How a quantified licensing exposure, found before signing, was shifted into the warranty and indemnity package instead of landing on the buyer after close.
This software M&A case study shows how software exposure covered by warranty and indemnity protected a buyer, because the licensing risk was quantified before signing and shifted into the deal documents rather than inherited as a post close cost.
The composite is a corporate acquirer buying a mid sized software and services business with around 900 staff. The estate spanned Microsoft, Oracle and a sprawl of subscription tools accumulated through the target own earlier acquisitions. The deal was competitive and moving fast. The buyer wanted the asset but did not want to carry a licensing liability it could not see. The question was not only how big the exposure was, but where in the deal structure it should sit.
We quantified a combined licensing exposure across the estate driven by Oracle deployment above entitlement and a set of subscription tools the target was using beyond its contracted counts. The aggregate sat in the low single digit millions. Critically, we separated the exposure into what could be remediated cheaply before close and what was genuinely uncertain and better handled through the deal documents. That split is what let counsel structure the protection precisely.
| Exposure component | Indicative value | Treatment | Who bears it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oracle deployment gap | ~ USD 1.4m | Remediated before close | Reduced to minimum |
| Subscription overuse | ~ USD 0.6m | Specific indemnity | Seller, via escrow |
| Uncertain audit risk | Range | Warranty and indemnity cover | Insurer and seller |
| Total addressed | ~ USD 2m plus range | Mixed | Off buyer books |
We gave the deal team a quantified exposure they could hand to counsel and to the warranty and indemnity broker. The certain, remediable portion was fixed before close so it did not need to be insured. The uncertain portion, the audit risk that depends on how a publisher might interpret the estate, was the right candidate for warranty and indemnity cover and a specific indemnity. We provide the commercial quantification. The buyer counsel and broker handled the legal and insurance mechanics, which is the correct division of labour.
The remediable gap was closed before signing at a fraction of its gross value. The uncertain audit risk was covered by a specific indemnity backed by an escrow holdback and sat within the scope of the warranty and indemnity policy. The buyer closed the deal it wanted with the licensing liability shifted off its own books. If a publisher tests the estate after close, the cost falls to the seller and the insurer, not the acquirer.
The lesson for buyers is that warranty and indemnity is only as good as the diligence behind it. A policy written around a risk no one has quantified leaves gaps and exclusions that surface exactly when a claim is made. The buyer that brings a defensible software exposure number to the negotiation can shift the liability cleanly. The buyer that relies on a generic warranty often finds the audit risk was never really covered.
This starts with our software due diligence service. Understand the mechanism in the indemnity glossary entry and the representations and warranties glossary entry.
Tell us where the transaction stands. We respond within one business day with a confidential, scoped software M&A risk assessment.
Book a confidential call