Case Studies

Family office work rarely becomes difficult because the theory is obscure. It becomes difficult because the assets are uneven, the structures are old, time pressure is real and several decisions often move at once.

These case studies illustrate work carried out by Beckett Farson for clients whose mandates have required sustained attention. Each situation reflects actual family office engagement by the firm, with identifying details adjusted where necessary to protect confidentiality.

Founder After a Partial Exit.

A Prague technology founder sold 62 percent of a business in a transaction that produced gross proceeds of approximately CZK 925 million, while retaining a meaningful minority stake and several earn-out rights over the following 24 months. Prior to the sale, most personal wealth had been tied to one operating company, with a smaller liquid portfolio of roughly CZK 62 million and two investment properties held through separate entities.

The immediate issue was not simply where to invest the proceeds. The founder’s personal balance sheet had changed shape almost overnight: tax reserves had to be ring-fenced, cash for near-term obligations had to remain accessible, private investment requests began arriving quickly, and the retained equity stake meant the founder was still exposed to the fortunes of the original business.

What Beckett Farson Handled

Beckett Farson built a 12-month post-transaction framework that separated the capital into four operating pools: tax reserve, strategic liquidity, long-duration investment capital, and an opportunity sleeve for direct or private market investments. Around CZK 240 million was held back initially across tax provisioning and liquidity reserves, while the investable pool was phased into public markets over three quarters.

The mandate also included coordination with legal and tax advisers on the founder’s new holding structure. Beckett Farson reviewed draft co‑investment proposals during the first six months after closing and worked with the client’s advisers to update the estate planning brief in light of the higher net worth and young children.

Result

After nine months, the founder had a functioning capital structure rather than a collection of disconnected decisions. Liquidity sufficient for several years of spending and tax settlement remained intact. Public‑market exposure had been built in stages, and the founder had declined nine unsolicited private deals while proceeding with two that matched the agreed framework.

Consolidating A Family Balance Sheet Spread Across Entities and Providers.

A second mandate involved a family with assets held across 14 legal entities, four bank relationships, three property vehicles and a long-standing mix of discretionary managers, direct holdings and legacy structures created over more than 15 years. The family could obtain information from each provider, but there was no single working picture of total exposure, group liquidity, cross-collateralisation, or the relationship between private holdings and the liquid portfolio.

The reporting problem had started to affect decision quality. Quarterly information arrived in inconsistent formats and at uneven times, which obscured the overall picture. Property debt was handled separately, leaving family members to take decisions without a full understanding of leverage and exposure.

What Beckett Farson Handled

Beckett Farson began with a reporting and entity map covering each vehicle, each adviser relationship, the beneficial owners attached to them, and the timing of major cash demands over the next 18 months. The exercise identified more than 120 separate line items that needed to be grouped into a coherent owner-level picture, including listed securities, private funds, directly held properties, cash, loans between entities and contingent commitments to uncalled capital.

Once the mapping was complete, Beckett Farson rebuilt the reporting pack around a smaller number of decision categories: liquid assets, illiquid assets, debt, upcoming capital calls, income generation, and entity-level cash requirements. The firm also reset meeting rhythms with external advisers so that legal, tax and investment discussions were sequenced around a single calendar rather than running independently.

Result

Within two reporting cycles, the family had a usable total-balance-sheet framework and a forward cash schedule covering the next 24 months. The process also identified duplicated custody arrangements and an underused financing line. It showed that overall illiquidity was materially higher than the family had assumed when they were relying on manager reports in isolation.

Preparing A Generational Transfer Over Time.

Rebuilding Adviser Coordination After Years of Drift.

Building Private Market Exposure After a Liquidity Event.