Brendan Duebner·May 7, 2026

Buying Small to Build for the Long Term ($300k SDE) | Brendan Duebner Interview

Brendan Duebner is a Bay Area native and Army veteran who searched self-funded for roughly two years before acquiring IT Total Care, a 24-year-old managed service provider (MSP) in Foster City, California, in March 2025. The business had ~$1.15m in revenue and ~$300k SDE at close, but had been slowly declining ~5%/year as the founder (Tony Maros) became semi-absentee. Brendan structured the deal with ~85% seller financing on generous 10-12 year, 5% terms, no SBA loan, no personal guarantee, and ~$175k working capital left in the business — making the effective net purchase price quite low relative to risk. He worked inside the business pre-close to build team rapport and validate fit, then immediately attacked the lack of sales and marketing, growing revenue 25% and EBITDA 40% in his first ~9.5 months by absorbing excess engineer capacity. Brendan's defining philosophy is the 'sailboat vs. cruise liner' model: intentionally buying small so he can learn the business intimately, compound over a 30-year horizon, and build a 20-40-person 'tribe' — prioritizing meaningful work and relationships over a fast exit. He implemented EOS himself, is acting as the sole salesperson, and is moving the team to in-person work to build culture — consciously going against the MSP industry trend of offshoring.

Deal facts

purchase price: ~$615k (including ~$100k assumed lease liabilities)
multiple: ~2x SDE (on $300k SDE); ~4x EBITDA (on $150k EBITDA) before working capital credit
sde ebitda: SDE ~$300k; EBITDA ~$150k
revenue: ~$1.15m (2024)
financing structure: ~85% seller note (10-12 year term, 5% interest, straight-line amortization) + ~15% buyer equity; no SBA loan; no personal guarantee; ~$175k cash left in business as working capital; stock deal
notes: Business had peaked at $1.4-1.5m revenue and declined ~5%/year for 3-4 years before acquisition. Closed March 2025. Tony Maros (seller/founder) retained no equity; had been semi-absentee. 80-90% recurring revenue; top customer ~10% of revenue. Team of Tony + 4 at close.

Why this business

Brendan was drawn to the long-term hold model — not a buy-and-flip — and reoriented his search toward smaller, overlooked businesses where he could compound value over a 30-year career. IT Total Care appealed because of its sticky recurring revenue (80-90%), long-tenured employees, and an absentee owner who had clearly been a good steward (overpaying staff). Despite being a declining business with thin EBITDA, Brendan believed a one-for-one owner swap plus adding sales and marketing discipline would be enough to stabilize and grow it. He also wanted a business he could run intimately as an owner-operator — what he called the 'sailboat vs. cruise liner' model — in his home Bay Area market.

What's working

Revenue grew ~25% in the first ~9.5 months of ownership (2025); EBITDA grew ~40% in the same period, driven largely by absorbing existing excess capacity
Sales and marketing effort led by Brendan personally (partnerships, outreach) reversed multi-year revenue decline
Long-tenured, overpaid-at-market staff provided stability and goodwill post-close — no employee departures
Self-implemented EOS (Entrepreneurial Operating System) within the first year, establishing leadership cadence, goal alignment, and meeting rhythms
Seller Tony Maros credibly backed Brendan with the team, accelerating trust-building despite Brendan having zero IT background
Recurring revenue model (80-90% contracted) provided resilience — slow revenue decline even with zero sales effort under prior owner
Working in the business pre-close gave Brendan deep insight into operations and allowed employees to vet him before the deal closed
Targeting 'high service' MSP positioning as technology partner (not just IT support), aiming to help clients with AI and full tech-stack management

What's hard

Business was declining ~5% per year and had very thin EBITDA margins (~13%) — required accepting a high-risk deal structure to make economics work
Team of four engineers meant loss of even one person could collapse revenue — 25% revenue concentration per person
Brendan has no IT background and had to earn credibility with a skeptical technical team
Still no real work-life balance a year in — operating under a 'one less day off' rule; not sustainable long-term
Bay Area hiring is difficult: competing with big tech for local talent, while choosing an all-local in-person team model that limits the talent pool
Excess capacity gains (the 40% EBITDA growth) are not repeatable year-over-year — growth will be harder to sustain
Transitioning team from fully remote (COVID era) to more in-office is a culture change requiring careful management

Notable quotes

I really believe, you know, Tony is not that involved in the day-to-day anymore. But the business had only been shrinking slowly despite adding zero new customers for multiple years. Like something is going right. And I figured, look, even if me and Tony are just a one-for-one swap, like I think even though I know nothing about the IT industry, I think I can add enough value where this will make sense.

My personal thought is — we are still designed to live like we did thousands and thousands of years ago, in small teams, small societies, egalitarian societies where everybody has to work together. And that is what really produces the most meaningful life. I selfishly think my life would be much better working building a company of somewhere between 20 and 40 people and trying to make the best possible thing that I can make for all of us.

One of the things I tried to diligence and that I would definitely recommend people try to diligence is: are you buying from a good person? Because inevitably when you're buying a small business, the seller is going to know infinitely more about that business than you will ever be able to figure out during diligence. If they want to hide something from you, they can and they will.

I think that when you're building to sell, you're going to make decisions that are very different than if your thought process is just: I'm trying to make this business as good as humanly possible. Like what do I need to do to make that happen? I think that'll cause a million different decisions that'll just take things in very different directions.