Corviniti/Services/Going Public Advisory

Services / Capital Markets / Going Public

Going Public Advisory

Going public is a sequence of decisions before it is a transaction: which path, on what clock, in what structure, with which elections, built by which team. This page is the decision framework we run with founders and CFOs.

We put numbers and dates on each decision, path, timing, structure, elections, team, before you commit to any of them.

Or call (347) 472-1115

Ro Sokhi, CPA, founder of Corviniti, on going public advisory across IPO, SPAC, and direct listing paths
Ro Sokhi Founder and CEO, Corviniti
In the press
Overview

Going public advisory: the path, timing, structure, and elections

Key takeaways
  • What it is. The decision framework for going public: which path (IPO, SPAC, or direct listing), on what timeline, in what structure, with which EGC and SRC elections, built by which team, and how year one runs.
  • Where it breaks. The choices made early, structure, elections, auditor, and team, compound for years, and the SPAC path is hardest on companies that are not ready, because it looks the fastest.
  • How we help. We run the path decision with numbers, map every pre-filing structure move to its accounting, and sequence the readiness work so the window is usable when it opens.

Most going-public content explains process. The decisions come first: an IPO, a SPAC merger, and a direct listing produce the same outcome, a listed company, through very different mechanics, costs, and accounting workloads, and the choices made early (structure, elections, auditor, team) compound for years. Choosing well matters more than executing fast.

This page walks the six decisions in the order they arrive, with how we advise on each. The gap-closing work that readiness requires lives on our IPO readiness page, and the document build on Form S-1 preparation; SPAC-specific mechanics are on the SPACs page. Here we decide; there we execute.

The path decision

The three paths compared: IPO, SPAC, and direct listing

The paths get sold, not compared. A traditional IPO offers underwritten price discovery through a bookbuild, raises primary capital, carries the standard lockup and the broadest investor validation, and runs a heavy but sequenced accounting load on your own clock. A SPAC merger gives a negotiated valuation and a contractual closing date, but adds redemption risk against the trust, sponsor promote and warrant dilution, and the harshest accounting calendar: PCAOB uplift, the S-4, and the Super 8-K compressed inside the deal timeline, with a first year of public reporting the target must be ready for at signing. A direct listing sets the price in an opening auction with no bookbuild and no lockup convention; primary direct listings are now allowed but remain rare, and the registration and readiness work is undiminished, only the marketing machinery goes away. Direct listings fit two very different profiles: brand-name companies that do not need primary capital, and microcaps that use a resale listing to avoid the exchange capital-raise minimum, a route Nasdaq has been restricting. Decide on capital need, valuation certainty versus discovery, timeline control, and readiness, because the SPAC path punishes unready companies hardest precisely because it looks the fastest.

The three paths to a public listing compared across eight axes. Price and valuation: a traditional IPO uses underwritten discovery via a bookbuild; a SPAC merger is negotiated with the sponsor, then carries redemption risk; a direct listing uses opening-auction discovery with no bookbuild. Primary capital: the IPO offering raises it; the SPAC provides it from the trust net of redemptions; a direct listing traditionally raises none, though primary direct listings are now allowed but rare. Extra dilution: underwriting fees for the IPO; sponsor promote and warrants for the SPAC; minimal for a direct listing. Lockup: standard 180 days for the IPO; negotiated for the SPAC; no lockup convention for a direct listing. Calendar pressure: heavy but on your clock for the IPO; harshest for the SPAC, with a fixed close, the S-4, and the Super 8-K; full registration with no roadshow for a direct listing. Investor validation: broadest via the roadshow for the IPO; narrower for the SPAC; market-set at the open for a direct listing. Accounting workload: heavy and sequenced for the IPO; the same or greater and compressed for the SPAC; the same S-1 and PCAOB work for a direct listing. Who it fits: most companies raising capital for the IPO; ready companies wanting valuation certainty for the SPAC; for a direct listing, brand-name companies that do not need primary capital, or microcaps using a resale listing to avoid the exchange capital-raise minimum, a route Nasdaq has been restricting.
The paths to a public listing, compared. Illustrative.
Pre-filing structure

