No. Substantiality, qualifying capital and the actual enterprise require review independently of price.
Compare what the funds accomplish
Separate committed capital from fees and planned spending. No universal fixed minimum makes every business at a particular price qualify. Hypothetical example: a virtual-production studio buyer comparing a modest leased facility with a more expensive purchase.
At a first review, the first review should ask what has actually been committed, what is exposed to loss, and what the enterprise requires to operate. The records most likely to settle that point are purchase or lease terms, escrow conditions, invoices, bank evidence, equipment commitments, and a realistic operating budget. Sequence the work deliberately: identify the transaction that creates the qualifying exposure first, then analyze whether the investment is substantial for that business.
A common error is choosing the lowest price because it sounds efficient while ignoring whether the committed funds can start and sustain operations; that error matters because a conclusion based on incomplete or mismatched facts may not carry to the final arrangement. Write down the decision that remains after the review, the fact that could change it, and the record needed to resolve that fact. This creates a usable file rather than a collection of documents that cannot be connected to the actual plan.