Wealth Management After a Business Sale - Preparing for the Check You've Never Had

You’ve spent years building a business worth seven or eight figures. You’ve negotiated a fair deal, survived due diligence, and you’re weeks from closing. But here’s what keeps experienced exit advisors up at night: the decisions you make in the sixty to ninety days after receiving that wire transfer carry uniquely important consequences. Not necessarily more consequential than the major decisions that built your business, but uniquely important because they’re often irreversible, made during emotional transition, and affect a long time horizon.

Executive Summary

Most business owners invest years preparing their companies for sale but allocate almost no time preparing themselves to manage the resulting wealth. This sequencing error creates predictable challenges that we’ve observed in our advisory practice. Newly liquid sellers face unfamiliar decisions about asset allocation, tax optimization, estate planning, and advisor selection, often while experiencing the emotional disorientation that accompanies major life transitions.

In our limited experience advising business sellers, we’ve observed certain patterns among those who struggle post-exit. We should be transparent about our sample: our observations come from working with owners of companies valued between $5 million and $50 million who sought professional guidance. This sample likely differs from all business sellers: those who manage transitions successfully without extensive advisory support aren’t represented in our experience. The patterns we describe may reflect correlation rather than causation, and sophisticated sellers with strong financial backgrounds may navigate these challenges independently.

This article provides a framework for wealth management planning that begins before transaction closing. We examine the psychological and practical challenges facing newly liquid business sellers, identify common post-exit financial mistakes we’ve witnessed, and outline a structured approach to building an advisory team and making sound decisions about significant proceeds. The goal is not to make you an investment expert, but to help you approach post-exit wealth management with appropriate preparation. Good preparation improves decision quality but doesn’t guarantee outcomes. Market conditions, advisor quality, and unforeseen events still create significant variance in results.

Introduction

The wire transfer notification arrives. After years of work, months of negotiation, and weeks of closing anxiety, you’re staring at a bank balance larger than any number you’ve previously associated with your personal finances. You’ve just joined a small club: business owners who successfully converted illiquid equity into liquid wealth.

What happens next matters enormously.

In our advisory practice, we’ve noticed that owners who approach wealth management with advance preparation appear to navigate this period more successfully, while those who assume they’ll “figure it out after closing” seem more frequently to make expensive mistakes. But we should acknowledge this observation may reflect selection bias: owners who plan ahead may differ from those who don’t in ways beyond the planning itself, such as financial sophistication, deal size, or access to quality advisors.

The challenge is that wealth management for newly liquid sellers differs fundamentally from both business financial management and traditional investment advisory relationships. You’re not managing operating cash flow or making capital allocation decisions within a business you understand intimately. You’re also not a typical high-net-worth individual who accumulated wealth gradually and learned investment lessons incrementally.

You’re something else: someone navigating what researchers have termed the psychological adjustment to sudden wealth. A 2001 study by Goldbart, Jaffe, and DiFuria on “sudden wealth syndrome” found that lottery winners and others experiencing rapid wealth accumulation reported higher rates of anxiety, guilt, and identity confusion. While business sellers differ from lottery winners in important ways (you earned your liquidity through years of effort), the psychological challenges of managing unfamiliar wealth levels appear similar.

This combination of unfamiliar territory, high stakes, and emotional vulnerability creates conditions favorable to poor decision-making. The antidote is preparation that begins before closing, not after.

Important context: The advice in this article applies differently based on your specific situation. A software founder selling to a strategic acquirer faces different challenges than a manufacturing owner selling to a private equity firm or a services business owner transitioning to family members. Similarly, a $5 million exit requires different advisory structures than a $50 million exit. Some sophisticated sellers with strong investment backgrounds may need minimal external support, while others benefit from comprehensive advisory teams. We’ll note these variations throughout, but you should filter all recommendations through your specific circumstances and honest self-assessment of your financial expertise.

The Unique Psychology of Sudden Liquidity

Understanding why newly liquid sellers sometimes make predictable mistakes requires examining the psychological dynamics at play. These observations come from our work with sellers and conversations with wealth management professionals. They represent practitioner experience that aligns with behavioral finance literature, though we cannot claim our sample represents all sellers.

