[MCNetwork]

I think we're years away from getting instantaneous approvals from PDF files. Half of the time the PDFs are barely legible because they are just blurry scans of statements. In addition, many applications are handwritten and look like chicken scratch. I haven't seen any type of OCR software that can make heads or tails out of these documents unless the PDFs are perfectly formatted and 100% legible which isn't the norm.

[Karen37a]

I think we're years away from getting instantaneous approvals from PDF files. Half of the time the PDFs are barely legible because they are based off of photocopied statements or handwritten chicken scratch on the application itself. I haven't seen any type of OCR software that can make heads or tails out of these statements unless the PDFs are perfectly formatted and 100% legible which isn't common. This is all wishful thinking right now.

I agree. And even if it could be done thru ocr software.( which it cant for the reasons above ) Standard application forms create more opportunities for backdooring Also those initial algorithms are just a pre pre pre determining factor to see if a file moves on to stage 2...more underwriting. Or stage 3..more underwriting.


The speed of approvals of deals (that someone wants) is not the main concern in this industry..you send in docs, an application and within a few hours or 24 hours you get approved; funded within another 24 hours. Nor documents.

Or you get denied.

The Key is to getting a file that the Funder likes( or wants to approve)...not how quick they scan their documents once you give it to them

Getting the clients to SEND the documents thru numerous phone calls ...convincing the client to do business with you is the key ( and fitting a certain underwriting guideline with the right or best funder) You cant force the merchant to speed up his end ( sending docs and stips) no matter how hard we try.


You can never take the human element out of sales ...or underwriting.

Even the best underwriting caused massive defaults for A paper

[WhoisKingsley]

I agree. And even if it could be done thru ocr software.( which it cant for the reasons above ) Standard application forms create more opportunities for backdooring Also those initial algorithms are just a pre pre pre determining factor to see if a file moves on to stage 2...more underwriting. Or stage 3..more underwriting.


The speed of approvals of deals (that someone wants) is not the main concern in this industry..you send in docs, an application and within a few hours or 24 hours you get approved; funded within another 24 hours. Nor documents.

Or you get denied.

The Key is to getting a file that the Funder likes( or wants to approve)...not how quick they scan their documents once you give it to them

Getting the clients to SEND the documents thru numerous phone calls ...convincing the client to do business with you is the key ( and fitting a certain underwriting guideline with the right or best funder) You cant force the merchant to speed up his end ( sending docs and stips) no matter how hard we try.


You can never take the human element out of sales ...or underwriting.

Even the best underwriting caused massive defaults for A paper

Standard application forms create more opportunities for backdooring ?!? I call BS. CAN Capital had a standard app. I didn’t hear the work “backdooring” until people started creating their own applications and so on. Standard applications for anything (repeat ANY THING) that you go into contract to has to be a certain way. That’s why it’s a reseller contract and the broker doesn’t own the merchant account (for some funders- in a good way not the bad ones- hear me out here) If a Broker had to keep organized and liable for anymore they are already responsible for … no offense but how many of ya’ll live with your mom? Have roommates? Airbnb? and ya’ll are scared of regulation?

The speed of approvals of deals (that someone wants) is not the main concern in this industry.
So why tf does everyone have “fast approvals” on their website? You mean to tell me you have over 20 ISOs under you and they don’t haunt you sun up to sun down (I am guessing - To be an ISO Manager is a full time job- submissions is another… then communicating it all…)

[Cfairbank]

I think we're years away from getting instantaneous approvals from PDF files. Half of the time the PDFs are barely legible because they are just blurry scans of statements. In addition, many applications are handwritten and look like chicken scratch. I haven't seen any type of OCR software that can make heads or tails out of these documents unless the PDFs are perfectly formatted and 100% legible which isn't the norm.

This couldn't be further from the truth. If it's legible to you, the machine will learn it. Today's OCRs aren't built properly on ML (if I'm not mistaken, they are static solutions because if you allow them to "learn", they wouldn't solve the broader problem an OCR is attempting to solve (take any pdf and put it into word or excel) , while we have a specific type of document and all we care about is the authenticity, the accuracy, and the ability to extract and analyze data specific to bank statements and applications (to start) -- and it's the constant learning that allows the computer, that initially can't identify anything "non-standard", to learn with each new app, quickly catch up to human ability, and then move ahead because of their ability to cross reference every pixel on every pdf -- that's what makes it "easy".... you wouldn't believe how quickly this was built. And, at proper capacity, if the computer can't recognize it, the human couldn't either so, you have to re-request docs anyways.

[HDF]

And, at proper capacity, if the computer can't recognize it, the human couldn't either so, you have to re-request docs anyways.

Ok, so that right there is the game changer. I'm sure however that top down needs to meet bottom up in terms of client acquisition at some point. But where? At what level does the productivity gained by the lender/funder benefit the broker/ISO? Or better stated perhaps, broker/ISO does the same amount of work and recon, and actually may spend more time in the process than less all said and done. Yet Funder/Lender benefits from economies of automation.

