I'm not OP, but when I experienced due dilligence the thing I found counter-intuitive was that …

I'm not OP, but when I experienced due dilligence the thing I found counter-intuitive was that 'looking really good at everything' isn't actually the best approach. As an example - it might be better that the company doing Due Dilligence finds you awful at sales during the DD phase, because they will see that you got revenue despite poor sales technique and they will see it as an easy target for improvement / 'to generate value'. Companies want to identify ways that they would be able to help the company they are aquiring. Not sure if this applies to Technical DD, but thought it was interesting enough to share!