Hospitality Property Finance: Restaurants, Hotels & Venues
Guide information. Written by Ben. Published: 29 October 2025. Reviewed: 15 May 2026.
Hospitality property finance requires specialist understanding of the unique challenges facing restaurants, hotels, cafés, and entertainment venues—businesses where property, operational fit-out, and liquor licences combine to create complex lending scenarios traditional banks often struggle to accommodate. Banks view hospitality ventures as higher risk given their sensitivity to economic conditions, high failure rates among new establishments, and the specialised nature of fit-outs that retain limited value if businesses fail. When venues include liquor licences, accommodation components, or require extensive fit-outs, financing complexity increases substantially.
The hospitality sector operates differently from standard commercial property transactions. A Melbourne restaurant owner purchasing premises valued at $2 million might also need $400,000 for kitchen fit-out, 50,000 for liquor licence acquisition, and $200,000 working capital—creating a $2.75 million total funding requirement where the property represents only 73% of the package. Traditional property lenders finance premises but rarely extend to operational components, creating funding gaps that specialist hospitality lenders or commercial property loans in Australia with business lending components must address.
Understanding hospitality property finance means recognising how lenders assess venues differently—examining trading history, customer demographics, location fundamentals, competition analysis, and operational expertise alongside standard property metrics. Liquor licence values, fit-out quality, kitchen equipment conditions, and accommodation ratings all influence lending decisions in ways that don't apply to standard commercial property transactions. This guide explores how to finance hospitality properties effectively, what lenders examine when assessing venues, strategies for structuring multi-component funding packages, and approaches to managing the premium costs associated with specialist hospitality lending. Emet Capital provides private lending solutions for hospitality property acquisitions requiring flexible finance structures.
📖 Series Context: This guide is part of our Construction & Development Finance series. For a complete overview, see our Complete Construction Finance Guide.
At a Glance
|
|
| Who this guide is for |
Hospitality business owners and investors |
| What it addresses |
Hotel, restaurant, and venue financing specialist requirements |
| When this is appropriate |
When acquiring or developing hospitality properties |
| When it's NOT appropriate |
For standard commercial property without hospitality use |
Understanding Hospitality Property Lending Challenges
Hospitality property finance presents distinct challenges that traditional commercial property lenders find difficult to accommodate within standard lending frameworks, creating need for specialist approaches and flexible structures.
Why Traditional Banks Struggle With Hospitality
Banks apply property lending criteria developed for retail, office, or industrial premises—asset types with relatively stable tenant markets and predictable income patterns. Hospitality venues don't fit these templates. A restaurant's viability depends heavily on operational factors—chef reputation, menu appeal, service quality, location foot traffic—that banks can't easily quantify or risk-assess using standard property lending models.
Trading performance volatility creates additional bank concerns. A Sydney waterfront restaurant might generate $2 million revenue annually, but seasonal variations, competition changes, or reputation shifts can dramatically impact performance within months. Banks preferring stable, predictable income streams struggle with hospitality's inherent volatility, often declining loans or imposing conservative LVRs (50% to 60%) that don't reflect venue values including operational components and liquor licences.
Specialised fit-outs present security challenges banks find problematic. A commercial kitchen worth $300,000 when operating becomes worth perhaps $50,000 to 00,000 as second-hand equipment if the restaurant fails. Custom dining room fit-outs, venue theming, or specialised entertainment equipment similarly lose value dramatically outside their original context. Banks lending against property value alone ignore these operational components, creating funding gaps for purchasers.
Liquor Licence Valuation Complications
Liquor licences represent substantial value—often $50,000 to $500,000 depending on licence type, location, and trading conditions—but banks rarely include licence values in lending calculations. Most banking policies explicitly exclude liquor licences from security assessments given their regulatory nature, transferability restrictions, and value volatility. A Brisbane hotel with a $3 million property value and $400,000 liquor licence typically secures bank lending at 65% of property value only (.95 million), forcing buyers to fund the liquor licence through other sources.
Licence types dramatically impact both business value and lending treatment. Unrestricted licences permitting 24-hour trading attract premium valuations and broader lender acceptance than restricted licences limiting trading hours or patron numbers. On-premises consumption licences differ from packaged liquor licences in transferability and value. Some lenders specialising in hospitality will include percentage of licence value (typically 30% to 50%) in security calculations, whilst others exclude licences entirely regardless of value.
