Cumulative level test: Advanced case analysis and ethical sales capstone
Check understanding, separately from reading
10 questions · 80% to pass · no timer. This longer test revisits both units in the level. These authored questions assess recognition and application of the taught distinctions, not professional qualification. You may review the lessons and retry. Repeat attempts reuse the question bank; a remembered answer is not proof of transfer to a new situation.
Saving a lesson records reading only. Previous lesson completions have not been converted into passing scores. You can continue reading without a pass; the assessment remains unpassed.
Question 1
Ridge has $9,000 defined monthly available cash and $6,000 scheduled service: coverage 1.50×. If available cash drops to $5,400, coverage is 0.90×. The second numerator is below service. Neither number is an approval decision or a substitute for a dated cash forecast.
Question 2
Tide opens Monday with $2,000 and payroll of $3,000 leaves before a customer pays Friday. Monday’s balance becomes -$1,000 before that collection. A positive Friday balance cannot retrospectively cover Monday’s gap. Verify actual settlement dates and any available, permitted buffer.
Question 3
Assume old remaining scheduled outflow and payoff both equal $20,000. New gross $40,000, fees $2,500, old payoff $20,000: net new cash $17,500. New purchased amount $40,000 × 1.3 = $52,000. New total − old remaining − net new cash = $14,500 incremental dollar cost, with no other charges.
Question 4
Harbor hears “no penalty,” yet its quote still includes the unpaid fixed purchased amount. Ask whether any discount is contractual, discretionary or unavailable, and whether the deadline changes the amount. Avoid inventing a legal entitlement to a rebate.
Question 5
Ridge needs a machine and recurring materials. A machine-specific term structure and a monitored working-capital line solve different problems. Combining them also changes aggregate service and collateral, so independent feasibility of each does not prove feasibility together.
Question 6
The same broker speaks with owners in different states about sales-based financing. A disclosure prepared for one offer and jurisdiction cannot simply be relabeled for the other. Product classification and provider roles also matter.
Question 7
A fictional restaurant is behind on taxes, payroll and several advances. A delayed receivable may be one issue, but layering another debit without a viability review can compound the problem. Ask about actual cash and existing provider communication; do not direct the owner to stop paying.
Question 8
A fictional proposal shows attractive first-week net cash, but the old debits continue and the new provider can suspend deposits after a covenant breach. The merchant still owes obligations. Test a late deposit, early suspension and a slow-sales case before calling the arrangement relief.
Question 9
Harbor: “The factor is high, I have two advances and my accountant dislikes daily payments.” A strong response acknowledges all three, asks permission to compare, and leaves open the possibility that no new financing is suitable. Do not answer only the easiest objection.
Question 10
Fictional Ridge wants a machine, carries an existing secured line, has seasonal receipts and is offered layered funding plus a personal HELOC. Separate machine finance from working capital, investigate lien restrictions, reject “HELOC equals business LOC,” and stress the full payment schedule. A documented pause is a successful result if evidence is insufficient.
Continuing does not mark this assessment passed.
Progress stays in this browser, on this device—not an account or cloud backup. Clearing browser data removes it. Visits never count as study. Previous untimed legacy completions are not invented as study days.