had funds

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "had funds" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to indicate that someone possessed money or financial resources at a certain point in time. Example: "Before the unexpected expenses arose, we had funds set aside for the project."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Formal & Business

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

39 human-written examples

On the other hand, many legitimate Russian businessmen had funds there as well.

The New York Times

Whereas the EMA had funds of £560m, the bursary has a pot of £180m.

The Guardian - Opinion

He had funds from Edward Hulton – the proprietor of the magazine Picture Post – and facilities from the Earl of Jersey.

Independent

Of fifty accounts that had been opened, only four had funds in them, in amounts ranging from two dollars to a hundred dollars.

The New Yorker

But Dornstein had funds at his disposal — he could draw on the money that his family had received from the Lockerbie fund set up by Qaddafi.

The New Yorker

When she started in 2007 the foundation had funds of just $7.3m, a staff of 12 and headquarters in a dingy shopping centre in St Petersburg, Florida.

The Economist

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

19 human-written examples

(He disclosed that Syngenta had funded it).

The New Yorker

Evans had funding and private investigators.

The Guardian - Opinion

Melonk (+7.63) had Funding Deficit and Fort Del Oro.

The Guardian - Sport

One summer sport, badminton, has had funding cut by £500,000.

Independent

VA had funding from CNPq and FAPEMIG.

BMC Genomics

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "had funds", ensure that the context clearly indicates the purpose or use of those funds. Provide specifics about what the money was intended for or enabled.

Common error

Avoid using "had funds" without specifying the source or purpose of the money. Be clear about where the funds came from and what they were used for to provide better context and avoid ambiguity.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "had funds" functions as a verb phrase, indicating the possession of money or financial resources at a particular time. As Ludwig AI suggests, it commonly expresses the state of having access to financial means. Examples in the search data illustrate how this phrase is used in various contexts.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

News & Media

50%

Science

26%

Formal & Business

12%

Less common in

Wiki

7%

Reference

3%

Encyclopedias

2%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "had funds" is a common and grammatically sound expression indicating possession of financial resources. As Ludwig AI confirms, it's suitable for various contexts, from news reports to scientific publications. The analysis shows that the phrase is most frequently used in news and media, followed by science and formal business settings. While numerous alternatives exist, such as "possessed capital" or "held financial resources", "had funds" remains a versatile and widely understood way to convey the availability of money. Ensure clarity by specifying the source and intended use of funds when employing this phrase.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

possessed capital

This alternative offers a more formal tone and emphasizes the control and ownership of financial resources.

held financial resources

This phrase highlights the control over financial resources. It is slightly more formal and emphasizes the availability of funds.

were financially able

This alternative focuses on the capacity to perform an action or support something with money.

were in a financial position

This alternative focuses on being situated favorably with respect to money, suggesting the ability to undertake actions because of available funds.

had financial backing

This implies that funds were available through external support or investment, rather than internal resources.

were flush with cash

This suggests an abundance of available money, possibly on a temporary basis or beyond normal amounts.

had the wherewithal

This focuses on the resources, including financial, necessary to achieve a specific purpose.

benefited from financial assistance

This emphasizes that the fund was gained from receiving support.

were affluent

This indicates a general state of wealth and abundance of financial resources. It's less specific than "had funds".

were solvent

This emphasizes the ability to meet financial obligations and remain in a stable financial condition.

FAQs

How can I use "had funds" in a sentence?

You can use "had funds" to indicate that someone possessed money or financial resources at a certain point in time. For example, "Before the unexpected expenses arose, we "had funds" set aside for the project."

What can I say instead of "had funds"?

You can use alternatives like "possessed capital", "held financial resources", or "were financially able" depending on the context.

Which is correct, "had funds" or "had fund"?

"Had funds" is the correct phrase when referring to financial resources in general. "Had fund" would only be correct if referring to a single, specific fund.

What's the difference between "had funds" and "received funding"?

"Had funds" implies possession of money, while "received funding" focuses on the act of obtaining financial support from an external source. They are not perfectly interchangeable; "received funding" implies an external source contributed to the funds.