Why identical car washes draw bids that differ by millions

Owners preparing to sell often anchor their expectations to whatever multiple a neighbor got, but that number tells them little about their own wash. In a piece published by Car Wash Business Center, John-Michael Tamburro, a strategic advisor at Miracle Car Wash Advisors, argues that the true value of a wash only emerges through a structured sale process that puts many buyers in competition.

Tamburro cites a recent sell-side process for a multi-site express platform in which more than 30 buyers reviewed the same wash, same financials, and same market. The gap between the lowest indication and the winning letter of intent was measured in full turns of EBITDA. On a wash generating $2 million in adjusted EBITDA, a single turn equals $2 million of purchase price, and a 2.75x spread translates to a $5.5 million difference between the least and most motivated buyer.

What a multiple actually prices

Buyers do not pay for reported EBITDA, Tamburro writes. They pay for cash flow they believe will survive the ownership transition without the seller involved. The multiple is essentially a confidence score on that belief. He notes the market now behaves differently than it did in 2021 and 2022, when cheap capital and a race for density led platforms to pay for growth potential. Today buyers underwrite tighter and pay for what a wash has proven.

Tamburro identifies six drivers that explain most of the spread between a low and high bid:

• Membership quality over count. Sophisticated buyers examine churn by cohort, revenue per member, and whether growth came from price hikes or new members. A smaller base with low churn can outperform a larger base bleeding members.
• The real estate answer. Owning versus leasing, and on what terms, changes the buyer math. Owned property offers sale-leaseback optionality; a short lease with no extensions does the opposite.
• Market protection. Buyers discount for nearby competition, including express sites under construction, weighing traffic counts, zoning, and defensible trade area.
• Margin consistency across sites. Buyers find the weakest location fast and price a portfolio off the question marks, not the trophies.
• Financial credibility. Clean books determine whether a buyer underwrites the numbers or discounts them.
• Regional density. A cluster covering one metro is a moat that consolidators pay up for, while scattered sites read as separate underwriting problems.

Buyer fit also moved outcomes, Tamburro adds. On one platform he advised, a strategic consolidator took several sites for the density while a private buyer took a single location for different reasons.

A 12-month runway

For owners eyeing a sale, Tamburro recommends starting roughly a year out. His checklist: clean the profit and loss statement by removing personal expenses and off-payroll family members; track membership data monthly by site, including churn and revenue per member; resolve whether real estate sells with the business or stays on a lease; address deferred capital expenditures or get quotes to control the number in negotiation; separate entities and build site-level P&Ls; and obtain a real valuation before a buyer sets the anchor.

Why it matters for operators

The practical lesson is that valuation is not fixed by market comps but built through preparation and competition. Operators who track cohort-level membership metrics, keep clean site-level financials, and resolve real estate questions before diligence give buyers fewer reasons to discount. Because the spread only surfaces when many buyers compete, negotiating quietly with one or two groups can leave significant money on the table. Twelve months of disciplined documentation may be the difference between capturing full turns of EBITDA and settling for the low end of the range.