Still, I am a buyer of the opportunity and real FinTech for once. Not the paper chase.

[Cfairbank]

And, at proper capacity, if the computer can't recognize it, the human couldn't either so, you have to re-request docs anyways.

Ok, so that right there is the game changer. I'm sure however that top down needs to meet bottom up in terms of client acquisition at some point. But where? At what level does the productivity gained by the lender/funder benefit the broker/ISO? Or better stated perhaps, broker/ISO does the same amount of work and recon, and actually may spend more time in the process than less all said and done. Yet Funder/Lender benefits from economies of automation.

Still, I am a buyer of the opportunity and real FinTech for once. Not the paper chase.

Fair points, and this may be much more applicable to our partners than a traditional MCA funder. As we've seen in this chain, a clear complaint of Breakout by a number of ISOs has been our lack approvals due to our differentiated underwriting model; but that is coupled with a recognition that if we make an offer, it typically won't be beat. And I'm pretty sure our reputation as a "safe" place to send apps is clear.... we receive tens of thousands of apps, and haven't even been accused of mismanaging one.... So if this technology allows a broker that views us as difficult to send us an app, with no extra work except pressing "send", but the potential to receive a real-time approval that is unlikely to be beat (even if that was the only approval of 10 submitted), does that make it worth it for the brokers that view us as difficult (especially since they know we won't backdoor apps)? And that's just the immediate benefits...

[Karen37a]

Fair points, and this may be much more applicable to our partners than a traditional MCA funder. As we've seen in this chain, a clear complaint of Breakout by a number of ISOs has been our lack approvals due to our differentiated underwriting model; but that is coupled with a recognition that if we make an offer, it typically won't be beat. And I'm pretty sure our reputation as a "safe" place to send apps is clear.... we receive tens of thousands of apps, and haven't even been accused of mismanaging one.... So if this technology allows a broker that views us as difficult to send us an app, with no extra work except pressing "send", but the potential to receive a real-time approval that is unlikely to be beat (even if that was the only approval of 10 submitted), does that make it worth it for the brokers that view us as difficult (especially since they know we won't backdoor apps)? And that's just the immediate benefits...

Carl,

They see you as "difficult" because of the tighter underwriting guidelines( and fewer approvals ) because you are A "plus"paper. Not the difficulty of sending the application ( once you get everything uploaded you hit send...just type in different funders email address). Or your CRM system sends it out with a hit of a button...you just choose which button

Tighter guidelines and more stips -=A paper-=better rates.
( and that's the way it should be)

And again for those who didn't see ( standard applications with no company name on it= more chances for backdooring.)That application will be passed around like candy to kids at a carnival, everyone claiming its theirs...I've seen applications where it was clear that someone chopped off the top of the application and photoshop their company name on it or just patched together photocopied it).

I have a compliance rule that we always get a new application with our company name on it, even if the other was blank and dated within 30 days. No one should ever allow noncompany specific application, nondifferrencieted...it opens up a new can of worms..people pulling credit all over the place.



Fishing in the wrong pond


The benefit of doing business with your company and companies like yours is getting the A-plus paper great rates and safety of knowing you are not being backdoored.

There will be low approval ratios and lower submissions,...smaller market of people who are just below banking grade but slightly above mca, who actually want/need money.

They are also harder to close because they are not "desperate" and can go anywhere they choose..."Close" meaning get the initial documents in and application ( thats the hard part)

its way harder to do ...and sometimes not worth it

[CraaaCraaa Radio]

Carl,

They see you as "difficult" because of the tighter underwriting guidelines( and fewer approvals ) because you are A "plus"paper. Not the difficulty of sending the application ( once you get everything uploaded you hit send...just type in different funders email address). Or your CRM system sends it out with a hit of a button...you just choose which button

Tighter guidelines and more stips -=A paper-=better rates.
( and that's the way it should be)

And again for those who didn't see ( standard applications with no company name on it= more chances for backdooring.)That application will be passed around like candy to kids at a carnival, everyone claiming its theirs...I've seen applications where it was clear that someone chopped off the top of the application and photoshop their company name on it or just patched together photocopied it).

I have a compliance rule that we always get a new application with our company name on it, even if the other was blank and dated within 30 days. No one should ever allow noncompany specific application, nondifferrencieted...it opens up a new can of worms..people pulling credit all over the place.



Fishing in the wrong pond


The benefit of doing business with your company and companies like yours is getting the A-plus paper great rates and safety of knowing you are not being backdoored.

There will be low approval ratios and lower submissions,...smaller market of people who are just below banking grade but slightly above mca, who actually want/need money.

