A typical development may combine the developer's own equity with a senior construction loan. Where the senior lender will not provide enough debt to complete the funding requirement, the developer may need to contribute more cash or introduce another layer of capital.
Mezzanine finance is one way to fill that gap.
Senior debt and mezzanine finance are both forms of borrowing, but they do not carry the same risk, security position, pricing, control rights or repayment priority. Senior debt is normally the first-ranking and lower-cost component of the capital stack. Mezzanine finance sits behind the senior lender and ahead of the developer's equity, taking greater risk in return for a higher expected return.
The practical issue for a developer is not simply which facility has the lower interest rate. The real question is how the complete funding structure affects:
the amount of developer equity required;
the total cost of finance;
project profitability;
cash retained for contingencies and other projects;
lender control;
execution certainty;
downside risk; and
the project's ability to reach completion and repay all funding.
This guide explains the difference between senior debt and mezzanine finance, how the two can work together, and what Australian property developers should examine before accepting a layered funding structure.
1. What Is Senior Debt?
Senior debt is the primary loan used to fund the acquisition, construction or refinance of a property development project.
It is described as "senior" because the lender generally ranks first in the repayment and security hierarchy. In a development transaction, the senior lender will commonly require a first-ranking registered mortgage over the development property and additional security over the borrowing entity, project accounts, contracts, insurances and related rights.
If the project performs as planned, the senior loan is repaid from the agreed exit, such as:
presale settlements;
sales of completed dwellings or lots;
sale of a completed commercial asset;
refinance into an investment facility; or
another lender-approved repayment source.
If the borrower defaults and the lender enforces its security, the senior lender is generally paid from the available security proceeds before subordinated lenders and equity investors.
That priority position usually makes senior debt less risky than mezzanine finance. As a result, senior debt will normally have a lower interest rate and lower expected return than a mezzanine facility for the same project.
Senior development debt can be provided by:
major banks;
second-tier banks;
non-bank lenders;
private credit funds;
institutional lenders; and
specialist development financiers.
The lender's name is less important than the actual terms. A senior loan from a private lender may be more flexible than a bank facility but could also carry a higher price. Developers should compare the complete structure rather than assuming every first-mortgage facility is the same.
2. What Is Mezzanine Finance?
Mezzanine finance is a subordinated layer of capital that sits between senior debt and developer equity in the funding structure.
The word "mezzanine" describes its middle position in the capital stack.
A mezzanine lender agrees that the senior lender will have priority. The mezzanine lender is therefore repaid after the senior debt but before ordinary equity receives distributions. Because the mezzanine lender takes a junior position and has less protection if the project underperforms, it generally requires a higher return.
Mezzanine finance may be secured through one or more of the following, subject to the senior lender's approval and the agreed transaction structure:
a second-ranking mortgage;
a general security agreement over the project entity;
security over shares or units in the project entity;
guarantees from the developer or related entities;
assignments of project rights or distributions; and
contractual rights under an intercreditor or priority deed.
Not every mezzanine facility uses the same security. Some senior lenders will not permit a second mortgage and may only allow alternative subordinated security. The legal structure must be negotiated with both funding parties.
Mezzanine funding is commonly used to reduce the amount of cash equity the developer needs to contribute. It may also help bridge a temporary equity gap where capital is tied up in another project, provided the development remains sufficiently profitable and resilient after allowing for the higher finance cost.
3. Where Each Facility Sits in the Capital Stack
The capital stack shows the order in which the project's funding sources absorb risk and receive repayment.
A simplified development capital stack may be presented as follows:
Senior debt - first-ranking debt and first to be repaid.
Mezzanine debt - subordinated debt and repaid after senior debt.
Preferred equity - if used, generally ranks ahead of ordinary equity under the investment agreement.
Ordinary developer or joint-venture equity - last to be repaid and first to absorb losses.
The exact structure can vary, but the risk principle is consistent.
Capital at the top of the stack normally has stronger security and lower risk. Capital lower in the stack accepts more risk and therefore expects a higher return.
The developer's equity is the first-loss position. If the completed value is lower than forecast or project costs are higher, the reduction generally affects the equity return before it creates a loss for the senior lender. If the loss is large enough to exhaust the equity, it begins to affect the mezzanine layer. The senior lender is affected only after the lower-ranking capital has been absorbed.
This is why the same project can support different pricing for senior debt, mezzanine debt and equity. Each capital provider is exposed to a different part of the risk.
