The Cost of Waiting - Part 2:
What Exit Readiness Cannot be Manufactured at the Last Minute
In Part 1 of this arc, we examined why meaningful exit preparation often needs to begin years before an owner intends to sell. There is another reason that time matters.
Making an improvement is not the same thing as proving that the improvement is sustainable.
An owner may know that the business has changed, but a buyer still needs evidence. That distinction becomes critically important once a business enters a transaction. Buyers are not acquiring the owner's intentions. They are acquiring the future cash flow, capabilities, customer relationships, systems, and people they believe will remain after ownership changes.
Their question is therefore not simply:
“Has the business improved?”
It is:
“Can we rely on those improvements continuing after the owner leaves?”
Buyers Are Assessing Transferability
Consider an owner-dependent business. Six months before going to market, the founder begins transferring responsibilities to managers. Customer relationships are reassigned. Staff members receive more authority. The owner reduces involvement in some operating decisions.
That is progress. But from a buyer's perspective, six months of change may not answer the most important question: Can this company continue to perform without the founder?
Evidence may include:
managers consistently making decisions independently,
customer relationships belonging to the company rather than primarily to the founder,
employees following established operating processes,
leadership roles with clear accountability,
dependable KPIs used to manage performance,
predictable financial reporting, and
operating results demonstrating that the new structure works.
BDC (the Business Development Bank) identifies operational independence, strong financials and clear market positioning as important considerations when preparing for an external sale.
KPMG similarly identifies leadership succession, financial performance, operational KPIs, growth visibility and competitive position as important elements of exit readiness.
The common thread is evidence. Buyers want to understand not only what has been changed, but whether those changes have become part of how the business operates.
Due Diligence Tests the Story
Every seller has a story about the business.
· The company has loyal customers.
· Management is strong.
· Growth prospects are excellent.
· Margins are improving.
· The owner is no longer essential.
· The systems work.
Due diligence tests those assertions. For a well-prepared seller, due diligence can help validate the quality of the company. For an unprepared seller, due diligence can become the point at which weaknesses are discovered.
That difference matters.
Axial's 2025 Dead Deal Report examined 75 Axial-sourced lower-middle-market transactions that had executed Letters of Intent but ultimately failed to close. Within that specific sample:
· 25.3% were attributed primarily to non-Quality-of-Earnings diligence findings,
· 21.3% involved Quality-of-Earnings EBITDA discrepancies, and
· 14.7% involved renegotiation challenges.
Reported diligence issues included:
· customer concentration,
· contractual problems,
· legal or compliance concerns, and
· differences between reported and supportable earnings.
These figures should not be interpreted as failure rates for M&A transactions generally. Axial specifically examined a selected group of transactions that had already failed. But the findings illustrate an important principle.
Problems discovered after an LOI can become much more consequential than problems identified before going to market.
Timing Changes the Owner's Options
Suppose an owner discovers significant customer concentration three years before a planned exit. There may be time to:
· develop new markets,
· invest in sales,
· acquire new customers,
· expand products or services,
· reduce dependence on the largest accounts, and
· establish several years of more diversified revenue.
Now imagine the buyer identifies the same concentration during due diligence. The underlying issue has not changed. But the owner's ability to respond has. The same principle applies to leadership gaps, weak contracts, undocumented processes, poor financial reporting, or excessive owner dependence.
Before going to market, these issues can become part of an improvement plan; after an LOI, they may become negotiating issues.
By then, the seller may already have:
incurred professional costs,
disclosed sensitive information,
committed substantial management time,
entered exclusivity, and
become strategically and emotionally invested in completing the transaction.
Finding a problem early creates time to address it. Having the buyer discover it later may provide the buyer with additional negotiating leverage.
Financial Quality Cannot Be Created Overnight
Financial preparation provides perhaps the clearest example of why history matters. Owners understandably focus on profitability. Buyers generally need to understand much more.
They may examine:
· revenue trends,
· gross and operating margins,
· working capital,
· customer concentration,
· recurring versus non-recurring revenue,
· unusual or one-time expenses,
· owner compensation and discretionary adjustments,
· capital requirements; and
· assumptions supporting normalized EBITDA.
Accounting records can be cleaned up. Reporting can be improved. Adjustments can be documented. But what cannot be created instantly is a credible operating history demonstrating how the company actually performs.
PwC's sell-side due-diligence guidance emphasizes the quality, composition and trajectory of earnings and cash flow and the importance of identifying critical issues before buyers do.
The important word is trajectory.
A single improved month proves relatively little. Several years of consistent performance tell a much stronger story.
The Same Principle Applies Beyond the Financial Statements
History matters throughout the company:
· A buyer assessing leadership may want evidence that management has operated successfully without constant founder involvement.
· A buyer assessing customer concentration may want to see that diversification has actually occurred.
· A buyer assessing recurring revenue may want evidence that customers renew.
· A buyer assessing processes may want to see that those processes are consistently followed.
· A buyer assessing growth may want evidence that recent investments are producing measurable results.
· A buyer assessing culture may want evidence that accountability exists throughout the organization rather than only when the owner is present.
· Documentation matters.
· But documentation is not the same as institutionalization.
· A process manual does not prove that employees use the process.
· An organizational chart does not prove that managers can lead.
· A forecast does not prove growth.
· A succession plan does not prove that the successor can successfully operate the company.
Evidence requires history, and history requires time.
Prepare for the Questions Before the Buyer Asks Them
One of the most useful things an owner can do well before a transaction is view the company through the eyes of a sophisticated buyer.
Ask:
What would concern me if I were buying this company?
Where is the business excessively dependent on me?
Which customers, employees or suppliers create concentration risk?
Are our earnings understandable and supportable?
Are important agreements documented?
Can management make decisions without me?
Are our KPIs dependable?
Can we demonstrate where growth will come from?
Would an outsider understand how this company actually operates?
Which weaknesses would I want corrected before entering due diligence?
The point is not to make the business perfect. Very few companies are. The objective is to identify material weaknesses while there is still enough time to decide what should be corrected, what can be mitigated and what needs to be disclosed and explained.
Exit Readiness Is Demonstrated, Not Declared
Owners sometimes assume they can become “exit ready” by completing a checklist shortly before going to market. A checklist can certainly help identify gaps. But meaningful readiness is not simply a collection of documents.
It is demonstrated in the way the company operates, and it can be seen in:
· leadership capability,
· financial discipline,
· customer stability,
· management accountability,
· repeatable processes,
· diversified risk,
· predictable performance, and
· reduced dependence on the owner.
Those characteristics cannot simply be announced to a buyer. They need to be observable.
The Real Advantage of Early Preparation
The value of starting early is therefore not merely that the owner has more time to fix problems. It is that the owner has more time to prove the problems were fixed. That distinction may materially affect how a buyer views risk. And buyer perception of risk can influence not only whether they proceed, but how they structure the transaction.
That leads to the final part of this series.
Coming in Part 3
Even when a transaction closes, a strong headline valuation does not necessarily mean the owner achieved the strongest possible exit.
Part 3 examines the true cost of waiting: how late preparation can reduce leverage, restrict options, and affect the amount, timing, and certainty of what the owner ultimately receives.
Selected Sources
· Business Development Bank of Canada, Many Entrepreneurs Are Ready to Pass the Torch, but Few Are Prepared, August 12, 2026.
· PwC Canada, Sell-Side Due Diligence and Vendor Assistance.
· KPMG Canada, Exit Timing: How to Maximize Value When Exiting Your Business, December 2025.
· Axial, Dead Deal Report: Unpacking 2025's Broken LOIs, January 2026.
Comments