Assess whether IP is owned or merely licensed (f17ecb)
August 31, 2026 · SmartSolo
Situation
Related-party revenue that disappears at close arrived with a contractor who actually wrote the core code for integration-risk PMO. That is a M&A Due Diligence People and Contracts decision on IP is owned or merely licensed in a PE platform evaluating a founder-led SaaS add-on.
Decision
Integration-risk PMO in a PE platform evaluating a founder-led SaaS add-on must choose IP is owned / Merely licensed using related-party revenue that disappears at close after a contractor who actually wrote the core code.
Hypotheses to test
- The population in related-party revenue that disappears at close is the one a contractor who actually wrote the core code named, so IP is owned follows for this People and Contracts file.
- The population in related-party revenue that disappears at close is adjacent only to a contractor who actually wrote the core code; Merely licensed is the honest M&A Due Diligence call.
- A PE platform evaluating a founder-led SaaS add-on already contained a contractor who actually wrote the core code before related-party revenue that disappears at close arrived; no new People and Contracts path.
- Provenance on related-party revenue that disappears at close after a contractor who actually wrote the core code is broken; do not pick IP is owned or Merely licensed yet.
Analysis required
- Tie quality-of-earnings, working-capital, and contingent items in related-party revenue that disappears at close to IP is owned or merely licensed.
- Name the document integration-risk PMO still needs before signing.
- Test whether a contractor who actually wrote the core code is a diligence gap, a price chip, or a walk-away.
- For this M&A Due Diligence People and Contracts file, read related-party revenue that disappears at close against a contractor who actually wrote the core code and write the one fact that would move IP is owned or merely licensed for integration-risk PMO.
Recommendation
Choose IP is owned / Merely licensed on this M&A Due Diligence / People and Contracts packet (related-party revenue that disappears at close after a contractor who actually wrote the core code). The follow-on People and Contracts action is what integration-risk PMO does next: implement the option, assign an owner, and log the missing fact.
Explore more
More M&A Due Diligence prompts
- Assess whether management can run this without the founder (6cdb92)
- Assess whether environmental liability is capped or open-ended after a QoE
- Assess whether related-party sales should be backed out of valuation (b695b1)
- Assess whether earnings quality supports the bid price (1fb5ba)
- Assess whether a top customer is actually sticky (273ac4)
Explore related decision areas
- Assess whether to bid as prime, sub, or no-bid (6ba5f5)Government RFP
- Does Inventory Exist, or Only On Paper — Revenue IntegrityForensic Accounting
- Whether umbrella attachment is too thin for the hazard from CAT model outputInsurance Underwriting
See governed multi-model AI on your own prompt
Compare GPT-5, Claude, and Gemini side by side, with human review and a decision record built in.

