LenderHawk analysis. Not affiliated with or endorsed by The Permanent Podcast.
Brent and Emily break down why deal terms often matter more than headline price in small-business acquisitions. The discussion focuses on EBITDA adjustments, recurring versus non-recurring expenses, owner compensation, and how buyers and sellers negotiate what counts as true earnings power.
Buyers, ETA investors, and operators who need a practical framework for negotiating earnings adjustments and understanding what really drives valuation.
Headline price can be less important than the allocation of risk and the timing of payment embedded in the terms.
EBITDA adjustments are a tug of war over what counts as recurring operating cost versus a discretionary or one-time item.
Owner compensation is often the largest judgment call because the seller may understate the economic value of their own labor while the buyer treats it as a real replacement cost.
A QofE is only as neutral as the party who commissioned it, so buyers should treat seller-paid and buyer-paid reports differently.
Large one-time expenses may deserve partial normalization, but not a full add-back if they supported revenue generation or growth.
Expenses that look non-recurring often recur annually, which makes historical normalization a negotiation rather than a math problem.
The right question is not whether an expense was optional in theory, but whether the business could have produced the same revenue and margins without it.
Deals can take 6 to 18 months to come together, so the final price depends on moving variables rather than a single static number.
Brent explains why terms are often more important than purchase price.
A 4.0x multiple on adjusted trailing twelve-month EBITDA is used as the example valuation anchor.
The hosts describe how pricing is commonly expressed in small-business acquisitions.
A business owner may work 80 to 100 hours per week and receive about 40 calls a day, yet still claim their role is economically irrelevant.
Used as an example of the owner-compensation debate in earnings normalization.
Some businesses show about $200,000 per year in expenses that are repeatedly labeled non-recurring even though they keep happening.
The hosts use this to illustrate how normalization can be stretched too far.
A website build costing $200,000 is cited as an example of a large expense that may benefit the business for 5 to 10 years.
The hosts discuss whether such an expense should be fully added back or partially amortized in valuation.
The example of buying a private plane is used to show how a personal asset can still be operationally important when it supports client or job-site travel.
The hosts discuss expenses that are personal in form but business-critical in function.
Treat EBITDA add-backs as a negotiated reality check rather than a mechanical checklist.
Why: Each adjustment should be tied to whether the expense was actually needed to produce the revenue and margins being sold.
Pressure-test every seller add-back by asking whether the expense will truly disappear after closing.
Why: Costs that recur in practice should not be removed just because they are labeled one-time.
Challenge owner-compensation assumptions by asking what replacement labor would cost in the post-close business.
Why: The buyer needs to underwrite the economic value of the seller’s labor, not the seller’s self-description of being unimportant.
Treat seller-paid QofEs with skepticism and compare them against buyer-paid diligence work.
Why: The commissioned side often influences the generosity of the accounting treatment.
For unusually large growth or capital expenditures, consider partial normalization instead of a full add-back.
Why: A large spend may be non-recurring in size but still represent a real cost of building the current revenue base.
Separate expenses that are personally convenient from expenses that are operationally required before negotiating the adjustment.
Why: Some family-business costs blur the line between personal benefit and business necessity.
The hosts use a plane as an example of an asset that is technically personal but still tied to business travel and revenue generation. The buyer must decide whether it is truly extraneous or part of the economic engine that created the company's margins.
Lesson: A cost can be personal in ownership form and still be economically necessary to the business.