The Structure
One facility, one application, two machines that only make sense together. A five-axis machining center produces the aerospace geometry; a coordinate-measuring machine proves it to the customer’s quality department. Financing them as equipment — each securing itself — is what let a shop with a modest balance sheet and no aerospace revenue yet put both on the floor before the RFQ deadline.
The aerospace work was not on the books yet. The machine that would win it was financed on the machine
Representative structure
Larger machine-tool purchases fund the same way when revenue, cash flow, and story qualify.
The Transaction

Bobby Friel
Founder, Basecamp Funding
Every job shop that has looked at aerospace work has hit the same wall: the RFQ asks for capability you do not have, the capability costs real money, and nobody awards the contract before the machine exists.
A Silicon Forest machine shop had the customers it wanted in reach — aerospace primes and their tier-one suppliers — and one gap between it and the bid list: five-axis capability. The shop ran three-axis mills and could not hold the tolerances or the geometries the aerospace RFQs called for. Equipment financing put a five-axis machining center and a coordinate-measuring machine on the floor in 5 days, at roughly 10% down — fast enough to get into a bid pipeline that closes on a calendar, not on a bank’s.
Underwriting
The machine secures the loan. A five-axis machining center from a major builder holds its value on a secondary market that machine-tool lenders price every day — which is why a shop can finance $380K of precision capability in five days on revenue that does not yet include the work the machine will win.
The Bank
The shop’s balance sheet and its existing revenue, which is three-axis work at three-axis margins. It sees a $380K purchase against no aerospace contracts, calls the expansion speculative, and asks for 25% to 30% down or a longer track record — neither of which fits an RFQ with a response date.
This Structure
The machine: builder, model, controller, spec, and resale value. The shop’s twelve months of deposits set the terms. The lender is not asked to believe an aerospace projection. It is asked to hold a machine it knows the market for.
Search for CNC machine financing and most results treat every machine as the same purchase. It isn’t. Three-axis work competes on price against every shop with a mill. Five-axis work competes on capability against a short list, and the customers — aerospace primes, medical, defense — qualify their suppliers before they bid. The machine is not an upgrade. It is the ticket to a different customer base with different margins.
Aerospace customers do not take a shop’s word on tolerances. A coordinate-measuring machine produces the inspection reports the quality department requires, and a shop without one does not get past supplier qualification no matter how good its machining is. Financing the CMM in the same facility as the machining center meant the shop could qualify and produce on the same timeline, instead of buying capability it could not yet prove.
An aerospace RFQ has a response date, and supplier qualification has to be underway before it. A shop that can show a five-axis machine on the floor and a CMM in the inspection room is on the list; a shop that can show a financing application in committee is not. Five days was a clean application, twelve months of bank statements, and two machines specified to the serial number — run through a lender that prices machine tools rather than one that prices balance sheets.
A well-specced five-axis machine from a major builder is among the most liquid collateral in manufacturing. Machine-tool lenders know the used market, the controller premiums, and the hours-to-value curve. That knowledge is what supports roughly 10% down where a bank, holding an asset it cannot price, protects itself with 25% or more.
A place on the aerospace bid list, which is where the margins live. Once a shop is a qualified supplier, the same machine bids the next RFQ and the one after that with no further approval. And the capability compounds: five-axis work attracts five-axis customers, who bring the next machine’s justification with them.
Run the arithmetic your own way: what does one aerospace contract net you against the same hours of three-axis work, and how many RFQs did you decline last year because the geometry was out of reach?
For most job shops at this scale, the answer is that the machine is paid for inside the first qualified contract and everything after that is a business the shop did not have. That is a different question than whether a bank can underwrite work that is not on the books yet.
The Products
| Product | Role here |
|---|---|
| Equipment Financing → | A five-axis machining center and a coordinate-measuring machine, one facility, each securing its own piece |
Financing this whole sector: Manufacturing Financing →
The Result
Start Here
Sixty seconds, no documents, and a soft-pull review. If there is an RFQ you cannot bid without a machine you do not have yet, this is where you find out what the structure looks like.
~60-second review · Soft-pull, FICO untouched · No obligation
No obligation. Soft-pull review — your FICO stays untouched.
Related
Representative scenarios — illustrative, anonymized figures, not specific client transactions.
FAQ
Yes, because the machine is the collateral, not the contract. A five-axis machining center from a major builder holds its value on a secondary market that machine-tool lenders price every day. The shop’s deposit history sets the terms; the lender is holding a machine it knows the market for, not underwriting an aerospace projection.
Because a bank underwrites the shop’s balance sheet and current revenue, and a $380K purchase against no aerospace contracts looks speculative on that form. It responds with 25% to 30% down or a request for a longer track record. An equipment lender underwrites the machine itself and closes in days.
Roughly 10% is common for a well-specced machine from a major builder when the shop’s deposits support it. Machine tools are among the most liquid collateral in manufacturing, and lenders that know the used market, controller premiums, and hours-to-value curve support a far lower down payment than a bank holding an asset it cannot price.
For aerospace or medical work, yes. Customers in those sectors require inspection reports from a coordinate-measuring machine before they qualify a supplier, and a shop without one does not get past qualification regardless of its machining. Financing both in one facility lets the shop qualify and produce on the same timeline.
Yes, and for many shops it is the better purchase. A used five-axis machine with documented hours and a current controller finances cleanly when the lender underwrites the machine rather than the invoice. Captive builder programs typically will not touch another builder’s used inventory; an independent structure will.
With a clean application, twelve months of bank statements, and the machines specified to the serial number, about a week; this one funded in 5 days. What slows a machine-tool deal is a shop waiting on a bank to accept that a machine is worth what the market says it is.
It changes who will talk to you. Three-axis work is priced against every shop with a mill. Five-axis work is priced against a short list of qualified suppliers, and aerospace, medical, and defense customers qualify suppliers before they bid. The machine is not an upgrade to existing work; it is entry to a different customer base with different margins.