Jad Kiwan

💰Sold 100+ ecom brands @ecomswap

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

We have sold over 100 Ecom brands.

Ask me anything on exits.

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

@shadox_a @cramptologue_ @ecomswap Yessir🦾

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

Dr. Squatch sold to Unilever for up to $1.5B.

Here's how a guy making soap at farmer's markets built a $400M brand that a $60B consumer giant had to own.

The numbers:

Grew revenue 20x in 2 years, from $5M to $100M, purely through DTC and viral content
Scaled further from $100M to $400M before the exit
85% DTC, 15% retail
Acquired by Unilever at roughly 17x EBITDA

Now here's what actually built it:

1.⁠ ⁠They made soap addictive
Monthly consumable. Natural reorder cycle. No chasing customers. On a brand scaling this aggressively, 20-30% of revenue coming from subscriptions is rare. That's $80-120M (Estimation) in predictable annual revenue before they ever had to acquire a new customer.

2.⁠ ⁠Their ads were a cheat code
They ran ads that cost 83% less than the industry average. They weren't just viral, they were efficient. Most brands burn cash as they scale. These guys got cheaper.

3.⁠ ⁠They stayed 85% direct on purpose
$340M out of $400M coming straight through their own channels. Unilever didn't just buy a brand. They bought a customer list, a subscription base, and a data machine.

4.⁠ ⁠Bundles 5x'd their order value
They didn't just sell soap. They sold kits, bundles, full grooming routines. One transaction, multiple products, one customer acquisition cost.

5.⁠ ⁠Retail was the multiplier, not the foundation
They only went to Walmart after the brand had pull. 1,600 stores, but DTC was already doing the heavy lifting. Retail became upside, not survival.

Unilever didn't buy Dr. Squatch because it was a nice brand.

They bought it because it was taking enough market share from their legacy portfolio that ignoring it was no longer an option.

That's what triggers a strategic acquisition at a premium multiple. Not just growth. Disruption that threatens something much bigger.

Build a brand that becomes someone else's problem. The exit follows.

[Ecomswap @ecomswap]

Why revenue alone no longer wins e-commerce deals.

Two e-commerce brands can both generate $1M in EBITDA - and still sell for completely different numbers.

One struggles to clear 3x.

The other gets bid up above 5x.

Same category.
Same platform.
Sometimes similar revenue.

The difference is usually operational risk.

Buyers are paying premiums for businesses that feel transferable after the founder exits.

Not founder-run ad accounts.
Not supplier relationships buried in WhatsApp chats.
Not businesses where one Meta CPM spike wipes out margin.

The businesses attracting the strongest buyer demand right now tend to look operationally boring:

Stable margins.
Diversified acquisition channels.
Documented systems.
Low founder dependency.

That’s what creates confidence during diligence.

And confidence is what expands multiples.

👉Browse live e-commerce acquisition opportunities currently attracting active buyer interest: https://t.co/5wdHcRsrUU

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

A lot of founders see raising capital as the key to taking their e-commerce brand to the next level.

What many don’t realize is that it also changes the type of business you’re building.

You often go from building a cash-flowing, lifestyle business to building a long-term growth company with outside expectations attached to it.

That means:
•more pressure to scale revenue at the expense of lower EBITDA margins
•bigger inventory and ad spend bets
•less flexibility
•higher exit expectations

An exit that would be life-changing for a bootstrapped founder may not be enough once investors are involved.

Capital can accelerate growth, but it puts you on a very different road that is a lot more long term.

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

Your job as an ecom brand owner is to hire people smarter than you then give them clear guidance, SOPs, KPIs and support.

Not to spend 90% of your time on media buying, funnels and creatives.

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

I have heard countless ecom founders tell me:
"We only run Meta ads, there is a huge upside for the buyer to test other channels!"

That's a red flag, not a selling point.

Single-channel dependency = single point of failure. If the algorithm shifts or CPMs spike, or anything happens to it your business dies with it.

Buyers pay for proof, not potential. Not testing another channel does not give any guarantee that that other channel will work.