Regulatory risks surrounding liquor licences concern lenders. Licence conditions, compliance requirements, and potential suspension or cancellation create uncertainty absent in standard property security. A Perth venue's $300,000 licence could become worthless if regulatory action suspends trading, creating downside risk banks avoid by excluding licences from lending calculations altogether.
Multi-Component Funding Requirements
Successful hospitality acquisitions typically require funding multiple components: property purchase, business goodwill, liquor licences, fit-out costs, equipment, and working capital. A Canberra café owner might need: .2 million for premises, $200,000 for business goodwill, $80,000 for liquor licence, 50,000 for kitchen equipment, and 00,000 working capital—totalling .73 million where property represents only 69% of requirements.
Few single lenders provide comprehensive packages covering all components at acceptable terms. Property lenders finance premises at 60% to 70% LVR but won't fund goodwill or licences. Business lenders might finance goodwill and equipment but require property security. Structuring transactions often requires combining multiple funding sources—property mortgage, equipment finance, business acquisition finance in Australia, and possibly vendor finance—creating complexity in coordination and higher total costs through multiple lender fees.
Timing coordination presents practical challenges. Property settlement, business transfer, liquor licence transfer, and equipment handover must align, yet different lenders operate on different timeframes with varying documentation requirements. Missing settlement dates because one funding component delays can jeopardise entire transactions, requiring penalty interest payments or risking deposit forfeitures.
Structuring Hospitality Property Finance
Effective hospitality property finance requires strategic structuring that addresses multiple funding components whilst managing costs and maintaining workable repayment obligations during what's often a transitional period as new owners establish operations.
Property Component Financing
The property element of hospitality purchases typically secures traditional commercial property lending at 60% to 70% LVR from banks or non-bank commercial lenders. A Melbourne restaurant property valued at $2.5 million might secure .5 million to .75 million property mortgage at 6% to 8% annually over 15 to 25-year terms. However, this covers only the property component—buyers need additional funding for all other transaction elements.
Some specialist hospitality lenders offer property lending at slightly higher LVRs (up to 75%) when venue trading history demonstrates strong performance. They might also consider liquor licence value in calculations, potentially advancing $2 million against combined $2.5 million property and $300,000 licence value (67% combined LVR). These flexible approaches cost more—rates typically 7% to 10% versus 6% to 8% for standard commercial property loans—but reduce equity requirements substantially.
Strata-titled hospitality properties present additional complexity. Individual restaurant or café units within mixed-use developments might face lender restrictions, with some banks declining strata hospitality entirely given concerns about body corporate decisions affecting operations, limited control over common areas, or difficulties enforcing security. Non-bank lenders more readily accept strata hospitality though at premium pricing reflecting perceived higher risk.
Business and Licence Funding
Business goodwill and liquor licences typically require separate funding from property mortgages. Options include vendor finance (sellers providing funding for these components), equipment finance lenders willing to include business assets in packages, or what is private lending sources accepting broader security including licences and operational components. Interest rates for non-property components typically run higher—10% to 18% annually—reflecting their subordinate security priority and higher risk profiles.
Vendor finance represents common structure for liquor licence and goodwill funding. Sellers might agree to finance 30% to 50% of business purchase price over 3 to 5 years at 7% to 10% interest, retaining security interest in the business and licence until full payment. A Brisbane hotel selling for $4 million ($3 million property, $600,000 licence, $400,000 goodwill) might structure as: $2.1 million bank property mortgage, million vendor finance covering licence and goodwill, and $900,000 buyer equity.
Private lenders occasionally provide comprehensive packages covering property, business, and licences in single facilities, though at premium all-in pricing (12% to 18% annually). These streamlined approaches simplify structuring and coordination but cost substantially more than segmented traditional approaches. They suit buyers prioritising simplicity over cost optimisation or those whose circumstances (limited trading history, credit impairments) prevent accessing traditional segmented funding.
Fit-Out and Equipment Finance
Kitchen equipment, dining furniture, point-of-sale systems, and venue fit-outs represent substantial capital requirements—often $200,000 to $800,000 for full-service restaurants or hotels. Equipment finance lenders specialise in these components, advancing 60% to 80% of equipment value at rates from 8% to 14% annually over 3 to 7-year terms matching equipment useful lives.
