Lawyers check the contracts. Accountants check the books. In most transactions the software, often the biggest operational asset, isn't looked at properly until after settlement. We look at it before you sign.
Every assessment answers these six in plain language, with the evidence in a technical annex.
Is the codebase an asset or a liability? We measure the debt: how much rework is built into every future feature, and how long the current pace can last.
Will it handle the growth the price assumes, with more users, more sites and new markets, or does growth mean a rebuild?
Vulnerabilities, access control, data handling and past incidents. These become your problem at settlement.
Does the seller actually own what they're selling? Third-party licences, open-source obligations and contractor IP are the usual problems.
How much of the system is in one developer's head, and what happens to the business if that person resigns?
Hosting, licences, monitoring, support load and how often it needs maintenance. The real annual bill behind the earnings figure.
Before you sign, we assess the platform and the people behind it across all six, then put the findings in commercial terms. You go into the negotiation knowing whether the technology is an asset, a liability or a reason to adjust the price, and what it would cost to fix.
A buyer's due diligence should find nothing to discount. We get your platform ready for review: documentation complete, IP clean, dependencies mapped, security evidenced, and nothing that depends on one person. Technology that gets through diligence cleanly adds to the price.
The same assessment works as a health check on a platform you run today. It's often the first step before a legacy rebuild or a change of supplier.
Ask about a health checkThree steps. You get the report before your signing deadline, not after.
We agree the scope with your deal team and work within the data room and NDA for the transaction.
Senior engineers review the code, architecture, infrastructure and team. These are the same people who build and take over platforms for a living.
A plain-language report for the board and a technical annex for your advisers: risks ranked, fixes costed, and what it means for the price spelled out.
The judgement behind the report comes from fifteen years of building custom software and taking over systems other people built.
It's the question a buyer needs answered, and the one we ask ourselves every time we take over a legacy system.
The people reading the code are the people who design and build our own platforms. They know what a shortcut looks like and what it costs later.
Findings ranked by risk and put in commercial terms, with the technical evidence in an annex for your advisers.
Every significant finding comes with an estimate to fix it, so a problem becomes a number you can negotiate with.
We've taken over Access databases and large platforms and kept them running. We know which problems are cosmetic and which are structural.
It's a fixed-scope job measured in weeks, not months, planned around your deal timeline. You get the report before your signing deadline.
A plain-language report for the board and a technical annex for advisers: findings across all six areas, risks ranked, fixes costed, and what it means for the price.
Yes. We get platforms ready for a buyer's review: documentation complete, IP clean, dependencies mapped, security evidenced, and nothing that depends on one person.
We work inside the deal's NDA and data room, and agree the assessment scope and access with your deal team before anything is opened. Findings go to you and the advisers you nominate, and nobody else.
That's common, and it's fine. We're assessing the system, not the person. Where the current developer is a key dependency we say so and recommend how to reduce it, which usually suits them too.
Tell us about the transaction and its timeline. A senior engineer will talk you through what an assessment would cover.