The Competence Trap

Successful business owners develop justified confidence in their decision-making abilities. You’ve made thousands of business decisions, many involving significant capital, and the results speak for themselves. This track record creates a reasonable assumption: you’ll apply the same judgment to managing personal wealth.

The challenge is that business financial decisions and personal wealth management require different competencies. Your business expertise (industry knowledge, operational intuition, customer insight) doesn’t directly transfer to investment management, tax optimization, or estate planning. But the confidence often does.

We’ve observed owners who would never attempt their own complex litigation or specialized surgery decide they can manage eight-figure portfolios based on reading a few books and watching market commentary. Some sellers bring business decision-making confidence into wealth management successfully, particularly if they have genuine investment experience or strong analytical backgrounds. But for many, business success doesn’t automatically translate to investment expertise. Consider honestly whether your track record includes meaningful investment experience beyond your business.

The Void of Purpose

For most business owners, the company provided more than income. It provided identity, structure, and purpose. The business gave you a reason to wake up, problems to solve, and a community of employees and customers who needed you.

After closing, that structure disappears. And into that void rushes an uncomfortable question: what now?

Wealth management can become a substitute for business management, a new problem to solve, a new domain to master. This isn’t inherently problematic for those with genuine investment aptitude, but it can lead to over-involvement in investment decisions, excessive trading, and the pursuit of “interesting” investments that satisfy intellectual curiosity more than they serve financial goals.

Research by Brad Barber and Terrance Odean at UC Davis analyzed over 66,000 household trading records and found that individual investors who traded most frequently earned annual returns 6.5 percentage points lower than the market average, primarily due to transaction costs and poor timing. Their 2000 paper “Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth” in the Journal of Finance suggests that overconfident investors trade more and perform worse. The owners who navigate this best recognize the void for what it is and address it directly (through new ventures, board service, philanthropy, or other structured activities) rather than channeling unfulfilled purpose into portfolio management.

The Trust Deficit

You built your business by maintaining control and questioning conventional wisdom. Healthy skepticism served you well: it protected you from bad deals, unreliable partners, and flawed assumptions.

Post-exit, this same skepticism can become counterproductive. Every advisor seems to have conflicts of interest. Every recommendation feels like a sales pitch. Every fee structure appears designed to transfer your wealth to someone else.

Some skepticism is warranted: the wealth management industry does have structural conflicts, and newly liquid sellers are attractive targets for advisors of varying quality and motivation. But excessive skepticism prevents engagement with the legitimate expertise you need and can lead to paralysis or DIY approaches that create their own problems.

The goal is calibrated skepticism: understanding advisor incentives, asking probing questions, and verifying credentials while remaining open to genuine expertise that can add value.

Common Post-Exit Mistakes We’ve Observed

Our observation of post-exit transitions among our clients reveals certain patterns. We cannot quantify exact prevalence rates (our sample is limited to sellers who sought professional guidance and may not represent all business sellers, including those who managed transitions successfully without extensive advisory support). The following mistakes appear frequently enough in our experience that we believe they warrant attention, though the financial impact varies widely based on individual circumstances.

Mistake One: The Immediate Major Decision

The first sixty to ninety days after closing represent a period of heightened vulnerability for many sellers. You’re processing significant emotional change, you may be exhausted from the transaction process, and the novelty of your new financial situation can distort normal judgment.

Yet this is precisely when many sellers feel compelled to make major decisions. The cash is “sitting there” earning modest returns. Friends and advisors offer investment opportunities. The stock market looks attractive (or terrifying) depending on the week.

In our experience, major decisions made in this window (large real estate purchases, significant investment commitments, loans to family members, funding of business ventures) seem to produce regret more often than decisions made later with more perspective. We cannot definitively establish causation between emotional state and financial outcome, and some sellers make excellent decisions immediately post-close.

