🌟 The project that didn’t make it to the Maclear platform: why?

Usually, we don't talk about projects we reject. The Maclear team follows stringent guidelines and only approves projects that truly fit our risk standards. Most applications don't even make it to the final round.

But this one was analyzed longer than usual before saying “no”.

Here’s on what was wrong with what seemed like a standard request from a Bulgarian company:

🌟 First, the request.

The company operates in the light industry sector. Stable revenue, 11 years in the register, reliable clients, multiple suppliers. There was a change of shareholder and regular business activity.

They sought finances to buy new equipment. On the surface: a solid, regular borrower.

🌟 Second, the deeper analysis.

• High debt load

The company already had two active bank loans, and its total debt was close to annual revenue — 0.85 debt-to-revenue ratio.

Adding a P2P loan would have pushed the ratio even higher.

• Control over business

The shareholder change was formally normal. But the new owner had no light industry experience, and the change happened just 4 months before the loan request — too soon to judge whether the company benefited from new ownership.

Plus, the structure became less transparent. The new shareholder brought in two minority partners whose backgrounds and funding sources were not clearly disclosed.

• Cash flow instability

Despite stable revenue on paper, the company's cash flow was inconsistent.

Seasonal dips in demand created cash flow gaps of 2–3 months per year, during which they relied on short-term bridging loans to cover payroll and supplier payments. This pattern increased the risk of default if the new equipment didn't generate expected returns quickly.

🌟 These three factors weighed against the project, so the final decision was rejection.

And that's okay. It's not about the company being “bad”. It’s rather about protecting investors’ money and interests.