[AdvanceFund]

As a broker/ISO would you rather get paid 8 points commission on a 6th position deal that the funder is charging 5% fee OR would you rather 12% commission if the funder is charging 10% fee.

[kashman1]

Its a scummy scenario either way for the merchant, the rates already absorbent. But are you in the making money business or passing up opportunities business?

[HDF]

Its a scummy scenario either way for the merchant, the rates already absorbent. But are you in the making money business or passing up opportunities business?

Honestly, an overleveraged merchant is no more or less of an opportunity than taking a drunk's wallet. It is not difficult, and they themselves are responsible for getting in that condition. But should you take advantage because it is so easy to tempt them?

[AndyYSCISOdept]

This cant be a real scenario.

If it was * points with 10% fee or 12 points and 10% fee we'd have something to talk about but honestly either way this merchant will be out of business shortly so you'll never have a chance to develop a long term client , so I guess in the interest of self preservation do what you like but either way the merchant wont make it.

[Michael I]

As a broker/ISO would you rather get paid 8 points commission on a 6th position deal that the funder is charging 5% fee OR would you rather 12% commission if the funder is charging 10% fee.

most people who will do a 6 th position also charge their own fee so why will they want you to charge 5% for them to get 2% when they can just charge the full 5% and get all 5

[AndyYSCISOdept]

I think either way those fees are ridiculous

[Karen37a]

I agree with Andy.

What should be done is to tell the merchant that they are taking out advances or loans to pay for advances or loans and they are one step away from insolvency.

If they are serious... let the advances pay down or off...net 30/40/50 and then consolidate or give them a plan to fix it and stay alive. If their end result is bankruptcy or default why go thru the drama with them? They are just going smile say what you want to hear then cut your throat as well.

Maybe I am too conservative ...6th? , what happened to the 3rd 4th 5th

[Kevin Henry-Seacoast]

I was just having a fee conversation this morning with a very experienced advisor. More often then not, some advisors and/or brokers are collecting fees from the client and the lender simultaneously. I don't have an issue with this so long as the fees are not outrageous. I can't tell you how many times we have proposed facilities for companies that clearly save them significant amounts of money in fees and gives them more liquidity only for the client to walk away because the advisor/broker got greedy.

[Karen37a]

I would guess that that person is going to pay what ever fee or charges they state because they are going to lock their bank account out as soon as they get the money.

No one is a "lay down" thats creditworthy or responsible.

[WestCoastFunding]

Hey guys, when giving a 12th position, what's the proper amount of points to charge? I think charging an extra two points is going to stress the merchant's cash flow. I want to be ethical, ya know.

[NoBigDeal]

Brokers already feel that a funder is making a ton of money on the payback as it is, so why do they have still have to charge additional bank fees?
From the funder side, I do get that if you're paying a higher commission you could have the ISO sell the higher fee. If they don't like it, then take a hit on comm
From the merchants side...WTF

[Karen37a]

I charge Psf fees ....someone is paying 1k a day...1500 a day.Getting called hourly to be stacked again. I wait 30-45 days, advances get paid off and I lower it to $700 and give them more money.

they are not going to get frugal at that point with me. I really won't allow it. It's actually not fair to me who could have just stacked them.

Ive told merchants ...you are worried about $1500 when you were paying that daily?

[MCNetwork]

I would be more concerned for a merchant that actually agrees to these fifth or sixth position terms with high fees. It's more likely he has no intention of paying it back.

[Funder Mark]

We just killed a $50k deal for the merchant having defaulted in a previous company he owned. When I spoke with him later, he said his rep had known about it and said it wouldn't be an issue, AND that the rep was still trying to force the merchant to pay a fee, after we killed the deal. There are scum funders, there are scum brokers, and there are scum merchants.

[Karen37a]

I agree. And I think its 80% on all ends.

They have that song.


"clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am stuck in the middle with you"

[Michael I]

Brokers already feel that a funder is making a ton of money on the payback as it is, so why do they have still have to charge additional bank fees?
From the funder side, I do get that if you're paying a higher commission you could have the ISO sell the higher fee. If they don't like it, then take a hit on comm
From the merchants side...WTF

Issue is it is usually not the funder or iso side it is the iso rep that does it . For years i thought yellowstone charged 10-15 % standard in till andy made me the wiser that is just the iso rep .

[Karen37a]

Some of us asked for excessive fees to be lowered and split then dropped off our psf fees to try to hook the clients up...only if the client is worth it

( not talking about Yellowstone)

And no one is doing anything for anybody unless you are profitable, look out for the funders money like its your own...low to no defaults and renewals

[J.Celifarco]

this post basically shows what the issues are in the industry... Is stacking a problem no if we were talking common sense seconds and may maybe sometimes thirds but of course the industry goes to the extreme and now people are talking about 6ths and more...
Charging fees is fine I dont see a problem with that until people take that to the extreme and start banging merchants over the head with crazy %'s.. Everything in moderation and all would be good

[Karen37a]

Its never going to change and If merchants didn't get bad advice some of us wouldn't be in business and wouldn't be valuable to the merchant.

...people are going to stack 4/5/6//7/8 >>> as far as they can go because most only care about the commission and the merchant only wants money and only comes to regret it AFTER he goes to the casino with the renovation/inventory money. Or when he has to pay it back (sometimes for any legitimate borrowing reason.)

