http://debanked.com/2016/06/balance-...ot-letting-go/
Thoughts? Ideas? Agree? Disagree?
Printable View
http://debanked.com/2016/06/balance-...ot-letting-go/
Thoughts? Ideas? Agree? Disagree?
Sure, nice job, well written.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhoisKingsley
Of course the captive funder has a shot at keeping the merchant's business and if the merchant is happy, they generally won't stray. Playing games with payoff and especially zero balance letters is just a weak move to begin with. Everyone I know in this biz puffs out their chest about what a great salesperson they are, as is the tendency of salespeople. You can't be above average or a star without some measure of ego. So, as the current funder, you have a free shot at keeping the merchant on your books. Or should I call it a penalty kick?
There's still an obstacle in the way, the competing broker, but you have the advantage. So, use your best sales skills to keep the client. Take your free shot, but if you miss, and the client still wants the letter, you've lost for one reason or another. Concede. Send the letter and let the merchant move on. All you do by withholding payoff letters, when the merchant is clearly going a different direction, is stack up a bad rep in the industry and a sour taste in the merchants mouth. You can't win them all, and you're not going to keep a client around by handcuffing them to your bumper.
Well said and true.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUNd
this would be the professional approach, but alas, many in this industry are FAR from professional. When you have some lackey who only opens 2-4 accounts a month, they need to fee the bejesus out of them and hold on for dear life. Otherwise, they are back to working the salami rack at Uncle Sal'sQuote:
Originally Posted by FUNd
I do not believe in withholding pay off letters- trust me. It was brought to my attention by another Broker the difficult time he was having obtaining a payoff letter from his Merchant. Now, we all know that there is a 50/50 chance it could be a lie on either the Broker or Merchants part, but when we got down to it- it was the Funder. Though the Funding Company WAS NOT an "A/B Paper" Funder, I reached out to some underwriters and another Funder to get the scoop on why in the world does it take sooo long? After reviewing the protocol (that is like the protocol of many other companies) I found that even though those "A/B Paper" companies want to keep their Merchants- they DO ADHERE to a Merchants request for a pay off letter at any time they request one. They do ask questions, as anyone would, but the findings are really baffling. I wish I had the correct numbers and would love data on this but know when I say "A lot" "Most" etc. the % if probably pretty dang high.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUNd
Merchants who call for a payoff letter (most of the time) do not have a solid offer in black and white. When questioned about the expectation about their new search for funding, the Merchant has no idea or gives a number that is clearly not possible.
The Merchant will receive a pay off or balance letter and nothing will happen. No payoff is made. BUT when the time comes for a renewal or add on- the Merchant does not qualify because they are "stacked" within the first 3 months of obtaining a first position. When the Merchant learns of the actual rules- it is too late and receivables are already tied into advances and thus, they need another stacked advance to get by.
But agreed. If any document is requested, it would hurt the company more by not complying with the request both on the consumer and Broker side.
Very well written and all great points. The payoff letter request really is a great opportunity to strengthen your bond with your client.
It is easy to get into defensive a mood and try prevent them from leaving, but the request has provided an opening for you to reach out and serve the client at a higher level, and put yourself in position for more business now or down the line.
If the request comes through, it signals the merchant is either not happy with what they have, they’re looking for something better, or their situation has changed and they are seeking a better fit.
Another voice is in their ear, but the great thing is that we can help with all three of these scenarios. We can always be the problem-solver as opposed to someone else.
The merchant may have made an ASSumption we can’t help this time around, they may have a limiting belief about what we can provide – and now they are exploring elsewhere. We can square up these assumptions and assure the client we’re on the case.
This is a great opportunity to get Curious, ask quality questions and understand what the reason for the request is, and how you can help them achieve their Outcome.
With new context and docs, we may be able to provide the solution that works for all stakeholders now. And if the numbers don’t make sense now, we can still be the merchant’s Trusted Advisor and consult them on the timing of when next to revisit.
More rapport gets built, we’re now tighter to the hip, and it becomes a lot harder for the merchant to leave or do something imprudent.
Tighter Relationships = Consistent Revenue
Fund On!
-FundingStrategist
https://fundingstrat.com