When Kolostat announced its acquisition of MSB Mechanical on June 17, 2024, it was adding a GTA plumbing, heating and HVAC contractor. The two leaders described the opportunity from different ends: Kolostat CEO Alain Champoux wanted a more integrated approach in the region; MSB president and founder Mat Black pointed to the buyer’s design-build capacity as a way to enhance services.
The business behind the name
A company project page now credits MSB with the East Gwillimbury Operations Centre. The page bears an August 27, 2024 date, but that is not a confirmed completion date. Its current attribution does not specify MSB’s technical scope or make it the general contractor.
The Town’s own completion announcement describes a facility supporting municipal infrastructure and core services, including training spaces. Its description gives the project a municipal operating purpose, rather than leaving it as an unnamed building in a contractor’s portfolio.
This gives the acquired contractor a concrete customer setting: a municipal facility supporting everyday operations and staff training.
An established buyer
Kolostat was already in Toronto. Its company history dates that office to 1997, well before the MSB transaction. The history also places the Krome combination in 2022. Those milestones matter because the business was adding to an existing presence and operating model, rather than entering Ontario for the first time. A regional acquisition can be important without being a first foothold.
Krome’s current account describes its contribution in terms of energy-performance design-build. That earlier combination provides useful context for the buyer’s development: energy work and mechanical construction sit within the same broader business story, although the sources do not establish identical transaction structures or integration processes.
Follow design into use
Kolostat’s current design-build offer puts engineering, fabrication, installation and commissioning under one contract. A site visit and engineering proposal precede execution and commissioning. It describes today’s offer; it does not establish that the acquisition created it.
An older Montréal project shows why the connections between those activities matter.
An April 2017 Informa-TECH account of Tour Aimia/Altoria describes a mixed-use building opened in June 2014. Office areas released heat while residential areas had continuing energy needs. Shared heat-recovery equipment connected those different demands. Instead of treating the two uses as isolated systems, the design made energy from one part useful elsewhere.
The account describes surplus heat stored through a geothermal system. When heating was needed, recovered energy, stored energy and then gas boilers formed successive parts of the supply. This is the physical dependency at the centre of the example: the equipment’s role makes sense in relation to the other sources and demands. The opportunity came from matching different uses within the building. Heat leaving one area could serve demand elsewhere; storage and backup supplied different parts of the sequence. That relationship is more informative than the presence of any single piece of equipment. The account’s numerical savings were projections, rather than measurements of achieved performance.
The Automated Logic project account identifies Kolostat as the mechanical designer and installer and the controls contractor, with installation in 2013–2014. It describes centralized HVAC controls, metering of energy transfers and use of that information for tenant billing. It also identifies changing occupancy, measuring exchanges, and fitting technologies within budgets and mechanical-room footprints as project challenges.
The tower and those installation dates precede the MSB acquisition; this is earlier buyer context, not a combination benefit.
What an owner should take from the project
A coordinated delivery offer should explain how design becomes installed equipment and then usable operating information. At the tower, controls and metering connected the systems to operation and energy allocation. Counting capabilities alone would leave that relationship unexplained.
For an owner assessing a contractor combination, the useful distinction is between possessing skills and connecting their responsibilities. A single contract describes an arrangement; it does not remove the need to explain who carries a design through installation, controls and use. That explanation is where the delivery model becomes practical.
The later company changes
MSB’s current notice says it joined Kolostat in 2024 and became one entity, Kolostat, as of July 1, 2026. That is the company’s account of a later organisational step, not an independently inspected legal-merger record. The notice describes integration; it supplies no measurement of customer gains.
Ownership has its own chronology. Kolostat’s history dates Thornhill ownership to 2019 and Groupe Climater ownership to 2025. The current group identity therefore should not be projected back onto the 2024 announcement. Nor should the ownership timeline stand in for the operating one: the earlier Toronto office, Krome combination and later parent-group change describe different stages of the company’s development.
The announcement leaves price and financing undisclosed.
The announced opportunity and the later integration are distinct observations. Understanding the underlying work is more useful than treating a new company name as a performance measure.
For general information and education, not legal, tax, investment or valuation advice. Reported transactions do not predict your business’s value, financing terms or sale outcome. Consult qualified advisers about your situation.
Subscribe to Deal Flow Canada for practical owner guides and Canadian deal updates.