Five questions settle whether a file is worth working: monthly revenue, how long trading, how many open positions, whether there have been negative days, and what the money is for. Asked in the first few minutes they filter most of the files that were never going to fund — and the position question is the one brokers most often leave until it is too late to matter.
A rep who packages every file that answers the phone is spending their week on submissions that were never going to fund. Qualification is not gatekeeping — it is deciding where the next two hours go.
| Ask | What you are actually establishing |
|---|---|
| Monthly revenue, roughly? | Whether the deal size justifies the work |
| How long have you been trading? | Whether they clear the funder floors at all |
| Any advances currently open? | How much of the receipts is already committed |
| Any negative days in the last few months? | The single fastest route to a decline |
| What is the money for? | Urgency, deal size, and whether an advance even fits |
Five questions, two minutes. They will not tell you whether a file funds, but they reliably tell you which files cannot.
This is the one that gets fumbled, because it sounds like an accusation and merchants often understate it. Ask it as a structuring question rather than a screening one — you are establishing what you can arrange, not checking whether they qualify.
It also matters because the statements will reveal it anyway. A position you knew about is a pricing input; one the underwriter finds costs you the submission and some standing with that funder.
What the money is for. It sounds like small talk and it is the most informative answer on the call.
Say so on the call rather than submitting a file you expect to fail. A merchant told plainly that they are three months short on time in business, with a note to call back, is a better outcome than a decline three days later — and they remember which broker was straight with them.
Diary those. A merchant who misses on time in business becomes fundable on a known date, and almost nobody follows up on them.
Monthly revenue, how long they have been trading, how many advances are currently open, whether there have been negative days recently, and what the money is for. Five questions in about two minutes, and they reliably identify the files that cannot fund.
Frame it as structuring rather than screening: carrying something changes what you can arrange, and you would rather build around it than have it come back from the funder. That is true and it gets a straighter answer than anything that sounds like a test — and the statements will reveal it regardless.
It is the most informative answer on the call. A specific dated need signals real urgency and a real close; "exploring options" signals a long cycle worth knowing about before you invest a morning. And an amount that does not match the stated purpose usually surfaces something the other questions missed.
Yes. A merchant told plainly they are three months short on time in business, with a date to call back, is a better outcome than a decline three days later — for both of you. Diary those, because they become fundable on a known date and almost nobody follows up.
A couple of minutes. The five questions are not the sales conversation, they are the decision about whether to have one — and a rep who packages every file that answers the phone spends the week on submissions that were never going to fund.
We will tell you straight up if we cannot help you. No commission deals, no free trials, no chasing you for three weeks.