Global differences is appetite for use of external consultants to support DDs

This topic contains 1 reply, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Joselin 8 months, 2 weeks ago.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #117917


    Participant

    The concept of Due Diligence has emerged over the years and includes the Commercial DD aspect which may have been overlooked previously. From your experience are you finding that you are able to carry out your own DD better than using a consultant and that the appointment of a consultancy firm is often largely driven by the need to “cover ones self” in the event of a poor judgement to proceed with the deal? In other words, i often find that practitioners in a given industry, are most effective at identifying risks, opportunities and arriving at a suitable valuation. Is this trend shared amongst you in other parts of the world?

    M

    #118184

    Joselin
    Participant

    I tend to agree with the observation you have made.

    Practitioners are usually most effective at identifying and understanding the pragmatic risks.
    The consultants I feel are there to cover/give an opinion in case things don’t work out.

    But overall, I do think consultants can be beneficial in providing a good structure for the information/analyses done, and also a neutral third party to provide an objective summary of what practitioners with different views/perspectives, and interests, are saying.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Loading.. Please wait