Public research · illustrative brief
Acquisition screening: app development companies
An advisory team is building an initial screen for a buyer seeking to expand mobile and web app development capabilities. What do five companies’ public offerings establish, and what remains unresolved?
Ackee, Futured and GoodRequest offer relevant development services. Cleevio first requires a clear group perimeter. Keboola does not match the specified custom-development model. Availability for acquisition is unconfirmed for every profile.
The brief and screening boundaries
- Buyer
- Illustrative European IT services group seeking a majority acquisition in a custom software developer.
- Capabilities and region
- Mobile and web app design and engineering with follow-on maintenance; evidenced operations in Czechia or Slovakia.
- Financial screen
- Profitable operations and scale suitable for the buyer. Budget and minimum EBITDA are not yet defined, so financial fit cannot be confirmed at this stage.
- Exclusions
- A standalone software platform without an evidenced offer of the required custom development. Willingness to sell is not inferred from a website.
The sample is selected by publicly described services and regional presence. A brand is not necessarily the legal acquisition entity. Service fit only justifies further financial and ownership research; it is not a recommendation to acquire.
Profile comparison
Showing 5 of 5 profiles.
| Profile | Published information | Assessment for the brief | What remains to verify |
|---|---|---|---|
| AckeeCheck financials and ownership | Offers mobile and web app development and UI/UX design; publishes a Prague contact address. Source 1: Ackee Source 2: Ackee | The offering fits the required capabilities. Operating scale and the transferable business perimeter remain unknown. | Which entity holds the contracts and team? What share of revenue comes from maintenance and repeat work? |
| FuturedCheck financials and ownership | Describes mobile and web app development. Its contact page identifies Futured apps s. r. o., Brno and Prague. Source 3: Futured Source 4: Futured | Services and Czech presence fit. Published entity details provide a starting point for checking filed accounts. | What are the margins and client concentration? Do the presented projects and relevant contracts belong to the same entity? |
| GoodRequestCheck financials and ownership | Offers mobile and web development, backend engineering and design. Publishes offices in Žilina and Bratislava. Source 5: GoodRequest Source 6: GoodRequest | The sector and regional screen fits. Website headcount is not a substitute for profitability. | Where are staff and client contracts held? How much delivery uses contractors, and how concentrated are customers? |
| CleevioDefine the group perimeter first | Lists design, mobile development, frontend and backend engineering; has a Prague presence and belongs to Cleevio Group. Source 7: Cleevio | Capabilities fit. The group website does not establish which entity the buyer would assess. | Which activities are client services versus proprietary products? Can they be separated financially and contractually? |
| KeboolaExclude for this brief | Presents a proprietary data platform for connecting, transforming and using business data. Source 8: Keboola | The published product does not fit the specified acquisition of a custom mobile and web app development business. | Revisit only if the brief changes to a data platform; a separate qualifying services business would need evidence. |
How an engagement would continue
Define the buyer
Add budget, target scale, margins, revenue geography and required stake. Until then, this remains a sector screen.
Establish the legal and financial picture
Check entities, ownership and available filings for the remaining profiles. Record dates, missing information and the reason for each next step.
Approve the approach
Agree recipients and the message with the client. Only agreed outreach can establish whether an owner wishes to discuss a transaction.
Scope of this example
Revenue, EBITDA, ownership, software rights and owners’ willingness to engage have not been verified in this example. The named companies are neither sale listings nor ORIGINATION business partners.
This is a purposive sample, not comprehensive market coverage. It uses the listed primary public sources; their claims have not been independently verified. The illustrative brief is not a client mandate. Nobody was contacted for this example. Sources must be refreshed before use in an engagement.
Prepared by ORIGINATION. Sources checked: .
The selection in a working file
Download the working templateThe same five profiles, criteria and reasons for each next step in an editable workbook. It extends the public analysis with fields for the client list and outreach approval record.
No registration. Historical sample with sources checked on 14 September 2026. This is not a currently verified shortlist; refresh the information before using it on an engagement.
3 profiles need further information, 1 has an unresolved entity perimeter and 1 is excluded for this brief. None is approved for outreach.
Recording the selection and approval
- Each profile has a working ID and a source reference. The brand, domain and legal entity are separate fields.
- The proposed shortlist follows from the longlist and criterion-level assessments. Financial fit, ownership and willingness to sell remain unverified until supported by evidence.
- The client list is checked for registration identity, domain and possible name matches. An absent list or blank field does not clear a company for contact.
- Approval relates to the exact brief version, profile, recipient and message. Changes require another check. A completed record does not itself prove that the client granted approval.
References behind the process
PwC describes criteria, an extensive target list, a shortlist and profiles. The historical HBS survey (§6.1) distinguishes sourcing from deeper diligence. Research held by LBS (§4.1) examines the use of public information in investment and acquisitions. Public information does not replace verification of the target business.
The record-keeping and approval controls are our proposed workflow. These references do not validate our service, the suitability of the named companies or an expected transaction volume.
Sources and review date
- Ackee · Nabídka vývoje aplikacíPublication date not stated · Sources checked: 2026-09-14
- Ackee · KontaktPublication date not stated · Sources checked: 2026-09-14
- Futured · Mobile & Web App DevelopmentPublication date not stated · Sources checked: 2026-09-14
- Futured · Kontakt a fakturační údajePublication date not stated · Sources checked: 2026-09-14
- GoodRequest · ServicesPublication date not stated · Sources checked: 2026-09-14
- GoodRequest · ContactPublication date not stated · Sources checked: 2026-09-14
- Cleevio · Services / Group / ContactPublication date not stated · Sources checked: 2026-09-14
- Keboola · PlatformPublication date not stated · Sources checked: 2026-09-14
Research for your own brief
A free initial consultation will clarify your brief. We then agree the deliverable, verification scope, timing and fixed fee for paid research. Any outreach is agreed separately.