Pre-filing structure moves and their accounting

The months before filing are when structure gets rewritten, and each move has an accounting consequence that lands in the S-1. A holding-company reorganization under a new public parent is typically a common-control transaction (ASC 805-50): carried over at historical amounts, no purchase accounting, presented as if the entities had always been combined. An Up-C structure puts the public company atop a partnership and brings noncontrolling-interest presentation; when pre-IPO owners exchange their units for shares, the public company records a step-up in tax basis and a deferred tax asset, and a tax receivable agreement, a liability for the customary 85% of those tax benefits shared back to the pre-IPO owners, a negotiated split rather than a rule, with the remaining 15% recorded in equity and the liability remeasured over time. Preferred stock conversion at the IPO resolves the temporary-equity (mezzanine) presentation and simplifies the cap table the prospectus describes. And the stock split set for pricing restates share counts and EPS retroactively across every period presented, the F-pages included, under ASC 260. Deliver the memo per step before counsel papers it, so the structure section of the S-1 describes decisions the accounting already supports.

Pre-filing structure moves and their accounting consequence in the S-1. Holding-company reorganization, entities rolled under a new public parent: a common-control transaction under ASC 805-50, carryover at historical amounts, no purchase accounting, presented as if always combined. Up-C with a tax receivable agreement, the public company atop a partnership with pre-IPO owners holding units: noncontrolling-interest presentation, a deferred tax asset from the basis step-up on exchanges, and a TRA liability for the customary 85% of the tax benefits shared back to pre-IPO owners (a negotiated split, not a rule), with the remaining 15% recorded in equity and the liability remeasured over time. Preferred stock conversion, preferred converts at the IPO: resolves the temporary-equity or mezzanine presentation and simplifies the cap table the prospectus describes. Stock split for pricing, a split sets a printable offer price: restates share counts and EPS retroactively across every period presented, the F-pages included, under ASC 260.
Pre-filing structure and its financial-statement effects. Illustrative.
EGC and SRC elections

EGC and SRC reliefs, and who qualifies

Two statuses carry scaled-disclosure reliefs, and the first question is who qualifies. An emerging growth company (EGC) has revenue under $1.235 billion, is within five years of its IPO, has under $1 billion of non-convertible debt over three years, and is not a large accelerated filer; the status lasts up to five years. A smaller reporting company (SRC) has a public float under $250 million, or revenue under $100 million with a public float under $700 million (or no public float). The EGC reliefs: two years of audited financial statements in the IPO instead of three; no auditor attestation on internal control under 404(b) for up to five years, though management still reports under 404(a) and non-accelerated filers are also exempt; no critical audit matters, which is an auditor requirement rather than a management election; reduced executive compensation disclosure; and the transition for new accounting standards, where new standards may be adopted on private-company effective dates and the election to decline is irrevocable. The SRC adds scaled Regulation S-X and S-K disclosure. EGC status ends by revenue, calendar, or float, whichever comes first.

Emerging growth company and smaller reporting company reliefs, and who qualifies for each. An emerging growth company (EGC) has revenue under $1.235 billion, is within five years of its IPO, has under $1 billion of non-convertible debt over three years, and is not a large accelerated filer; the status lasts up to five years. A smaller reporting company (SRC) has a public float under $250 million, or revenue under $100 million with a public float under $700 million, or no public float. Reliefs and who they apply to: two years of audited financial statements instead of three (EGC); the ICFR auditor attestation under 404(b), where management still reports under 404(a) and the auditor does not attest, for EGCs up to five years and for non-accelerated filers; critical audit matters, where the auditor is not required to communicate CAMs, an auditor requirement and not a management election (EGC); reduced executive compensation disclosure, including no pay-versus-performance, pay-ratio, or say-on-pay (EGC and SRC); the transition for new accounting standards, which may be adopted on private-company effective dates with the election to decline irrevocable (EGC); and scaled financial and narrative disclosure under Regulation S-X and S-K (SRC).
EGC and SRC reliefs and who qualifies. Illustrative.

This is for you if

  • Bankers and sponsors are pitching paths and you want the comparison from someone not selling one.
  • A window is forming and you need to know if your clocks can meet it.
  • A reorganization, Up-C, or split is being drafted without the accounting memos.
  • The board asked what being public will actually cost, and the honest number does not exist yet.