4. The Key Differences at a Glance
Senior Debt
normally holds first-ranking security;
is paid first from project proceeds;
carries lower risk relative to subordinated capital;
generally has a lower interest rate and fee burden;
usually provides more conservative leverage;
may require more developer equity;
often has detailed construction, presale and covenant requirements; and
controls major project decisions through the facility documents.
Mezzanine Finance
sits behind the senior lender;
is repaid after senior debt and before ordinary equity;
takes greater risk than the senior lender;
generally has a higher interest rate or required return;
can increase total project leverage;
can reduce the developer's cash-equity contribution;
normally requires the senior lender's consent; and
often involves an intercreditor or priority arrangement.
The two facilities are not direct substitutes in every transaction. Senior debt normally forms the foundation of the funding structure. Mezzanine finance is an additional layer used where there is a gap between the senior facility and the equity the developer is willing or able to contribute.
5. Security and Repayment Priority
Security and priority are among the most important differences between senior debt and mezzanine finance.
Senior Lender Position
The senior lender will commonly require:
a first-ranking registered mortgage over the development property;
a first-ranking general security interest over the borrower;
control of the project bank accounts;
assignment or noting of key insurances;
rights concerning the building contract, presales and material project agreements;
guarantees and indemnities; and
covenants restricting additional debt, asset disposals and distributions.
The precise package depends on the lender, borrower and project.
“Senior is the floor; mezzanine is the stretch.”
— The Australian Property Development Handbook
Mezzanine Lender Position
The mezzanine lender accepts that its enforcement and repayment rights are subordinate to the senior lender. Its security may include a second mortgage or entity-level security, but those rights are normally regulated by an intercreditor or priority deed.
That deed may determine:
which lender can take enforcement action;
whether the mezzanine lender must wait during a standstill period;
how enforcement proceeds are distributed;
whether the mezzanine lender can cure a senior default;
how amendments to the senior facility are handled;
how additional advances rank;
what information each lender receives; and
whether the mezzanine lender can purchase or refinance the senior debt.
Developers should not treat the intercreditor deed as a document that only concerns the lenders. Its terms can materially affect what happens if the project runs into difficulty.
6. Leverage and Developer Equity
Senior lenders generally limit their exposure by reference to one or more measures, including:
loan-to-cost ratio;
loan-to-value ratio;
loan-to-gross-realisation-value ratio;
peak debt;
presale debt cover;
completed investment value;
the developer's hard-equity contribution; and
minimum projected profit or interest cover.
Where the senior facility does not cover the complete funding requirement, the shortfall must be met through developer equity or another capital source.
Mezzanine finance can fund part of that shortfall.
For example, assume a project requires $30 million in total development cost. A senior lender may approve $19.5 million, leaving $10.5 million to be funded by the developer.
A mezzanine lender might provide an additional $6 million, reducing the developer's required equity to $4.5 million.
The mezzanine facility has not changed the project's cost. It has changed who provides the capital and how the risk is divided.
This distinction matters because mezzanine debt is not automatically treated as developer equity. A senior lender may require a minimum amount of genuine cash or unencumbered land equity to remain at risk. The senior lender must approve the subordinated funding and be satisfied that the total debt burden does not undermine the project.
7. Pricing and Total Cost
Senior debt is generally cheaper because the lender holds the strongest security and first repayment priority.
Mezzanine finance is normally more expensive because the lender takes greater risk and may have limited control over enforcement while the senior facility remains outstanding.
The cost of either facility can include more than the headline interest rate.
Senior Debt Costs May Include
interest on drawn funds;
establishment or application fees;
line or commitment fees;
undrawn fees;
valuation costs;
quantity surveyor fees;
legal costs;
monitoring fees;
extension fees;
default interest; and
early repayment or break costs.
Mezzanine Finance Costs May Include
cash-pay interest;
capitalised or payment-in-kind interest;
establishment fees;
line or commitment fees;
legal and intercreditor costs;
monitoring fees;
minimum interest periods;
minimum-dollar-return requirements;
MOIC floors;
exit fees; and
in some structures, profit participation or equity-linked returns.
Developers should model the total dollar cost under the expected project timeline and under delayed scenarios.
A mezzanine facility that appears acceptable over 15 months may become considerably more expensive if construction and settlements extend to 21 months. A minimum return can also make the effective cost high where the facility is repaid earlier than expected.
