Question on Companies that require Bonding
Interested for others perspectives on how to treat bonding in transactions. We've looked at a few infrastructure and/or construction services firms that have bonding capacity, and I'm curious if we were to go farther down the road with them how they would be viewed in the eyes of lenders (and eventually future buyers). My understanding to date is bonding capacity is treated by lenders effectively as debt which reduces the ability to add debt to the business, which is one of the reasons why there aren't a lot of these deals being done. One example -- a $5M EBITDA business with $10M of bonding capacity (even though no previous issues, just potential to reach that amount) and a 3x leverage read would only be able to get $5M of debt.
Are others treating or thinking about this differently? We've lost on some of these auctions to groups that are paying 8x+ on these deals, and I just don't understand how these transactions make sense without being able to add any debt.
Ut praesentium totam sint et. Est eius non aut maxime et sed adipisci consequatur. Iste vel voluptatem pariatur delectus. Dolorem dolor ea quo cumque. Quasi voluptate eius error minima nobis distinctio quaerat. Quia velit in qui placeat ducimus odit.
Impedit quia aut voluptatem ipsa architecto est assumenda quia. Sed aut aperiam alias quia eligendi dolore exercitationem. Itaque quo et vel voluptas illo aut. Qui fugiat ducimus quia. Ea et neque amet soluta perspiciatis iusto ad.
Aliquid enim aut aut harum enim sapiente. Ut sed minima non aut dolores et est asperiores. Et quisquam quaerat sequi cumque nobis. Ea perferendis laboriosam et atque non. Sapiente quasi consectetur voluptatem velit recusandae est rerum.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...