We structure acquisition and growth financing with banks, funds, other financial institutions and international capital markets.
Overview
The financing of an acquisition, ownership transition, or recapitalisation should reflect the cash the business can generate and the investment it still needs to make. A capital structure review compares the flexibility, cost, and ownership implications of available funding approaches. For a midmarket company, resilience through a trading downturn can matter as much as maximising funding at completion.
What we examine
We assess debt service capacity, seasonality, working capital fluctuations, maintenance investment and the reliability of forecasts. Existing facilities, security arrangements, shareholder loans, leases, and contingent obligations can affect borrowing capacity. Funding alternatives may include bank debt, private credit, asset-backed facilities, equity, or seller financing. Their suitability depends on the business, transaction, and the requirements of the relevant capital providers.
How we support the transaction
We establish the total financing requirement in a sources-and-uses schedule, including fees, refinancing and liquidity retained for operations. An integrated financial model tests repayment profiles, interest costs, and liquidity under base and downside scenarios. A financing brief and term comparison can bring together pricing, amortisation, maturity, covenants, security, and consent requirements. Where several instruments are proposed, the assessment makes their ranking and interaction explicit for detailed review by financing counsel.
Bergweiss structures acquisition and growth financing across banks, debt and equity funds, other financial institutions and international capital markets. Our broad partner network supports both straightforward funding needs and complex cross-border structures. We prepare the financing model and materials, identify suitable capital providers, compare terms and coordinate diligence and documentation. Depending on the business and its stage, the solution may combine bank facilities, private credit, private equity, venture capital or securities financing. Speed, strong relationships and financial expertise guide the process; funding remains subject to approvals and agreed terms.
Decision considerations
The lowest stated interest margin does not necessarily produce the best fit. Fees, mandatory repayments, restrictions on acquisitions or dividends, and refinancing risk influence the overall result. Owners should understand how much covenant and liquidity headroom remains if earnings weaken or customers pay later. Equity may reduce repayment pressure while introducing dilution and governance obligations; the trade-off should be assessed against the company’s priorities.
What we prepare
We agree the scope with you. Depending on your objectives, our work can include:
- A sources-and-uses schedule covering consideration, fees, refinancing and operating liquidity.
- A cash-flow model testing interest, repayments and headroom under base and downside assumptions.
- A funding comparison including fees, maturity, covenants, security and consent requirements.
- A financing information pack and issues list for discussions with prospective capital providers.
3 pages · Practical checklist, questions and space for your priorities.
Practical questions
Why is the interest margin only part of the comparison?
Arrangement fees, repayment schedules, commitment charges and prepayment terms can materially affect total cost. Covenants and restrictions on dividends, acquisitions or additional borrowing also shape flexibility. A comparison should show both the expected cash cost and how each facility behaves if trading weakens or the company needs to invest. Financing counsel reviews the detailed obligations and the interaction between different funding instruments.
How should a downside case be designed?
Use changes linked to the actual business: a slower sales cycle, customer loss, margin pressure, delayed collections or higher input costs. Follow the effect through profit, working capital and cash, rather than applying a single percentage reduction to earnings. The model should show when liquidity or covenant headroom becomes constrained and which management actions are feasible without relying on uncommitted new funding.
