Need a Funder or Vendor? START HERE

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 60
  1. #26
    Senior Member Reputation points: 18402
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    781

    Quote Originally Posted by ridextreme View Post
    Letitia James, New York state's attorney general, is continuing to investigate the merchant cash advance industry, according to her spokesman, Fabien Levy. "Many small businesses are struggling and trying to figure out how they can get by," Levy said. "We don't want them to feel they have no other option but to go to these predatory lenders."

    So the NY AG doesn't want merchants that got denied by banks to "feel" they have no other option to get funding, when the reality is, they don't. I would love to here where a "struggling business" with bad personal credit can get funds to meet the following weeks payroll outside of MCA... NYS has become a dictator state run by power trip thugs.
    Paying 40 to 49 cents on the dollar isnt helping anybody..if anything it makes matters much worse.

  2. #27
    Senior Member Reputation points: 46943 JasonBishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    191

    Quote Originally Posted by golf2014 View Post
    Paying 40 to 49 cents on the dollar isnt helping anybody..if anything it makes matters much worse.
    Why are you still active on this forum Scott? You seem to hate everything that the industry stands for. Why do you continually heckle from the sidelines and contribute 100% Negativity to every post?

  3. #28
    Senior Member Reputation points: 46943 JasonBishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    191

    Quote Originally Posted by golf2014 View Post
    I told u you this very thing a year ago...because somebody i know who works with feds...
    So you're pretty much a scumbag right?

  4. #29
    Senior Member Reputation points: 18402
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    781

    Why do 75 year old people march outside an abortion clinic ?? Its full of scams galore...it will end soon enough. 5 days a week payments ?? Loansharks are cheaper. Its the greed and bs and corrupt crsp thst will end this.

  5. #30
    Senior Member Reputation points: 301165
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    3,313

    Quote Originally Posted by golf2014 View Post
    Find other work next year
    Golf stop trying to vindicate why you failed in this industry.in the last ten years this industry went from a couple of million to a couple of billion and is still growing.look how people are willing to buy on deck, kabbage.This industry is not going anywhere

  6. #31
    Senior Member Reputation points: 18402
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    781

    In fairness to all....carry on...i dont have to comment. I failed ?? I havent been doing this in years. When the govt says they want it gone..its going away. Popcorn for sale to watch the show folks. Carry on.im.out.

  7. #32
    Senior Member Reputation points: 16117 capaxess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    west Florida
    Posts
    175

    Quote Originally Posted by golf2014 View Post
    Paying 40 to 49 cents on the dollar isnt helping anybody..if anything it makes matters much worse.
    But THAT'S what money actually costs when there's risk involved - how can having access to even expensive money make things worse for a "struggling business" - it could be the difference between surviving or not. Uncle Sambino is handing out free money at low rates (or even free) cuz they have a printer, if I had one I'd be giving out lower rates too!
    The MCA industry came about because of the void created by banks leaving small businesses out in the cold. High risk underwriters/lenders then calculated what rates were needed to turn a profit - many who have tried to capture market share by taking on more risk have failed. Although there are abuses MCA rates by an large reflect true price discovery after risk/rewards are correctly calculated.

  8. #33
    Senior Member Reputation points: 16117 capaxess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    west Florida
    Posts
    175

    Quote Originally Posted by cmarks View Post
    Nope,,, payday lenders support trump, had their convention at Trump Doral, hes allowing for consumers to fight for themselves by weakening regulations.
    Can find many articles on showing this:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...audio-reveals/

    https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...g-payday-loans

    https://www.propublica.org/article/t...-and-cashed-in
    I stand corrected, thank you! I had seen somewhere (I can't remember unfortunately) that many payday lenders were Delaware based and have enjoyed political suck from Biden and his crew. It's still confusing to me why they get a pass from the same administration though, maybe the MCA industry needs to step up it's political giving and get with the program?

  9. #34
    Senior Member Reputation points: 16117 capaxess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    west Florida
    Posts
    175

    Quote Originally Posted by golf2014 View Post
    In fairness to all....carry on...i dont have to comment. I failed ?? I havent been doing this in years. When the govt says they want it gone..its going away. Popcorn for sale to watch the show folks. Carry on.im.out.
    Really? What has the government managed to "want gone" that actually went away? War on Drugs? War on Terrorism? War on Poverty? I'm begining to think they might actually want to get into the MCA business lol! The Govt. isn't nearly as omnipotent as they would like us to think they are. In fact, considering the amount of epic fails they've sustained it's really evident that the only thing they're actually good at is narrative management (lying) and even that's starting to fade. But I'll take the popcorn though, thanks! The show isn't gonna be where you think it is however.

  10. #35
    Senior Member Reputation points: 18402
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    781

    As stated im staying out of negative based comments. But ftc wants it gone..they r very powerfull.