New equipment from major suppliers attracts best terms (70% to 80% finance at 8% to 10% rates), whilst second-hand or custom equipment faces conservative treatment (50% to 60% finance at 12% to 14% rates). Lenders prefer readily marketable equipment—standard commercial kitchen appliances, common furniture styles—over highly customised installations with limited resale markets. A Perth restaurant's $400,000 kitchen might secure $300,000 equipment finance if comprising recognisable branded appliances, but only $200,000 if including extensive custom fabrication.
Fit-out funding sometimes structures as part of property lending when undertaken post-acquisition. Buyers might secure initial property finance then arrange construction or renovation facilities providing progressive funding as fit-out proceeds. These work-in-progress facilities typically require 30% to 40% buyer contribution with lender funds released against architect certificates or quantity surveyor reports confirming work completion and value.
Lender Assessment of Hospitality Venues
Understanding what lenders examine when assessing hospitality property finance helps buyers present applications strategically and target appropriate lending sources matching their venue profiles.
Trading History and Performance
Established venues with 2-plus years trading history receive most favourable lending treatment. Lenders examine profit and loss statements, BAS returns, and bank statements assessing revenue consistency, profit margins, expense management, and cash flow patterns. A Melbourne café generating $800,000 revenue annually with 12% EBITDA ($96,000) provides clearer lending assessment than new ventures with projections only.
Seasonal variations require explanation and accommodation in serviceability calculations. Coastal venues experiencing 60% of annual revenue during 4-month summer periods need lenders understanding this pattern won't apply uniform monthly serviceability tests. Similarly, venues near universities, convention centres, or tourist attractions with distinct seasonal patterns require assessment frameworks recognising legitimate revenue variability.
COVID-19 trading disruptions created assessment challenges lenders handle differently. Some disregard 2020-2021 financials entirely, focusing on 2019 and 2022-2023 performance. Others accept recent trading as normalised if venues demonstrate recovery to pre-COVID levels. Buyers should address pandemic impacts proactively in applications, explaining historical context and presenting current trading demonstrating recovery rather than leaving lenders to interpret disrupted financials independently.
Location and Market Analysis
Venue location fundamentally impacts lending appetite and terms. High-traffic hospitality precincts in capital cities—Melbourne's Southbank, Sydney's Darling Harbour, Brisbane's Fortitude Valley—attract most competitive lending given proven demand and venue liquidity if enforcement becomes necessary. Suburban locations require stronger individual venue performance given lower precinct confidence.
Competition analysis matters enormously. Lenders want confidence that markets can sustain additional venues or that existing venues possess competitive advantages justifying ongoing viability. A Brisbane suburb with three existing Italian restaurants struggling financially raises questions about a fourth restaurant's prospects regardless of the buyer's operational plans. Conversely, suburbs with limited hospitality options but strong demographics might justify new venue confidence despite absence of established precinct.
Demographics and foot traffic quantification strengthens applications. Providing data on local population, employment density, tourist numbers, or nearby residential developments demonstrates market demand beyond just stating "good location." A Canberra venue near Parliamentary Triangle might present data showing 15,000 daily office workers within 500 metres, 3 million annual tourists, and limited competing venues—quantifying opportunity rather than relying on subjective location claims.
Operational Expertise Assessment
Lender confidence in operator capability significantly impacts approval likelihood and terms. Buyers with proven hospitality management experience—previous venue ownership, executive chef credentials, or senior hospitality management roles—receive preferential treatment versus first-time operators entering hospitality without relevant background. A Perth buyer with 15 years restaurant management including previous successful venue ownership might secure 70% LVR at 7.5%, whilst a first-time operator with corporate background faces 60% LVR at 9% for the identical venue.
Management depth beyond the primary buyer matters for larger venues. Hotels or significant restaurants requiring multiple managers, head chefs, and operational teams benefit from demonstrating recruitment plans, existing relationships with experienced hospitality professionals, or employment contracts with key personnel. Single-person operations carry succession and key person risks that larger established teams mitigate.
Business plans demonstrating realistic understanding of hospitality operations strengthen applications substantially. Plans addressing menu development, pricing strategies, service models, staff structures, marketing approaches, and financial projections grounded in comparable venue performance demonstrate sophistication lenders value. Conversely, vague aspirational statements without operational specificity suggest inexperience that concerns lenders assessing likelihood of success.
