Structuring earn-ins and phased acquisitions in joint ventures

Earn-ins and phased acquisitions are deal structures commonly used in joint ventures (JVs) and strategic partnerships to manage risk, valuation uncertainty, and capital commitments. Instead of acquiring a full ownership stake upfront, buyers acquire an initial minority position and agree to increase their stake over time based on achieving performance, financial, or operational milestones. These structures are widely used in sectors such as natural resources, pharmaceuticals, technology, and infrastructure, where asset values depend heavily on future developments or regulatory outcomes.

Earn-ins and phased acquisitions balance risk and upside.

In volatile industries where future cash flows are uncertain, earn-ins allow investors to participate in high-potential ventures while minimizing upfront exposure. Key benefits include:

• Reduced initial capital outlay → Limits investment until milestones demonstrate asset viability.

• Risk-sharing → Allocates early-stage financial and operational risks between partners.

• Performance-based pricing → Valuation adjusts dynamically based on achieving agreed milestones.

• Stronger alignment → Sellers remain incentivized to meet performance targets, protecting buyer interests.

By linking ownership increases to measurable outcomes, these structures create mutually beneficial incentives for both parties.

How phased acquisitions are structured.

Phased acquisitions typically follow a multi-stage ownership model:

1. Initial entry investment

   • Buyer acquires a minority stake (e.g., 20%–40%) in the JV or target company.

   • Capital is allocated for early-stage operations, R&D, or resource exploration.

2. Performance-based triggers

   • Additional ownership increments are acquired when predefined operational, financial, or regulatory milestones are achieved.

   • Examples include regulatory approvals, production targets, or profitability thresholds.

3. Final consolidation

   • Upon achieving all milestones, the buyer may acquire a controlling or full stake in the venture under pre-agreed pricing formulas.

These milestones are carefully negotiated to balance buyer flexibility with seller upside protection.

Valuation frameworks for earn-ins and phased acquisitions.

These transactions require flexible pricing models that evolve alongside operational performance:

Valuation Approach	Application	Best Use Case
Pre-agreed price formulas	Sets purchase prices upfront based on ownership tiers	Used when milestone values are predictable
Performance-based pricing	Adjusts price based on operational metrics like EBITDA, revenue, or reserves	Common in resource and pharma deals
Market-linked valuation	Uses comparable multiples or market pricing upon trigger events	Suitable for high-growth, uncertain sectors
Hybrid structures	Combines upfront pricing with contingent earn-outs	Offers flexibility in competitive deals

By structuring dynamic valuation mechanisms, parties manage future uncertainty while minimizing pricing disputes.

Key sectors adopting earn-in and phased acquisition models.

These structures are particularly prevalent where asset values depend on exploration success, regulatory milestones, or commercialization performance:

• Natural resources → Mining and energy companies use earn-ins for projects where reserves and production viability require staged investment.

• Biotech and pharmaceuticals → Buyers invest incrementally based on clinical trial outcomes, regulatory approvals, and commercialization targets.

• Technology → Strategic partnerships for AI platforms, SaaS products, and hardware ventures often phase ownership alongside revenue growth.

• Infrastructure → Long-horizon projects with high upfront capital needs benefit from gradual equity ramp-ups aligned with construction milestones.

By tying acquisition timing to de-risking events, investors optimize exposure while securing upside participation.

Risk management considerations in phased transactions.

While earn-ins offer flexibility, they introduce unique complexities that require careful structuring:

• Defining milestones precisely → Ambiguous performance targets can lead to disputes over pricing or ownership transfer.

• Funding obligations → Investors must commit sufficient capital at each phase without overleveraging.

• Governance alignment → Buyers require board representation and information rights even at minority stages.

• Exit strategies → Provisions should address scenarios where milestones fail or regulatory approvals are delayed.

Well-drafted shareholder agreements and JV contracts are critical to avoiding operational and financial conflicts.

Examples of phased acquisitions in practice.

• GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis (2015) → Structured phased equity transfers tied to regulatory approvals in a $20 billion asset swap.

• Rio Tinto and Turquoise Hill (2012) → Mining JV with milestone-based ownership increases linked to production targets in Mongolia.

• Qualcomm Ventures → Frequently uses earn-in structures for strategic tech investments, increasing ownership based on revenue performance.

These examples demonstrate how phased models enable strategic flexibility in industries with high development risk and significant upside potential.

Earn-ins and phased acquisitions enhance deal adaptability.

By structuring ownership transfers around achievable milestones, companies can manage valuation uncertainty, reduce upfront risk, and align partner incentives. These mechanisms are increasingly important in capital-intensive sectors where market volatility and regulatory hurdles complicate traditional acquisition structures.

When executed effectively, earn-ins and phased acquisitions provide a balanced framework that promotes collaboration, risk mitigation, and long-term value creation in joint ventures and strategic partnerships.

____________

FOLLOW US FOR MORE.

DATA STUDIOS

datastudios.org