Diligence 4.3
The Competing Field
Who else is buying, what they pay, and the lane they leave open.
Cedarline Capital · Fund I
Three Groups of BuyersCompeting · 02
All names below are fictional

Everyone wants the trades. Not everyone wants them our size.

National strategicsBuying scale8–11xPay up, but only for scaled platforms. Rarely chase a sub-$5M-EBITDA shop. They are our exit, not our rival on the small deals.ServiceCrown GroupApex Home Services
PE consolidators$500M+ funds$75M+Need to write large cheques, so they compete for platforms but skip the small bolt-ons that build value. Different weight class.Redwood Trades PartnersMeridian Home Services FundLongbow Industrial
Franchise aggregatorsBrand-ledLightGrow through franchising with lighter operational control. A different model, not a control-buyout competitor.HomeFront Brands
Illustrative competitive setCedarline Capital · Buyers
Where Cedarline SitsCompeting · 03
Target size against operational control

An empty quadrant: small targets, hands-on control.

Operational control HighLow Target company size →
Cedarline's lane
Cedarline
National strategics
PE consolidators
Franchise aggregators
Too small for the big funds, too operational for the strategicsCedarline Capital · Map
Our LaneCompeting · 04
Why the gap stays open

The sub-$50M platform, bought proprietary, run by an operator.

01Below the big fundsA $500M fund cannot spend time on a $30M platform or a $1M bolt-on. The math of their fund size keeps them out of our deals.
02Above the strategics' patienceStrategics want a finished platform, not a founder-run shop that needs two years of operational work.
03Proprietary, not auctionedDirect owner sourcing keeps entry multiples disciplined where auctions would compress the return.
04Operator in the seatRosa Delgado runs the playbook inside each platform. That is the work the other buyers will not do.
The gap is the edgeCedarline Capital · Lane