  11. #36
    Senior Member Reputation points: 76187
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    508

    Quote Originally Posted by capaxess View Post
    But THAT'S what money actually costs when there's risk involved - how can having access to even expensive money make things worse for a "struggling business" - it could be the difference between surviving or not. Uncle Sambino is handing out free money at low rates (or even free) cuz they have a printer, if I had one I'd be giving out lower rates too!
    The MCA industry came about because of the void created by banks leaving small businesses out in the cold. High risk underwriters/lenders then calculated what rates were needed to turn a profit - many who have tried to capture market share by taking on more risk have failed. Although there are abuses MCA rates by an large reflect true price discovery after risk/rewards are correctly calculated.
    Maybe the best option is to have no access to capital at all. I understand the MCA product works in a lot of specific scenarios but I just don't see how 50k 1.499 70 days 7% fee with a daily payment of $1,070.71 can really truly help anyone lol. It might just be better for the business owner to learn better savings habits rather than have someone give them a quick but expensive 50k so they can continue to feel like they have money to spend.

  12. #37
    Senior Member Reputation points: 301165
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    3,313

    Quote Originally Posted by pcfunder View Post
    Maybe the best option is to have no access to capital at all. I understand the MCA product works in a lot of specific scenarios but I just don't see how 50k 1.499 70 days 7% fee with a daily payment of $1,070.71 can really truly help anyone lol. It might just be better for the business owner to learn better savings habits rather than have someone give them a quick but expensive 50k so they can continue to feel like they have money to spend.
    that is not the mca industry. that is the bottom 1% . here is a list from last year which numbers probably doubled of what the mca industry as a whole is https://debanked.com/2019/08/the-201...rs-by-revenue/ . One or 2 companies doing wrong things that might get closed down ,does not close down the billions that go out to HELP business

  13. #38
    Senior Member Reputation points: 76187
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    508

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael I View Post
    that is not the mca industry. that is the bottom 1% . here is a list from last year which numbers probably doubled of what the mca industry as a whole is https://debanked.com/2019/08/the-201...rs-by-revenue/ . One or 2 companies doing wrong things that might get closed down ,does not close down the billions that go out to HELP business
    yeahhhhhhhh my thing is I have trouble believing that only 1% of brokers offer those type of deals. I know that MCA has A/B funding companies but they seem to get stacked a lotttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttttttttttttttttttt of the time. I mean enough of the time to literally stall funding, shut down, or cause massive A paper funding companies to sell. Also companies like Yellowstone are funding how much a month again? Par had 500 million dollars to fund with as well? I've also met a lot of brokers who give a merchant a great 1st position deal. A type of deal that if I was a restaurant owner would make me happy. Then once the merchant reaches out after 3 months for more money, their eyes glow with dollar signs instead of advising the merchant not to do that. Then when the 2nd position starts to hurt and the merchant asks for more money, the broker is like "oh ma gawsh more comishhhhhhhh lets do itttttttttt!". If the merchant was advised on how to better handle the capital with the 1st position, I would bet a lot of money that the default rate would be MUCH lower.

  14. #39
    Senior Member Reputation points: 301165
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    3,313

    Quote Originally Posted by pcfunder View Post
    yeahhhhhhhh my thing is I have trouble believing that only 1% of brokers offer those type of deals. I know that MCA has A/B funding companies but they seem to get stacked a lotttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttttttttttttttttttt of the time. I mean enough of the time to literally stall funding, shut down, or cause massive A paper funding companies to sell. Also companies like Yellowstone are funding how much a month again? Par had 500 million dollars to fund with as well? I've also met a lot of brokers who give a merchant a great 1st position deal. A type of deal that if I was a restaurant owner would make me happy. Then once the merchant reaches out after 3 months for more money, their eyes glow with dollar signs instead of advising the merchant not to do that. Then when the 2nd position starts to hurt and the merchant asks for more money, the broker is like "oh ma gawsh more comishhhhhhhh lets do itttttttttt!". If the merchant was advised on how to better handle the capital with the 1st position, I would bet a lot of money that the default rate would be MUCH lower.
    the heading of this thread "is not just bad actors" , that means they want to get rid of all the A first position guys also.Go to corrupt banks to get decline and than close your business

  15. #40
    Senior Member Reputation points: 216519
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    3,334

