STEELMAN
For lenders and receivers

Hold or act.
Make it defensible in writing.

The decision is rarely about whether the borrower is viable. It is about whether you can show, afterwards, that the call was reasonable on what was in front of you. That requires the recovery case and the counter-case side by side, with every assumption exposed rather than buried.

What you are up against

The file argues one side

Material arrives from the borrower, built to persuade, with the unfavourable readings left out.

The committee cannot test anything

A recommendation nobody around the table can interrogate is a recommendation taken on trust, which is exactly what nobody wants on the record.

Timing is invisible

A trailing-twelve-month test means the quarter a fix starts working is not the quarter the ratio moves. Files rarely show that, so the wait looks like drift.

A look inside

The test it would never have failed

Eight closed and reported quarters, restated as they would have read with the plan running from the first of them. Set every lever to rest and the two lines sit on top of each other, breach included. From Kestrel Fabrication Ltd..

Quarters in breach as reported
2 of 5
on the trailing twelve-month test
Quarters in breach restated
0 of 5
same quarters, different decisions
Trailing EBITDA
$588k → $759k
no capital, no new plant, no new system
Both cases on one page, with the counter-argument priced in
Attrition charged against repricing rather than argued away
The revolver effect on fixed charges, shown explicitly
Every figure reconciled to the filed quarters
Unlock the full exampleYour name and email, once. Nothing automated follows.
Other situations

Five more we build for.

Send us a live file and we will tell you within a day.

If there is an edge worth communicating in your numbers, we will say what it is and how we would make it. If there is not, we will say that instead and charge you nothing.

Start a conversation