The general prescription is conceptually simple but practically difficult: in most cases, avoid significant irreversible decisions for sixty to ninety days. Exceptions may include time-sensitive tax planning opportunities (such as year-end charitable giving deadlines or installment sale elections), urgent family needs, or situations where market conditions or specific opportunities genuinely require faster action. The goal isn’t rigid rule-following but creating space for emotional processing before major commitments.

Why is waiting difficult? Pressure from advisors eager to deploy capital, family requests that feel urgent, market anxiety when indices move sharply in either direction, and the psychological discomfort of cash “doing nothing.”

Consider putting the bulk of proceeds in short-term treasuries or money market funds during this period. At recent short-term treasury yields, you’ll earn modest returns while maintaining full liquidity. Yes, if the stock market rises significantly during those ninety days, you’ll have foregone additional returns. For a $20 million position, missing a strong quarter could mean several hundred thousand dollars in opportunity cost.

But this calculation cuts both ways. If markets decline during the same period, waiting provides significant loss avoidance. A 15% market decline on $20 million represents $3 million in preserved capital. The waiting period isn’t just about emotional protection: it’s also about avoiding the risk of deploying capital at an unfavorable entry point during a period when your judgment may be compromised. Whether this tradeoff favors waiting or immediate deployment depends on market conditions, your emotional state, and your existing investment experience.

Mistake Two: The Fragmented Advisory Relationship

Newly liquid sellers often accumulate advisors rather than building coordinated advisory teams. You have a CPA who handled business taxes, a lawyer who did the transaction, a financial advisor from your banking relationship, and perhaps a new wealth manager recommended by a friend. Without explicit coordination mechanisms, each tends to operate independently, offering recommendations based on partial information.

This fragmentation creates three risks. First, optimization opportunities that require coordination (such as tax-aware investment strategies or integrated estate and asset protection planning) may be missed. Second, conflicting advice creates confusion and decision paralysis. Third, without a designated lead advisor responsible for integration, nobody “owns” the complete picture, creating gaps and inconsistencies.

The solution is explicit designation of one advisor as lead coordinator, with mandate and authority to identify gaps and require coordination among specialists. This could be you, if you have the time, sophistication, and objectivity to manage multiple professional relationships. More commonly, this role is filled by a wealth manager or family office professional.

Warning signs of coordination failure include: conflicting advice from team members without resolution, lack of regular team communication, advisors who resist sharing information with other team members, and optimization opportunities requiring cross-advisor coordination that aren’t being captured.

Deal structure matters here: If you’ve sold to a strategic buyer with employment continuation or earnout provisions, coordination becomes more complex. You’re managing ongoing income, earnout optimization, and initial liquidity simultaneously. If you’ve achieved full liquidity from a financial buyer, the coordination needs differ.

Mistake Three: The Trophy Investment

Business owners built wealth by investing in things they understood and could influence. This experience creates a natural attraction to “investable businesses”: private companies, real estate developments, startup ventures where you can apply operational insight and exercise some control.

The challenge isn’t these investments themselves, which can be valuable portfolio components for investors with genuine expertise. It’s the concentration and timing. Newly liquid sellers sometimes over-allocate to trophy investments because they feel familiar, committing significant capital to illiquid positions before establishing a stable foundation of diversified assets.

We’ve observed cases where sellers put thirty to fifty percent of net proceeds into a single real estate development or friend’s business within six months of closing. Some of these investments perform well (concentrated bets sometimes work). But without deep information advantage (as you had in your own business), concentrated bets create asymmetric risk: you can lose most of your investment but realistic upside is typically capped. For newly liquid sellers without specific expertise in the target asset class, diversification typically offers better risk-adjusted outcomes.

A useful framework: treat the first eighteen to twenty-four months post-exit as a period for building a diversified foundation. Trophy investments can come later, funded from established cash flow rather than initial proceeds, and sized appropriately for their risk profile. But if you have genuine competitive advantage in a specific asset class (real estate expertise if you developed buildings, startup investing acumen if you built a tech company), appropriate early allocation to that domain can make sense. Honest self-assessment is key.