Test early, diversify acquisition, or your valuation will get affected by this.

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

Everlane raised $193M from investors and sold for $100M.
Investors lost money. Founders got nothing. Lenders got paid first. This is what a failed exit looks like.

A "radical transparency" DTC brand ends up owned by SHEIN, the fast fashion giant that's the opposite of everything they stood for.

The numbers

$193M raised over 10 rounds

2016 valuation: $250M

2020: L Catterton at $550M valuation (projected $500M revenue)

Actual 2022 revenue: $170M

Sept 2022: $65M credit line

Nov 2022: $25M from Gordon Brothers

2025: Sold for $100M

What killed it

SKU explosion Everlane ran 1,000+ SKUs across dozens of categories by 2020. That's insane for a DTC brand doing sub-$200M revenue.

More SKUs = fragmented inventory, higher holding costs, worse unit economics. They weren't Zara. They couldn't move product fast enough to justify the breadth.

Margin compression Apparel already runs 5-15% net margins on a good day. Add in: rising CAC (iOS 14), logistics costs up 30-40% post-COVID, and returns averaging 25-30% in apparel. The model broke.

Revenue miss crushed trust Pitched $500M to L Catterton. Delivered $170M. That gap doesn't get forgiven.

Gordon Brothers showed up When you're raising debt from a lender of last resort, it's over. No VC, no bank, no one else would touch them by late 2022.

Capital markets froze DTC apparel funding dried up in 2022. Everlane needed cash to survive. There was none.

The exit

Lenders got paid first. Preferred took a beating. Common equity walked away with nothing.

The lesson

DTC apparel is brutal.

Thin margins + high CAC + inventory risk + SKU complexity = almost no room for error.

Everlane made every mistake: over-expanded the catalog, missed projections, raised expensive debt, and ran out of runway when the market turned.

This is what happens when you can't grow into your valuation.

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

Tb to a nice day in the desert

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

A lot of founders exit because they have to sell not because they want to.

Don’t be that guy.

Don’t wait for your number to tank to go to market, you will lose almost all of your leverage and exit for pennies on the dollar.

There is no right time to exit as things could always scale up the same way the could scale down.

The most successful exits are founders that set certain goals and KPIs for what they want out to achieve out of their brand and aim towards a number they would be happy with and actually exit when they reach it.

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

The SaaS gold rush may be reaching it's peak.

SaaS businesses were always known for commanding high multiples.

That’s what led a lot of founders to build software with the vision of exiting.

But AI is changing the equation.

What used to take years of development, large engineering teams, and $$$ in R&D can now be replicated incredibly fast with minimal capital through AI.

The moat is no longer just the product.

It’s the brand, the distribution, the community, the data, and the user retention.

Investors know this.

And a lot of capital is starting to shift towards other models. Notably, DTC brands with strong distribution that are building a real brand, loyal customer base, strong distribution, and operational infrastructure.

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

@noahismailanji 🤕

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

💀

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

The multiple a buyer is willing to pay is directly correlated to the risk associated with your brand.

Higher risk = lower valuation.

These KPIs are what acquirers measure.

Most founders try to increase revenue.

The best founders reduce risk and show upside.

That is what buyers pay for.

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

I've sold 100+ DTC brands.

Here are 10 optimizations that can directly increase your valuation by 30%+ and exactly how to fix them 👇

[Jad Kiwan @ecom_jad]

8/ IP and Moat
No moat = replaceable.

How to fix it:

Develop unique formulations or exclusive supplier relationships
Build a strong brand identity, not generic dropshipping Secure trademarks where possible Develop new SKUs early
Listen to your customers. Understand what pain points pushed them to buy. Use that data to develop new versions of your SKU and expand your product line.

A patent gives you the highest moat but it can be as simple as launching new color-ways or reformulating a supplement based on what customers are actually telling you.

Building toward the perfect product should always be the goal. As you scale that priority should only grow. It is how you outcompete everyone else in the space.

Innovate a product and positioning that competitors cannot copy and angles that only you have.