--000000000000d7f539063e5179c1 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d7f51f063e5179bf" --000000000000d7f51f063e5179bf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tim, Per our chat, attached is a revised LOI. I updated our corporate entity name, updated the consideration to 99k in 3 separate payments and also scaled back the non-compete given we're on the Selling side. With respect to the non-compete, I said we wouldn't compete within 15 miles of our Kansas office location for 3 years, but we can agree to something more in terms of mileage or years as needed depending on his push back. Let me know if you'd like to discuss it first before sending it to the potential Buyer. On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 9:01=E2=80=AFAM Steve Koyanagi wrote: > To clarify, is Dane willing to pay us 99k total no matter how successful > the business is after we close? Or, are the two subsequent 33k installmen= t > payments based on how the business does post-close (i.e. earnout)? > > > On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 6:41=E2=80=AFAM Timothy Thomas wro= te: > >> I spoke with Dane and he would be willing to increase his offer to $33k >> now, $33k in 3 months and $33k in 6 months. Please review the LOI and >> advise how you would like to proceed. >> >> Thanks >> >> On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 3:10=E2=80=AFPM Timothy Thomas wr= ote: >> >>> The offer is low but I believe we can get to the 100K mark. >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 2:55=E2=80=AFPM Timothy Thomas w= rote: >>> >>>> Please review the attached LOI. >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>> From: Dane Johnson >>>> Date: Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 2:46=E2=80=AFPM >>>> Subject: Fwd: LOI Draft >>>> To: Timothy Thomas , Grant Eckert >>>> >>>> >>>> Tim, >>>> >>>> Please find attached the executed LOI. We have also included a word >>>> version in case the name needs to be changed for The Key. Please revi= ew >>>> and let us know your thoughts. Thank you. >>>> >>>> Sincerely, >>>> >>>> Dane Johnson >>>> 913-908-9808 >>>> >>>> >>>> --000000000000d7f51f063e5179bf Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tim,=C2=A0 Per our chat, attached is a revised LOI.= I updated=C2=A0our corporate=C2=A0entity name, updated the consideration t= o 99k in 3 separate payments=C2=A0and also scaled back the non-compete give= n=C2=A0we're on the Selling side.=C2=A0 With respect= to the non-compete, I said we wouldn't compete within 15 miles of our = Kansas office location for 3 years, but we can agree to something more in t= erms of mileage or years as needed depending on his push back. Let me know if you'd like to discuss it first before sendi= ng it to the potential Buyer. On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 9:01=E2=80=AFAM S= teve Koyanagi < skoyanagi@thekey.com > wrote: To clarify, is Dane willing to pay us= 99k total no matter how successful the business is after we close? Or, are= the two subsequent 33k installment payments based on how the bus