Finish Big

Finish Big Plot Summary

Introduction

In the quiet office of a successful manufacturing company, a 65-year-old founder sits contemplating a letter from a potential buyer. After three decades of building his business from nothing into an industry leader, he faces the inevitable question that confronts every entrepreneur: how and when to exit? This moment of transition represents perhaps the most significant yet least discussed phase of business ownership. While countless resources exist for starting and growing companies, the final chapter—the exit—receives comparatively little attention, despite its profound impact on the entrepreneur's legacy, wealth, and personal fulfillment. This book illuminates the complex journey of business exits through the experiences of entrepreneurs who have navigated this challenging transition. It reveals how successful exits require years of preparation, not merely in financial terms but in psychological readiness and organizational development. Readers will discover that exits encompass multiple dimensions beyond maximizing sale price: finding personal fulfillment after departure, ensuring fair treatment of employees and other stakeholders, and preserving the company's core values. Whether you're a business owner contemplating your eventual departure, an advisor helping clients through transitions, or an entrepreneur just beginning your journey, understanding the exit process provides invaluable perspective on the entire business-building endeavor.

Chapter 1: The Entrepreneurial Mindset: Preparing for the Inevitable Exit

The entrepreneurial journey begins with a fundamental truth that many business founders initially resist: every entrepreneur will exit their business someday. This reality often comes as a shock to those who have spent years focused on growth, survival, and day-to-day operations. During the early 2000s, as Ray Pagano contemplated the future of Videolarm, the security camera housing company he had built over decades, he confronted this unavoidable fact. Like many entrepreneurs, he had devoted little thought to his eventual departure until personal circumstances forced the issue. The most successful entrepreneurs develop what Jack Stack of SRC Holdings calls "creative paranoia"—a mindset that constantly identifies and addresses weaknesses and vulnerabilities. This approach not only helps avoid disaster but builds maximum value in a business and improves the odds of having the exit you want. When Norm Brodsky was building CitiStorage in the 1990s, he consistently evaluated his company through the eyes of potential buyers, asking what would make his business more valuable and less risky. This perspective led him to implement systems and practices that strengthened the company regardless of whether he ultimately sold it. The exit process encompasses four distinct stages that require different skills and mindsets. The exploratory stage involves investigating possibilities and deciding what matters most to you in an exit. During the strategic stage, entrepreneurs view their company as a product itself and build qualities that maximize its value. The execution stage encompasses the actual transaction process, while the transition stage begins after the deal closes and continues until the entrepreneur is fully engaged in whatever comes next. As Bruce Leech discovered after selling CrossCom National, until you've moved on psychologically to a new venture or role, your exit remains incomplete. What distinguishes truly successful exits is their multidimensional nature. Beyond receiving fair financial compensation, entrepreneurs seek a sense of accomplishment about what they've built, peace with how stakeholders were treated, and a new sense of purpose beyond the company. For some, there's even a fifth element: seeing the company continue to thrive without them. When Bill Niman built his meat company into a nationally recognized brand, he cared deeply about maintaining the company's standards for humane animal treatment—so much so that he eventually walked away from the business when new owners made changes he couldn't accept. By the late 2010s, a more sophisticated understanding of exits had emerged among business owners. Rather than viewing the sale of a company as simply a financial transaction, entrepreneurs increasingly recognized it as a complex process with profound implications for all stakeholders. This evolution represented not an abandonment of entrepreneurial ambition but its maturation into a more nuanced understanding of how businesses can provide both financial rewards and personal fulfillment. As one entrepreneur reflected, "Everything you do in business is preparing for the endgame, whether you know it or not."

