Owner staying on post-acquisition, in a limited role

It depends on what you're going to do.

If the seller want to give up a lot of the administrative work and you're putting in someone to fill that role, they're going to have to be good at finessing rhe responsibilities away from the previous owner.

If you want it run just the way it has been foe the last 20 years, you're golden.

If you're looking to grow and make changes, I guarantee the guy has "tried that before" and will attempt to spike a lot of the things you want to do. They're still doable, you're just going to have.to have someone in there fighting for every inch of new ground.

Having a seller stay on, post-transaction helps with the business continuity and puts your employees’ minds at ease (they are seeing a young entrepreneur come in to run the show, often with little similar experience and that will scare many of them). Also many of the owner’s responsibilities are ad hoc and it is tough to prepare for some of these things beforehand, so knowing that you have direct access to the former owner can be very beneficial. With that said, the seller can be distracting and condescending as they will undoubtedly be insecure about selling their business and watching someone new run it and make changes. Personally, I found the pros outweigh the cons however it should be a finite period, with well defined roles and responsibilities for the seller.