Mistake Four: The Tax Minimization Obsession

Sellers often emerge from transactions (particularly those with substantial capital gains) with heightened sensitivity to taxation. Having just experienced a significant tax event, they become focused on minimizing future tax exposure.

This impulse sometimes leads to errors. Complex tax-advantaged structures that generate fees exceeding tax savings. Investments selected primarily for tax benefits rather than fundamental merit. Aggressive positions that trigger audits or penalties.

Geographic arbitrage deserves careful treatment. Relocation to no-income-tax states (Florida, Texas, Nevada) can be genuinely value-creating if you’d consider living there anyway and the lifestyle fits. But tax domicile changes require careful planning around residency establishment, state audit exposure, and timing relative to transaction closing. States like California and New York aggressively audit former residents who claim new domiciles, and failing to properly establish residency can result in tax liability in both states. Work with a tax advisor experienced in state domicile changes, and understand that relocation solely for tax purposes becomes wealth-destroying when lifestyle costs (distance from family, preference for different climate) exceed tax savings.

Tax efficiency matters, but it’s one consideration among many. The goal is maximizing after-tax wealth and quality of life, not minimizing taxes per se. The specific tax expertise needed depends on your transaction structure: stock versus asset sale, installment sale treatment, earnout provisions, continued employment. Discuss these structuring issues with your transaction attorney and tax advisor during pre-closing planning.

Mistake Five: The Family Bank

Liquidity creates visibility, and visibility creates requests. Adult children need down payment assistance. Siblings want business loans. Parents have medical expenses. Nieces and nephews are launching startups. The extended family somehow learns about your transaction and develops financial needs.

Responding to these requests without structure creates multiple problems. Loans that were never intended as gifts become gifts when repayment doesn’t materialize. Unequal treatment of family members creates lasting resentment. Financial support creates dependency rather than development. And the aggregate impact of individually reasonable requests erodes wealth significantly.

Family financial support can be structured thoughtfully (through foundations, lending programs with documented terms, or educational funding vehicles) to provide help while maintaining boundaries. But research on family wealth transfers, including work by family business scholars like John Ward, suggests structures don’t fully prevent dependency or family conflict: the human relationships matter more than the mechanics. Expect to have difficult conversations even with good structures in place, and be prepared to enforce boundaries.

Alternatively, some sellers find clarity in a simple policy: “I’m not making any family financial commitments in the first year post-exit.” This gives you time to understand your own needs and develop a thoughtful approach. Either structured support vehicles or temporary moratorium can work. The key is having a deliberate framework rather than reactive responses to each request.

Building Your Wealth Management Team

The time to begin building your advisory team is before closing, not after. Pre-transaction engagement allows for thoughtful selection, proper onboarding, and development of the coordinated relationships that effective wealth management requires.

When You May Not Need Extensive Advisory Support

Before discussing team architecture, we should acknowledge that comprehensive advisory teams aren’t necessary for everyone. You may need minimal external support if:

• You have significant prior investment experience managing portfolios of comparable size
• Your financial situation is straightforward (single liquidity event, simple family structure, no complex estate planning needs)
• You have strong analytical skills and willingness to dedicate time to financial management
• Your proceeds are at the lower end of our range ($3-5 million) where advisory costs consume a higher percentage of assets

Some sophisticated sellers successfully manage post-exit transitions using index funds for core holdings, engaging specialists only for specific projects (estate plan creation, tax filing). This approach trades lower ongoing costs for higher self-management burden and the risk of missing optimization opportunities. If you’re considering this path, honestly assess whether your investment track record supports your confidence and whether you can maintain objectivity during emotional transition.

Team Architecture by Deal Size

For those who determine advisory support is appropriate, the structure varies significantly by net proceeds. The following framework represents general guidance based on industry norms. Your specific complexity, family situation, and investment sophistication should inform actual decisions. These cost estimates reflect our understanding of typical fee structures as of late 2024 and may not include initial setup costs, minimums, or project fees that could increase first-year costs by 25-50%.

