Our financial statements show steady historical growth, but our recent deployment of AI-driven client intake has dramatically lowered our customer acquisition cost over the last six months. How do we force the buyer to apply our valuation multiple to our annualized run-rate EBITDA rather than our trailing twelve-month historical average?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Buyers love to use the trailing twelve-month historical average because it averages out your recent growth spikes and saves them money. If you have recently deployed AI-driven client intake that has permanently cut your customer acquisition costs and boosted your margins, relying on historical averages penalizes your innovation. You must build a bulletproof case to force the buyer to value the business on an annualized run-rate EBITDA. Start by isolating the exact date the AI system went live. Use your EOS weekly scorecard to show a clear before-and-after picture of your marketing spend and intake efficiency. Prove that the cost reduction is not a temporary fluke but a structural change in your operating model. Next, present your financials with a clear run-rate adjustment that annualizes the most recent three months of performance. Show that this annualized figure is the new baseline. Back this up by showing your pipeline of new business, proving that the automated system can handle the increased volume without adding administrative staff. If the buyer resists, offer a structural compromise. Propose a short-term clawback or a structured adjustment where a portion of the purchase price is held in escrow and released after ninety days of proving the run-rate EBITDA holds steady. This protects your valuation while giving the buyer the empirical proof they need to write the check.