The problem is not access to capital – It’s preparation
Many companies continue to concentrate their key decisions in one or two people, a dynamic that can be seen as a risk, explains financier Jesús D. Mattei
April 26, 2026 – 11:07 PM
Obtaining financing requires much more than simply having a company’s books in order, according to Sygnus Capital Vice President Jesús D. Mattei.
In Puerto Rico, many strong businesses — including family-owned companies with decades of history — face challenges when trying to finance their growth, not because they lack potential, but because they enter the process without having built the foundations that capital providers require.
There is a common perception that approaching a bank simply involves presenting financial statements and explaining a need. In reality, it is a far more demanding process: a structured evaluation designed to determine whether a company represents a manageable risk. And that evaluation is not defined in a single meeting. It is determined long before that point.
In practice, every financial institution conducts its own due diligence. The difference between companies that gain access to capital on favorable terms and those that do not lies in who leads that process. The best-positioned companies conduct that evaluation internally first.
What Is a Bank Really Evaluating?
First, the quality of financial information. It is not enough to provide statements prepared solely for tax purposes. What lenders seek is consistency, traceability, and, above all, future visibility. Credible projections with clear assumptions carry as much weight as historical results. A company that cannot explain how it plans to grow will struggle to justify why it needs capital.
Second, operational dependency. Many companies continue to concentrate key decisions in one or two people. From a credit perspective, this is not efficiency — it is risk. The absence of clear management structures and defined processes limits scalability and reduces third-party confidence.
Third, corporate formality. Informal agreements, incomplete documentation, or ambiguous structures create friction throughout the process. Capital providers seek certainty: they want to understand who is in control, how decisions are made, and what mechanisms exist to manage conflicts. Without that clarity, even viable transactions can stall.
Timing and the Right Door
Fourth, the relationship with the financial system. The best financing terms are rarely negotiated during moments of urgency. They are built over time through transparency, consistency, and credibility. At the same time, the ecosystem has evolved: private funds and specialized credit structures now complement traditional banking, enabling more flexible solutions when needed.
One common mistake is treating all capital as interchangeable. It is not. The financing structure must align with the intended use of funds. Financing long-term growth with short-term debt can create unnecessary pressure on cash flow and compromise operations.
It is also necessary to anticipate difficult questions. Customer concentration, resilience during economic downturns, and supplier dependency are among the factors that will always be evaluated. Avoiding these issues does not improve the perception of risk; understanding and managing them does.
In our experience, the most common limitations in financing processes are not caused by structural weaknesses within the business itself, but by a lack of preparation in presenting the company properly. And that preparation requires discipline, not urgency.
Puerto Rico has a resilient business community. But scaling to the next level requires adopting more rigorous practices. Access to capital should not be viewed as a transactional event, but rather as a capability that is continuously developed.
Ultimately, capital does not evaluate numbers alone. It evaluates clarity, structure, and execution capacity. Companies that understand this stop chasing financing and begin attracting it.