Chapter 2: Self-Knowledge: The Foundation of Successful Transitions

In the early hours of a winter morning in 2003, Bruce Leech sat alone in his office, staring at documents he needed to sign before selling CrossCom National, the telecommunications company he had built over 23 years. Despite unanimous encouragement from his board, managers, lawyers, accountants, and family, he felt utterly alone in making this momentous decision. He signed the papers, feeling he had no choice, but without clarity about what would come next. This scenario illustrates a common pitfall: exiting without sufficient self-knowledge. The consequences soon became apparent as Leech rented an office in downtown Chicago and waited for opportunities that never materialized, experiencing a profound sense of irrelevance and purposelessness. The importance of self-knowledge cannot be overstated when planning a business exit. Understanding what you want and don't want, what makes you tick, what energizes you, and what your true passions are affects every aspect of your business journey—especially its conclusion. Norm Brodsky learned this lesson the hard way while building his first business, CitiPostal. His determination to reach an arbitrary goal of $100 million in sales led him to make a disastrous acquisition that eventually landed him in bankruptcy court. Through this painful experience, he gained crucial self-knowledge, recognizing that his gambler instincts had put thousands of employees at risk and subsequently changing his business goals. Different entrepreneurs maintain different relationships with their businesses, and these relationships evolve over time. Michael LeMonier maintained emotional distance from his businesses from the start, viewing them as vehicles for discovering his purpose rather than as his purpose itself. In contrast, Chip Conley of Joie de Vivre Hospitality found his passion shifting after 24 years of building a boutique hotel chain, realizing that being CEO had started to feel more like a depleting job than an energizing calling. This self-awareness allowed him to transition to writing and speaking, where he found renewed purpose. The exit process inevitably forces entrepreneurs to confront questions of identity and purpose. When Dave Jackson sold his home health care company in 1998, he initially struggled to find meaning. "I would get up at six o'clock, shower, get dressed, and go to the basement, and then I would sit down there and rearrange the pencils all day," he recalled. "It was like playing business. I was searching for something, but I didn't know what." This experience led Jackson to co-found Evolve USA, a support group for business owners navigating exits, recognizing that the questions owners face change dramatically after selling. By the mid-2010s, many successful entrepreneurs had embraced a more holistic view of their business journeys. Rather than seeing business building as a linear progression toward an eventual exit, they began to view it as one chapter in a longer narrative of contribution and purpose. Martin Babinec's transition from TriNet to founding Upstate Venture Connect illustrated this approach—using the knowledge, connections, and resources gained from one successful venture to create broader economic opportunity and impact. As Bruce Leech learned too late: "When people talk about moving on, the focus is almost always on the transaction, but that's only 20 to 30 percent of it. The other 70 to 80 percent is the emotional part."

