Prepared for lenders, CDCs, and federal agencies to SBA SOP 50 10 8, USDA 7 CFR Part 5001, and conventional underwriting standards. Fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the agency, never the borrower. 4,000+ engagements since 1998 covering $41.2 billion in evaluated project value. So far in 2026: 41 engagements and $1.54 billion evaluated — 17 SBA, 11 USDA.
Manufacturing feasibility joins market demand to production economics. The study establishes demand for the plant's output — contracted, identified, or market-derived — then tests the production model: capacity and utilization ramp, input cost structure, labor availability at the required skill level, and the capital budget against industry benchmarks. Packaging and printing operations are analyzed on anchor-customer commitments, substrate cost pass-through ability, and equipment economics where a single press or line represents the dominant capital item. Because USDA and SBA reviewers read manufacturing studies against job-creation and rural-impact criteria as well as repayment, the study documents employment, wage levels, and local economic effect to the standard the program requires.
Methodology combines industry production and pricing data, packaging industry demand data, RSMeans location-adjusted facility budgets, BLS occupational wage data for the staffing model, and RMA and IBISWorld operating benchmarks. The financial model carries the utilization ramp, input-cost sensitivity, and program coverage tests across the firm's standard stress discipline, with every assumption sourced.
Every Wert-Berater financial model is fully linked with no hardcoded values, so any reviewer can stress any input. Deliverables comprise a complete narrative report and the linked Excel model, with ten-year pro forma, sensitivity analysis at ±5, 10, and 15 percent, interest-rate stress from +0.5 to +3.0 percent, and ratio analysis benchmarked against RMA and IBISWorld data.
SBA engagements are prepared to SOP 50 10 8, including its debt-service-coverage minimums of 1.15x operating and 1.00x global. USDA engagements follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 across the Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs. Conventional engagements are built to the lender's stated coverage standard, typically 1.20x. Manufacturing reaches us predominantly through USDA B&I — where rural plant economics and job creation align with program purpose — alongside SBA 504 for owner-occupied facilities and conventional lending; Value-Added Producer Grant studies are prepared to 7 CFR Part 5001 where agricultural producers integrate forward into processing.
The firm's manufacturing and processing record spans USDA B&I and SBA engagements nationwide, including cold-chain, food-system, and industrial projects; manufacturing studies are prepared with the same fully linked financial models and stress discipline as every Wert-Berater engagement. Independence is non-negotiable: determinations follow the evidence and are not revised under pressure, and studies are built to pass lender, agency, and third-party review without exception items.
Screening the industrial market before committing to a full engagement? Manufacturing Market Risk Intelligence is a report prepared by our analysts to a published structure: supply, demand and the operating conditions in one market, with coverage shown before the order is taken. It is a market risk view, not a feasibility determination on your project, and it does not replace the study described on this page.
A feasibility study for a printing or packaging plant is not a generic manufacturing template. The scope is built around the specific substrate, process technology, and customer base the project serves — corrugated converting, flexible film, folding carton, labels, commercial print, or a combination. The study opens by establishing the production model: press or line configuration, rated speed, expected waste and makeready allowance, and the utilization ramp from commissioning through stabilized operations. It then tests whether the revenue the model requires is supportable by identified demand, contracted volume, or a defensible market-share assumption, and whether the cost structure at that utilization level produces coverage.
Standard deliverables for this asset class include:
Demand for a packaging or printing plant cannot be read from a single market-size figure. The study constructs demand from the bottom up, beginning with the plant’s actual customer pipeline. Executed contracts, letters of intent, and documented purchase commitments are reviewed and stress-tested for renewal probability and exclusivity. Where the plant relies on open-market volume beyond contracted work, the study identifies the served geographic market, the customer industries generating that demand — food and beverage, e-commerce fulfillment, consumer goods, pharmaceutical — and the production capacity already serving them.
Competitive supply is mapped through a combination of sources: trade-association capacity surveys published by organizations serving the corrugated, flexible packaging, or commercial print sectors; public filings and press releases from regional converters and commercial printers; state business registration records; and, where relevant, equipment-auction activity that signals plant closures or capacity reductions. Substrate sourcing is examined through supplier concentration and regional mill capacity, since input availability constrains output as directly as customer demand does. For rural projects seeking USDA B&I financing, the study documents the absence or insufficiency of comparable capacity in the service area, which supports both the market-need finding and the rural-impact narrative the program requires. Every demand assumption is sourced and disclosed so a reviewer can evaluate the evidence rather than accept a conclusion.
A small number of inputs drive most of the variance in a packaging or printing plant’s projected debt-service coverage. Identifying and stress-testing those inputs is the analytical core of the study. The firm tests each assumption across the standard sensitivity range and documents the coverage ratio at each interval so a lender can see exactly where the project breaks.
SBA, USDA, and conventional lenders each bring a distinct lens to a packaging or printing plant, but all three share a common concern: whether the plant can service its debt across a realistic range of operating outcomes, not only at the base case.
