New Searcher - Question About CIMs

searcher profile

January 17, 2026

by a searcher from University of Guelph in Stouffville, ON, Canada

I see people here stating that they review x number of CIMs per week, or that they have reviewed 100s over the course of the year. From my experience so far, it seems like a process to even get access to a CIM. I have to sign the NDA, and then book a call with the sell-side broker, and then I’ll get the CIM. This process takes days sometimes. Do I have this right? I have a full time job so I’m trying to do this on the side, but maybe this is why people say it works better when you commit to the search full time.
2
16
210
Replies
16
commentor profile
Reply by a searcher
from University of KwaZulu in Tasmania, Australia
This depends - in my experience - on the industry and location of search. Searching for manufacturing businesses in Australia (Tasmania) requires a sensitivity to people and place. An approach here will be worlds apart from say a service industry USA. For me it is first a strategic consideration and then a careful quiet dance. Indefinite/long-hold Search is like finding your life partners on investor and acquisition side… so in my case time spent being carefully considerate is what feels right for me. Find what feels right for you.
commentor profile
Reply by a searcher
from Queen's University in Toronto, ON, Canada
It is often the process but it gets easier over time. As brokers and bankers get to know you and know you're serious, you have to jump through less hoops. Some have blanket NDAs (sign once and get access to all their CIMs) while others do it individually. Sometimes you can call a broker and ask a few questions and quickly realize the business isn't right (and not bother going through the NDA process). But if you're new, my suggestion is to get as many CIMs as possible. You can learn something from each one, and if you stay in same industry you'll be able to more quickly identify risks and opportunities when you read CIM.
commentor profile
+14 more replies.
Join the discussion