Specialist Hospitality Lenders vs Traditional Sources
Different lender types serve hospitality property finance, each with distinct advantages, limitations, and cost structures that suit different buyer circumstances and venue profiles.
Traditional Bank Lending
Major banks occasionally provide hospitality property finance, though typically only for established venues with strong trading histories, substantial buyer equity (40% to 50%), and experienced operators. Banks offering hospitality lending maintain specialist teams understanding sector nuances, but conservative risk appetites mean many viable transactions don't meet their criteria.
Bank hospitality lending advantages include competitive rates (6% to 8% annually), longer terms (15 to 25 years), and comprehensive banking relationships potentially including transaction accounts, merchant facilities, and business loans. However, slow approval processes (8 to 12 weeks), extensive documentation requirements, and conservative LVRs (60% maximum typically) limit bank suitability for many hospitality transactions.
Regional banks and credit unions sometimes demonstrate more flexible hospitality appetite than major banks, particularly for venues in their geographic footprints. These institutions might lend at 65% to 70% LVR for local hospitality businesses supporting community employment and development, viewing venues through relationship banking lenses rather than purely financial metrics.
Non-Bank Commercial Lenders
Non-bank commercial lenders represent the largest source of hospitality property finance, offering specialised products addressing sector requirements banks don't accommodate. These lenders understand hospitality operations, accept higher risk profiles than banks, and structure flexible solutions combining property, business, and equipment components.
Non-bank hospitality lenders typically advance 65% to 75% LVR at 7% to 11% interest over 10 to 20-year terms. Some include portions of liquor licence values in calculations, potentially increasing effective leverage. Approval processes run faster than banks (3 to 6 weeks), documentation requirements prove less onerous, and relationship flexibility enables accommodation of seasonal cash flows or staged development plans.
Cost trade-offs involve higher rates and fees compared to banks—establishment fees typically 1% to 2% versus bank fees under 1%, and interest rates 1% to 3% higher. However, for buyers unable to access bank lending, non-bank sources provide viable alternatives enabling transactions that otherwise couldn't proceed. The rate premium often proves acceptable given approval speed, flexibility, and willingness to finance complex hospitality transactions.
Private Lending Solutions
Private lenders provide highest-risk hospitality property finance—venues with limited trading history, borrowers with credit impairments, complex multi-component transactions, or time-sensitive opportunities requiring settlement within weeks. Private hospitality lending typically costs 10% to 18% annually at 60% to 70% LVR, with establishment fees 2% to 4% and terms spanning 12 to 36 months.
Private lending suits specific scenarios: bridging finance whilst establishing trading history enabling refinancing to cheaper sources, acquisition opportunities requiring quick settlement before traditional lender approval completes, buyers with strong hospitality experience but past credit issues, or ventures combining residential accommodation, entertainment, and food service creating complexity traditional lenders avoid.
Exit strategies matter critically with private hospitality lending given the costs involved. Borrowers should plan refinancing within 12 to 24 months once they've established trading history, improved credit profiles, or completed developments enabling access to cheaper traditional financing. Using private lending indefinitely erodes profitability through excessive interest costs—it works best as transitional funding bridging to sustainable long-term structures.
Common Hospitality Finance Scenarios
Different hospitality venue types present distinct financing challenges and opportunities requiring tailored approaches matching operational models to appropriate funding structures.
Restaurant and Café Acquisitions
Restaurants and cafés represent most common hospitality finance scenarios, ranging from small suburban cafés requiring $300,000 to $600,000 total funding through to premium CBD restaurants needing $3 million to $8 million comprehensive packages. Smaller venues often rely on vendor finance for business and licence components, equipment finance for fit-outs, and personal borrowings or savings for working capital given difficulty accessing full bank finance at modest transaction values.
Larger restaurant transactions attract more diverse lending options. Established high-revenue restaurants ($2 million-plus annually) with proven profitability might access bank lending, whilst newer or transitioning venues require non-bank or private sources. Chain restaurants or franchise operations benefit from brand recognition and operational systems that lenders favour, sometimes securing better terms than independent venues despite similar financial metrics.
Lease versus freehold significantly impacts financing. Leasehold restaurants remove property lending components but create reliance on business, licence, and equipment finance only—often meaning higher overall costs and shorter terms. Freehold venues enable property mortgage leverage at better rates offsetting more expensive business component funding, though require substantially larger initial capital given property deposits.
