Do you remember Buckminster Fuller, the architect, systems theorist, inventor, and futurist who passed away in the early 1980s?  He felt that most social problems would not be remedied by politicians or philanthropists but rather by technological advances.  He was into sustainability and minimalism before it was popular.  He coined the term "ephemeralization" to describe his primary thesis of the ability of technological advancement to do more and more with fewer and fewer resources until eventually you can do nearly everything at a very low cost and using the least amount of resources possible. This sounds a bit like the Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle mantra of many of today's sustainability promoters.
  
His belief was that ephemeralization would result in ever-increasing standards of living for an ever-growing population despite finite resources.  One of the ways that he believed this would occur is through disruptive innovation - where new ways of thinking, and new technologies would create novel and better solutions to life's problems.  

Here’s a quote I came across today from Bucky:

“In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete.”

I'm a fan of Bucky's thought process.  It's amazing to look at the last 50 years of innovation and consider how much more efficiently we can do so many things today.   

While there are several things that Codiligent has already done to change the traditional problematic business brokerage model, Bucky's ideas challenge me to consider what else can I do to create an entirely new and better model for buying and selling businesses?  If you have ideas I'd love to hear them.

Likewise, I challenge you to think about what can you do in your industry that is revolutionary, not evolutionary?  What paradigm can be shredded, discarded, and replaced by a new more efficient and effective model for your industry?

A common misconception of business sellers is that if a business has a low price because there is a corresponding low level of Seller Discretionary Earnings (Earnings Before Interest Taxes Depreciation and Amortization plus the expensed wages of one owner) it will be easier to sell given that more buyers can come up with a few hundred thousand dollars, than millions of dollars.

Unfortunately, there are other factors that tend to outweigh this logic.  Most individuals who are sophisticated enough to be serious about acquiring a business, and who have the financial wherewithal to do a deal, are also able to earn high salaries working for someone else.  Most of the acquirers that Codiligent has worked with would be able to command salaries of $100,000+ a year working for someone else (often far higher).  So, the challenge is that if someone is able to earn $100,000+ a year working for someone else without the expense and risk of business ownership, it is hard to justify paying for a business in which they will earn a similar amount of money.  For example, if an acquirer could make $100,000 working for someone else, but was looking at a business valued at $300,000 which was generating $110,000 of Seller Discretionary Earnings, their remaining cash flow beyond a market rate of compensation for their labor would be just $10,000. This would represent a meager 3% annual return on their $300,000 investment.  

With companies that are looking to buy another business as a strategic acquisition, the challenge is often that after paying someone to run the business there will be too little cash flow remaining to justify devoting the time, attention, and resources to the acquisition unless they have a way to significantly increase cash flow, and even then it still may make more sense for them to leverage their time, energy, and resources on a larger alternate transaction.

There are reasons a buyer may still be interested in a smaller acquisition, for example: an individual may buy a company for lifestyle, opportunities for growth, because they are passionate about the type of business, or they desire to live in the location of the business.  Perhaps a strategic buyer may be able to cross sell the target company's products or services, may gain a new technology or R&D, or might gain client relationships or some other advantage. However as a general rule, businesses with more than $150,000 in re-cast Seller Discretionary Earnings will be more marketable than those with lower Seller Discretionary Earnings.