Case study 01 / Energy, integrated gas-to-LNG
A sponsor's 87-page raise would not close. Honeycomb found why in under an hour.
A sponsor was raising C$1.15B across two pitch decks and had failed to attract capital. Honeycomb reconciled the decks against public filings, found three structural flaws that made the deal unexecutable as written, and surfaced the one fundable thesis underneath it.
What Honeycomb found
The anchor position could not be bought
The C$300M infrastructure leg targeted equity already fully held by the project's two existing partners, neither of them a seller.
A third of the return had no basis
Roughly 4.3 points of IRR came from an integration synergy the plant's existing third-party contracts left no room to capture.
The package contradicted itself
The decks disagreed on deal size, strategy, and even the acquirer's identity, while paying a premium for a liquid public stake with no control.
The shift
Public record showed roughly C$500M on-market value, with no control
Before: Sponsor claimed a 10% upstream stake for C$750M
No third-party equity existed to buy on the stated terms
Before: Sponsor claimed 12% of the LNG project for C$300M
Three acquirer identities and three deal sizes in one package
Before: One acquirer, one C$1.15B deal
Outcome
Honeycomb stripped out the passive minority sleeve and identified the fundable version: operator-led consolidation of undervalued producers, matched to the buyer who could underwrite it.
An anonymised example of work done with Honeycomb. Figures describe this case and are not a general performance guarantee.
Discuss your own case