For SBA 504 engagements — common where the borrower is acquiring or constructing an owner-occupied facility — the study must demonstrate 1.15x operating coverage and 1.00x global coverage to SOP 50 10 8 minimums, with the utilization ramp and anchor-customer risk addressed explicitly. The SBA reviewer will examine whether projected revenue is contracted or assumed, and the study must be transparent about that distinction.
USDA Business & Industry engagements require the study to address rural impact: job creation, wage levels relative to the local market, and the absence of comparable private-sector capacity. A packaging plant serving agricultural producers — converting film for produce, printing labels for food brands — can also support a Value-Added Producer Grant narrative where the agricultural linkage is documented. REAP eligibility may arise where the facility incorporates qualifying energy systems.
Conventional lenders typically require 1.20x coverage and focus on customer concentration, equipment collateral value, and the sponsor’s operating experience in the substrate or process. The study documents each of these directly, with the financial model structured so the lender’s credit team can run its own stress without rebuilding the workbook.
The fee for a printing or packaging manufacturing feasibility study is fixed and quoted in writing within one business day of a project inquiry. No portion of the fee is contingent on the finding, and the determination is not revised under pressure. That structure is not a policy preference; it is the condition that makes an independent study credible to a lender or agency reviewer.
Standard delivery runs ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. The data room for a packaging or printing plant typically includes the draft lease or real estate purchase agreement, equipment quotes or appraisals for the press or converting line, executed or draft customer contracts, three years of sponsor financial statements where an operating business is involved, and the project’s construction or renovation budget. Rush delivery is available when the lending timeline requires it.
Every engagement is published to a secure client portal where the linked Excel model remains live and recalculates when inputs change. Because no values are hardcoded, a lender’s credit officer or an agency underwriter can adjust any assumption — substrate cost, utilization rate, interest rate — and observe the effect on coverage immediately. The narrative report, pro forma, sensitivity tables, and statement of conditions are all accessible through the same portal. Wert-Berater has completed 4,000+ engagements representing $41.2 billion in evaluated project value; the process and the model structure are consistent across every engagement.
The fee is fixed, quoted in writing within one business day, and is not contingent on the outcome. Because scope varies with plant complexity, substrate type, number of customer relationships to analyze, and the lending program involved, the firm quotes each engagement individually after a brief project review. No fee is collected on a contingency basis, and the finding is never adjusted to match a preferred result.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. For a printing or packaging plant, the data room typically includes equipment quotes or appraisals, customer contracts or letters of intent, the real estate agreement, and sponsor financials. Rush delivery is available when a lender’s commitment deadline requires it. Incomplete submissions extend the timeline; the clock starts when the data room is complete.
Three factors create underwriting difficulty specific to this asset class. First, a single press or converting line often represents the majority of capital cost, so equipment delay or cost overrun compresses early-year coverage disproportionately. Second, substrate costs — paper, film, ink — are volatile, and not every customer contract permits pass-through. Third, anchor-customer concentration is common in smaller plants, meaning partial loss of one relationship can move coverage below minimums without a replacement pipeline in place.
A study prepared to the more demanding of the two program standards can generally satisfy both, but the deliverable must address each program’s specific requirements. USDA B&I requires documentation of rural impact, job creation, and wage levels that SBA does not mandate in the same form. SBA SOP 50 10 8 imposes specific coverage minimums and global-cash-flow requirements. The firm prepares dual-program studies where the financing structure involves both agencies.
Lenders and agency reviewers distinguish between executed contracts, letters of intent, and projected open-market volume. The study documents each category separately and applies different confidence weights accordingly. Executed contracts with defined volumes, pricing, and terms carry the most weight; projected market-share volume requires a competitive-supply analysis to support it. Anchor-customer concentration, renewal risk, and the availability of replacement volume if a key relationship ends are all addressed explicitly.
No. An independent feasibility study is an analytical determination of whether a project is financially feasible under stated assumptions. It does not guarantee loan approval, and no agency has endorsed or pre-approved any study format or firm. Approval decisions rest with the lender and the reviewing agency. The value of an independent study is that it is prepared without a contingent fee and without revision under pressure, which is what makes it credible to the reviewer.
Qualify a project. Tell us about the project and the program. We will tell you the truth about it — scope, timeline, and fee confirmed before work begins.
Schedule a Zoom Call →Legal disclosure. Wert-Berater, Inc. offices are mailing addresses only. Following the COVID-19 pandemic the firm has elected to work remotely; its office locations receive mail and are not staffed for visitors or in-person meetings. Headquarters mailing address: 1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.
Wert-Berater, Inc. is an independent provider of feasibility studies and other related services. The firm does not provide financing or equity investment advice, and does not arrange, broker, or place debt or equity capital of any kind.
All appraisal assignments are performed by Bruce E. Jones, MAI, ASA-GC, BCA, CMEA, a member of the Appraisal Institute since 2006, a staff member of Wert-Berater, Inc. and owner of Special Purpose Realty Valuation.