Chapter 3: Building Value: Creating a Business Others Want to Buy

In 2006, Bill Niman stood at a crossroads with the nationally recognized meat company that bore his name. Despite growing to $60 million in sales and revolutionizing the industry with humanely raised meat, Niman Ranch lost $4 million that year and was nearly out of cash. When potential acquirers were approached, only one bid emerged—from Hilco Equity Partners, which offered to buy 43% of the stock and voting control for about $5 million. With bankruptcy looming, Niman and his board accepted. Within a year, Niman had left over disagreements with the new management, taking nothing of value with him except a cow, a steer, and worthless stock. This cautionary tale highlights a fundamental truth: to avoid a forced sale, entrepreneurs must build businesses capable of responding and adapting to almost any circumstance. What makes a business truly sellable? Smart buyers evaluate companies based on their current cash flow, projected growth, and the risk of those projections not materializing. John Warrillow, who developed a tool called The Sellability Score, identifies eight key factors affecting a company's desirability to investors. Financial performance forms the baseline, with growth potential significantly impacting valuation calculations. Overdependence on any single customer, supplier, or employee creates vulnerability, while strong cash flow reduces reliance on outside capital. Recurring revenue provides assurance of future sales, and a unique value proposition protects against price pressure. Measurable customer satisfaction predicts future growth, while a strong management team ensures the company can function without the owner. The transformation of Shades of Light illustrates how building value requires time and strategic focus. When Ashton Harrison first attempted to sell her high-end lighting company in 2005, she discovered it wasn't ready despite growing to $12.5 million in annual sales over nineteen years. With consultant Steve Kimball's help, Harrison embarked on a three-year turnaround, implementing a four-pronged strategy: eliminating unprofitable product lines, shifting from a catalog-driven to a web-driven business model, increasing contract sales to hospitality companies, and developing exclusive products. By 2010, sales had grown almost 25% to $10.7 million while maintaining a 10% profit margin—well above industry average. This transformation made Shades of Light an attractive acquisition target, resulting in a successful sale in 2011. Private equity groups have adopted rigorous financial disciplines that create outsized investment returns, and wise entrepreneurs borrow these practices even if they never plan to sell to PE firms. These include maintaining minimum EBITDA levels, eliminating perks that reduce company value, and creating a culture of accountability. When Martin Babinec sold a controlling interest in TriNet to a publicly owned buyer, he experienced the painful but valuable discipline of accountability. After missing revenue targets, CEO Tony Martin refused to advance the next tranche of investment capital despite Babinec's protests. "We learned how to be a private company that runs like a public company," Babinec reflected. "You have to deliver on your budget, which is extremely difficult to learn how to do." By the 2010s, sophisticated entrepreneurs recognized that building a sellable business required more than just financial performance—it demanded creating a company that could thrive without its founder. Ray Pagano transformed his management approach at Videolarm, empowering his team and implementing open-book management. This preparation not only increased his company's value fourfold but ensured his employees would thrive after his departure. His exit brought both liberation and satisfaction—he could look back with pride while confidently moving forward. The message for business owners became clear: start thinking about your exit now, regardless of your timeline, because the process leads to better business practices and forces clarification of who you are, what you want, and why.

Chapter 4: Timing and Preparation: The Multi-Year Exit Process

When Ashton Harrison first attempted to sell Shades of Light in 2005, she quickly discovered a painful truth: timing matters enormously in business exits. Despite growing her high-end lighting company to $12.5 million in annual sales over nineteen years, the business wasn't ready to be sold. It struggled with inventory problems, financial statement errors, employee theft, and declining sales. Harrison realized she needed to transform the business before any sale could succeed. With consultant Steve Kimball's help, she embarked on a three-year turnaround that ultimately made the company an attractive acquisition target. From her first attempt to sell until the successful closing in July 2011, the process took seven years—and ten years from when she first considered exiting. This experience illustrates a critical rule: the earlier you start preparing for an exit, the more likely it is to be a happy one. Time is essential for developing the qualities buyers seek, which at minimum include designing and proving a business model, demonstrating growth potential, and reducing risk. For more ambitious exits—selling to private equity, going public, or creating an enduring employee or family-owned company—additional time is needed to form a strong management team, develop potential successors, foster a high-performance culture, and implement financial systems that give lenders and investors confidence. Size significantly affects exit options. Private equity groups generally don't invest in companies with less than $5 million in EBITDA, while going public typically requires about $25 million in EBITDA. Even for companies already large enough to entertain various exit options, preparation can take years. As Robert Tormey notes: "Owners frequently underestimate the difficulty of selling a business. The search for a buyer may take one or two years. Market cycles can last five years or more. After the sale, many buyers expect a seller to remain active for two or three years. Consequently, the exit process may be a five- or six-year affair from beginning to end." Market timing also plays a crucial role in successful exits. Ray Pagano sold Videolarm in February 2009 just as the economy was tanking. His CFO later realized that had the closing happened even a month later, the buyer would likely have called off the deal. Similarly, Norm Brodsky sold CitiStorage in December 2007 when records-storage companies were commanding premium prices. He later discovered that technological changes in the medical records industry would have soon destroyed much of his company's value had he waited. Jack Stack of SRC Holdings represents perhaps the most comprehensive approach to exit planning. He spent nearly three decades developing the systems, disciplines, and culture that would allow his company to continue thriving after his departure. "I believe a culture can survive if it has structure, but it has to be a hard structure, not a soft one," Stack explains. "There have to be disciplines, and you need courage. The more you teach people that pattern of thinking, the better chance there is that the culture will be sustained." By the 2010s, SRC had grown to $528 million in annual revenues, with the value of its stock increasing from 10 cents to nearly $4,000 per share—creating substantial wealth for employee-owners while maintaining the company's independence and values. Whether your goal is building an enduring great company or simply maximizing your return, the lesson is clear: start early. Every exit is affected by the time allotted to plan for it, and those who begin preparing years in advance have far more options than those forced into rushed decisions.

