Why Seller’s Remorse Is a Key Indicator in M&A Tech Due Diligence

When one tech company buys another, that shiny new asset package comes with more than just code and contracts. I’ve spent years assessing tech targets, and I’ve learned to look beyond the obvious. The real story? It’s often written in the team’s emotional relationship with their work. This isn’t soft stuff—it’s a critical indicator of risk and value.

The Hidden Value of Emotional Capital in Technical Assessments

I’ve sat across from engineers who treated their code like family heirlooms. One architect once told me his system was “like a child.” That kind of passion can be good—or it can be a warning sign.

Sure, check the financials. Check the market position. But don’t skip the tech team’s mindset. What they’ve built is just part of the story. The why behind it—their pride, their habits, their stubbornness—that’s where you find what might sink or save the deal.

Take that SaaS startup with the brilliant algorithm. Everything looked great on paper. Then I talked to the lead developer. He called it “my baby.” His voice cracked when he mentioned the acquisition. Attachment like that isn’t just emotional—it’s a flag. Is he proud of clean, well-documented code? Or is he clinging to something bloated, undocumented, and built for his ego, not the business?

The “Sentimental Tech Asset” Red Flag

Ever met a collector who sells a rare coin to buy a truck, then spends years regretting it? Tech teams do this too. They make choices that feel right in the moment but cost more later. Look for these signs:

<
• Legacy Code for Old Times’ Sake: That one-off system the founder built in 2012? Still running, even though it’s fragile and no one really knows how it works. No docs. No clear owner. Just a “we’ve always had this” vibe.

<

• The One-Person Show: There’s always that one engineer who “knows the whole thing.” They won’t write it down. Won’t train anyone. “I built this from nothing,” they say. That’s not ownership—it’s a single point of failure.

<

• Stuck in the Past: “We’ve always used this framework.” Why? Because it’s what they know. Not because it’s best. Not because it scales. Just because.

Here’s what I do: Map the team’s emotional investment. Find code that hasn’t been touched in years. Ask why. If the answer is “because [X] loves it,” stop. That’s not love—it’s a risk.

How to Conduct a Code Quality Audit with Emotional Intelligence

Most audits look at the code. They miss the people. But the people decide if the code will survive the acquisition.

1. Code Ownership Analysis

Don’t just look at the code. Look at who wrote it. Use Git history to make a heatmap:

<
• One person wrote 90% of a file? That’s a red flag.
• No recent changes to a file? It might be abandoned.
• Too many rewrites? It’s unstable.

git log --pretty=format:"%h %an %ad" --date=short --name-only | grep -E "(filename|extension)" | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr | head -20

One file rewritten 50 times by one person? That’s not maintenance. That’s a time bomb.

2. Documentation vs. “Nostalgia Debt”

Docs aren’t just for new hires. They’re a sign of team health. Ask: Are the docs a manual, or a eulogy?

• Clear diagrams? Or just “this is how I built it back then”?
• Runbooks for deployment, monitoring, and crashes?
• Records of big decisions and failures?

Missing docs? That’s not a gap. That’s nostalgia debt—the cost of keeping something alive just because it “feels right.”

3. Test Coverage and Refactoring Patterns

Tests are good. But who wrote them? If the only person who tests a module is its author, that’s a problem.

• No refactoring in two years? The code’s stale.
• Flaky tests? Commented out? That’s neglect.

“Trucks come and go, but your first serious system doesn’t.” – A collector’s wisdom, and a tech team’s cautionary tale.

Scalability Assessment: When “It Works” Isn’t Enough

I remember a fintech company. Their payment system “just worked,” they said. The CTO called it “the heart of the company.” Emotionally, not technically.

• No rate limits.
• No idempotency.
• No circuit breakers.

They scaled by adding more servers. We simulated 10x traffic. The system failed in 30 seconds. “But it’s always worked,” they said. That was the issue. It was a technical heirloom, not a product.

Actionable Scalability Checklist

• Architecture Diagrams: Do they show resilience? Retries? Queues?
• Load Tests: Are they recent? Realistic? Or just “we’ve never crashed”?
• Tech Debt Registry: Is there a list of known issues? With owners and deadlines?

Technology Risk Analysis: The Ego Quotient

Every codebase has an ego quotient—how much pride drives the tech, not data. High ego quotient? High risk.

1. “We Don’t Need That” Culture

“We don’t need alerts. We watch it.” “We grep the files.” “Everyone knows how it works.” That’s not efficiency. That’s anti-collaboration. It’s a sign the team refuses to adapt.

2. “Golden Path” Architecture

One “right” way to do things. Enforced by a few senior engineers. In one audit, every API had the same naming convention. The architect left after the deal. Nothing worked.

3. “We Built It Ourselves” Syndrome

Custom auth. Custom logging. Custom database. Not because it’s better. Because “we did it ourselves.” That’s not innovation. That’s technical vanity.

Green Lights: When Sentimentality Is an Asset

Not all attachment is bad. The best teams take pride in quality:

• They open-source their libraries. They share knowledge.
• They refactor code “because it’s cleaner,” not because it’s broken.
• They treat the system as a shared legacy, not a personal trophy.

One SaaS company I checked had a “museum” repo. Public. Full of deprecated systems. With stories and lessons. That’s not nostalgia. That’s technical maturity. They learned from their past.

Conclusion: The Emotional Due Diligence Framework

Here’s how I assess the emotional side of tech due diligence:

1. Map the Emotional Footprint: Find systems with high attachment, low docs, or one-person dependency.
2. Audit for “Nostalgia Debt”: Look for frozen code. Undocumented. Rewritten. By one person.
3. Stress Test the “Golden Path”: Ask: “What if the lead engineer leaves tomorrow?”
4. Reward Pride, Not Ego: Favor teams that share, document, and evolve. Not just those who “love” their code.

Seller’s remorse isn’t just about coins or cars. It’s a metaphor for legacy. The systems we hold onto. The decisions we regret. The code we’re proud of. They tell a story. In M&A, you’re buying that story. Because when the deal closes, you’re not just buying technology. You’re buying the emotional capital behind it. And that’s often the most valuable—and fragile—asset of all.

Related Resources

You might also find these related articles helpful:

• A CTO’s Post-Mortem on Sunk Costs, Strategic Regret, and What It Means for Tech Roadmaps – Introduction: The Emotional Cost of Strategic Trade-offs As a CTO, I’m constantly balancing business goals with te…
• How Your Regretted Coin Sale Codebase Can Power a Lucrative Expert Witness Career in Legal Tech – When software becomes evidence in court, lawyers need someone who speaks both code and courtroom. That’s where you…
• How I Turned ‘Post-Coin Seller’s Remorse’ Into a Technical Book: A Technical Author’s Journey with O’Reilly – Ever stared at an empty spot in your collection and thought: “Why did I sell that?” I have. That gut-punch f…