Category B2B secure cloud and on-premise communications software, EMEA/LATAM customers · Listed Flippa, Vetted + Data Verified Asking $162,000 (cut 20% from $202,536) · TTM revenue $106,892 · Monthly profit $3,475 (SDE, annualized $41,700) · Disclosed multiples 3.9× profit, 3.0× revenue
Stripe and Google Analytics are connected, and Flippa's team vetted the listing, so the $106,892 and $3,475/month figures are better sourced than most. What isn't sourced is the current MRR field itself, which renders blank on the page. The title supplies "$5k+ MRR" instead.
| Risk-adjusted multiple | 2.9× |
| IRR at the asking price | −21.4% |
| Maximum defensible offer at 30% IRR | $50,000 |
| Annual net revenue retention (implied) | 80.4% |
| Payback at asking price | 3.9 years |
A 3.9-year payback against a 3-year hold, before any discounting, is why the IRR at the $162,000 ask is negative rather than merely low.
Take the two disclosed absolute figures — $162,000 asking price, $106,892 trailing-twelve-month revenue — and the revenue multiple is $162,000 / $106,892 = 1.5×, not the 3.0× the listing states. For the stated 3.0× to be correct against either asking price, annual revenue behind it would need to be $54,000 (at $162,000) or $67,512 (at the original $202,536) — $4,500 to $5,626 a month, not the $8,908 a month that $106,892 averages out to over the trailing year.
Both readings point the same direction: the current run rate is roughly half the trailing-year average. That is consistent with the profit multiple, too. $162,000 / 3.9 = $41,538, matching the $41,700 you get by annualizing the disclosed $3,475 monthly profit — so the deal is priced off the current, smaller monthly figure, while the revenue total headlining the page is the larger, trailing one. Nothing in the listing text says revenue has fallen; the only way to see it is to run the listing's own two multiples against its own two dollar figures and notice they describe different-sized businesses.
The churn field has the same shape of problem. The listing states "a churn rate of 1%" and, separately, "an 80%+ renewal rate," without saying whether the churn figure is monthly or annual, or logo or revenue. Back the 80%+ renewal rate out to a monthly figure instead — the standard reading for annual B2B contracts — and it lands at 1.8% monthly logo churn, not 1%. That 1.8% is what we used to run the model; it also reproduces the 80.4% annual retention above almost exactly, which the flat "1%" headline number does not.
The title separately says "30+ customers"; the listing body says "10 active contracts." Both are on the same page. We didn't build either into the multiple adjustment, since averaging revenue across 10 or 30 customers stays under the model's concentration threshold either way, but a buyer negotiating price should know which count is real before relying on either.
$50,000, not $162,000 — a 69% cut to the current ask, or 75% off the original $202,536. Structure it as a minority payment at closing, the rest tied to an eighteen-month earnout on retained revenue measured against the seller's own disclosed current run rate, not the trailing-twelve-month total. The earnout base matters here specifically because the two numbers disagree: anchor to the higher, trailing figure and the seller gets paid for revenue that may already be gone.
Before any of that: get the real current MRR from Stripe directly, get a definition of the churn figure (period and logo-versus-revenue), and get the actual customer count. All three sit on the page already, in two different, contradictory forms.
Run your own numbers on any listing: Ledgerline, free.
Two of these a week. Get the next one by email.