simulation-bidder-steps-plan

What it does

The skill runs a structured workflow for a simulated bidder process in corporate law. It clarifies role, output, deadlines, and urgency, then identifies applicable norms and documents to review. It asks to verify responsible parties and stakeholders, collects and checks documents and evidence, and separates corporate, procedural, and governance aspects. It provides an output path including a memo, action lists, or board-facing documents, tailored to a seller or buyer scenario and different deal phases. It emphasizes not conflating procedural steps with substantive judgments and requires sourcing every key assertion from live or verifiable materials.

How it works

• Clarify role, target output, deadlines, and urgency for the bidder-process simulation.
• Mark deadlines and urgency using discipline-specific categories; keep cross-domain borders between dispute-related timelines and other areas rigid.
• Verify core normative references and sources live from the listed statutes and practice areas (e.g., GmbHG, AktG, HGB, BGB, UmWG, Registerrecht, signing/closing mechanics).
• Identify the responsible party and audience (Mandant, Gegner, authorities, experts, or EU/international bodies).
• Collect and audit documents and evidence across the file, flag gaps, and request missing items from the client as needed, including up-to-date regulatory changes.
• Focus on corporate-law aspects: form the corporate structure, governance, diligence items, and risk considerations without mixing with negotiation routing unless specified.
• Produce an output suitable for partner-level use: a memo, closing checklist, or board/committee materials, including required sections and references.
• Ensure every factual assertion is supported by a source and indicate any unverifiable items as [zu verifizieren].
• Offer an escalation path or negotiation lines with options, anchored to the bidder-process context and the applicable corporate-legal framework.

When to use it

• Triggered when a credible next-step action is needed in a simulated bidder process.
• When analysis should be performed from the perspective of the corporation, management, shareholders, or in-house legal team.
• When the output should be a board-ready document or client-facing communication, or a structured internal briefing suitable for decision-making.
• When gaps exist in corporate-structuring, governance, or factual underpinnings and a risk-focused view is required.

What it can touch

• Uses: claude-code
• References corporate-law norms, governance bodies, and procedural milestones as listed in the workflow and core sections. It requires sourcing and does not invent or guess legal positions without a verifiable basis.

Caveats

• Output is not a final decision about signing, filing, or closing; it is an intermediate or documentary aid for decision-makers.
• It does not replace partner, organizer, or client decisions on signing, registrations, or closing.
• All claims must be backed by verifiable sources; unverifiable items are flagged for verification.
• No reliance on model knowledge quotes; prefer live documents and court or official sources for legal citations.