Skip to main content

Search Fund Process and Best Practices


From my last post about search funds, I took a closer look at some of the documents on the Stanford CES website.  Specifically, I read through a 2007 study on the state of search funds.  It covered the stages search funds go through and typical characteristics at each stage - profiles of principals, typical fund and acquisition sizes, range of returns for the funds, etc.

Some highlights from the four stages of search funds are as follows:
  1. Raising the search fund (3 months): Write a formal proposal and business plan for the fund.  Sections of the plan include - executive summary, overview of process, list of screening criteria, detailed timeline and milestones, explanation of financing sought, outline of exit alternatives, backgrounds of principals and allocation of future responsibilities in the target.  Raising a fund typically takes around 3 months.
  2. Identifying and making the acquisition (20 months): The three steps in identifying an acquisition are 1) generating deal flow, screening potential candidates, and assessing seller interest.  Typically, principals focus on only a few (2 - 4) target industries and may even further limit their search geographically.  This is a very time-consuming process.  A thoughtful industry screen can take between four and eight months of full-time effort (a lot of effort) and may not turn up a potential acquisition.  Companies are targeted within those industries based on "sustainable market position, their history of positive, stable cash flows, and opportunities for improvement and growth".  This criteria limits the risk associated with investing in principals that have little experience running companies.  Purchase prices range from $5 - $20 million (at around 0.9x annual revenue or 4.9x EBITDA).
  3. Operation (2 - 5 years): Principals run the company for 2 - 5 years focusing on growing the value of the business.  Value creation can happen through multiple ways: revenue growth, improvements in operating efficiency, appropriate use of leverage, or expansion.
  4. Exit: Liquidity events occur in multiple ways, including: sell, take public, investor equity may be sold to other investors or bought back by the company, or dividends may be issued.
Typical search funders are around 30 years old, recent MBA graduates, and ex-management consultants or investment bankers.

I also came across a good best practices document titled "Management Principles for MBA Search Fund/LBO Executives".  It sounded like the biggest risk factor of the business are the people - the old team, the new team, and coaching resources.

Managing Performance of the Old Team: The new CEO has to take control immediately and hold his new employees accountable for their performance.  It's a common mistake for CEO's to let performance issues slide.  This undermines the principal's credibility with employees and jeapordizes the company's ability to perform at the required level.

Getting New Team On-Board Quickly: The new CEO also needs to get their new management team established as soon as possible so that they are running the business (instead of the other way around).

Coaching: The principal should also not feel shy about leveraging the experience of the new board of directors.  Investors expect the new CEO to need support, so it's not a bad idea to have a board member on retainer during the first few months of transition.

Some additional resources to look into further:
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Possible Solution to the Mortgage Crisis

Came across this one on Mankiw's blog as well (... someone has been stealing my WSJ's each morning before I can pick them up outside). Martin Feldstein, a professor at Harvard and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors for Reagan, had an opinion article in the WSJ yesterday that outlined a possible solution to the mortgage crisis. Criteria for the plan is: don't shift burden to taxpayers, don't force banks to eat all the losses, and create an incentive for homeowners to stay in their homes. The idea is that the US government would provide loans to homeowners up to 20% of their mortgage amount, with a 15 year pay-back period and adjustable interest rate based on the two-year treasury note. The whole thing would be funded by selling more two-year treasury notes. This would obviously not stop anyone from walking away from their home if they have negative equity, but it might prompt those that are worried about that scenario happening to them in the future to sti...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Reluctant Fundamentalist

I read The Reluctant Fundamentalist by Mohsin Hamid while on vacation in Italy and thought it was really good. The book basically tells the story of a Pakistani man who comes to the US, attends a good university, gets a dream job in financial services in New York, falls in love with an American girl, and then abandons it all to return to his home country after 9/11. Although the story is a little contrived - the parallel between the man's failing romance with the girl and his failing romance with America is a little too obvious - it's really wonderfully written and a real page-turner. Given my ethnic background, how I went to a good school, moved to New York to do consulting, and was there on 9/11, much of the story felt familiar. At its core, for me, it was really a story about identity in the U.S. Particularly about changing your identity here - the ability to transform from an immigrant or an outsider to one of the elite and how America post-9/11 developed an isolationi...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Fortunate 400

So there's rich, and then there's super rich. I recently read an article in the WSJ about the top 400 taxpayers based on income. Pretty incredible statistics. Those top 400, or what they call the "Fortunate 400", pulled in $85.6 billion in income in 2005. That's over $200 million each ... in one year! Here's a quick graphic to drive that home: Very impressive. There's all the obvious jaw-dropping statistics to go with that. For instance, to make the cut to be in the 400 you had to pull in at least $100 million. With an average of $200 million, that means there's people pulling in well over that number. Obviously, quite crazy numbers, and generally speaking not necessarily anything to be concerned about. I'm all for capitalism. But one of the more disheartening statistics was that adjusting for inflation, the minimum income to make the cutoff into the Fortunate 400 has nearly tripled since 1992. That's probably not a good sign as I imagine that...
Post a Comment
Read more