Hotel and Accommodation Finance
Hotels combining accommodation, food service, liquor licences, and entertainment present most complex hospitality finance scenarios. Small boutique hotels (10 to 30 rooms) might require $2 million to $6 million funding, whilst larger regional hotels exceed 0 million. These transactions typically involve multiple funding sources: commercial property lending for premises (60% to 65% LVR), equipment finance for rooms and facilities, and potentially subordinate lending for business goodwill and licences.
Accommodation ratings and occupancy history heavily influence lending terms. Well-maintained hotels with consistent 70%-plus occupancy rates and positive online reviews secure better terms than dated properties requiring capital expenditure or locations experiencing occupancy challenges. Lenders might require independent accommodation valuations assessing revenue potential, competitive positioning, and capital requirements—analysis costing $5,000 to 5,000 but necessary for major hotel transactions.
Strata hotel units—individual hotel rooms owned separately within larger hotel complexes under management agreements—present unique challenges. Most lenders decline strata hotel room finance given management agreement risks, difficulty enforcing security on individual rooms, and concerns about complex legal structures. Specialist lenders occasionally provide strata hotel finance at premium pricing (10% to 14% interest), targeting investors purchasing multiple rooms within single developments.
Licensed Venue and Entertainment Financing
Venues focused on entertainment—nightclubs, live music venues, event spaces—with licensed bars present higher-risk profiles most traditional lenders avoid. These venues often experience greater revenue volatility, higher operational complexity, and compliance challenges given their emphasis on alcohol service and late-night operations. Financing typically requires specialist hospitality lenders or private sources willing to accept these risk factors.
Unrestricted liquor licences with extended trading hours attract premium valuations—sometimes $200,000 to $500,000 in major cities—but create lending challenges. Lenders recognise licence value but worry about regulatory risks, community opposition, and potential licence condition changes affecting operations. Most lenders exclude licence value from security calculations, forcing buyers to fund licences through vendor finance, private lending, or equity.
Sound equipment, lighting systems, staging, and specialised entertainment infrastructure represent substantial capital (00,000 to $500,000-plus) that standard equipment lenders struggle to finance given limited secondary markets. Buyers often fund these components through vendor finance, private lenders willing to accept broader security, or capital raises from investor groups—approaches that avoid traditional lending entirely.
Managing Hospitality Lending Costs
Hospitality property finance typically costs more than standard commercial property lending given higher perceived risks, multi-component structures, and specialist lender requirements. Strategic approaches help minimise total costs whilst maintaining workable structures.
Optimising Loan Structures
Consider separating property and business components with different lenders if this delivers lower blended costs. A Melbourne venue might use bank property lending at 7% for $2 million premises whilst private lender finances $500,000 business and licence components at 12%—creating 8% blended rate on $2.5 million total versus 10% if single specialist lender financed everything. However, coordination complexity and duplicate establishment fees (5,000 to $30,000) might offset rate advantages on smaller transactions.
Vendor finance negotiation provides crucial cost savings. Vendors motivated by tax planning, steady income preferences, or limited buyer pools might accept 5% to 7% vendor finance rates versus 10% to 15% third-party lending costs. Negotiating 50% vendor finance on business and licence components potentially saves 5,000 to $25,000 annually on typical $500,000 business value—meaningful amount given hospitality's tight margins.
Progressive draw-downs on fit-out funding avoid paying interest on unused funds. Rather than borrowing full $300,000 equipment finance upfront, arrange progressive releases as equipment purchases occur—paying interest only on drawn amounts until full facility utilisation. This might save $8,000 to 2,000 interest over 4 to 6-month fit-out periods compared to fully-drawn upfront structures.
Frequently Asked Questions
What LVR can I expect for hospitality property finance?
Hospitality property finance typically provides 60% to 70% LVR depending on venue type, trading history, and buyer experience. Banks offering hospitality lending usually cap at 60% LVR, whilst non-bank commercial lenders might extend to 70% to 75% for established venues with strong trading histories. Specialist hospitality lenders occasionally include portions of liquor licence value (30% to 50% of licence value) in security calculations, potentially increasing effective leverage. Properties in established hospitality precincts with proven demand receive better LVRs than suburban locations. Buyers with extensive hospitality management experience secure higher LVRs than first-time operators. Expect to contribute 30% to 40% equity covering deposits, stamp duty, legal costs, and initial working capital for most hospitality transactions.
