- The firm generates $8.0 million of gross revenue, which provides meaningful scale for a buyer to underwrite.
- Consulting represents 70% of revenue, giving the firm a predominantly advisory revenue mix.
- The firm reports 50% EBOC, indicating a substantial earnings conversion level relative to revenue.
- With 30,000 billable hours, the firm shows a sizable volume of chargeable work supporting the revenue base.
- The partnership structure is concentrated, with 4 partners and 20 staff, and revenue per partner is $2.0 million.
- Tax work still contributes 30% of revenue, providing a second service line alongside consulting.
- EBOC at 50% suggests only mid-tier earnings quality and leaves limited margin for a buyer to underwrite a premium multiple.
- The firm’s 70% consulting revenue creates a concentrated service-mix profile that may be more volatile than a balanced practice mix.
- With only 4 partners generating $8,000,000 of revenue, the firm shows meaningful partner concentration and potential succession dependence.
- Revenue per partner of $2,000,000 is strong, but with just 20 staff across the firm it may indicate capacity constraints that could limit near-term scalable growth.
- Increase the tax revenue mix from 30% to improve service diversification and reduce reliance on the 70% consulting-heavy revenue base.
- Leverage the strong 50% EBOC margin to support pricing discipline and selective reinvestment in higher-value service delivery.
- Build scale by expanding beyond the current 4-partner, 20-staff structure to increase capacity and reduce key-person concentration.
- Improve partner leverage by growing billable hours per partner, given 30,000 billable hours across only 4 partners and 20 staff.
- Use the $2.0 million revenue per partner level as a platform to broaden client coverage and deepen account penetration without diluting economics.
- At $8.0M gross revenue with only 4 partners, the firm appears highly partner-dependent, creating key-person and succession risk if one or more partners reduce involvement or exit.
- The staffing base of 20 against 30,000 billable hours suggests meaningful leverage pressure, which can strain delivery capacity and limit scalability without additional hiring.
- Consulting represents 70% of revenue, so earnings are heavily tied to one service line, increasing sensitivity to any slowdown in consulting demand or margin compression within that segment.
- Revenue per partner of $2.0M is strong, but it also indicates a concentrated production model that may be difficult to sustain if partner productivity changes.
- Partner ages are shown only as 45, which provides limited visibility into succession timing and makes it harder to assess the durability of the current ownership structure.