What we learnt from training management to tell a R3.5bn equity story

Whether you are selling New Balance sneakers or a R5 billion business, a sale is still a sale. The audience changes. The stakes escalate. The questions become sharper. But the underlying dynamics remain the same: belief has to be earned, conviction has to be built, and trust has to be established in a finite window of time.

Investors may be among the most sophisticated audiences in the world, but they are still human. Sales psychology still applies. Not in a snake-oil way, and not through theatrics, but through clarity, confidence, and credibility. What we learnt most clearly while training the CEO and CFO of a R3.5 billion business is that the equity story does not succeed because it is perfectly written. It succeeds because the people who have to defend it believe in it, understand it, and can make it their own.

Management cannot just present the equity story. They have to co-author it.

One of the most consistent failure points we see in management presentations is distance. Distance between the narrative and the people telling it. Distance between the slides and the lived reality of the business.

The equity story cannot be something that is handed to management at the eleventh hour and memorised under pressure. If management is expected to defend the story under bidder cross-examination, they have to be involved from the outset in shaping it.

This is not about diluting strategic discipline. It is about recognising that no advisor, banker, or consultant runs the business day to day. Management has unique insight into what really drives performance, where the fragilities are, which decisions mattered most, and why certain trade-offs were made. Those insights are precisely what investors are looking for when they lean forward in their chairs.

Involving management in the creation of the equity story changes the tone immediately. Emphasis becomes more natural. Omissions become intentional rather than accidental. And the story gains texture that simply cannot be manufactured externally.

Management interviews are not interrogations. They are invitations.

Too often, management interviews are framed as extraction exercises. Questions are asked. Answers are logged. Slides are built elsewhere. That framing subtly positions management as inputs rather than owners.

Reframing those sessions as opportunities for management to share their perspective changes everything. These are the people who understand the business better than anyone else in the room. The interview process should be designed to surface how they think, how they prioritise, and how they explain complexity in plain language.

Investors are not only listening for facts. They are listening for judgement. For pattern recognition. For signs that leadership has been tested and has learnt something along the way. Those signals only emerge when management is given space to articulate the business in their own words.

Leadership dynamics matter more than polish.

One of the most powerful moments in the process came not from a perfectly delivered slide, but from the interaction between the CEO and CFO themselves. The way they handed over sections. The way they built on each other’s points. The way one would add nuance or context without undermining the other.

These interpersonal dynamics are not incidental. For investors, they are diagnostic. They signal alignment, mutual respect, and shared ownership of the strategy. Encouraging leaders to share the presentation, rather than rigidly dividing it into silos, allows those dynamics to surface naturally.

The goal is not choreography. It is authenticity. Investors are assessing whether this is a team they can back through complexity, volatility, and pressure. Chemistry, or the lack of it, is immediately apparent.

The deck is an aid, not the event.

By the time management presentations take place, bidders have already seen the information memorandum, the financials, and the data room. Repeating those materials verbatim adds little value.

The management presentation is an opportunity to add a new dimension. To invite investors into management’s world. The slides should support that objective, not compete with it.

We learnt quickly that there is no single “right” way to use a deck. Some leaders are overwhelmed by dense slides and perform best with a single image that anchors the discussion. Others prefer more structure and prompts to keep them on track. The mistake is assuming one format works for everyone.

The only way to get this right is to ask. Understand how each leader prefers to present. Adapt the materials accordingly. The best decks disappear into the background. What remains is the story, told confidently by the people who know it best.

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to preparation.

The same principle applies to rehearsal. Some executives want a full script they can practise until it becomes second nature. Others find scripts paralysing and prefer high-level talking points. Forcing either into the wrong mode introduces risk.

Effective preparation starts with understanding the individual. What makes them confident. What throws them off. What kind of structure helps them perform under pressure. Management teams are not homogeneous, and preparation should not be either.

This is especially important in high-stakes processes, where small drops in confidence can have outsized effects on how the story is received.

Small physical choices have disproportionate impact.

Two decisions made a noticeable difference to the quality of delivery: standing up, and presenting on home soil.

Standing changes the energy in the room. It creates presence, authority, and momentum. It shifts the dynamic from explanation to leadership. For management teams used to operating at pace, it often feels more natural than sitting behind a table.

Presenting on home ground is equally powerful. Bringing investors onto the premises turns the abstract into the tangible. It allows management to reference real assets, real people, real operations. It subtly reinforces who knows the business best. The psychological advantage is real, even if rarely acknowledged explicitly.

Training is not cosmetic. It is risk mitigation.

Senior executives are not necessarily expert speakers. They have verbal tics. Habits. Filler words. These are human, but under investor scrutiny they can distract from the message.

Working with an elite presentation coach helped strip away those distractions. Not to create a performance, but to remove friction. Clearer articulation, better pacing, and more deliberate emphasis materially improved how the story landed.

Just as important were the dry runs. Repetition builds confidence. It exposes weak transitions. It surfaces inconsistencies early, when they can still be addressed safely.

Mock Q&A is where the real work happens.

The most valuable sessions were the mock bidder Q&A. Hard questions. Left-field angles. Detailed challenges on strategy, capital allocation, and downside scenarios.

