depends on the quality of the company, but there can be unsecured loans/revolvers. For a syndication, the bank has to take into consideration many different factors (both qualitative and quant). Also, the bank's relationship (and ability to cross-sell) with the client has a HUGE influence on the amount that the bank is willing to commit

 

Like Yacht man said, I'm pretty sure that revolvers will be secured with company assets and with around 85% of eligible A/R & inventory. Term loans will be similar to the revolvers and both will be 1st lien on the company's assets.

The other side of that will be the interest rates banks charge on those and lenders will have covenants about things like EBITDA or the leverage ratio.

@bigmonkey; unsecured revolvers & term loans? Do you have an example?

 

I want to say it's fairly easy. I've seen some shockingly bad companies with revolvers. I've even seen a company that was in default of their existing revolver, refinance and pay of the old revolver with a new revolver.

 
Best Response

Most people here are clueless. Assuming a company is not in distress, revolver's will typically be sized to be able to fund the most extreme working capital swings a company could have. They are designed to fund continuing operations in the short term. Revolver's typically have a 1st Lien on all assets of the company. The 85% of A/R, 65% of Inventory, etc. that people are referring to only refers to ABL's. An ABL is cheaper but has a borrowing base calculated off advance rates like the one above. A regular revover's size does not change whereas an ABL's borrowing base changes on a quarterly basis. Also note that unlike someone said, revolvers do not function at all on the ability to syndicate. As revolvers are only drawn on a temporary basis, CLO's and hedge funds never bought revovler paper. They are pretty much only held on a institutional basis. Now term loans as described below do depend on this, but entirely different market.

Term loans are sized depending on the deal. In an all bank debt LBO structure of two years ago, all the TL paper was sold to CLO's allowing for cheaper borrowing than the bond market. Companies were levered upward of 4.0x through TL's at the height of the boom. In these cases you might have a TLB and TLC, the TLB secured and pari passu with the revolver and the TLC with a 2nd Lien. Nowadays, no one is doing TL's because there are no buyers of the paper.

 
jws43yale:
Most people here are clueless. Assuming a company is not in distress, revolver's will typically be sized to be able to fund the most extreme working capital swings a company could have. They are designed to fund continuing operations in the short term. Revolver's typically have a 1st Lien on all assets of the company. The 85% of A/R, 65% of Inventory, etc. that people are referring to only refers to ABL's. An ABL is cheaper but has a borrowing base calculated off advance rates like the one above. A regular revover's size does not change whereas an ABL's borrowing base changes on a quarterly basis. Also note that unlike someone said, revolvers do not function at all on the ability to syndicate. As revolvers are only drawn on a temporary basis, CLO's and hedge funds never bought revovler paper. They are pretty much only held on a institutional basis. Now term loans as described below do depend on this, but entirely different market.

Term loans are sized depending on the deal. In an all bank debt LBO structure of two years ago, all the TL paper was sold to CLO's allowing for cheaper borrowing than the bond market. Companies were levered upward of 4.0x through TL's at the height of the boom. In these cases you might have a TLB and TLC, the TLB secured and pari passu with the revolver and the TLC with a 2nd Lien. Nowadays, no one is doing TL's because there are no buyers of the paper.

that's the answer you want. nowadays even the abls are priced much higher than before. another note is that most revolvers are asset based and lots term loans are cash flow based. only small TLs are getting done in club deals where all the banks come together taking small pieces instead of one bank underwrite the whole deal then syndicate whatever the bank doesnt want to hold on to.

 

Id dolor expedita illum enim vel. Et nam laboriosam necessitatibus aut. Sit magni et odio qui illum consequatur occaecati. Aut ut fugiat excepturi atque sed neque.

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. New 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (87) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (146) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”