What you get

  • The path comparison IPO, SPAC, and direct listing tradeoffs run against your profile, with the accounting workload priced per path.
  • The backward timeline Gating items scoped, staleness calendar mapped, and a filing-ready date you can hold against any window.
  • Structure and election memos Common control, Up-C and TRA, split mechanics, and the EGC elections decided line by line.
  • The team and year-one plan The honest cost base, the hiring sequence, and the four-quarter plan that starts before the bell.
How We Help

What we deliver

On a going-public engagement, you get each decision quantified before you commit to it.

The path comparisonIPO, SPAC, and direct listing tradeoffs run against your profile, with the accounting workload priced per path.
The backward timelineGating items scoped, staleness calendar mapped, and a filing-ready date you can hold against any window.
Structure and election memosCommon control, Up-C and TRA, split mechanics, and the EGC elections decided line by line.
The team and year-one planThe honest cost base, the hiring sequence, and the four-quarter plan that starts before the bell.

When companies bring us in

  • Bankers and sponsors are pitching paths and you want the comparison from someone not selling one.
  • A window is forming and you need to know if your clocks can meet it.
  • A reorganization, Up-C, or split is being drafted without the accounting memos.
  • The board asked what being public will actually cost, and the honest number does not exist yet.
Our Experience

Where we have done this work

Engagement Notes

Three paths, advised by one team

Path and readiness advisory across the full range of routes: a digital advertising platform through a traditional IPO, a streaming television company through a reverse merger onto the public markets, and a pre-revenue small modular reactor company through a SPAC combination, each with the path tradeoffs quantified before the bankers' decks arrived, and the accounting calendar built backward from the chosen route.

Engagement Notes

Decisions papered before they compounded

Structure and election advisory in the pre-filing window: common control memos for holding-company reorganizations, TRA liability mechanics modeled before the Up-C was signed, retroactive EPS handled at the split decision rather than the printer, and EGC elections decided line by line with the analyst audience in mind.

The Detail

The gaps, and how we close each one

Decision 01

Which path: the honest comparisonIPO / SPAC / Direct

The paths get sold, not compared: bankers pitch IPOs, sponsors pitch SPACs, and direct listings get invoked by companies that mostly are not candidates. Each is right for a specific profile, and the accounting workload, often the deciding constraint, differs sharply by path.

How to decide

Compare on five axes. Traditional IPO: underwritten price discovery and marketing, the fullest process (comfort letters, lockups, roadshow), the S-1 build on your own clock, and the broadest investor validation; the accounting load is heavy but sequenced. SPAC merger: a negotiated valuation and a contractual closing date, but redemption risk against the trust, the sponsor promote and warrant dilution priced in, and the harshest accounting calendar, PCAOB uplift, S-4, and the Super 8-K compressed inside deal timelines, plus a first year of public reporting the target must be ready for at signing, not closing. Direct listing: no underwritten offering, no lockup convention, real only for companies with brand recognition and, historically, no need for primary capital (primary direct listings exist but remain rare); the registration and readiness work is undiminished, only the marketing machinery goes away. Decide on capital need, valuation certainty versus discovery, timeline control, and, honestly, readiness: the SPAC path punishes unready companies hardest precisely because it looks fastest.

What we do: We quantify the tradeoffs across IPO, SPAC, and direct listing for your specific profile, before the pitch decks frame them.

Decision 02

When to go: readiness clocks versus market windowsTiming

Companies time listings to market windows they cannot control and neglect the clocks they can: the audit uplift, the financial statement periods, and the organizational build all have fixed durations, and a window is only usable by a company that finished them before it opened.

How to decide

Build the timeline backward from a target window with the gating items on top: the PCAOB audit uplift or re-audit is almost always the longest pole (scope it first, per our PCAOB page); the staleness calendar dictates which fiscal periods your filing rides on and when each amendment must refresh; and the readiness workstreams, positions, controls, tax, close, run twelve to eighteen months for most companies. Then hold the discipline the market rewards: be filing-ready and window-agnostic, meaning the confidential draft is submitted, comments are being cleared, and the company can accelerate to a roadshow inside weeks when conditions align, rather than starting the build when the window opens and arriving as it closes. Two boring metrics predict readiness better than any banker deck: how many days your close takes, and whether the last two quarters would have survived a 10-Q deadline. When both answers are good, timing becomes a choice.

