There are many reasons for this — e.g. restruc­tu­ring, opti­miza­tion or the pre-finan­cing of orders after a restruc­tu­ring. Addi­tio­nal finan­cial resour­ces may also be needed to pay off share­hol­ders or purchase companies.

For compa­nies in the manu­fac­tu­ring sector, the purely object-rela­ted finan­cing form of sale & lease back of used machi­nery and produc­tion equip­ment is an inno­va­tive way of procu­ring liqui­dity. Many compa­nies have enorm­ous amounts of tied-up capi­tal in the form of used machi­nery on the shop floor. With sale and lease back, these are sold and leased back directly.

In the future, banks will have even less room for maneu­ver in many finan­cing situa­tions due to the regu­la­ti­ons. — One exam­ple: With the intro­duc­tion of IFRS 9, each indi­vi­dual expo­sure must be reco­gni­zed in the balance sheet at its current fair value, which will result in a higher depo­sit of equity. There is incre­asing pres­sure, for exam­ple, to sell on restruc­tu­ring expo­sures with the asso­cia­ted need for write-downs. It can also be assu­med that banks are unli­kely to accom­pany new credit expo­sures that are risky from their point of view. As a result, the gap in credit­wort­hi­ness will widen even further. Other finan­cing part­ners will incre­asingly fill this gap: Credit rating and bank-inde­pen­dent provi­ders, also private equity compa­nies, fintechs as well as various play­ers on the capi­tal market.

There needs to be a stra­te­gic and broad-based corpo­rate finan­cing with a mix of models and diffe­rent finan­ciers that ensu­res SMEs have suffi­ci­ent funds for various occa­si­ons. Inter­nal finan­cing in the form of sale and lease back of used mobile assets repres­ents a credit­wort­hi­ness and bank-inde­pen­dent — and thus truly alter­na­tive — compo­nent within this mix. Suita­ble for finan­cing inno­va­tion proces­ses, growth, succes­sion and restruc­tu­ring — in other words, for all entre­pre­neu­rial situations.