Running these in a controlled environment allows management to practise defending the story without the consequences of getting it wrong. It sharpens thinking. It reveals where the narrative is robust and where it needs reinforcement.

For investors, the Q&A is often more revealing than the presentation itself. Preparation here is non-negotiable.

Alignment beats micromanagement.

A final lesson was restraint. There are a thousand details that could be emphasised in a business of this scale. Overloading management with too many messages creates dilution, not strength.

The role of advisors is not to script every sentence, but to ensure alignment. To provide a clear strategic spine, and then allow management to tell the story in their own way, drawing on their singular understanding of the business from the inside out.

When that balance is struck, the story feels owned, not borrowed.

The equity story is a team sport.

The strongest outcomes came when all stakeholders were aligned around a single narrative: management, bankers, current shareholders, including the sell-side PE, and the equity story advisors. Consistency across touchpoints builds trust. Discrepancies create doubt.

Ultimately, telling the equity story is not about performance. It is about credibility under pressure. When the CEO and CFO stand in front of bidders, confident in a story they helped shape, supported by preparation that respects who they are as leaders, the business is positioned to achieve not just a transaction, but the right transaction, at the right price, with the right partner.

---

• Why should management be involved in creating the equity story in a sell-side process?

  Management involvement in creating the equity story materially increases its credibility and defensibility. Investors test not only the logic of the narrative but whether leadership genuinely owns it. When management co-authors the story, emphasis becomes intentional, trade-offs are explained with nuance, and answers under pressure feel authentic rather than rehearsed. This reduces narrative risk in management presentations and Q&A, directly supporting buyer conviction and price confidence in competitive processes.

• What is the biggest mistake companies make in management presentations to investors?

  The biggest mistake is treating the management presentation as a repetition of the information memorandum. By this stage, bidders already know the numbers and facts. What they want is insight, judgement, and perspective. Regurgitating materials wastes scarce attention and weakens differentiation. The management presentation should add a new dimension by explaining how the business really works, why decisions were made, and how leadership thinks about risk and growth.

• Why are management interviews critical to a strong equity story?

  Management interviews are critical because they surface insights that cannot be found in documents or data rooms. Investors are listening for how leaders think, not just what they say. When interviews are framed as opportunities for management to share their perspective, the equity story gains depth, realism, and coherence. This strengthens the narrative spine of the deal and improves consistency across written materials, presentations, and live Q&A.

• How do leadership dynamics between CEO and CFO influence investor perception?

  Leadership dynamics signal organisational health, alignment, and decision-making quality to investors. When CEOs and CFOs build on each other’s points naturally, it demonstrates trust, shared ownership of strategy, and internal coherence. Conversely, rigid handovers or visible tension raise questions about execution risk. Encouraging authentic interaction during presentations allows investors to assess whether the leadership team can be relied on through complexity and post-transaction change.

• How should PowerPoint be used in a management presentation?

  PowerPoint should function as a visual aid, not the centrepiece of the presentation. Investors do not need slides to read at them; they need leadership to guide them through the business. The most effective decks support how each leader presents, whether that means minimal visuals or structured prompts. Adapting slides to management’s strengths improves delivery quality and reduces the risk of distraction or over-reliance on scripted content.

• Is there a standard way to prepare executives for investor presentations?

  There is no one-size-fits-all approach to preparing executives for investor presentations. Some leaders perform best with scripts, others with talking points. Effective preparation starts by understanding individual preferences and confidence triggers. Forcing a uniform approach increases delivery risk. Tailored preparation leads to more natural communication, stronger presence, and greater resilience under pressure, all of which influence investor belief and valuation outcomes.

• Why does presenting on home ground matter in deal processes?

  Presenting on home ground provides a tangible psychological advantage. When investors are brought into the operational environment, the business becomes real rather than abstract. Management speaks with greater authority, references real assets, and demonstrates command of the space. This subtly reinforces credibility and reduces perceived execution risk. Home-ground presentations often strengthen investor confidence and can positively influence competitive tension and pricing.

• What role does presentation training play in deal outcomes?

  Presentation training is a form of risk mitigation, not cosmetic polish. Senior executives are not professional speakers, and verbal habits can undermine otherwise strong messages. Targeted coaching improves clarity, pacing, and emphasis, ensuring the equity story lands as intended. Combined with dry runs, training reduces the probability of missteps in live sessions where credibility, not theatrics, directly affects buyer confidence and valuation support.

• Why is mock bidder Q&A essential before management presentations?

  Mock bidder Q&A is essential because real value is tested under scrutiny, not during prepared remarks. Investors often form their strongest views during questioning. Simulating hard, left-field, and detailed questions allows management to stress-test the equity story in a safe environment. This improves response quality, exposes weaknesses early, and increases confidence during live interactions, reducing narrative risk at critical pricing moments.

• How does alignment between advisors and management affect valuation?

  Alignment across management, bankers, shareholders, and equity story advisors directly affects deal certainty and pricing. Inconsistent narratives create doubt and slow momentum, while a single, coherent story builds trust across all bidder touchpoints. When management is not micromanaged but supported within a clear strategic spine, the story feels owned and credible. This consistency strengthens investor belief and supports higher-value outcomes with the right buyers.