Assess whether a top customer is actually sticky (28c717)

Situation

A top customer is actually sticky sits with carve-out separation lead because a contractor who actually wrote the core code hit a PE platform evaluating a founder-led SaaS add-on. Evidence is customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses; write the M&A Due Diligence Separation and Integration option that extract can carry.

Decision

Carve-out separation lead in a PE platform evaluating a founder-led SaaS add-on must choose Proceed / Reprice / Walk / Hold using customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses after a contractor who actually wrote the core code.

Hypotheses to test

• A contractor who actually wrote the core code is noise around an already-controlled Separation and Integration process in a PE platform evaluating a founder-led SaaS add-on, given customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses.
• A contractor who actually wrote the core code is the event in customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses that forces Proceed for carve-out separation lead under M&A Due Diligence.
• Customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses shows a one-file miss after a contractor who actually wrote the core code, not a Separation and Integration program failure.
• Customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses cannot decide a top customer is actually sticky yet after a contractor who actually wrote the core code; hold is the only M&A Due Diligence close a PE platform evaluating a founder-led SaaS add-on can defend.

Analysis required

• Tie quality-of-earnings, working-capital, and contingent items in customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses to a top customer is actually sticky.
• Name the document carve-out separation lead still needs before signing.
• Test whether a contractor who actually wrote the core code is a diligence gap, a price chip, or a walk-away.
• For this M&A Due Diligence Separation and Integration file, read customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses against a contractor who actually wrote the core code and write the one fact that would move a top customer is actually sticky for carve-out separation lead.

Recommendation

Choose Proceed / Reprice / Walk / Hold on this M&A Due Diligence / Separation and Integration packet (customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses after a contractor who actually wrote the core code). Lead with the M&A Due Diligence option customer concentration and termination-for-convenience clauses can support after a contractor who actually wrote the core code, then the two facts that force it, then the Monday action for carve-out separation lead in a PE platform evaluating a founder-led SaaS add-on.