A debt offer fits when a SaaS company can cover fixed repayments from revenue it can forecast. When revenue still depends on pilots, renewals, or a fundraise that may slip, six months of uncertainty can be safer than a repayment date that arrives every month.
At 9:12 a.m., Esi read the term sheet on her phone outside a café in Osu, Accra. Her laptop was open beside a cooling cup of coffee. The offer would fund six more months for the small team building software for independent retailers. In return, the company would begin repayments on a fixed schedule.
She had one signed customer, two active pilots, and a product that still needed work before either pilot could become a contract. Her co-founder wanted to accept before the lender changed its mind. An investor conversation had gone quiet after asking for more evidence of repeatable demand.
Payroll was due soon. If the pilots failed to convert, the company could lose the team and still owe money. The bad ending was clear: Esi could spend the next quarter building under repayment pressure, then reach the same fundraising gap with less room to decide.
The term sheet changed the question
The first question was not whether debt was cheaper than equity. It was whether the company had a reliable source for the repayment.
Esi had been treating the offer as a rescue from fundraising uncertainty. The repayment schedule made the uncertainty visible in a different form. Instead of wondering when an investor might sign, she would know exactly when cash had to leave the account.
That distinction matters for an early-stage SaaS company. Equity asks founders to defend a future story. Debt asks the business to meet a present obligation. A company with contracted revenue, low churn, and a clear collection cycle may be able to carry that obligation. A company waiting for pilots to prove demand is carrying a different kind of risk.
The lender had not made the product more ready. The money would give Esi time, but the terms would decide what that time felt like.
Map repayments against the revenue you already have
Esi printed the repayment schedule and placed it beside a simple twelve-month cash plan. She removed projected revenue from leads that had not signed. She kept the one customer, the costs she could not pause, and the realistic chance that one pilot would need more work before paying.
The gap was uncomfortable. A delayed renewal, a customer payment that arrived late, or a longer sales cycle would create pressure immediately. The business had no buffer between “the pilot went well” and “cash is available for repayment.”
That exercise changed the conversation with her co-founder. They stopped debating the headline amount and started naming the conditions required to repay it: two pilot conversions, continued retention from the existing customer, and no surprise hiring.
Those conditions were possible. They were not yet predictable.
A founder can make this exercise quickly:
- Build the repayment calendar into the cash forecast, month by month.
- Count signed and collectible revenue first. Treat pilot revenue and investor interest as scenarios.
- Ask what happens if one expected payment arrives later than planned.
- Identify the product work that repayment pressure would force you to delay.
The answer may still be debt. The point is to choose it with the full schedule in view.
Six months can buy proof, or postpone a harder problem
Esi’s team had a decision in front of them before the term sheet arrived. They needed to learn whether their product could become a repeatable purchase for retailers, or whether it was still being shaped around each pilot.
Debt could fund more product work. It could also encourage the wrong work: shipping custom requests to protect near-term cash while leaving the core buying decision untested.
That was the real fork. One path offered a fixed amount of money and a fixed repayment burden. The other offered a thinner runway and the chance to focus every week on the proof an investor or customer would need to see.
This is close to the choice in Term Sheet Due Diligence: Why Daniel Protected His Pilot’s Next Proof Point. A term sheet can create urgency, but the next proof point still determines what the company can credibly raise or sell.
Esi’s team decided to negotiate for time rather than take the first structure offered. They cut a planned hire, narrowed the pilot scope, and set a date to review conversion evidence before committing to any financing. That did not remove the uncertainty. It made the uncertainty their main work.
The pressure you choose shapes the company you build
By late afternoon, the café table held the printed schedule, a page of customer questions, and a shorter product plan. Esi had stopped calling the debt offer “runway.” It was capital with a monthly claim on the business.
That wording mattered because it changed what counted as progress. A strong demo would not be enough. A customer saying they liked the product would not be enough. The team needed evidence that a buyer would sign, pay, and stay.
For founders deciding between debt and another fundraising stretch, the useful question is practical: what revenue will pay this obligation if the next fundraise does not happen?
If the answer relies on several events going right at once, protect the roadmap and keep looking for proof. If the answer sits in contracts, collections, and a business you can already forecast, debt may give you room to move without giving away more ownership.
Esi left Osu with no signed financing and a smaller plan for the week. The first task on Monday was a call with the pilot customer, focused on the one question the term sheet had exposed: what would make this a paid renewal?
Comments
No comments yet.