Chapter 5: Succession Planning: Finding the Right Leadership

In 2007, Roxanne Byrde received a promising phone call from Harry, the son of a long-time franchisee who expressed interest in buying her company. At 65, succession was very much on her mind. She wanted to work another decade while gradually transferring leadership, and she was deeply concerned about preserving her company's culture. Harry seemed perfect—she'd known him since childhood, found him to be "an easygoing gentleman," and he had served effectively on the company's franchisee advisory council. With her attorney's help, Byrde crafted a plan whereby Harry would pay $1.5 million for 5% of the stock, while the company would gradually buy and retire Byrde's shares. Though it might take a decade for Harry to become sole owner, he would be acquiring a $50 million company for just $1.5 million. The agreement included a crucial clause giving Byrde authority to terminate the deal within the first two years and buy back Harry's stock at the purchase price. This prudent precaution proved invaluable. Almost immediately after joining the company, Harry revealed himself to be someone entirely different from the person Byrde thought she knew. He was abrasive with employees, making statements like "I'm not here to be your friend" and openly discussing workforce reductions that created anxiety. After eighteen months of unsuccessful attempts to modify Harry's behavior, Byrde exercised her termination clause. She was back where she started—with no successor and no exit plan—but had avoided a potentially disastrous outcome. Byrde's experience illustrates a common challenge: finding the right successor is difficult, and the wrong person can cause enormous harm. Jim O'Neal learned this lesson when he hired a consultant named Vince to run his trucking company, O&S, while O'Neal pursued a political career as mayor of Springfield, Missouri. Though Vince had identified problems in the company during an assessment, he lacked the skills to address them as CEO. Under his leadership, O&S went from $68 million in sales with $1.8 million in profits to losses of $300,000 in 2009 and $865,000 in 2010. By 2012, the company filed for bankruptcy protection with liabilities of $10-50 million. Daniel, founder of an executive placement firm, experienced similar problems after hiring Ralph, a partner from a Big Four accounting firm with stellar credentials. Ralph created layers of bureaucracy, promoted people based on loyalty rather than performance, and moved the firm away from its core market of middle-market companies. When the recession hit in 2007, the company's revenues declined for the first time in its history, and it was sold for about $50 million—half what Daniel believed it could have been worth had the firm stayed its original course. In retrospect, Daniel realized the board had failed to question Ralph about his management philosophy, examining his résumé and qualifications but never asking how widely he believed financial information should be shared with partners and employees. Given these cautionary tales, what's the solution? First, allow enough time to be wrong. Second, have backup plans. Third, develop multiple potential successors rather than betting everything on one person. Martin Lightsey of Specialty Blades demonstrated these principles when grooming his son-in-law, Peter Harris, as a potential CEO. Harris started as a salesman, proved himself through various roles, and was ultimately selected by the board without Lightsey's involvement. Years later, Harris himself began preparing for succession by hiring Alan Connor as president, creating a smooth transition to the company's third generation of leadership. By the 2010s, sophisticated business owners recognized that succession planning required not just identifying potential leaders but testing them in increasingly responsible roles before making final decisions. As Roxanne Byrde eventually discovered when she found her true successor, George Williams, "He has strengths that I don't have. I actually see the company being much more successful under his leadership."