8. Interest Payment and Drawdown Mechanics
Senior development loans are usually drawn progressively as eligible project costs are incurred and certified. The lender may fund land acquisition, construction, professional fees, statutory costs and interest, subject to the approved budget and facility conditions.
Mezzanine funding can be structured in several ways.
It may be:
advanced at financial close;
contributed after the developer's equity but before senior debt;
drawn proportionately with the senior lender;
drawn only after the senior facility reaches an agreed threshold; or
held as a standby amount for specific funding requirements.
Interest may be paid monthly or capitalised. If interest is capitalised, the loan balance increases over time and must be included in the peak-debt analysis.
The order in which equity, mezzanine debt and senior debt are contributed has a significant effect on the developer's cash flow and the amount of interest incurred.
Developers should confirm:
which capital is contributed first;
how each drawdown is approved;
whether both lenders must approve variations;
who receives the quantity surveyor's reports;
whether savings can offset overruns;
how interest reserves are calculated; and
what happens if one lender refuses to fund.
9. Documentation and Intercreditor Complexity
A senior-only facility involves one lender, one primary facility agreement and one security package.
Adding mezzanine finance creates another credit process, another set of lawyers and another lender with its own conditions.
The transaction may require:
a senior facility agreement;
a mezzanine facility agreement;
first-ranking security documents;
mezzanine security documents;
an intercreditor or priority deed;
amended project-account arrangements;
consents to second-ranking security;
additional guarantees; and
coordinated conditions precedent.
This can increase legal cost and execution time.
It can also create negotiation risk. The senior and mezzanine lenders must agree on matters such as permitted payments, enforcement rights, standstill periods, amendments, additional funding and default remedies.
A good layered funding structure is therefore not only about obtaining two approvals. The two facilities must be capable of closing and operating together.
10. Benefits of Senior Debt
Lower Cost of Capital
Senior debt is generally the lowest-cost external capital in the development stack. Using more developer equity and less subordinated finance can preserve project profit and provide a larger buffer against delays or cost increases.
Simpler Structure
One senior lender usually means fewer documents, fewer approval parties and no intercreditor negotiation.
Stronger Equity Buffer
A lower-leverage structure leaves more equity beneath the debt. This can help absorb valuation declines, cost overruns and slower settlements.
Potentially Easier Exit
A project with less debt may be easier to repay through sales or refinance. This can be particularly important where the developer intends to retain the completed asset and transition to an investment loan.
Lower Sensitivity to Delay
Because senior debt generally costs less than mezzanine finance, an extended project period may have a less severe impact on the total finance cost.
11. Limitations of Senior Debt
Talk to BluCow about your project →
Higher Developer Equity Requirement
The principal disadvantage is that the developer may need to contribute substantially more cash or land equity.
Reduced Liquidity
Committing more equity to one project can reduce the developer's ability to manage overruns, fund another development or acquire a new site.
Potentially Stricter Policy Requirements
Some senior lenders may require more presales, stronger pre-leasing, fixed-price construction contracts, additional guarantees or a more conservative valuation position.
Less Flexibility for Complex Transactions
A mainstream senior lender may not support an unusual asset, compressed settlement, incomplete approval position, speculative project or complex ownership structure.
Senior debt is cheaper, but the lowest-cost lender is not useful if its conditions cannot be satisfied or its timing does not match the transaction.
12. Benefits of Mezzanine Finance
Reduced Cash-Equity Requirement
Mezzanine finance can allow the developer to complete the capital stack without introducing as much additional cash.
Retention of Ownership
Unlike ordinary joint-venture equity, mezzanine debt does not normally give the lender an ownership share in the project, although some facilities may include profit-linked or equity-style economics.
Preservation of Capital
The developer may retain capital for contingencies, another project or an acquisition opportunity.
Potentially Higher Return on Developer Equity
Using less equity can increase the return on the developer's invested capital if the project performs as forecast and the additional finance cost is controlled.
Bridge Between Projects
Mezzanine finance can be useful where the developer's equity is temporarily tied up in another project that is close to completion or settlement.
More Flexible Capital Structure
A specialist mezzanine lender may support a transaction that cannot be completed with senior debt alone, provided the project and sponsor can support the additional leverage.
13. Risks and Disadvantages of Mezzanine Finance
Higher Total Finance Cost
The higher return required by the mezzanine lender reduces the project's profit and can materially affect returns if the project is delayed.
