Financing inventory for a product you have never sold
The minimum order quantity sets the bet. Work out the sell-through you need to break even before you find out what sell-through you get.
Drafted with AI assistance. Not yet independently checked. Nobody has verified the claims on this page against a source, so treat the figures and legal points as a starting point rather than as settled, and confirm anything you are about to act on. How we check things.
Stock of a product you already sell is a cash timing problem. Stock of a product you have never sold is a different thing: a fixed bet placed against an unknown demand curve, with a minimum order quantity chosen by the supplier rather than by you.
The arithmetic that matters is not the margin at full price. It is the sell-through percentage at which you get your money back.
The break-even sell-through
Financed over nine months at an illustrative 14 per cent, the money costs about 3,114. Total to recover: 32,774.
At full price, that is 840 units — a sell-through of 46.7 per cent.
Now adjust for the fact that new products rarely sell out at list. If the average realised price across the run is 75 per cent of list, because some of it moves on promotion, break-even is 1,120 units, or 62.2 per cent sell-through.
That is the number to argue about. Not "will it sell" but "will 62 per cent of it sell at an average of three-quarters of list within nine months". That question can be answered with evidence; the first cannot.
A realistic outcome, priced
Take a distribution rather than a point estimate. Suppose 70 per cent sells at full price, 15 per cent at half price, and 15 per cent never sells:
- 1,260 units at 39: 49,140
- 270 units at 19.50: 5,265
- 270 units written off: 0
Revenue 54,405, less landed cost 29,660 and finance 3,114, leaves 21,631. A good outcome. It is also a cliff: the difference between this and the 62 per cent break-even case is roughly eight percentage points of sell-through.
Run the same table at 50 per cent full price, 20 per cent half price and 30 per cent dead, and the position is 900 units at 39 plus 360 at 19.50, or 42,120 — still above cost, but the return no longer compensates for nine months of tied-up cash and shelf space.
What reduces the bet
The shelf-space cost nobody books
There is a second cost that never appears on the finance quote. The 1,800 units occupy space, working capital and attention that a proven product could have used. If your best-selling line turns four times a year at a 40 per cent margin, 29,660 tied up in it would have produced roughly 47,000 of gross profit over twelve months. The new product has to beat that, not merely beat zero.
This is the reason serious buyers cap new-product exposure rather than judging each opportunity on its own merits. Every untested SKU is funded by displacing a tested one, and the displacement is invisible because the proven product never shows up as a loss.
Why lenders price this differently
New-product inventory is weak collateral and lenders treat it accordingly. In a borrowing base, inventory typically carries a low advance rate, and slow-moving or aged stock becomes ineligible — which means the goods you most need to finance are the goods that stop generating availability. See what is a borrowing base.
The practical consequence: do not assume the stock will finance itself once it lands. An inventory facility will lend against what has a demonstrated turn rate. A new SKU has none, so the money usually has to come from a general-purpose facility underwritten on your overall cash flow, which means it is really your whole business standing behind the bet.
The pre-commitment checklist
- Compute the break-even unit count at full price and at a realistic average realised price. Write both down.
- Compare that to the best comparable you have actually sold. If the new product needs a faster turn than anything in your range achieves, the plan is assuming a better business than you have.
- Set the markdown ladder before the order, with dates: day 60 at 15 per cent off, day 90 at 30, day 120 clear it. Written down in advance, it gets executed. Decided in the moment, it gets deferred until the goods are worthless.
- Cap the exposure as a share of something. A common self-imposed rule is that a single untested product cannot exceed a set percentage of total inventory value or of monthly gross profit. Choose the number when you are calm.
- Match the finance term to the expected clearance date plus a buffer, and check for prepayment terms so clearing early actually saves money.
- Decide in advance what a failure looks like and what you will do: a liquidator, a wholesale channel, a bundle with a proven product. Knowing the exit before the entry is what keeps a bad bet from becoming a bad year.
The honest framing is that this is a purchase of an option on demand. Price it that way, size it so that a total loss is survivable, and do not fund it with money whose payments assume it worked.
Where this applies
Related questions
What does this guide cover?
The minimum order quantity sets the bet. Work out the sell-through you need to break even before you find out what sell-through you get.
Which funding products does this apply to?
Working Capital, Term Loan, Business Line of Credit, Asset-Based Lending. Each has its own page listing the funders in this directory that offer it and what each one publishes about its terms.
Is this specific to retail?
It is written around how a retail business actually generates and collects cash, which is what makes its funding problem different. The mechanics transfer; the arithmetic may not.
Who writes this?
The Find Me Funders research desk. Some drafting is AI-assisted, and every page that is says so at the top, including whether a person has checked its claims yet.
How do I know a figure here is right?
Where a page carries the green notice, its claims were checked against the sources listed at the end and a reviewer is named. Where it carries the amber one, nobody has verified it yet and you should confirm anything you plan to act on.
Are the examples real deals?
No. Every worked example is labelled illustrative and exists to show the arithmetic. What any particular lender charges is on that lender's page, where it publishes it.
Why do you never say what a typical rate is?
Because we cannot source it. A market average assembled from lenders who do not publish prices is a guess with a decimal point on it. Where a lender publishes a figure, we show that figure and say where it came from.
Is this financial or legal advice?
No. It is general information about how these products work. Outcomes depend on your contract and your state, and a lawyer or accountant licensed where you are is the person to ask about your situation.
Can I reuse this content?
Quote a paragraph with a link back. Do not republish whole articles.