[wallerbusiness]

Is Bizfi any good for brokering out deals to. I have some B credit clients I want to send over.

[Funder Mark]

Probably a bad time, considering the amount of staff they let go recently. I think it would make more sense to let things settle down.

[Han Solo]

they are only funding deals over 650 credit last i heard

[FundingCzar]

they are only funding deals over 650 credit last i heard

This is true- Bizfi is in turmoil right now. I wouldn't be surprised if they completely closed funding within the next month or two unless they get a merger/acquisition/buyout. That is pretty unlikely though given the state of their book. According to my contacts at Bizfi most of their employees are actively seeking new jobs.

That being said -I loved working with Bizfi, good people, its a shame it has come to this.

[ridextreme]

MCC was one of the biggest players back in the prime day$

[J.Celifarco]

I havent counted them out just yet.. I wouldn't bet against them landing on their feet, but thats me. They are still funding

[MCNetwork]

A lot of us got our start in this industry working at MCC/NLF (myself included). Hope they can get back on track.

[MCAFunds]

MCC was the absolute best. It is a shame to hear, see and witness what has happened. CAN Capital, now MCC, this industry is and always will be a 60/80 payment schedule, factored at a 1.45 paying out 8 percent to staff and knowing, full well, that 100 funded deals 8-12 of them will default, the other 88 deals will create profits. Facts.

[Han Solo]

conversation is about will they fund B paper not the state of that company lets not try to get into that

[Han Solo]

we will fund B paperwork here at SOS Capital send it to newdeals@soscapital.com

[J.Celifarco]

MCC was the absolute best. It is a shame to hear, see and witness what has happened. CAN Capital, now MCC, this industry is and always will be a 60/80 payment schedule, factored at a 1.45 paying out 8 percent to staff and knowing, full well, that 100 funded deals 8-12 of them will default, the other 88 deals will create profits. Facts.

I dont agree with this.. This industry was built on 5-9 month deals 1.34-1.45 and I think this will always be the sweet spot where funders can make money and the merchant isn't getting hit over the head too bad. Shorter then that is being greedy unless it is a very week file. The question is where do you go with pricing and term for the stronger files that makes sense for both bank and merchant

[MCNetwork]

CAN Capital, now MCC, this industry is and always will be a 60/80 payment schedule, factored at a 1.45 paying out 8 percent to staff and knowing, full well, that 100 funded deals 8-12 of them will default, the other 88 deals will create profits. Facts.

This is the high risk model for C/D paper. And the default rate is probably closer to 20%, not anywhere near 8-12%. There will always be a market for lower rate, longer term advances. They just need to be underwritten properly. Three month 1.45's hurt more merchants than they help which is why I don't peddle those deals.

[Han Solo]

This is the high risk model for C/D paper. And the default rate is probably closer to 20%, not anywhere near 8-12%. There will always be a market for lower rate, longer term advances. They just need to be underwritten properly. Three month 1.45's hurt more merchants than they help which is why I don't peddle those deals.

the deals usually get underwritten properly when was the last time you funded a deal as it was originally underwritten?

[MCNetwork]

the deals usually get underwritten properly when was the last time you funded a deal as it was originally underwritten?

Yesterday. 90% of my deals are funded as they were originally underwritten.

[Kevin Henry-Seacoast]

Yesterday. 90% of my deals are funded as they were originally underwritten.

Nice work! I hate guys that lie or bait and switch. We are running a touch better than you guys, but we are a different animal.

[J.Celifarco]

the deals usually get underwritten properly when was the last time you funded a deal as it was originally underwritten?

with bizfi better then 90% of the time deals were funded as underwritten it is why they were always at or near the top of my list for goto funders

[MCNetwork]

The only reason why I see deals get heavily revised is if the Decision Logic or month to date activity comes back looking horrible, which is understandable. But I try to make sure to give my underwriters all the info upfront so they have enough data to make an accurate offer.

[MCNetwork]

Hello,

If your not currently partnered with Yellowstone Id love to chat with you.