What we do: We build the backward timeline off the audit uplift and staleness calendar, and get you filing-ready and window-agnostic.

Decision 03

Structure before the filing: reorganizations, Up-C, and the cap table resetStructure

The months before filing are when structure gets rewritten: entities reorganized under a new public parent, Up-C structures with tax receivable agreements, preferred stock converting, and the stock split that makes the offering price printable. Each move has accounting consequences that land in the S-1.

How to decide

Map every step to its accounting before counsel papers it. A pre-IPO reorganization under a new holding company is typically a common control transaction: carried over at historical amounts, often presented as if it had always existed, with no purchase accounting, a conclusion to document, not assume. Up-C structures put the public company atop a partnership: expect noncontrolling interest presentation, exchange mechanics, and a tax receivable agreement that books a liability for most of the tax benefits shared back to pre-IPO holders, with remeasurements that surprise boards later. Preferred conversion at the IPO resolves the temporary-equity presentation and simplifies the cap table the prospectus describes, and the stock split set for pricing restates share counts and EPS retroactively across every period presented, F-pages included, a mechanical scramble when decided late. We sit with counsel on the step plan and deliver the memo per step, so the structure section of the S-1 describes decisions the accounting already supports.

What we do: We memo every reorganization step, common control, TRA, split mechanics, before counsel papers it.

Weighing the paths right now? Talk to us before the pitch decks frame the decision.

Talk to an Expert
Decision 04

EGC and smaller reporting company status: which relief to takeEGC / SRC

Most new issuers qualify as emerging growth companies, and many as smaller reporting companies. Each relief is a separate election: some save real money, some cost credibility with investors, and one is a bet on your own growth curve that expires on a schedule.

How to decide

EGC status (revenue below roughly $1.2 billion, lasting up to five years post-IPO unless outgrown) offers: two years of audited financials in the IPO instead of three (take it; the third year rarely prices the deal), no 404(b) auditor attestation during the window (take it, but build controls anyway, because the exemption expires and a material weakness must be disclosed either way), exemption from CAMs and reduced compensation disclosure (take them), and the extended transition for new accounting standards, the one to think hardest about: adopting on private-company timelines saves effort but breaks comparability with public peers, and sophisticated investors notice; opting out is irrevocable, so the election is a real decision, made standard by standard where allowed. SRC status layers scaled disclosure on top for companies under the float and revenue thresholds. The principle across the reliefs: take the ones that reduce cost without reducing comparability on the metrics investors actually model, and plan the exit from each relief before you take it, because EGC status ends by calendar, by revenue, or by float, whichever arrives first.

What we do: We decide the EGC and SRC elections line by line, with the exit from each relief planned before it is taken.

From our engagements: The election we most often reverse for clients is the extended accounting-standard transition, taken by default at IPO and regretted when every comparable company is on the new standard and the analysts have to footnote you. A default taken without analysis is not a decision.
Decision 05

The team and the cost base: what public actually costsTeam & Cost

Going-public budgets capture the transaction and miss the transformation: the recurring cost of being public, audit fees at PCAOB rates, directors and officers insurance, the reporting and controls staff, systems, exceeds most private-company estimates by a multiple, and understaffing it is how first years go wrong.

How to decide

Budget the recurring base honestly and build the team in sequence. The recurring lines: the PCAOB audit at a meaningful premium to the private audit, public-company D&O insurance (routinely the sticker shock of the process), the SOX program, listing and filing infrastructure (exchange fees, XBRL, transfer agent, EDGAR), and investor relations. The hiring sequence that works: an SEC reporting lead first (twelve or more months before filing, because the S-1 and the first 10-Qs are theirs), technical accounting capability next (hired or, commonly, outsourced to a firm like ours), then the controls owner as the SOX build starts, with the controller function upgraded in parallel. The advisor lineup, auditor, counsel, bankers, and the company-side accounting advisor, gets engaged in that order, auditor first because the uplift gates everything. The honest total for a mid-cap first year as a public company runs well into seven figures before the first day of trading; companies that budget it plan, and companies that discover it cut the wrong corners.

