Not necessarily. Marginality asks whether the business can generate more than a minimal living for the family, now or within five years. Seasonal payroll and a credible growth plan can satisfy that; a campground that only pays the owners cannot.
Seasonal is acceptable; owner-only is not
Hypothetical example: a Frontenac Islands couple's target campground shows a net income after the season that roughly equals what the two of them would need to live. Presented that way, the business is marginal. The same campground presented with its four seasonal employees, a year-round caretaker, a reservation system that could support additional cabins and a five-year plan showing the season lengthening into the shoulder months makes a different case, because the test looks at capacity to create jobs and income beyond the investors' subsistence.
The consular officer will read the projections against the historical figures the seller provides, so the plan should reconcile with the tax returns rather than depart from them. The couple should also be able to explain how the off-season is financed, since a business that closes for seven months has fixed costs throughout. A campground that already pays wages to non-family staff has done most of the work of answering the question.
Hypothetical example: A Frontenac Islands couple propose to buy an independent bicycle repair and retail shop. Their first review should test whether the money has left their personal control, whether the shop is operating, and whether projected income extends beyond the household. The signed purchase agreement, escrow instructions, seller financials, and staffing plan each settle a different part of that inquiry.
A projected profit without a workable sales and labour basis will not cure a weak investment record.