💡 Introduction: Why This Topic Matters
After acquiring an asset, most teams focus on revenue synergies and capex – but vendor terms are where a lot of cash is quietly trapped. Many unlisted assets come with legacy supplier arrangements that no longer match the scale, credit quality, or data transparency of the new owner. Extending terms, smoothing payment profiles, or aligning them to receipts can create meaningful, recurring cash benefits. But you can’t negotiate effectively without a clear view of the cash at stake. This article shows you how to model that value for unlisted infrastructure and other assets in the “Unlisted Asset Monitoring (Post Acquisition)” group. It connects directly to working capital improvements, AP calendar modelling, and broader financing decisions like vendor finance vs bank debt.
🧩 A Simple Framework You Can Use
Use a three‑lens framework: portfolio, vendor, and risk. The portfolio lens looks at aggregate spend, existing terms, and payment patterns across all vendors. The vendor lens zooms into individual suppliers: their strategic criticality, willingness to negotiate, and economics. The risk lens evaluates what could break if you push terms too far – from supply chain resilience to customer concentration risk if key customers depend on those vendors. Start by building a baseline view of current terms and cash outflows, then model scenarios with extended terms, discounts, or early‑payment programs. Feed those scenarios into your 13‑week cash view and budget vs actuals in cash. This framework turns vendor term resets into a structured, auditable part of your unlisted asset management playbook instead of opportunistic calls.
🛠️ Step-by-Step Implementation
Step 1: Build a Clean Vendor and Spend Baseline
Start by consolidating vendor data across the asset: supplier names, categories, annual spend, current terms, and actual payment behaviour. Use AP transaction histories and tools that can turn bills into a calendar view. Group vendors into logical categories – core operations, maintenance, capex, overhead. For each, calculate effective days‑payable based on actual payment dates, not contractual terms. This is the foundation for quantifying cash lift later. Also, flag any areas where high customer concentration intersects with key vendors; for example, a single maintenance provider supporting a major client contract. This matters for customer concentration risk and should inform how aggressively you push. Finally, align this baseline with your broader unlisted asset management model so you can see vendor spend in the context of revenue and capex.
Step 2: Segment Vendors and Define Negotiation Strategies
Not all vendors are equal. Segment them by strategic importance, substitutability, and bargaining power. For each segment, define realistic target terms – e.g., moving from 30 to 45 days, or from 45 to 60 days – and any trade‑offs (price, volume commitments, or exclusivity). Model the impact of each potential change on cash, using your AP calendar and working capital templates. Be explicit about risk: for critical unlisted infrastructure providers, you may accept shorter terms in exchange for service levels, while pushing harder on non‑critical spend. This segmentation ensures your overall plan balances cash optimisation with operational resilience and understanding unlisted assets in a full‑system context.
Step 3: Model “before and After” Cash Curves
With strategies set, build “before and after” scenarios. For each vendor or segment, plot current cash outflows by month, then overlay new term structures. Use scenario tools that can aggregate these changes into one consolidated cash view. Pay attention to transition effects: shifting terms may create a one‑off cash benefit (a gap month) that shouldn’t be mistaken for recurring improvement. Tie these curves directly into your short‑term cash forecast and budget vs actuals in cash, so you can see how vendor terms interact with other post‑acquisition levers like capex and revenue‑to‑receipts work. This is your main input into internal approvals and IC decks.
Step 4: Execute Negotiations and Track Real Behaviour
Now move from modelling to action. Plan negotiation waves, starting with lower‑risk vendors to prove the approach. Enter discussions with a clear view of value for both sides, not just your own cash needs. For some suppliers, you might offer volume commitments, longer contracts, or access to better forecasting in exchange for extended terms. For others, early‑payment programs funded by external finance could make sense. Once new terms are agreed, track actual payment behaviour over the next few cycles using your AP calendar. Feed real outcomes back into the model, updating effective days‑payable and cash benefits. This closes the loop between unlisted asset management theory and practice.
Step 5: Institutionalise Gains and Communicate to Stakeholders
Finally, codify what worked. Update procurement policies, contract templates and approval workflows so new terms don’t quietly erode over time. Embed vendor segmentation and term targets into working capital dashboards and regular budget vs actuals reviews. For boards, investors and any supporting financial adviser, present the vendor term reset as a structured value‑creation initiative: upfront modelling, controlled execution, and measurable cash lift. At the portfolio level, compare results across unlisted assets and share playbooks where particular negotiation strategies worked well. Include these improvements in exit readiness packs, so buyers see a track record of disciplined cash management, not just opportunistic wins.
📈 Real-World Examples
A PE‑backed platform acquired a network of unlisted infrastructure assets with fragmented vendor bases and inconsistent terms. By building a consolidated vendor baseline and AP calendar, they found that over half of the spend was still on 30‑day terms despite the platform’s stronger credit profile. After segmenting vendors and modelling “before and after” scenarios, they executed a three‑wave negotiation program. Average effective days‑payable moved from 34 to 48, releasing several million dollars of working capital. Crucially, they avoided pushing too hard on vendors tied to key customers, mitigating customer concentration risk. The cash lift funded part of a capex program without additional debt, and the documented playbook became a highlight in the asset’s exit materials.
⚠️ Common Mistakes to Avoid
One mistake is treating vendor term resets as a one‑off squeeze rather than part of a structured unlisted asset management plan. That can damage relationships and backfire operationally. Another is failing to distinguish between contractual terms and actual payment behaviour; if you already pay late, “extending terms” on paper may deliver little real cash benefit. Some teams also ignore risk: pushing small, fragile vendors too far can disrupt supply chains and ultimately harm unlisted assets. Others celebrate the one‑off cash bump from the transition period without recognising it won’t repeat. Finally, many don’t tie improvements into budget vs actuals in cash, working capital metrics or funding choices such as vendor finance vs bank debt, so the strategic value is under‑reported.
🚀 Next Steps
Start with one acquired asset and build a clean vendor baseline: spend, terms, effective days‑payable, and criticality. Use AP calendar tools and working capital models to quantify what a 10-20‑day extension would mean for cash. Then design a small, controlled negotiation wave and model both transition and steady‑state effects in your short‑term cash and budget vs actuals views. As you prove success, roll out the approach across other unlisted assets and embed the vendor term strategy into your standard post‑acquisition playbook. Over time, vendor terms reset becomes not just a one‑off initiative, but a repeatable source of cash lift every time you acquire and integrate a new asset.
Back