Mini/Small caps SPA execution: Purchase Price Mechanism (Working Capital)

Hi,

with regard to really small companies (3 - 10m sales): How do you set the purchase price mechanism especially the working capital mechanism in the SPA?

In large deals, besides a debt/cash clause, I try to include a working capital mechanism (Target WC - Actual/Closing WC) as a correction mechanism at closing of the deal. Even there its hard to determine Target WC but at least you have an intra-year reporting to base on. With small companies though, which only have a rudimentary internal reporting (i.e. without reporting any work in progress or other inventory reporting during the year), it is hard to determine a Target value.

What do you do or what would you recommend? Do you even implement a WC mechanism or do you skip it? It is really a pain in the ass for me as 1. Sellers do not understand the mechanism and 2. due to the lack of information it is hard to negotiate on the Target value.

P.S.: I work outside the US in the engineering services sector.

Mick

4 Comments
 

Not sure what is considered standard outside of US. But it's common to hire accountants to do a quality of earnings even on small deals that would include a NWC PEG, and some kind of true up adjustment in the SPA at deal closing (and even a separate final NWC true up after closing). The QoE would try to "normalize" the NWC PEG. And assuming you're using average of LTM (or similar time frame), most of the months you'd capture in your average would include months that don't have typical year end gross ups (like WIP) that would otherwise accurately reflect NWC. As long as you're being consistent in how you're calculating the Target vs. Final, you should be directionally there. In any case, I tend to view NWC PEGs as a way of keeping the sellers honest moreso than trying to extract any economic value.

As far as explaining it to unsophisticated sellers, well...welcome to doing tiny deals. I have found that if you explain a NWC PEG in the context of how it could benefit them (i.e., the Final is greater than Target and so it's an increase to how much cash they'll receive), they suddenly understand it better...

 
"jobless123" And assuming you're using average of LTM (or similar time frame), most of the months you'd capture in your average would include months that don't have typical year end gross ups (like WIP) that would otherwise accurately reflect NWC. As long as you're being consistent in how you're calculating the Target vs. Final, you should be directionally there.
So you exclude WIP from the WC definition in case closing accounts are based on an intra-year month w/o WIP? Hard to explain that to the seller as he might get afraid that e.g. TAR are too low as most of the work is included in ongoing project work.
"jobless123" In any case, I tend to view NWC PEGs as a way of keeping the sellers honest moreso than trying to extract any economic value.

As far as explaining it to unsophisticated sellers, well...welcome to doing tiny deals. I have found that if you explain a NWC PEG in the context of how it could benefit them (i.e., the Final is greater than Target and so it's an increase to how much cash they'll receive), they suddenly understand it better...

Yes, I also start with your first argument and only after the positive cash referral they suddenly get it.
 

I don't work at all in engineering services at all so I have no idea how WIP in that industry is actually recorded accounting wise. But couldn't you estimate what WIP is at any given time using some kind of Days or % of Sales / COGs method based on year-end actuals?

 
Best Response

Delectus ipsum qui autem omnis perferendis repellendus. Quam quod sunt omnis saepe blanditiis ea dolores exercitationem. Cupiditate nemo est sunt optio vel veniam autem. Facere sequi velit aut modi dicta molestiae recusandae.

Deserunt et qui tempore dolorem debitis eum est. Quos et natus at voluptas rerum nobis alias distinctio. Necessitatibus corporis aut tenetur modi vel accusamus praesentium. Laborum et quaerat corporis ex animi ea earum. Rem veritatis tempore qui.

Magnam et provident vel iusto. Magni illo sapiente rerum repellendus qui delectus. Non facere et est at voluptates totam.

Qui facere sit repellendus qui enim provident. Sunt laboriosam ipsam cum voluptatem dolorem eos in. Perspiciatis vero sed veritatis sit.

Career Advancement Opportunities

November 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 99.0%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.4%
  • Guggenheim Partners 02 97.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 06 97.4%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

November 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.5%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 99.0%
  • Evercore 01 98.4%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.9%
  • BMO Capital Markets 13 97.4%

Professional Growth Opportunities

November 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 99.0%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.9%
  • JPMorgan No 97.4%

Total Avg Compensation

November 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (57) $264
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (29) $183
  • Intern/Summer Associate (16) $161
  • 1st Year Analyst (84) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (76) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”