How do lenders value liquor licences in hospitality finance?
Most traditional lenders exclude liquor licences entirely from security valuations despite their substantial market values ($50,000 to $500,000). Banks view licences as regulatory permissions rather than tangible assets, creating conservative positions that ignore licence values in lending calculations. Specialist hospitality lenders adopt more flexible approaches, sometimes including 30% to 50% of licence value in total security assessments. For example, a $300,000 unrestricted licence might support $90,000 to 50,000 additional lending from specialist sources. Licence type significantly impacts treatment—unrestricted licences receive more favourable consideration than restricted licences with limited trading hours. Recent comparable licence sales, trading conditions, and regulatory environment all influence how specialist lenders incorporate licence values into finance packages.
Can I finance restaurant fit-outs and equipment?
Yes, restaurant fit-outs and equipment typically secure separate financing from property mortgages through equipment finance lenders. Kitchen appliances, dining furniture, point-of-sale systems, and fit-out costs ranging from 00,000 to $800,000 can be financed at 60% to 80% of value. New equipment from major suppliers attracts best terms (70% to 80% finance at 8% to 10% rates), whilst second-hand equipment faces conservative treatment (50% to 60% finance at 12% to 14% rates). Repayment terms span 3 to 7 years matching equipment useful lives. Some lenders offer progressive draw-down structures releasing funds as equipment purchases occur rather than providing lump sums upfront. Fit-out finance might also structure as construction facilities attached to property lending when undertaken post-acquisition, with funds released progressively against work completion certificates.
What experience do I need to secure hospitality property finance?
Lenders strongly prefer borrowers with proven hospitality management experience—previous venue ownership, executive chef credentials, senior hospitality management roles, or substantial industry tenure. Buyers with 10-plus years hospitality experience including previous successful venue ownership receive best terms (lower rates, higher LVRs, faster approvals). First-time hospitality operators without relevant background face conservative treatment—lower LVRs (reducing from 70% to 60%), higher interest rates (adding 1% to 2%), and stricter serviceability assessments. However, strong business experience in other sectors combined with quality business plans and recruitment of experienced hospitality professionals can partially offset lack of direct hospitality background. Some specialist lenders offering consulting or mentoring services alongside finance target capable business people transitioning into hospitality, providing both capital and operational guidance.
How long does hospitality property finance approval take?
Traditional bank hospitality lending typically requires 8 to 12 weeks from initial application to settlement, involving extensive documentation, committee approvals, and conservative processes. Non-bank commercial lenders specialising in hospitality provide faster timelines—3 to 6 weeks for standard scenarios with established venues and experienced operators. Private lenders offer fastest approval, sometimes completing assessment within 1 to 2 weeks for urgent transactions. However, total transaction timelines extend beyond lender approval to include liquor licence transfers (4 to 12 weeks depending on jurisdiction), business due diligence, lease assignments (for leasehold venues), and settlement coordination. Well-structured hospitality acquisitions typically require 2 to 4 months from initial offer to completion, though urgent scenarios with motivated vendors and private lending might compress to 6 to 8 weeks.
Should I use vendor finance for hospitality acquisitions?
Vendor finance provides valuable tool for hospitality acquisitions, particularly for business goodwill and liquor licence components that traditional lenders won't finance. Vendors often offer better terms than third-party lenders—potentially 5% to 7% interest versus 10% to 15% from private sources—saving 5,000 to $25,000 annually on typical $500,000 vendor finance amounts. Vendors accepting 30% to 50% deferred payment reduce buyers' immediate funding requirements, enabling transactions that couldn't otherwise proceed given limited lending options for non-property components. However, vendor finance creates ongoing relationships with sellers who retain security interests until full payment. Ensure vendor finance terms include reasonable repayment schedules matching realistic business cash flows rather than aggressive structures creating payment stress. Also verify vendors will properly subordinate their security to property lenders, avoiding conflicts between first and second security holders.
Disclaimer: This article provides general information only and should not be considered financial advice. Consult with a licensed finance professional for advice specific to your circumstances.
Author: Written by the expert team at Emet Capital, experienced finance brokers specialising in commercial property and business lending across Australia.