$3-10 million in net proceeds: For straightforward exits with simple family structures, a full five-advisor team is likely oversized. Focus on a quality wealth manager who can coordinate limited specialist engagement (tax advisor, estate planning attorney) on a project basis. Total ongoing advisory costs typically range from $25,000-80,000 annually (wealth management fees plus project work), representing roughly 0.5-1.5% of assets. At this level, sophisticated sellers may consider hybrid approaches using low-cost index funds for core holdings with selective specialist engagement.

$10-30 million in net proceeds: This is the range where comprehensive advisory relationships become more clearly justified. A core team typically includes a wealth manager (often charging 0.5-1% of AUM), a high-net-worth tax specialist, and an estate planning attorney with experience in estates of this magnitude. Insurance review and periodic engagement with a trusted advisor round out the team. Total annual costs typically range from $75,000-200,000, representing roughly 0.5-1% of assets, though first-year costs may be higher due to setup and initial planning work.

$30-75 million in net proceeds: At this level, dedicated family office services become relevant (either a single-family office if warranted by complexity and family size, or multi-family office services). The coordination function becomes more formal, and specialist advisors engage on a more regular basis. Total annual costs typically range from $250,000-500,000, including both management fees and specialist engagement.

Above $75 million: Dedicated family office structures with in-house capabilities become economically justified for many families. The specific structure depends on complexity, number of principals, and geographic considerations.

These costs represent significant expenditure. The justification is preventing wealth erosion from uncoordinated planning, tax inefficiency, and avoidable mistakes. Whether these costs are justified for your situation depends on your complexity, your own financial sophistication, and your willingness to spend time coordinating advisors yourself.

The Core Team Roles

Wealth Manager or Family Office: The central coordinator responsible for investment management and overall wealth strategy. Look for experience specifically with post-exit transitions: the issues facing newly liquid sellers differ from those of inheritors or gradual wealth accumulators. Be aware that wealth managers have inherent conflicts (they benefit from managing more of your assets) and evaluate their recommendations with appropriate skepticism.

Tax Advisor: A specialist in high-net-worth individual taxation, familiar with the planning opportunities and pitfalls relevant to your situation. This may be a different firm than handled your business taxes, as post-exit tax planning requires different expertise than business tax compliance.

Estate Planning Attorney: Someone who specializes in estates of your magnitude, experienced with the specific structures relevant to business sale proceeds. Your transaction attorney likely isn’t the right person for this role.

Insurance Specialist: An independent advisor who can assess coverage needs across property, casualty, liability, and life insurance, identifying gaps created by your changed circumstances.

Trusted Advisor or Family Counsel (optional but valuable): An experienced professional (often a retired executive, family office veteran, or specialized consultant) who can serve as a sounding board and advocate for your interests, with no product sales motivation. This role is more valuable for larger, more complex situations.

Managing Advisor Conflicts

Even quality advisors have inherent conflicts and territorial tendencies. Wealth managers benefit from managing more assets. Attorneys bill hourly and may recommend more complex structures. Insurance specialists earn commissions on products sold. These conflicts don’t make advisors dishonest, but they do influence recommendations.

Strategies for managing these conflicts include:

• Understanding each advisor’s compensation structure and how it might bias their advice
• Seeking second opinions on major recommendations, particularly those involving significant fees or commissions
• Explicitly requiring coordination and information sharing among team members
• Periodically reviewing whether each advisor is adding value commensurate with their cost
• Being willing to change advisors who resist coordination or provide consistently self-serving advice

Selection Criteria That Matter

When evaluating advisors, focus on these criteria:

Specialization in Post-Exit Transitions: Ask specifically about their experience with clients who recently sold businesses. How many such clients have they worked with? What were the outcomes? What mistakes do they see most commonly?

Fee Transparency: Understand completely how each advisor is compensated. Asset-based fees, hourly rates, project fees, and product commissions all create different incentives. There’s no single right answer, but opacity is a warning sign.

Coordination Capability: Ask how they work with other advisors. The best professionals actively seek coordination because they understand integrated planning produces better outcomes.