Chapter 6: Expert Guidance: Assembling the Right Advisory Team

Michael LeMonier stood before his fellow members of Evolve USA, a support group for business owners navigating exits, and shared devastating news. A brilliant entrepreneur he had once mentored had committed suicide after selling his business for $100 million. "I asked his former partner what had happened," LeMonier recounted. "He said, 'He lost his sense of purpose.'" This tragic story highlighted a profound truth about business exits: the questions owners face change dramatically after selling. Instead of quantifiable business objectives, they confront existential questions about identity, purpose, and meaning. This reality underscores why expert guidance is essential throughout the exit process—not just for maximizing financial returns but for navigating the emotional and practical challenges of transition. The path to an exit can be lonely, which explains why many owners postpone it as long as possible. When they finally reach that stage, they risk becoming overly dependent on investment bankers, brokers, and other specialists whose interests differ from theirs. For these professionals, the transaction is the finish line. For owners, it's the beginning of whatever comes next, which will be greatly affected by how the sale is handled. This disconnect explains why getting advice from people who've experienced exits themselves is invaluable. Dave Jackson and Bruce Leech founded Evolve USA after their own difficult transitions, recognizing that peer support could help others avoid the mistakes they had made. While peer groups provide essential support, owners need different expertise as they progress through the exit process. In the exploratory phase, they require guidance in clarifying their personal goals and options. During the strategic phase, they need specialists who understand how to develop key value drivers. In the execution phase, they need advisors experienced in their specific type of exit. The right lead advisor will do more to ensure a happy outcome than anyone except the owner themselves. Attempting to manage the entire process alone is generally a terrible idea. First, most owners lack the necessary knowledge and skills. Second, the process demands so much attention that the business's performance will likely suffer if the owner tries to handle both roles. Ironically, the best lead advisors are often former business owners who learned through their own mistakes—including the mistake of trying to manage their own exits. Basil Peters exemplifies this journey. His first exit experience with Nexus Engineering was nearly disastrous. He made twelve critical mistakes, from failing to formulate an exit strategy to neglecting to check whether major shareholders were aligned around common goals. Only luck saved him from complete failure. Years later, having learned from these errors, Peters expertly guided Barry Carlson through the sale of Parasun Technologies, achieving a final price of $14.8 million—nearly 50% more than their target. A complete exit team typically includes a lead advisor (ideally a former business owner), a lawyer, an accountant, and possibly an insurance professional and wealth manager. Business brokers or investment bankers may also be needed to develop a market for the company and find potential acquirers. The lead advisor's job is to assemble and manage this team, ensuring all technical issues are properly addressed while keeping the owner's personal goals at the center of the process. The contrast between Peters' first and second exit experiences demonstrates the value of expert guidance. His first exit succeeded despite his mistakes; his second succeeded because of his expertise. As Carlson observed about Peters and his partner David Raffa: "At one point, we had an offer we were content with, but Basil and David looked at it and said, 'Let's keep the working capital.' So they went back and said, 'Okay, we like the numbers, but, of course, we're going to keep all but a quarter of a million dollars in working capital.' The buyer said okay. That was an extra $1.6 million. I would have left it on the table." By the 2010s, sophisticated business owners recognized that assembling the right advisory team was not an expense but an investment that could dramatically improve both financial outcomes and personal satisfaction with the exit process.

