Written by Erik | Haven Commerce LLC
How to Know Where Your Company Actually Stands Before the Options Run Out
The reason most boards can’t make decisions about stuck companies isn’t lack of willpower or indecisiveness.
It’s lack of reliable information.
Specifically, three things are almost always missing when a board is trying to decide what to do with a stuck portfolio company: an honest assessment of how much cash is actually left, an independent view of what the company’s assets are actually worth, and a clear comparison of the realistic paths forward with real numbers attached to each one.
Without those three things, every board conversation is an opinion contest. The founder thinks there’s more time than there is. The VC thinks the product is worth more than it is. The independent director doesn’t know what to think. Everyone defers another quarter.
The Two-Week Diagnostic is a structured process that produces those three things. Not a 90-page consulting deck — a 5 to 7 page Situation Assessment that gives the board what it needs to make a decision and commit to a timeline.
This guide explains what the diagnostic produces, how it’s done, why it has to be independent, and what happens to board conversations when everyone is looking at the same reliable numbers for the first time.
The founder’s financials are optimistic by default. Not dishonest — optimistic. The runway estimate assumes revenue stays flat or grows modestly. The burn number doesn’t include accrued liabilities that haven’t posted yet. The pipeline includes deals that have been “close to signing” for six months.
This isn’t a character flaw. It’s the natural cognitive response to an incredibly stressful situation. Founders who’ve been running a stuck company for 18 months have an enormous psychological investment in the version of reality where things work out. Every estimate tilts toward that version.
The result: boards are making high-stakes, often irreversible decisions based on numbers that are systematically off by 20% to 40%.
A founder who reports 7 months of runway typically has 4 to 5 months of true runway once you adjust for accrued but unpaid liabilities, at-risk revenue, timing mismatches between annual contracts and quarterly expenses, and the cost of executing whatever resolution path the board chooses.
A sale process takes 3 to 4 months. A restructuring takes 60 to 90 days. An ABC wind-down requires $50K to $100K in upfront fees. If the board doesn’t know the real number, they can’t make a rational decision about which options are still available.
The first deliverable of any diagnostic is the Cash-Zero Date: the exact calendar date the company runs out of money at its current true burn rate.
“About 6 months of runway” is abstract. “September 14th” is concrete.
When a board sees a specific date, the conversation changes. “We should probably do something” becomes “we need a decision by August 1st or we lose the ability to choose.” Nobody can argue with a calendar date. They can argue with estimates, projections, and vibes. They can’t argue with arithmetic.
But the Cash-Zero Date also produces a second number that most boards have never calculated: the RIF Date.
The RIF Date is the latest day the company can execute a reduction in force and still have enough cash to cover all severance obligations and WARN Act compliance. If the Cash-Zero Date is September 14th and monthly burn is $200K, the company has maybe $800K in cash at the point it needs to RIF. With 20 employees averaging $100K in salary, severance and WARN obligations might total $400K. That means the RIF has to happen by July 15th — not September 14th.
And if today is June 20th, the board doesn’t have 3 months to decide. It has 3 weeks.
I’ve watched boards sit through quarterly meetings discussing “strategic alternatives” while operating on a vague sense of “we have some time.” The Cash-Zero model makes that vagueness impossible to sustain. Two dates on one page change the entire dynamic.
The standard runway calculation is cash divided by monthly burn. The real calculation is different.
Step 1: Start with actual bank balance. Not the accounting system cash number, not the CFO’s reported position — the actual cleared balance in the company’s bank accounts as of today. In early-stage companies, these numbers often differ by $100K to $300K due to timing, float, and accounting treatment.
Step 2: Identify accrued but unpaid liabilities. Back payroll taxes. Accrued PTO that converts to cash on termination. Vendor invoices that are net-60 and haven’t posted. State franchise taxes due annually. Unpaid expense reports. These aren’t on the income statement, but they’re real cash obligations.
Step 3: Assess revenue at risk. Customers who are 60+ days past due on invoices. Contracts up for renewal in the next 90 days with no renewal signal. Channel partners who’ve hinted at renegotiation. The cash forecast assumes all of this revenue arrives on time. It probably won’t.
Step 4: Add the cost of resolution. Every path forward requires cash that isn’t in the operating budget. A sale process with an investment banker: $10K to $25K per month in retainer plus expenses. An ABC wind-down: $50K to $100K in assignee fees. A legal restructuring: $25K to $75K in counsel fees. A standalone diagnostic: fixed scope. Even the cheapest resolution option costs real money. If that cost isn’t modeled, the runway estimate isn’t a runway estimate — it’s a hope estimate.
The second deliverable of the diagnostic is an asset catalog: a structured inventory of what the company actually has that’s valuable and transferable.
Most boards have never seen this. It sounds obvious — of course they know what the company owns — but in practice, the specific items that matter in a transaction are rarely documented clearly.
Product IP: Which code is actually proprietary, where is it documented, what does the licensing look like for third-party components, and is there technical debt that would materially affect a buyer’s assessment?