Greater Leverage
More debt means less room for error. Cost overruns, sales discounts and valuation reductions can erode the equity buffer quickly.
“You pay for every extra dollar of leverage — twice over.”
— The Australian Property Development Handbook
Two-Lender Execution Risk
Both lenders must approve the structure and agree on priority arrangements. A delay or change in one facility can affect the other.
Additional Control Rights
The mezzanine lender may require consent rights over budgets, variations, sales, distributions, additional debt and changes to the project team.
Potential for Conflicting Lender Objectives
The senior lender's priority is protecting repayment of the senior debt. The mezzanine lender may have a different view about extensions, asset sales, additional funding or enforcement. The intercreditor arrangement must address these tensions.
Refinance Risk
A highly leveraged project may be difficult to refinance, especially if the developer intends to hold the completed asset and the stabilised income does not support the total debt.
Equity Call Risk
If the project exceeds budget, the lenders may require the developer to contribute additional equity before further drawdowns are made.
Loss Magnification
Leverage can increase the return on equity when a project succeeds, but it also magnifies the effect of underperformance. A relatively modest decline in value can eliminate a large portion of the developer's equity.
14. Illustrative Funding Comparison
Consider a simplified townhouse development with the following assumptions:
total development cost: $30 million;
gross realisation value: $39 million;
projected profit before finance: $9 million; and
expected debt term: 18 months.
Option A: Senior Debt Only
Assume the senior lender provides 65% of total development cost.
senior facility: $19.5 million;
developer equity: $10.5 million.
Option B: Senior Debt Plus Mezzanine Finance
Assume the senior facility remains $19.5 million and a mezzanine lender provides another $6 million.
senior facility: $19.5 million;
mezzanine facility: $6 million;
developer equity: $4.5 million.
The mezzanine structure reduces the developer's initial equity requirement by $6 million.
Now assume, solely for illustration and not as an indication of current market pricing, that:
the senior facility has an average drawn balance of $12 million at 9% per annum for 18 months; and
the mezzanine facility has an average drawn balance of $4 million at 18% per annum for 18 months.
The simplified interest would be approximately:
senior interest: $1.62 million; and
mezzanine interest: $1.08 million.
Under the senior-only option, the simplified interest is $1.62 million. Under the layered structure, total simplified interest is $2.70 million before establishment fees, legal costs, minimum returns and other charges.
The developer has preserved $6 million of equity but paid approximately $1.08 million of additional simplified interest.
That trade-off may be attractive if the retained capital:
provides an essential contingency buffer;
allows another profitable project to proceed;
avoids giving up a large share of the project's profit to an equity partner; or
solves a temporary equity-timing issue.
It may be unattractive if the retained cash has no productive use or if the additional finance cost leaves the project with an inadequate margin.
The example also shows why return on equity should not be considered in isolation. Reducing the developer's equity can make the percentage return appear higher, but the project has also become more leveraged and more sensitive to delay, cost increases and lower sales values.
15. When Senior Debt Alone May Be the Better Choice
A senior-only structure may be preferable where:
the developer has sufficient equity and liquidity;
the project profit margin is modest;
cost certainty is limited;
the exit depends on a refinance with conservative serviceability;
the project may take longer than forecast;
the developer does not have a valuable use for the capital preserved by mezzanine funding;
the senior lender's conditions are achievable;
simplicity and lower cost are more important than maximum leverage; or
the developer wants a larger equity buffer beneath the debt.
Contributing more equity can feel inefficient, but it may create a safer and more profitable project once the full cost and risk of mezzanine finance are considered.
16. When Mezzanine Finance May Be Appropriate
Mezzanine finance may suit a project where:
the senior facility is insufficient to complete the capital stack;
the project has a strong, evidence-based profit margin;
the developer has relevant experience and a capable delivery team;
planning, construction and exit risks are well understood;
the developer wants to preserve capital for another productive use;
additional ordinary equity would cause excessive ownership dilution;
the project can absorb the higher finance cost;
the senior lender permits subordinated debt;
both lenders can coordinate documentation and drawdowns; and
downside modelling shows that the development remains viable under reasonable stress.
Mezzanine finance is best used as part of a deliberate capital strategy, not as a last-minute attempt to rescue an undercapitalised or marginal project.
17. Alternatives to Mezzanine Finance
Mezzanine debt is only one way to fill the gap between senior debt and developer equity.
