The Concern
A Mumbai-based family office was planning a significant minority investment in a promoter-led consumer products company. Read More
What We Did
We worked with the investment team to understand the deal structure, the key assumptions behind the valuation, and the specific concerns the committee wanted addressed. Read More
What We Found
The company's core business was genuine and growing, but several material issues had not been disclosed.
Read More
The Outcome
The price was revised to reflect the related-party pricing and customer concentration risk.
Read More
The Concern
A Mumbai-based family office was planning a significant minority investment in a promoter-led consumer products company. Over four years the company had grown rapidly, and it was now preparing for its next phase of expansion.
The investor's advisors had already completed financial and legal due diligence and raised no major concerns. Revenues were growing, margins were healthy, and the promoter had a strong track record.
The investment would give the family office a minority stake with limited control, so the investment committee wanted independent assurance before committing. It wanted to understand the promoter, the company's business relationships, and anything that might not show up in financial statements or management presentations.
What We Did
- Understood the decision. We worked with the investment team to understand the deal structure, the key assumptions behind the valuation, and the specific concerns the committee wanted addressed.
- Defined the scope. The review covered the promoter’s background, the corporate structure and related parties, legal and regulatory history, and key supplier, distributor and customer relationships.
- Investigated. We reviewed corporate and regulatory filings, court records and adverse media. We also made discreet, lawful inquiries with industry sources and former business associates.
• Verified and filtered. We separated material concerns from information with little bearing on the investment.
• Assessed the impact. We set out how each finding could affect value, governance or reputation, so the committee could act on it.
What We Found
The company’s core business was genuine and growing, but several material issues had not been disclosed.
- Undisclosed related-party dealings. Two key raw material suppliers were indirectly linked to the promoter’s family through holding entities, and their prices were noticeably above comparable market rates.
- An unresolved co-founder dispute. A former co-founder had filed a claim over equity and compensation. The case was pending and had not been mentioned in investor discussions.
- A previous venture with unresolved liabilities. An earlier company founded by the promoter had closed with outstanding dues to vendors, some of whom had started recovery proceedings.
- Customer concentration. A significant share of revenue came from one distributor with close personal ties to the promoter.
None of this suggested the business was fraudulent. Taken together, though, the findings had real implications for valuation, governance and risk.
The Outcome
The family office went ahead, but on revised terms:
- Adjusted valuation: The price was revised to reflect the related-party pricing and customer concentration risk.
- Related-party safeguards: Related-party transactions had to be disclosed, reviewed and moved to market-based terms.
- Escrow protection: Part of the investment was held in escrow until the co-founder dispute was resolved.
- Stronger governance: The investor gained a board seat and approval rights over related-party dealings.
- Ongoing monitoring: Monitoring of key relationships was built into the post-investment governance framework.
The investment committee invested knowing exactly which risks it was accepting and what safeguards were in place to manage them.