Why do lenders dislike bundling plant finance with extra cash?

Because the limit stops matching the asset value and the purpose becomes unclear. It can look like cash-out inside an asset facility, which increases risk grade and conditions.

Is a separate buffer the same as a Business Loan?

Not always. It depends on structure and security, but conceptually it’s closer to working capital than it is to long-term asset funding.

What limit problems does bundling usually create?

If the machine values lower than expected, you instantly have a shortfall. That can force a lower approved limit, more deposit, or a restructure of the request.

What’s the fastest way to support the cash buffer story?

A simple list of what it covers, the time window, and how it gets paid down once throughput stabilises — plus clean statements to show cashflow rhythm.

What’s the most common mistake when people try to do two facilities?

They keep the evidence pack blended, so both facilities inherit the same confusion. The fix is to separate proof: asset identity for plant; cashflow clarity for the buffer.

Case Study (Manufacturing) (2026): One Upgrade, Two Facilities

27 Jan

Written By Nick Lim

Two-facility plant finance and cash buffer for manufacturing business owners
| Switchboard Finance

🏭 Manufacturing • case study • two facilities • risk logic • 2026 • Business Owners Finance Hub

Case Study (Manufacturing) (2026): One Upgrade, Two Facilities — Plant Finance + a Separate Cash Buffer (Why Bundling Would’ve Been Declined)

This is a structure decision case study — not another “pre-approval plan”. Same upgrade, same borrower, two different ways to fund it: bundled (decline risk) vs split (clean approval path).

If you want the “are we even ready?” baseline first, use: 11 Signs Your Business Is Ready for Asset Finance in 2025. For the main asset lane entry point, start here: Low Doc Asset Finance.

Talk to a Broker Check Eligibility

1) The scenario (one upgrade, two needs)

A manufacturing business needed a key machine upgrade to lift throughput. But the “real cost” wasn’t just the machine — it was installation downtime, tooling, training, and supplier timing while production ramped back up.

The owner initially tried to bundle everything into one request: “finance the machine + give me extra cash for the buffer”. That sounds efficient — but it often reads as “asset finance plus cash-out”, which increases credit risk and conditions.

Real-life example: The machine was $240k. The business also needed a $60k buffer to cover install + ramp-up and avoid cash squeeze. Bundling the $300k as one facility created a “cash-out” red flag. Splitting kept each facility clean and explainable.

2) Why bundling gets declined (the lender logic)

Plant finance is meant to be secured against the asset. When you bundle a cash buffer into the same facility, the lender can’t cleanly tie the full limit to the machine value — which can trigger a valuation haircut, limit reduction, or a straight decline.

It also blurs repayment logic. A machine produces value over years, but a cash buffer is short-life working money. When those are mixed, the deal looks like “long-term debt funding short-term cash”, which lenders hate.

Bundled request = common lender objections

Valuation gap: if the asset values at $230k and you asked for $300k, you’ve created an instant shortfall.
Purpose blur: “equipment finance” becomes “cash-out”, which changes policy lanes.
Term mismatch: you’re trying to finance short-life cash on a long term length.

Consequence if you don’t fix this: you’ll usually get slower assessment (more questions), a lower approved limit, stricter conditions, or a decline — even if the business and machine are strong.

3) The split structure (two facilities, one outcome)

We split it into two facilities with two different “stories” — each clean in its own lane. Facility A was pure plant finance secured to the machine value. Facility B was a separate cash buffer with a short, explainable purpose and tighter controls.

You can think of it like two different products doing two different jobs: Asset Finance for the machine, and Working Capital as the buffer. (If you want a simple “equipment product” refresher first, read: Lease vs Buy Equipment.)

Facility	Purpose	What the lender is comfortable with	Why it’s cleaner
A: Plant facility	Fund the machine purchase	Secured to the asset and its valuation	Limit ties to value; approval criteria stays in the asset lane
B: Cash buffer	Install + ramp-up buffer (short life)	Clear use, short window, simple repayment plan	Separates “cash risk” from “asset risk” so policy stays clean

Real-life example: The plant facility covered the full machine value (based on a clean evidence pack), while the buffer was capped to a defined window (install + first production cycle). Two different lanes, one upgrade delivered.

4) The “proof pack” that made the split work

Two facilities only work if each has a clean evidence trail. The plant side needs clear asset identity + scope. The buffer side needs a clear cashflow rhythm and a simple “what it covers” list.

If you want the fastest submission approach, use the manufacturing “Day 0” pack concept here: Factory Plant Finance “Day 0” Submission Bundle (2026). And if you want to avoid the most common avoidable delays, read: Top 5 Mistakes Business Owners Make When Applying for Equipment Finance.

Buffer clarity (what we wrote in plain English)

Install + commissioning costs (timed to delivery)
Tooling and initial consumables
Supplier timing gap during ramp-up
A defined cap and paydown plan once throughput stabilised

Consequence if you don’t separate the proof: lenders treat the whole request as one messy “cash-out” deal, which drags valuation, conditions, and approval speed down together.

Summary

The manufacturing upgrade only worked because we separated “asset risk” from “cash risk”. One plant facility tied to valuation + one separate cash buffer with a short, clear purpose.

If you’re planning a similar upgrade, start with: Low Doc Asset Finance and make the buffer logic clean under Working Capital. If you want the fastest submission workflow, use the manufacturing Day 0 pack: Day 0 Submission Bundle.

Talk to a Broker Check Eligibility