I'm looking to get a $100 Million Dollar buyout, what numbers should I shoot for?

STOP. DO NOT DO THIS.... I would never want help from someone like you. Don't get me wrong -- you aren't evil (that I know about) but you don't seem have any value that I could pay for. What would you be "consulting" a CEO like me about? How do you expect to make my business better when you don't have a clue about your own business? THAT'S THE TRUTH... Fuck the truth. If you want to get clients then you hustle -- every waking moment. You try an angle and fail and then try a different angle. You can't outsmart your way to bigger results. 2 plus 2 does not equal 4 -- it equals you going bankrupt. If you want to be successful then you need to exert massive amounts of effort to get off the ground. So get your ass out there and start asking everyone you meet: "What is that one big accounting question that's been bothering you for some time now? If I can't help you i'll buy you a cup of coffee" Then just go be a badass...

"Based on the success we are able to achieve" suggests, to me, you are looking at a price that will be tagged to an earn out provision. In other words, the price of the deal will be contingent on you achieving specific revenue targets in the future. If I'm reading this wrong, please correct me because it's an important piece of information. Early stage startup typically suggests a focus on revenue growth with minimal focus on earnings. The most valuable acquisitions will be those that have growth in the top quartile of the industry along with an EBITDA that is also in the top quartile. Companies with these will have the highest multiples. Revenue multiples are also a function of the industry and the general character of the market. Currently, the IPO markets are doing pretty well and the overall M&A market appears to be pretty solid making multiples equally solid. In terms of industry, the media publishing industry has moderate to slow growth depending on the segment. I'm assuming there is a social or online component to your startup which would suggest that it would be part of the new growth side of the market. Generally speaking, market growth averages are at about 8% for larger companies suggesting that new entrants should be able to sustain low to mid double digit growth over a longer horizon. "Growth rates", i.e. percentages, can be meaningless for very small companies. For instance, a company that grows from $25,000 to $250,000 in a year has a massive growth rate..... but the value may be very low due to lack of track record and overall profitability. As such, it can be very hard to estimate multiples. That said, if I were putting forth a hypothetical, it would be something like the following: Assuming: The company has over $1M in revenue and is growing at an average of 12 - 15% per year. Assuming: The company is profitable, but barely, say something in the 10% EBITDA range. Assuming: The company is a service company with few assets but is not subject to significant brain drain (key people leaving would result in devaluing the company). If any of the above are wrong, it can change things significantly. Revenue multiples might be in the 0.7 - 1.15x revenue on forward looking and .9 - 1.25 on a trailing level. EBITDA Multiples could be in the 8 - 10 times on a forward looking and 10 - 12 times on a trailing level. Take it with a grain of salt because there are a lot of factors you don't mention and more information is important to make a meaningful diagnosis.

They met a need for lots of people. Their values lead to long term success, but their short term growth was due to meeting a need in the marketplace and doing really well.

I would suggest the first question to ask is "what problem do I solve?" And of those people I solve problems for "who do I create the most value for?" In the non-profit world you need to add "How does my business help the non-profit run better and/or help the group the non-profit focuses on?" For example, if you've created a platform that drives donations, your company "has created a platform that helps you reach fundraising goals faster." What you don't want to do is market and sell to B2B and B2C audiences simultaneously. They have different ways of buying - a B2B audience needs to have their benefits quantified (using your thing makes me x amount more) - and it's extremely hard for a startup to be able to do both well. Better to start with one, execute really well and move into the other. Feel free to give me a call and we can dig into who your most valuable audience is.

First, I agree with Chad in that the pure pursuit of money is unlikely to render anything significant. By using a monetary value as a primary goal, you're only diluting the real drivers of success: passion, crafting great customer experiences, building an incredible team and culture etc. That said, making $1m isn't that hard. :) I love this thinking by Amy Hoy and that's how I would go about making $1m: http://unicornfree.com/30x500. Using that logic, this is what I'd do: * To earn $1m in a year, I need to earn +- $80k a month. * To earn $80k a month, I need 1600 customers paying me $50 per month. * So what can I build that could attract 1600 people to pay me $50? * Or, what could I build that could attract 400 people to pay me $200 per month? This logic works on two drivers: * Cumulative revenue and growth. So SaaS works best in this regard, as you only need to focus on having new signups that are greater than your churn. * Building something that people are willing to (really) pay for and going for quality over quantity. If you are building something that sells for $5 pm, you'll need to sell at much higher volumes (which are tricky). In terms of doing that, these are the areas of my business that I would prioritize: 1. Build an awesome team that do things they're passionate about. 2. Prioritize customer experiences above anything else. Do everything in your power (regardless of whether it can't scale) to add value and help your customers. 3. Build a brand and reputation that has long-lasting value.