Minimum Engagement Before Closing: Look for advisors willing to engage before the transaction closes, establishing the relationship and beginning planning during the pre-close period rather than scrambling afterward.

Reference Conversations: Speak with other clients who sold businesses, specifically asking about the first year post-exit. Did the advisor provide appropriate guidance during the vulnerable transition period?

The Pre-Closing Engagement

Quality advisors often require 120-180 days for new client onboarding, particularly wealth managers with asset minimums or those with full practices. Begin advisor selection immediately if closing is within six months. If close is sooner, prioritize engaging a lead wealth manager who can coordinate specialist engagement post-close. You can refine the team later.

This window allows for:

Baseline Planning: Documenting current assets, liabilities, and estate plans; identifying gaps and optimization opportunities; establishing goals and constraints for post-exit wealth management.

Tax Coordination: Making sure transaction structure and timing are coordinated with post-close planning; identifying installment sale opportunities, charitable planning, and other tax-aware strategies. Some tax planning opportunities have firm deadlines: discuss timing-sensitive decisions with your tax advisor before closing.

Liquidity Preparation: Establishing accounts and relationships that allow immediate deployment of proceeds into appropriate holding vehicles; avoiding the “cash sitting in checking account” problem.

Family Communication: If relevant, facilitating family conversations about expectations, potential support structures, and boundaries before the visibility of closing creates pressure. Family conversations about financial expectations are difficult and often fail initially. Consider engaging a family wealth advisor or mediator if family dynamics are complex. Be prepared that these conversations may need to occur post-close, when money is real and stakes are clear.

A Framework for Post-Exit Decisions

Even with proper preparation and qualified advisors, you’ll face numerous decisions in the months following closing. A structured framework helps navigate these choices.

The Time Horizon Filter

Before evaluating any opportunity, classify it by time horizon:

Immediate Necessities (within 90 days): What must happen right away (tax payments, existing commitments, immediate living expenses)?

Near-Term Needs (1-3 years): What will you likely need to fund within three years (home purchase, major expenses, known commitments)?

Long-Term Growth (3+ years): What portion of wealth is genuinely long-term, with no anticipated liquidity needs?

This classification should drive asset allocation. Immediate needs belong in cash equivalents. Near-term needs require liquid, low-volatility investments. Only long-term capital should pursue growth strategies with meaningful volatility.

Many post-exit mistakes occur when sellers invest near-term capital as if it were long-term, or commit long-term capital to illiquid investments without proper liquidity reserves.

The Reversibility Test

For any significant decision, ask: how reversible is this?

Buying an index fund is highly reversible: you can sell tomorrow with minimal friction. Investing in a private equity fund typically locks capital for seven to ten years. Purchasing real estate falls somewhere between, with moderate friction and timing dependence.

During the first year post-exit, weight reversibility heavily. Favor liquid investments over illiquid ones. The reversibility principle suggests renting before buying real estate, which works well if rental options exist in your preferred location and timeline is flexible. If timeline is tight or market conditions favor purchase, you may choose to buy sooner. Just do so with clear-eyed recognition of lower reversibility.

As you gain confidence in your post-exit life structure, you can appropriately reduce the reversibility requirement and make longer-term commitments that may offer better returns.

The Simplicity Premium

Complex strategies have real costs: higher fees, greater monitoring requirements, more opportunities for error, and reduced transparency. Sometimes complexity is warranted, but newly liquid sellers often gravitate toward complexity for the wrong reasons (intellectual stimulation, advisor sales pressure, or the assumption that sophisticated wealth requires sophisticated strategies).

In our experience, the first post-exit year should emphasize simplicity. Diversified public market portfolios, straightforward estate structures, and transparent advisory relationships. Complexity can be added later, deliberately and with clear justification, once the foundation is established.

Industry-Specific Considerations

The general framework above applies broadly, but specific tactical advice varies significantly by industry and transaction type.

Technology and Software Founders: Often receive significant equity consideration (stock in acquirer), which creates concentration risk and timing considerations for diversification. Strategic buyers frequently require employment continuation, meaning you’re managing ongoing income alongside initial liquidity. Tax treatment may involve qualified small business stock (QSBS) exclusions worth substantial tax savings if properly structured.