Chapter 7: Stakeholder Considerations: Ethical Responsibilities in Exits

Jack Altschuler sat in a video studio twelve years after selling his water treatment company, visibly emotional as he recalled a pivotal moment during the sale process. His office manager had discovered an invoice revealing his plans to sell the business and confronted him directly: "Jack, are you selling Maram?" The shock on her face haunted him still. Following his advisors' recommendations, he had kept the sale secret from his fifteen employees—a decision that contradicted the culture of trust and loyalty he had built over decades. This ethical dilemma—balancing confidentiality against transparency with employees—represents just one of many stakeholder considerations that business owners must navigate during exits. While financial advisors often recommend secrecy to maintain business stability and prevent competitors from exploiting the situation, this approach can damage relationships and create lasting regrets. For Ray Pagano of Videolarm, employee considerations were paramount. Early in his exit planning, he implemented a phantom stock program giving all employees, including assembly workers and office staff, a stake in the company's future value. Though initially met with skepticism, this program ultimately delivered substantial payouts when Pagano sold the company in 2009. Assembly workers received as much as $40,000 each—enough for one employee to build a home for his parents in Mexico. Norm Brodsky took a similar approach with CitiStorage. Having once lost a business and watched nearly 3,000 employees lose their jobs through his mistakes, he was determined to protect his people in any future exit. When selling CitiStorage, he walked away from one deal because he didn't trust the buyer to honor commitments regarding employee treatment. The deal he eventually accepted included provisions ensuring employees would be treated fairly. As Brodsky explained, "I wanted to make sure my people would be taken care of. That was more important to me than getting the highest possible price." The question of ethical responsibilities extends beyond employees to customers, suppliers, and communities. Bill Niman felt so strongly about maintaining his company's standards for humane animal treatment that he left after the new owners made changes he couldn't accept. Years later, he still wouldn't eat meat bearing his own name: "I'm not willing to eat Niman Ranch beef myself, and so I don't recommend it to others." His experience highlights how deeply personal values can be embedded in a business, creating ethical dilemmas when ownership changes threaten those values. For some owners, ethical considerations lead them to reject traditional exit paths entirely. Paul Saginaw and Ari Weinzweig of Zingerman's Community of Businesses in Ann Arbor, Michigan, developed a complex succession plan ensuring the business would remain true to its principles after they were gone. Their governance committee spent years addressing questions about ownership transfer, intellectual property, and employee ownership. Similarly, Jack Stack of SRC Holdings prioritized stakeholder interests by selling his company to its employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) rather than a third party, despite some board members' objections. Martin Lightsey of Specialty Blades found another path, using intrastate stock offerings to allow Virginia residents to invest in his company. This mechanism provided liquidity for existing shareholders while maintaining the company's independence and values. When Lightsey eventually stepped down as CEO, the company remained true to its principles under new leadership. These varied approaches demonstrate that there is no single "right" answer to stakeholder considerations. What matters is thoughtful deliberation about responsibilities to all who helped build the business. By the 2010s, the most successful business exits balanced financial rewards with ethical responsibilities, leaving owners not just wealthy but at peace with how they've treated those who contributed to their success. As Michael LeMonier put it: "My first goal in selling the company I own now is to economically and publicly thank my leadership team for what they've done. I'm going to maximize the dollars, but that's in order to take care of the team."

Summary

Throughout the journey from business creation to transition, a fundamental tension emerges between financial outcomes and personal fulfillment. The most successful entrepreneurs recognize that a truly satisfying exit encompasses multiple dimensions: receiving fair compensation for years of risk and effort, feeling a sense of accomplishment about what they've built, being at peace with how stakeholders were treated, and discovering a new sense of purpose beyond the company. This multidimensional view represents a significant evolution from the narrower focus on maximizing sale price that dominated earlier thinking about business exits. The most profound lesson from examining business transitions is that preparation—both personal and organizational—determines outcomes more than any other factor. Entrepreneurs who begin planning years in advance, who develop self-knowledge about their goals and values, who build companies with the qualities buyers value, who groom potential successors, who assemble experienced advisory teams, and who thoughtfully consider their responsibilities to stakeholders achieve exits that bring not just wealth but satisfaction and peace of mind. For business owners at any stage, this insight offers clear guidance: view your company as a creation with its own lifecycle, recognize that your relationship with it will inevitably change, and prepare for that transition with the same care and attention you devoted to building it in the first place.

About Author

Loading...

Bo Burlingham

Read more