I'm curious, why would you let them do a thorough technology review of your startup in the first place? (Edit: Because it can be dangerous)
My team has been hired for this role several times: we receive full access to the technology stack and the target's engineering team. We then prepare a thorough report that the potential acquirer can ask us questions about, discuss any concerns, and request potential solutions to any issues and associated costs.
This has at least three benefits:
1. Isolating the target from revealing their IP to the acquirer,
2. We're experts in the target's stack (say Rails), whereas the potential acquirer may be more of a Java or Django shop, and be unaware of stack-specific issues to look for,
3. Allowing us to offer an unbiased opinion: we don't have any vested or emotional interest in the sale going through or not, so we can be pretty blunt about anything that might be an ongoing issue.
I won't say how much we charge for a service like this, but it's absolute flea spit compared to the $14 million on the table.
Just curious, no offense intended, but how would I go about trusting a third party company which likely has much lesser reputation than the potential acquirer.
Q: Alex - I'm curious why the company was doing such deep due diligence on you in the first place? Was this for a potential partnership opportunity (you said it wasn't a natural fit?) Or were you simply receptive to an acquisition offer at that time, even if you weren't sure you actually had a genuine interest in selling? ...
A: Thanks for the comment, Michael. The conversation steered toward a potential acquisition very quickly. I'm not opposed to exploring opportunities, so the meetings went on. It wasn't until after the offer was made that I decided to turn it down.
It’s not a company that would be a natural product partner for us.