Manufacturing and Distribution Owners: Asset sales are more common, creating different tax treatment (ordinary income on some assets, capital gains on others). Real estate may be retained and leased back, creating ongoing income streams that affect liquidity planning. Earnout structures are common, requiring continued engagement with the business.

Professional Services Firms: Often involve longer transitions with earnout structures tied to client retention. Key person considerations mean the owner cannot simply walk away. The “void of purpose” may be less acute if transition period is lengthy.

Real Estate Operating Companies: Owners often have deep real estate expertise and may appropriately maintain concentrated real estate exposure post-exit. 1031 exchange considerations may defer tax but lock capital into real estate.

These variations affect timing, tax treatment, and appropriate post-exit strategies. Filter all general recommendations through your specific industry context.

Actionable Takeaways

As you approach a liquidity event, prioritize these actions:

Begin Advisor Assembly Early: If closing is within six months, start building your wealth management team immediately. Quality advisors often require 120-180 days for proper onboarding. The pre-closing period is invaluable for coordination and initial planning.

Honestly Assess Your Advisory Needs: Not everyone needs a comprehensive advisory team. If you have strong investment experience, a straightforward situation, and willingness to manage coordination yourself, you may need only targeted specialist support. Match advisory expenditure to your actual complexity.

Establish a Holding Period with Exceptions: In most cases, avoid significant irreversible decisions in the first sixty to ninety days post-close. Communicate this intention to family members and advisors to create accountability. But recognize exceptions for time-sensitive tax planning or genuine emergencies. Prepare for the difficulty: market anxiety, advisor pressure, and family requests will test your resolve.

Quantify Your Time Horizons: Before closing, create a concrete schedule of anticipated liquidity needs for the next decade. This framework will guide appropriate asset allocation from day one.

Prepare for Family Conversations: If family financial requests are likely, develop your framework and boundaries before closing creates visibility and pressure. Decide whether structured support vehicles or a temporary moratorium on commitments better fits your situation. Expect these conversations to be difficult regardless of the approach you choose.

Address the Purpose Question: The void left by exiting your business is real. Begin exploring what will provide purpose and structure post-exit, recognizing that wealth management cannot fill this role effectively.

Document Your Investment Policy: Work with your wealth manager to create a written investment policy statement before closing. This document provides discipline when post-exit emotions tempt deviation.

Conclusion

The check you’ve never had presents opportunities and risks unlike anything in your prior experience. Your success building a valuable business doesn’t automatically transfer to managing the proceeds: these are different competencies requiring different preparation.

The owners who appear to navigate this transition more successfully, in our limited observation, often share a common characteristic: they approach post-exit wealth management with the same strategic discipline they applied to building their businesses. They assemble capable teams (or honestly assess that they can manage independently), create frameworks for decision-making, and resist the pressure for immediate action that creates expensive mistakes.

We should be clear about what preparation can and cannot accomplish. Good discipline reduces the risk of self-inflicted wealth destruction: poor advisor selection, concentrated bets without information advantage, impulsive decisions during emotional transition. But preparation doesn’t guarantee outcomes. Market timing, economic conditions, and unforeseen events create significant variance. Even well-prepared sellers experience outcomes that miss expectations; the goal is improving odds and avoiding unforced errors, not achieving certainty.

Your transaction will close, the wire will arrive, and you’ll face novel decisions with permanent consequences. The quality of those decisions depends heavily on preparation that begins now, before closing, while you still have the bandwidth and objectivity to plan thoughtfully.

The wealth management industry stands ready to help you, though the extent of advisory support you need depends on your financial complexity, investment expertise, and honest self-assessment of your capabilities. Some sellers benefit from comprehensive advisory teams; others need targeted help in specific areas; still others with strong financial acumen and straightforward situations may thrive with minimal external support. Approaching this transition with appropriate preparation, calibrated skepticism, and professional support matched to your actual needs gives you the best chance of preserving and growing the wealth you’ve spent years creating.