What we do: We budget the recurring public-company cost base honestly and sequence the hires and advisors in the order that works.

Decision 06

Year one as a registrant: planning the first four quartersYear One

The listing is only the start. Year one brings four quarterly cycles, a first 10-K materially heavier than the S-1, a first proxy season, and the guidance question, all executed by a team that just finished a transaction sprint.

How to decide

Plan the four quarters before pricing: the first 10-Q lands weeks after listing (the mechanics live on our capital markets page), and each subsequent quarter should get measurably cheaper as the close hardens. The first 10-K is a bigger lift than teams expect, the S-1 gave you a head start on maybe half of it, and the controls reporting, the full S-K item set, and the first annual disclosure-committee cycle are new. The first proxy introduces compensation disclosure and shareholder mechanics on their own calendar. Decide the guidance policy deliberately: what metrics, what horizon, or none, because the policy you start with is the one you will be measured against, and withdrawing guidance later is itself news. And schedule the relief expirations: the 404(b) date, the EGC sunset, the SRC retest, each a project with a start date, not a surprise. We stay through year one on most going-public engagements precisely because the reporting obligations continue after the transaction closes.

What we do: We plan the four quarters, the first 10-K delta, and the guidance policy before pricing, and stay through year one.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Is a SPAC really faster than an IPO?

The signing-to-listing window is shorter, but the accounting work is the same or greater and arrives compressed: PCAOB uplift, S-4, Super 8-K, and immediate public reporting. For a ready company, yes, somewhat faster; for an unready one, the fixed closing date turns every delay into deal risk. Readiness, not path, sets your real speed.

Do we qualify for a direct listing?

Structurally, most companies can register one; practically, the path suits companies with strong brand recognition, existing shareholder liquidity needs, and limited need for primary capital in the offering. Without the built-in demand a bookbuild creates, the profile matters more than the mechanics.

Which EGC reliefs should we actually take?

Two years of financials, the 404(b) deferral, reduced compensation disclosure, and the CAM exemption are usually clean takes. The extended accounting-standard transition is the contested one: it trades effort for comparability, and we decide it standard by standard with your investor audience in mind.

When should we start, honestly?

Eighteen to twenty-four months before the window you want, driven by the audit uplift and the close-process build. The cheap first step is a readiness assessment and the uplift-versus-re-audit scoping; both convert the question from 'when' to a dated plan.

Can you advise us and also do the readiness and reporting work?

Yes, that is the normal shape: the decision framework on this page, the gap-closing on the readiness side, the S-1 financial content, and reporting through year one, one team across the arc, alongside your auditors and counsel, never in their independence-restricted seats.

Sources & authorities

Primary sources for this page

  • Emerging growth companies. Securities Act Section 2(a)(19) and the JOBS Act: the EGC definition and its reliefs.
  • Smaller reporting companies. Exchange Act Rule 12b-2: the public-float and revenue thresholds for scaled disclosure.
  • Auditor attestation. SOX Section 404(b): the attestation an EGC is exempt from for up to five years.
  • Primary direct listings. SEC statement on primary direct listings (December 2020): capital raised in the opening auction without a traditional underwritten offering.
  • Common-control transactions. ASC 805-50: carryover basis and retrospective presentation for a holding-company reorganization.
  • Earnings per share. ASC 260: retroactive restatement of share counts and EPS for a stock split across every period presented.

This page summarizes SEC rules and staff guidance for general information, and is not accounting or legal advice. Rules change; confirm the current text before you rely on it.

Contact Us

Contact Us to Learn More

Call: (347) 472-1115
Email: info@corviniti.com

The best way to get started is to complete the form below. Tell us a bit about your business and we will advise on how best to get started.

We will get back to you within 24 hours.

Ro Sokhi, CPA
Ro Sokhi, CPA
Founder & CEO · Big Four experience · 20+ years

We will get back to you within 24 hours.