SPAC-tacular or SPAC-trap? Navigating Alternate Paths to Liquidity

A SPAC, or Special Purpose Acquisition Company, is a publicly traded shell corporation created for the sole purpose of acquiring a private company, thereby taking it public without going through the traditional IPO process. Think of it as a financial “blank check” company: it raises capital from public investors with no existing business operations, just the intent to merge with or acquire a private company within a set period—usually 18 to 24 months.

How is a SPAC Formed?

1. Sponsor Formation:
   A SPAC is typically formed by a group of experienced operators, former executives, or institutional investors—collectively referred to as sponsors. These sponsors often have expertise in a specific industry (e.g., healthcare, fintech, mobility) and a track record of operational or investment success.
2. IPO Process:
   The SPAC raises capital by going public through a traditional IPO. However, since it has no operating business, the disclosures are far simpler than a normal IPO. Investors purchase units (usually one share of common stock plus a fraction of a warrant to buy more stock later). The funds raised are placed into a trust account, earning interest and held solely for the purpose of acquiring a private target.
3. Target Search and Merger (De-SPAC):
   After the IPO, the SPAC has up to 24 months to identify and complete a merger or acquisition with a target private company. This merger—known as the De-SPAC transaction—effectively takes the private company public.
4. Shareholder Vote and Redemption:
   Before the acquisition, SPAC shareholders vote to approve the transaction. If they don’t like the deal, they can redeem their shares (typically at the IPO price plus accrued interest), significantly affecting how much capital remains for the target company post-transaction.

---

Who Forms SPACs?

• Experienced Operators and Executives: Many SPACs are formed by former CEOs, CFOs, or board members with industry-specific reputations and expertise.
• Private Equity or Venture Capital Firms: These firms may sponsor a SPAC to take one of their portfolio companies public.
• Investment Banks and Financiers: Occasionally, SPACs are structured with Wall Street institutions providing structuring and advisory support.
• Celebrities and Public Figures: In the 2020–2021 SPAC boom, notable public figures (e.g., athletes, politicians, entertainers) sponsored SPACs, though many lacked direct operational expertise.

---

Advantages of SPACs

1. Speed to Market:
   A SPAC merger can take a private company public faster than a traditional IPO—often within a few months, compared to 12–18 months for a conventional IPO.
2. Valuation Certainty:
   The private company negotiates its valuation directly with the SPAC sponsors, avoiding the market-driven price discovery of an IPO roadshow.
3. Access to Capital:
   SPACs often raise additional capital via PIPEs (Private Investment in Public Equity), providing significant cash for growth or liquidity.
4. Sponsor Expertise:
   Sponsors may offer strategic support, industry connections, and governance insights to help scale the business.
5. Alternative for Complex Businesses:
   Companies that might struggle with IPO readiness (due to limited revenue history, complex accounting, or market uncertainty) may find a SPAC route more feasible.

---

Regulatory Hurdles and Issues

1. SEC Oversight:
   While the initial SPAC IPO has fewer requirements, the De-SPAC transaction triggers full SEC scrutiny. This includes audited financials, Form S-4 or F-4 registration, and comprehensive disclosure of risk factors, management, and projections.
2. Projection Use and Liability:
   SPACs often use forward-looking financial projections, unlike traditional IPOs. The SEC has raised concerns about the use of overly optimistic projections and the lack of underwriter liability, leading to increased scrutiny and proposed rule changes.
3. Dilution Risk:
   Sponsors typically receive “promote shares”—often 20% of total equity post-merger—regardless of performance. Add in warrants and redemptions, and the dilution can be significant, reducing value for the remaining shareholders.
4. High Redemption Rates:
   Many investors choose to redeem their shares before the merger, which can dramatically reduce the available cash for the company. This often forces sponsors to secure PIPE funding or restructure the deal.
5. Post-Merger Underperformance:
   A large number of SPAC-backed companies have underperformed after going public, due to inflated projections, lack of financial discipline, or poor readiness for the demands of the public markets.
6. Accounting and SOX Compliance:
   Post-merger, the target company must comply with SOX 404(a) or (b), PCAOB-audited financials, and public company reporting requirements. Many private companies are ill-prepared for this rigor, resulting in restatements or control deficiencies.

---

Key Takeaway for CFOs and Founders

A SPAC can be a strategic vehicle for liquidity and growth, but it requires the same level of discipline, governance, and readiness as a traditional IPO. It is not a shortcut—it’s an alternative path that demands careful navigation.

Due diligence, financial infrastructure, legal preparedness, and post-merger planning are critical. The public market has no patience for half-built narratives. If you’re not ready to operate as a public company, a SPAC won’t solve that problem—it will only expose it.

Liquidity events in business, like milestones in life, tend to come with equal parts promise and peril. And few financial instruments have surged—and soured—as dramatically in recent memory as the SPAC. Once heralded as a fast lane to public markets, the Special Purpose Acquisition Company has become, in the minds of many, both a shortcut and a cautionary tale.

The basic concept is straightforward. A SPAC is a shell company that goes public with no operations—just capital and a management team. Its only purpose is to acquire a private company and take it public in the process. To the target, this sounds ideal: you skip the traditional IPO gauntlet, negotiate terms with a single counterparty, and ring the bell with cash in the bank. So why not?

Because, as with most things in finance, the devil hides in the details.

Let’s take a step back and look at what made SPACs so appealing in the first place. In a frothy market flush with liquidity, venture-backed companies and growth-stage firms saw SPACs as a viable, even attractive, alternative to traditional IPOs or direct listings. The allure was speed, valuation control, and fewer regulatory hurdles upfront. Combine that with the market’s appetite for stories over earnings, and you had a recipe for a boom.

