isn’t from fear. It’s because you’ve come to appreciate the value of planning. It’s not because you are afraid to make a mistake, but rather you want to avoid the delays that come with making repairs every time you hit a pothole.

Every school of business wisdom extols the value of planning. When we are younger, we tend to ignore it. We scoff at Abraham Lincoln’s quote “If I had eight hours to cut down a tree; I’d spend seven sharpening my saw.” The tree is right in front of us. The saw is in our hands. We can sharpen as we go. Sometimes that works. Often it doesn’t.

Many Boomer owners will operate from a fear of failure. Their businesses will fade as the world continues to change around them and they don’t adjust. Hopefully, they’ve been successful enough in the past to exit comfortably.

Some, likely a small minority, still seek to leave a bigger legacy. They have a shorter time frame, lacking the 30 or 40 years of a full career ahead of them. They’ve learned to spend the seven hours sharpening, so that the hour spent sawing is easier and more productive. Those entrepreneurs will adjust to change on their own timetable, but  with far better results.

Their caution isn’t from fear, but from experience.