Most owners of established businesses can tell you what the company earned last year. Fewer can tell you what it would have earned if someone else had done their job. The distinction sounds academic. It is worth a multiple.
Consider a company doing four million in revenue with six hundred thousand of reported profit. The owner takes a modest salary, a hundred and fifty thousand, say, because the accountant advised keeping W-2 income low and taking the rest as distribution. On paper this is a business earning six hundred thousand.
Now ask what it would cost to replace the owner. Not to replace their ownership. To replace their work. They are running sales, holding the four largest customer relationships, approving pricing on anything unusual, and making every hiring decision above a certain level. In most markets that is a general manager and a sales lead. Call it three hundred and twenty thousand fully loaded, conservatively.
The company does not earn six hundred thousand. It earns four hundred and thirty. The difference has been quietly funded by an owner who never priced their own labor.
This matters in three places, and only one of them is a sale.
It distorts every decision made on margin. A company that believes it clears fifteen percent when it actually clears eleven will take work it should decline, price at levels it cannot sustain, and approve investments against a return that does not exist. The error compounds because it is invisible. The money genuinely arrives in the bank each month. It simply arrives because someone is working for free.
It misrepresents capacity. Owners frequently conclude they cannot afford a senior hire. Often the truth is that they have already made the hire; they are simply the person filling the role, and the salary is being paid in foregone enterprise value rather than in payroll.
It produces a valuation surprise. Any competent buyer normalizes owner compensation. They will price the company on what it earns with a market-rate management team in place, because that is the company they are buying. An owner who has spent years compounding an unpriced salary into reported profit discovers the adjustment at the least convenient moment, and experiences it as the buyer being unreasonable rather than as arithmetic finally arriving.
The correction is not complicated, though it is uncomfortable. Price your own role at what the market would charge for it. Not what you pay yourself, but what it would cost to hire your replacement, at the level of competence the company actually requires. Then look at the profit line again.
Some owners find the number holds up. Most find a gap, and the gap is usually the most important figure in the business, because it is the distance between the company they believe they own and the company that exists.
A business improved on true numbers improves faster than one improved on flattering ones.
← All thinking