Running your own numbers?
Open the feasibility calculators →Stretch Senior Funding
One lender provides a higher-leverage senior facility at a blended price. This can avoid a separate intercreditor structure but may still involve a high total cost, minimum returns and tighter controls.
Preferred Equity
An investor contributes capital that ranks ahead of ordinary equity under the investment agreement. Preferred equity may involve a priority return, profit participation and substantial control rights.
Joint-Venture Equity
An equity partner contributes capital in exchange for an agreed share of project ownership and profit. There is no fixed debt repayment in the same way as a loan, but the developer gives up part of the upside and may share control.
Landowner Equity or Deferred Settlement
A landowner may contribute the site to a joint venture or agree to deferred consideration. This can reduce the cash required at acquisition but creates its own legal, tax and commercial issues.
Additional Developer Equity
The developer can contribute more cash, refinance another asset or retain more equity in the project. This is often the cheapest capital economically, although it concentrates the developer's own funds.
The correct choice depends on cost, control, risk, timing, dilution, security and the commercial value of retaining capital.
18. What Senior and Mezzanine Lenders Will Assess
Both lenders will review the underlying project, but their perspectives are not identical.
Developer and Sponsor
They will assess experience, financial capacity, liquidity, net worth, conduct, prior projects and the ability to manage difficulties.
Site and Planning
The lenders will review ownership, planning approvals, conditions, easements, contamination, infrastructure, staging and remaining approval risks.
Feasibility
The development feasibility should include realistic revenue, complete costs, finance charges, contingency and sensitivity analysis.
Valuation
An independent valuer may assess the current site value, gross realisation value, completed investment value, market demand and sale or leasing evidence.
Builder and Construction Contract
The lenders will consider the builder's experience and financial capacity, contract type, exclusions, program, liquidated damages, variations and quantity-surveyor findings.
Equity and Funding Sources
The source and timing of developer equity must be verified. The senior lender will also need to approve the mezzanine facility and confirm how it ranks.
Presales or Pre-Leasing
The lenders may assess the number, quality, enforceability, deposits, purchaser concentration and settlement profile of presales, or the covenant and lease terms of commercial tenants.
Exit Strategy
The repayment plan must be specific, credible and supported by the project's timeline and market evidence.
“Match the layer to the risk it carries.”
— The Australian Property Development Handbook
Downside Resilience
The lenders will test the effect of higher costs, lower values, delayed completion, slower sales and increased interest.
19. Questions to Ask When Comparing the Two Structures
Facility Amount and Leverage
What is the senior facility limit?
What is the mezzanine facility limit?
Which leverage measures apply to each facility?
Are capitalised interest and fees included in the limits?
What costs are excluded from lender funding?
Pricing and Return
What interest rate applies to each facility?
Is interest paid or capitalised?
What establishment, line, monitoring and exit fees apply?
Is there a minimum interest period or MOIC floor?
How does the total cost change if the project is early or late?
Contribution Sequence
When must developer equity be contributed?
When does mezzanine funding begin?
Does senior debt draw proportionately or only after other capital is used?
Who funds cost overruns?
Security and Guarantees
What first-ranking security does the senior lender require?
What security is permitted for the mezzanine lender?
Are personal, corporate or limited guarantees required?
What recourse applies if the project underperforms?
Intercreditor Arrangements
Who controls enforcement?
What standstill period applies to the mezzanine lender?
Can the mezzanine lender cure a senior default?
Can either lender make additional advances?
How are facility amendments and extensions approved?
Drawdowns and Project Control
Which lender approves drawdowns?
Must both lenders approve budget variations?
Who controls project bank accounts?
What sales, pricing and release controls apply?
Can distributions be made before both facilities are repaid?
Term and Exit
Do both facilities mature on the same date?
What extension rights exist?
What fees and conditions apply to an extension?
Can the facilities be refinanced or repaid early?
Is the proposed exit sufficient to repay both debt layers?
Default and Remedies
What events constitute default under each facility?
Can a default under one loan trigger a default under the other?
What remedy periods are available?
What default interest and enforcement costs apply?
20. Which Option Is Better?
Neither senior debt nor mezzanine finance is universally better.
Senior debt is usually better where the developer can contribute the required equity and wants the lowest practical cost, a simpler structure and a larger buffer against project risk.
Mezzanine finance can be better where the project is strong, the developer wants to preserve capital, the additional debt creates a clear commercial benefit and the project can comfortably absorb the higher cost.