They are also harder to close because they are not "desperate" and can go anywhere they choose..."Close" meaning get the initial documents in and application ( thats the hard part)

which is why some salespeople "pot shi*" saying" i closed so and so much a/b paper", its way harder to do ...and sometimes not worth it

This thread is not strictly about Breakout, it was created to help users/members know what banks and or lenders are still available via the funders directory of debanked. I am quite sure that Breakout will continue to fund and will continue to offer stellar programs to borrowers and the Iso's that submit. Me saying hard to get approvals doesn't equate to they are not a good lender. It means call breakout speak to the ISO department and learn the product. That should be done with all lenders that are signed up. How can you be competitive if you don't know the ins and outs of the financial product.

[Karen37a]

This thread is not strictly about Breakout, it was created to help users/members know what banks and or lenders are still available via the funders directory of debanked. I am quite sure that Breakout will continue to fund and will continue to offer stellar programs to borrowers and the Iso's that submit. Me saying hard to get approvals doesn't equate to they are not a good lender. It means call breakout speak to the ISO department and learn the product. That should be done with all lenders that are signed up. How can you be competitive if you don't know the ins and outs of the financial product.

World of MCA ....Carl asked a question. I answered it.

People offered solutions and commentary. I am stating what I know first hand from my perspective in regards to the specific comments and solutions that were offered...some are off target

That has nothing to do with you posting a helpful list of Funders and a general description of what you think they specialize in...and its not an exact science. You were posting information to be helpful.

[Cfairbank]

Carl,

They see you as "difficult" because of the tighter underwriting guidelines( and fewer approvals ) because you are A "plus"paper. Not the difficulty of sending the application

The benefit of doing business with your company and companies like yours is getting the A-plus paper great rates and safety of knowing you are not being backdoored.

This was the original point I was trying to address — and I'll say it again: we do not ONLY fund A+ paper or "low risk" paper as viewed through the eyes of a broker. You are right, the product our ISO’s, who don’t do much volume with us and, therefore, don't look for the the characteristics that allow us to "de-risk" a customer, only see us as an A+ shop. But we do leverage multiple de-risking strategies that may be completely irrelevant to standard MCA underwriting, but allow us to take a customer you view high risk (B or C) be able to make that customer a "near prime" risk and approve with A-paper pricing. But we don’t just offer “one” product, and through our hybrid product, for example, we can fund a credit profile many would view as high risk, but we have structured the product in such a way that we are de-risking our position sufficiently to provide better rates and an optimized financing structure than they could get elsewhere.

Fishing in the wrong pond

Agreed, brokers are not, nor should they be, our primary source or focus for client acquisition. But our top brokers are fantastic partners and we have no plans to stop funding with brokers.

And again for those who didn't see ( standard applications with no company name on it= more chances for backdooring.)That application will be passed around like candy to kids at a carnival, everyone claiming its theirs...I've seen applications where it was clear that someone chopped off the top of the application and photoshop their company name on it or just patched together photocopied it).

Who said standard app?? Use any app you want and name the fields whatever you want and place them wherever you want on the app. Ultimately, as long a human can decipher something and that something isn't a complete, one-time outlier, a computer, leveraging so many more datapoints, can do it and do it better... and better and better with each accurate result. While I won't get into our internal methodologies, google search for a simple ML diagram and you should be able to see at a very high level how a full feedback loop works and why it is so powerful... and why humans don't stand a chance of beating it.

[Karen37a]

This was the original point I was trying to address — and I'll say it again: we do not ONLY fund A+ paper or "low risk" paper as viewed through the eyes of a broker. You are right, the product our ISO’s, who don’t do much volume with us and, therefore, don't look for the the characteristics that allow us to "de-risk" a customer, only see us as an A+ shop. But we do leverage multiple de-risking strategies that may be completely irrelevant to standard MCA underwriting, but allow us to take a customer you view high risk (B or C) be able to make that customer a "near prime" risk and approve with A-paper pricing. But we don’t just offer “one” product, and through our hybrid product, for example, we can fund a credit profile many would view as high risk, but we have structured the product in such a way that we are de-risking our position sufficiently to provide better rates and an optimized financing structure than they could get elsewhere.



Agreed, brokers are not, nor should they be, our primary source or focus for client acquisition. But our top brokers are fantastic partners and we have no plans to stop funding with brokers.



Who said standard app?? Use any app you want and name the fields whatever you want and place them wherever you want on the app. Ultimately, as long a human can decipher something and that something isn't a complete, one-time outlier, a computer, leveraging so many more datapoints, can do it and do it better... and better and better with each accurate result. While I won't get into our internal methodologies, google search for a simple ML diagram and you should be able to see at a very high level how a full feedback loop works and why it is so powerful... and why humans don't stand a chance of beating it.

I am not going to debate this . Like I debated the regulations issues, certain a paper collapsing before they actually did.

I do have a computer science degree and fully understand ocr ...even quant strategies. ( computers dont have a chance against a trained sales force of brokers live, or underwrting)

in plain english......reading a pdf or application quickly is of no use to salespeople or Isos or closers, It doesnt help in anyway.nor computer generated algorithm approvals because there i s no way that it isnt going to be eventually manually approved....if you did there would be more defaults.

Gl with it.