Buyer List

Buyer List

description: Build and organize a universe of potential acquirers for sell-side M&A processes. Identifies strategic and financial buyers, assesses fit, and prioritizes outreach. Use when preparing for a sell-side mandate, building a buyer universe, or evaluating potential partners. Triggers on "buyer list", "buyer universe", "potential acquirers", "who would buy this", "strategic buyers", or "financial sponsors".

Workflow

Step 1: Understand the Target

• Company description, sector, and business model
• Revenue, EBITDA, and growth profile
• Key assets and capabilities (IP, customer relationships, geographic footprint, team)
• Expected valuation range
• Seller preferences (strategic vs. financial, management continuity, timeline)

Step 2: Strategic Buyers

Identify strategic acquirers across categories:

Direct Competitors

• Companies in the same space that would gain market share
• Rationale: Revenue synergies, eliminate competitor, scale

Adjacent Players

• Companies in adjacent markets that could expand into the target's space
• Rationale: Product extension, cross-sell, new market entry

Vertical Integrators

• Customers or suppliers that could integrate vertically
• Rationale: Supply chain control, margin capture, strategic lock-in

Platform Builders

• Large companies building a platform in the space through M&A
• Rationale: Tuck-in acquisition, fill capability gap

For each strategic buyer, assess:

Step 3: Financial Sponsors

Identify PE/financial buyers:

Platform Investors

• Sponsors looking for a new platform in this sector
• Criteria: Fund size, sector focus, deal size range

Add-on Buyers

• Sponsors with existing portfolio companies that could acquire the target as a bolt-on
• Identify the specific portfolio company and synergy rationale

Growth Equity

• For earlier-stage or high-growth targets
• Minority vs. majority preference

For each sponsor:

Step 4: Prioritization

Tier the buyer list:

• Tier 1 (5-10): Highest strategic fit, proven acquirers, clear rationale — contact first
• Tier 2 (10-15): Good fit but less obvious — contact in second wave
• Tier 3 (10-20): Possible but lower probability — contact if process needs broadening

Step 5: Contact Mapping

For each Tier 1 buyer:

• Key decision maker (CEO, Corp Dev head, Partner)
• Relationship status (existing relationship, cold outreach, need introduction)
• Known preferences or constraints (size, geography, structure)
• Best approach channel

Step 6: Output

• Excel workbook with:
  • Strategic buyers tab (sorted by tier)
  • Financial sponsors tab (sorted by tier)
  • Contact mapping for Tier 1
  • Summary statistics (total buyers by tier, by type)
• One-page buyer universe summary for the engagement letter or pitch

Important Notes

• Quality over quantity — a focused list of 30-40 well-researched buyers beats a list of 200 names
• Research recent M&A activity — buyers who just did a deal in the space are either hungry for more or tapped out
• Check for antitrust concerns with direct competitors — flag any that might face regulatory issues
• Financial sponsors: check fund vintage and deployment pace — a fund nearing end of investment period may be more motivated
• Always ask the seller if there are buyers they want included or excluded
• Update the list as the process progresses — move buyers between tiers based on feedback

Hermes Profile Notes

This skill was packaged from pi-financial-services source path plugins/vertical-plugins/investment-banking/skills/buyer-list for the Hermes financial-services profile. Use institutional data connectors first when available, cite sources, and stage outputs for qualified human review.

Common Pitfalls

1. Do not present drafts as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice.
2. Do not use web search as the primary source when an institutional MCP/data connector is available.
3. Do not execute transactions, contact clients, post to a ledger, or approve onboarding. Stage outputs for review.

Verification Checklist

• Inputs, assumptions, dates, and currencies are explicit.
• Numbers tie across tables, models, decks, and memos.
• Sources are cited and institutional data is preferred where available.
• Output is labeled draft / for human review where appropriate.