The decision should be made by comparing complete, executable structures.
A developer should model at least:
the expected case;
a construction-cost increase;
a three-month and six-month delay;
lower sales prices or valuation;
slower settlement or leasing;
extension fees;
minimum-return provisions; and
the amount of additional equity that may be required under stress.
The best funding package is not necessarily the one with the most debt or the lowest headline rate. It is the structure that provides enough capital to complete the project, preserves an acceptable risk-adjusted profit and remains manageable if the development does not proceed exactly as forecast.
Frequently Asked Questions
These principles come from our free guide.
Download the handbook →Is mezzanine finance the same as a second mortgage?
Not necessarily. A mezzanine lender may take a second-ranking mortgage, but the security can also be structured through shares, units, general security agreements, guarantees or contractual rights. The senior lender must approve the subordinated security and priority arrangements.
Is mezzanine debt treated as equity by the senior lender?
Generally not in the same way as genuine developer equity. A senior lender may permit mezzanine finance but still require a minimum hard-equity contribution from the developer.
Why does mezzanine finance cost more?
The mezzanine lender ranks behind the senior lender and is exposed to loss sooner if the project's value falls or costs increase. It receives a higher return for accepting that additional risk and weaker priority.
Can the same lender provide both senior and mezzanine debt?
Yes. A lender or related funding group may provide multiple tranches, or a single lender may offer a unitranche or stretch senior structure. The legal and pricing arrangements vary.
Does mezzanine finance always dilute the developer's ownership?
Standard mezzanine debt does not usually transfer ordinary ownership, but some facilities include profit participation, conversion rights, warrants or equity-style returns. The documents must be reviewed carefully.
Can interest on both facilities be capitalised?
Potentially, subject to the lender's approval and the facility limits. Capitalised interest increases peak debt and must be included in the feasibility and leverage calculations.
Who gets repaid first at settlement?
The senior lender is normally repaid first, followed by the mezzanine lender. Developer or investor equity distributions occur after the debt obligations and other agreed costs are satisfied.
Can mezzanine finance be added after the senior loan settles?
Possibly, but the senior lender's consent will normally be required. Adding subordinated debt later may trigger a full credit reassessment, new valuation, amended security documents and intercreditor negotiations.
Is mezzanine finance suitable for first-time developers?
It can be difficult because limited experience combined with higher leverage increases risk. A lender may require more equity, a highly experienced builder and development manager, stronger guarantees, presales or a straightforward project.
What is the main warning when using mezzanine debt?
Do not focus only on the reduction in upfront equity. Model the full dollar cost, extension risk, lender controls, downside scenarios and the amount of equity that could still be required if the project exceeds budget.
Final Thoughts
Senior debt and mezzanine finance occupy different positions in the development capital stack.
Senior debt provides the foundation. It normally holds first-ranking security, receives repayment first and costs less because it takes less risk.
Mezzanine finance fills part of the gap between the senior facility and developer equity. It can reduce the developer's cash contribution and preserve capital, but it adds cost, leverage, documentation and another lender relationship.
For a strong project, mezzanine funding can be an effective way to improve capital efficiency and avoid excessive equity dilution. For a marginal project, it can consume the remaining profit and leave very little room for delays, cost overruns or weaker sales.
The decision should therefore be based on the complete project economics rather than the headline leverage.
Developers should compare senior-only, senior-plus-mezzanine, stretch senior and equity alternatives using the same assumptions. They should also test each structure under realistic downside scenarios before committing to a term sheet.
How BluCow Capital Can Help
We can help developers compare senior debt, mezzanine finance, stretch senior, preferred equity and joint-venture options by reviewing the feasibility, valuation, equity contribution, construction structure, presales or leasing, lender requirements and exit strategy.
The objective is not simply to maximise leverage. It is to identify an executable capital structure that provides enough funding to complete the project while protecting liquidity, project profit and the developer's longer-term strategy.
To discuss funding for an upcoming property development, contact BluCow Capital or submit an enquiry through blucowcapital.com.au.
Disclaimer
This article provides general information only and does not constitute financial, legal, tax, investment or credit advice. Lending criteria, pricing, leverage, security, intercreditor arrangements and approval requirements vary between lenders and transactions. Developers should obtain advice appropriate to their circumstances and have all facility and security documents reviewed before entering into a funding arrangement.