Customer contracts: Which agreements have assignment clauses that allow the contracts to transfer to a buyer? Which have change-of-control provisions that give customers the right to cancel? What’s the weighted-average remaining contract duration? The difference between a customer base that transfers cleanly and one that requires individual consent from 80 customers is significant to any buyer.
Data assets: Proprietary training data, customer behavioral data, aggregated benchmarks — for AI-adjacent products especially, these can be worth more than the product itself to the right acquirer.
Team: Who is critical to the product (would a buyer need them to maintain the codebase?) versus valuable but not essential? Who would follow the product to a new owner? The asset catalog for an acqui-hire is primarily a people catalog — specific names, roles, and retention probabilities.
Domain, brand, and content: Valuable only in specific contexts, but worth cataloging.
The asset catalog isn’t theoretical. It’s the factual foundation for every resolution path. A sale process needs it to prepare a data room. An acqui-hire needs it to know who to include in the deal. A wind-down needs it to identify what to market to buyers through the ABC process.
The third deliverable is a path analysis: real numbers on each of the four resolution paths, modeled from the company’s actual financial and operational position.
This is where the diagnostic earns its value. Most boards have conceptually discussed “a sale” or “a restructuring” without ever putting real numbers on either. When you model a sale at $8M enterprise value with a preference haircut and show the Series B recovering $2.5M versus $0 in a wind-down, the conversation changes from “should we sell?” to “what does the Series B need to see to agree to this?”
Numbers remove abstractions. Abstractions are where board decisions go to die.
This is the part founders sometimes push back on. “I can build this model,” they say. And they’re right — technically, they can.
The problem isn’t capability. It’s credibility.
When the founder produces the analysis, every number is filtered through their psychological investment in the outcome. The cash position is slightly more optimistic. The at-risk revenue is slightly less alarming. The most favorable path gets slightly more favorable assumptions. None of this is intentional. It’s human.
When the board looks at the founder’s analysis, they know this. They’ve been receiving optimistic reports for 18 months. Even when the numbers are accurate, the board discounts them based on prior experience. The conversation stays in the realm of opinion.
An independent assessment produced by someone with no stake in any particular outcome resets the conversation. When everyone is looking at the same numbers from the same source, and that source has no reason to tilt toward any outcome, the discussion moves from “do we trust these numbers?” to “what do we do about them?”
That shift — from opinion-based to fact-based — is what converts stuck boards into boards that make decisions.
The diagnostic doesn’t start with a questionnaire or a data request. It starts with reconciliation.
Before anything else, I reconcile the company’s reported cash position against actual bank statements. Not the accounting system balance — the bank balance. The gap between these two numbers tells me immediately how well the company understands its own situation. If they’re off by more than 10%, we have a credibility problem with every other number they’ve given the board.
Payroll tax filings: Are the 941s current? Payroll tax delinquency is a personal liability for officers and directors — not just the company. If filings are behind, the board needs to know today, not in two weeks.
D&O insurance: Is the policy in force? When does it expire? In a restructuring or wind-down, the D&O policy is the board’s primary protection against personal liability claims. A lapsed policy at the wrong moment is catastrophic.
Debt covenants: Has any covenant been breached? Are any payments past due? Lenders who discover a breach through a closing process have enormous leverage. Better to know now and manage it than to discover it in due diligence.
These three checks aren’t just financial questions — they’re personal liability questions for every director on the board. They often surface information that changes the urgency of the timeline significantly.
After the financial reconciliation, I ask the founder one question in the first meeting: “If you had to ship one thing in the next 30 days that would meaningfully change the trajectory, what would it be?”
The clarity and specificity of the answer tells me more about the state of the business than any spreadsheet. A founder who answers immediately with a specific feature, customer, or market signal is running a company with a coherent product strategy and some remaining momentum. A founder who pauses and says “I’m not sure” is running a company that’s lost its way — and the restructuring work is fundamentally different.
The Two-Week Diagnostic isn’t a standalone exercise. It’s the first 30 days of every resolution path.
A strategic reset starts with the Situation Assessment because you can’t know which costs to cut without knowing which product lines drive actual retention. A sale process starts with the asset catalog because you can’t build a data room without knowing what you own. An acqui-hire starts with the team inventory because the deal value is entirely based on the specific people being acquired. A wind-down starts with the liability scan because the ABC process requires a complete picture of creditor claims.
The diagnostic is the reason every path starts with a 30-day mapping phase rather than jumping directly to execution. Execution without a reliable map produces mistakes that are expensive to correct in the middle of a process.
The good news: the diagnostic can be done as a standalone engagement. Fixed scope, defined deliverable, no commitment to the 90-day process that follows. Some boards use the Situation Assessment to act on their own — they had the analytical capability, they just needed reliable data to work from. Some boards use it as the foundation for a longer engagement. Either way, the board exits the diagnostic with something it didn’t have before: a clear, independent picture of where the company actually stands.
That picture is the starting point for every decision that follows.
If you’re a board member, GP, or founder who needs clarity on what you’re actually working with, let’s talk. . I’ll walk you through what a diagnostic would look like for your specific situation — the scope, the timeline, and what the deliverable would tell you
Schedule a Conversation