Thank You.

Best Regards,


Fabio Giordano
ISO Development
(201) 494-3956 (Cell)
(978) 244-5196 (Fax)
FGiordano@YellowStoneCapLLC.com
www.YellowStoneCapLLC.com

Sounds good! Who is Yellowstone? Tell me about your company.

[MCAFunds]

I dont agree with this.. This industry was built on 5-9 month deals 1.34-1.45 and I think this will always be the sweet spot where funders can make money and the merchant isn't getting hit over the head too bad. Shorter then that is being greedy unless it is a very week file. The question is where do you go with pricing and term for the stronger files that makes sense for both bank and merchant

Two of the largest funders go under and sell, one is on the brink and the one public funder/lender's stock is pennies... You do not have to agree to anything, no one does, but when a trend starts then a trend begins. This is a trend that is happening now. You can either not agree, which I can see your point, or accept the trend.

[MCAFunds]

I dont agree with this.. This industry was built on 5-9 month deals 1.34-1.45 and I think this will always be the sweet spot where funders can make money and the merchant isn't getting hit over the head too bad. Shorter then that is being greedy unless it is a very week file. The question is where do you go with pricing and term for the stronger files that makes sense for both bank and merchant

80 Payments is 4 months, you said 5 months - pretty much the same thing. The trend is 1.45, you said 1.35 - 1.45, very close to the same thing. You may not agree, but your repsonse is 90% what I just stated. Look.

[MCAFunds]

This is the high risk model for C/D paper. And the default rate is probably closer to 20%, not anywhere near 8-12%. There will always be a market for lower rate, longer term advances. They just need to be underwritten properly. Three month 1.45's hurt more merchants than they help which is why I don't peddle those deals.

100% agreed. But you're talking about a very small piece of the market, which I would bet $10,000 that 60% or more of those deals are stacked, hence to show you the trend once again. You're right, default probably is closer to 20%, hence why the 60-80 payment structure works. You do not need to peddle, sell, fund, syndicate or broker any of those deals, but do me this at least, when was the last week or month you and your staff have funded 50 12 months deals vs. 50 4 month deals.

[MCNetwork]

The largest funders are failing because their operations were too massive to support any type of downturn in the business. They were under pressure to originate deals just to keep paying their overhead, which is a recipe for disaster. The next iteration in this industry will result in boutique funders who are much smaller and leaner and much more selective with their deals. The 1.20s and 1.30s can still be profitable as long as expenses are kept in check and cost of money and client acquisition costs are minimized.

[J.Celifarco]

80 Payments is 4 months, you said 5 months - pretty much the same thing. The trend is 1.45, you said 1.35 - 1.45, very close to the same thing. You may not agree, but your repsonse is 90% what I just stated. Look.

yes but I think 5 on the low end you have 4 on you high end. Hey all we can say is time will tell and we will see how everything plays out

[MCAFunds]

The largest funders are failing because their operations were too massive to support any type of downturn in the business. They were under pressure to originate deals just to keep paying their overhead, which is a recipe for disaster. The next iteration in this industry will result in boutique funders who are much smaller and leaner and much more selective with their deals. The 1.20s and 1.30s can still be profitable as long as expenses are kept in check and cost of money and client acquisition costs are minimized.

A 1.20 will never be profitable, a 1.20 can never break even. 1.30? Maybe, at best break even. Why does AMEX charge 27% to 55 Million businesses annually. Why do banks not lend to anyone with a heart beat, same reason why a 1.20 or even a 1.30 do not work. Put 100 Funded deals in a hat at a 1.20 and 1.45 and I will take the 1.45 all day. The ONLY way a 1.20 or 1.30 can work is IF and only IF, they have an exclusive no stacking etc etc etc clause.

[MCNetwork]

when was the last week or month you and your staff have funded 50 12 months deals vs. 50 4 month deals.

Our average deal size is more like 6-8 months. This is because cash advances, by their nature, are intended to be a type of short term, bridge financing, not long-term debt. That's not our value proposition.