And boom it did.

In 2020 and 2021, SPAC issuance hit record highs. Celebrities, financiers, and ex-operators all raised blank-check companies. De-SPAC transactions—the actual mergers—skyrocketed. Targets were often early-stage, capital-hungry, and short on financial maturity. In some cases, projections extended five to ten years out, with hockey-stick curves as far as the eye could see.

But as Warren Buffett often warns: “You only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out.” And the tide, it seems, has gone out with a vengeance.

As interest rates rose and scrutiny returned, many SPAC-backed companies faltered. Their projections proved optimistic. Their financial controls proved thin. And the very promise of a shortcut to public markets became, in hindsight, an expensive detour. Redemptions soared. Share prices plunged. Investors, once giddy, turned skeptical.

So, are SPACs dead?

Not quite. But they are, like any financial instrument, only as good as the discipline behind them. The SPAC is a tool—not a magic wand. And for a CFO evaluating the path to liquidity, the question is not “SPAC or not?” but “Are we truly ready for life as a public company—regardless of the route?”

Let’s unpack what that means.

A SPAC transaction, while faster than a traditional IPO, does not bypass the requirements of being a public company. You’ll still face quarterly reporting, SEC scrutiny, PCAOB-compliant audits, and investor relations demands. If your systems, controls, and leadership team aren’t already public-company caliber, the SPAC will expose that gap—often in front of a less forgiving audience.

More critically, the structure of a SPAC deal can be complex—sometimes to a fault. The sponsor economics (typically 20% of the SPAC’s equity), the use of PIPEs (private investments in public equity), the redemption mechanics, and the warrant overhang can make the post-transaction capitalization structure both dilutive and difficult to explain. A company might close a SPAC deal thinking they’ve raised $200 million, only to find that redemptions reduced the actual proceeds to half that—or less.

The CFO’s role in a SPAC process, then, is not just to manage the numbers—but to pressure-test the assumptions. What’s the pro forma ownership? What happens if 80% of shareholders redeem? Are the warrants counted in diluted share count? How do earnout provisions align with realistic performance? And how does the capital structure look to future investors?

In too many SPAC deals, these questions were not fully answered until it was too late.

Then there’s the matter of valuation. One of the purported benefits of a SPAC is that it allows the private company to “negotiate” its valuation rather than let the public markets set it through IPO pricing. But this cuts both ways. If the valuation is too aggressive, the post-transaction stock often sinks. If it’s too low, existing shareholders leave money on the table. Either way, the market eventually speaks.

So what’s a CFO to do?

First, treat a SPAC not as a shortcut, but as a merger. Due diligence must be rigorous. Audit readiness must be real. Forecasts must be grounded, not aspirational. And financial infrastructure must be robust. You’re not just selling a story—you’re marrying into one.

Second, scrutinize the SPAC sponsor. Their track record, experience, and alignment matter. Have they taken companies public before? Are they long-term thinkers or short-term promoters? Do they bring more than capital—perhaps industry expertise, networks, or credibility?

Third, model all scenarios. What happens under high redemption? What if the PIPE doesn’t close? What does dilution look like with full warrant conversion? If the company has to raise follow-on capital at a lower valuation, what are the implications?

Fourth, prepare for life after the bell. Some SPAC deals focus so intently on closing the transaction that they forget the hard part begins the next day. Investor relations must be ready. Internal controls must be in place. The board must be public-ready. And the CEO and CFO must know how to communicate—not just to analysts, but to employees, customers, and regulators.

Fifth, and most importantly, ask whether a SPAC is the right path—not just the expedient one. There are cases where SPACs make sense: complex carve-outs, capital-intensive growth companies with clear line of sight to profitability, businesses with unique assets but limited visibility. But for many, the traditional IPO, with its institutional roadshow, price discovery, and investor discipline, remains the better route.

Private equity-backed companies, in particular, should weigh the SPAC option carefully. Sponsors often prioritize timing, but the CFO must balance that with the cost of capital, control implications, and long-term reputation. The public markets are not forgiving. A misstep in the first few quarters post-debut can tarnish the equity story for years.

It’s also worth noting that regulators are paying attention. The SEC has issued guidance and is tightening requirements around SPAC disclosures, projections, and liability. The era of five-year CAGR slides with no audited history is coming to an end. And rightly so. Public investors deserve the same level of diligence, whether the company arrives via IPO, direct listing, or SPAC.

In the end, the SPAC conversation is really about readiness. The CFO’s checklist must look the same regardless of the route:

• Can we close the books accurately and quickly?
• Are our forecasts credible and consistent?
• Is our board structured appropriately?
• Are we SOX-compliant or on the path?
• Can we manage investor expectations quarterly?
• Do we have IR, legal, audit, and tax resources in place?
• Is our valuation supported by fundamentals?

Because capital markets, like nature, are efficient over time. They reward performance, punish opacity, and value consistency. Whether you enter through a SPAC or an S-1, the work required to stay public is the same.

A SPAC can be a tool—a potentially useful one. But it is not a strategy. And it is not an escape hatch. The companies that succeed post-SPAC are those that would have succeeded regardless. The route may be different, but the destination demands the same discipline.

So is it SPAC-tacular? Sometimes.

But more often than not, the better question is: Are we ready to be public?

Because if the answer is no, no structure will save you.

And if the answer is yes, any structure will do.