Merchants stack themselves and go thru painstaking efforts to do so.
( so if the Iso broker doesn't do it, they are going straight to the Direct Funder if they didn't go already around their back or called and backdoored)

Then the merchant says" these brokers forced me to take more money", (even though they had to sign a contract send in documents, stips and re sign contract.)......"boo hoo Its their fault so I shouldn't have to pay it back its such high ((interest)) "

Anyone who has been in Finance for a long time experienced clients buying stocks ...when it went UP it was their idea and they are Gordon Gekko...when it goes DOWN you forced them and they are just a humble Sunday school teacher who shouldn't have been trading stocks and want their money back (.Stockbrokers vilified)

Same with Mortgages...UP UP UP...everyone was a refinancing /flipping home genius...DOWN ...the brokers tricked me into taking cash out and buying boats, cars, and jewelry.( ok, give the boat and car back ...NO WAY) ( Mortgage brokers vilified )

This is common. Hard to know whats going on from the outside which is why I never wanted regulators stepping in ( also chasing away institutional investors and hedge funds, perceived risk...making it harder to raise money)or new Funders who really haven't experienced the live flip flop clients who lie during the document collection phase.
Light bulb eventually goes off.

[NoBigDeal]

Issue is it is usually not the funder or iso side it is the iso rep that does it . For years i thought yellowstone charged 10-15 % standard in till andy made me the wiser that is just the iso rep .

It's true. Comes back to having a good ISO rep who cares more about getting deals done rather than forcing high bank fees

[Chambo]

Its never going to change and If merchants didn't get bad advice some of us wouldn't be in business and wouldn't be valuable to the merchant.

...people are going to stack 4/5/6//7/8 >>> as far as they can go because most only care about the commission and the merchant only wants money and only comes to regret it AFTER he goes to the casino with the renovation/inventory money. Or when he has to pay it back (sometimes for any legitimate borrowing reason.)

Merchants stack themselves and go thru painstaking efforts to do so.
( so if the Iso broker doesn't do it, they are going straight to the Direct Funder if they didn't go already around their back or called and backdoored)

Then the merchant says" these brokers forced me to take more money", (even though they had to sign a contract send in documents, stips and re sign contract.)......"boo hoo Its their fault so I shouldn't have to pay it back its such high ((interest)) "

Anyone who has been in Finance for a long time experienced clients buying stocks ...when it went UP it was their idea and they are Gordon Gekko...when it goes DOWN you forced them and they are just a humble Sunday school teacher who shouldn't have been trading stocks and want their money back (.Stockbrokers vilified)

Same with Mortgages...UP UP UP...everyone was a refinancing /flipping home genius...DOWN ...the brokers tricked me into taking cash out and buying boats, cars, and jewelry.( ok, give the boat and car back ...NO WAY) ( Mortgage brokers vilified )

This is common. Hard to know whats going on from the outside which is why I never wanted regulators stepping in ( also chasing away institutional investors and hedge funds, perceived risk...making it harder to raise money)or new Funders who really haven't experienced the live flip flop clients who lie during the document collection phase.
Light bulb eventually goes off.

That argument has been tried over and over, but always loses in the FINRA/NASD/SEC world, and will soon lose in our world too.....due to TWO WORDS

FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY

[Karen37a]

That argument has been tried over and over, but always loses in the FINRA/NASD/SEC world, and will soon lose in our world too.....due to TWO WORDS

FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY

We do not have a Fiduciary Responsibility to liars and con artists. ( and Default artists )We will never have one. I help merchants who really do not want to help themselves all day long.


And If you work with a lender/funder directly you never have a fiduciary to anyone but your employer/funder and their money...especially if you syndicate.( protect Investors money, no defaults) If small independents ever get fiduciary dol, Amex and these other 3% advance companies and loan companies are going to get rich.

Also . When they hear a stranger on the phone ( when cold calling ) say...the fees are too high. A fiduciary will force them to turn it over to debt restructuring

This fiduciary word is like watching the show "wicked tuna" with my boyfriend and they say " we have to sustain the species " every 3 seconds.

My " real Fiduciary" is to the Lender /funder/happy horse/investor and myself...while helping merchants

And I never lost the Finra Nasd argument which is why my license isn't marked.( on top of doing the right thing)

We shall see going forward

[Chambo]

pout, argue, spew nonsense all you want. It'll come down to Fiduciary Responsibility very soon.

Who cares what a merchant signs? You should know, as the professional, that a 3 month 1.45 5th position is nothing but toxic. you will have until 2018, when Dems take over congress after this Trump debacle.

[Karen37a]

The Fiduciary Dol rules dont apply to people who have employers or Funders. They cant force, someone, to not be on their employer's side ( unless it's egregious )

I do not care anyway...I advise my clients to do the right thing or wait

[Chambo]

The Fiduciary Dol rules dont apply to people who have employers or Funders. They cant force, someone, to not be on their employer's side ( unless it's egregious )

I do not care anyway...I advise my clients to do the right thing or wait

Like I said, that argument has been used over and over....and always loses. You have 15-16 months to correct the path. After that, there's an incredibly good chance Elizabeth Warren is coming to lock you up