    Quote Originally Posted by pcfunder View Post
    yeahhhhhhhh my thing is I have trouble believing that only 1% of brokers offer those type of deals. I know that MCA has A/B funding companies but they seem to get stacked a lotttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttttttttttttttttttt of the time. I mean enough of the time to literally stall funding, shut down, or cause massive A paper funding companies to sell. Also companies like Yellowstone are funding how much a month again? Par had 500 million dollars to fund with as well? I've also met a lot of brokers who give a merchant a great 1st position deal. A type of deal that if I was a restaurant owner would make me happy. Then once the merchant reaches out after 3 months for more money, their eyes glow with dollar signs instead of advising the merchant not to do that. Then when the 2nd position starts to hurt and the merchant asks for more money, the broker is like "oh ma gawsh more comishhhhhhhh lets do itttttttttt!". If the merchant was advised on how to better handle the capital with the 1st position, I would bet a lot of money that the default rate would be MUCH lower.
    So I've been that guy. I set up a factor for a client, then he came to me for a "1st position MCA" (his words) a few weeks later. Then a month later came and asked for "more money." Guess what? He had stacked himself twice already. I found a 4th position. He came back to me for a 5th, I couldn't close it, but then he came back again and Everest funded him - the exact same offer that I given him on the 5th!

    Was I supposed to sit around and advise him "no, it's bad for your business"? He knew exactly what he was doing, I think he liked seeing my eyes roll with what he did. (He obviously had another broker.) He did not default, he felt that the cost of money was expensive, but worthwhile to use the build the business in the right way.

    If I was given a "do not stack" clause on the ISO contracts, then that's one thing (the other broker did, BTW). But if the client demanded more money, he'll find it from someone.

    Is it unethical to let the business owner decide for himself? Brokers aren't "advisors", otherwise the company would pay us salary. We are matchmakers (at least that's what I do). We shouldn't be pure salesmen either, but that's a problem with boiler rooms. Par was very aggressive in general, but they were definitely very aggressive when it came to their no stacking clauses with merchants. The part that will make the lending industry harder to make a buck for many brokers? If the feds or states force disclosures of fees, to forcibly give the client all options (very very hard to understand how - qualified for SBA doesn't mean they want an SBA - at least with a mortgage broker, there's only one type of loan, a mortgage), or whatever else is forced upon real estate brokers.

  16. #41
    Senior Member Reputation points: 76187
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    508

    Quote Originally Posted by abfunders View Post
    So I've been that guy. I set up a factor for a client, then he came to me for a "1st position MCA" (his words) a few weeks later. Then a month later came and asked for "more money." Guess what? He had stacked himself twice already. I found a 4th position. He came back to me for a 5th, I couldn't close it, but then he came back again and Everest funded him - the exact same offer that I given him on the 5th!

    Was I supposed to sit around and advise him "no, it's bad for your business"? He knew exactly what he was doing, I think he liked seeing my eyes roll with what he did. (He obviously had another broker.) He did not default, he felt that the cost of money was expensive, but worthwhile to use the build the business in the right way.

    If I was given a "do not stack" clause on the ISO contracts, then that's one thing (the other broker did, BTW). But if the client demanded more money, he'll find it from someone.

    Is it unethical to let the business owner decide for himself? Brokers aren't "advisors", otherwise the company would pay us salary. We are matchmakers (at least that's what I do). We shouldn't be pure salesmen either, but that's a problem with boiler rooms. Par was very aggressive in general, but they were definitely very aggressive when it came to their no stacking clauses with merchants. The part that will make the lending industry harder to make a buck for many brokers? If the feds or states force disclosures of fees, to forcibly give the client all options (very very hard to understand how - qualified for SBA doesn't mean they want an SBA - at least with a mortgage broker, there's only one type of loan, a mortgage), or whatever else is forced upon real estate brokers.
    I think that exact scenario is what legislators are using to discuss why MCA needs to be regulated

  17. #42
    Senior Member Reputation points: 337045
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Rock Ridge
    Posts
    3,453

    Everyone in capital markets defines themselves and the relationships they keep by what business they are willing to do and whom they are willing to work with. The cream always rise to the top. The bottom feeders will always be bottom feeders.
    Hedley Lamarr......That's Hedley

  18. #43
    Senior Member Reputation points: 86751
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,346

    the industry tried to self regulate. it didn't work. now it is being regulated or pushed out completely. if it becomes a play where you have to disclose APR, you have to partner with a federally chartered bank who becomes by default 'the lender" and you have that middle layer to deal with now, some of the co will simply leave the space. this will impact brokers commissions as well as a lot of commissions are earned on stacking and high risk. we saw what happened in the sub prime mortgage space. many of those individuals setup funding companies in our space after making millions in sub prime. we saw what happened with the payday lending industry how they tried to use rent a tribal land schemes and got busted. some of those individuals came to this industry. what we have here is a bad actors with bad intentions and it's not just 1%. a cleanup has to happen. it's happening now. what's left may not interest brokers future investors to enter this space. not many got into this space to have compliance, government control. the wild west crew will just find something else to make quick money elsewhere or maybe some mavericks will didge the bullet for awhile lying low until they get busted.

  19. #44
    Senior Member Reputation points: 216519
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    3,334

    Quote Originally Posted by pcfunder View Post
    I think that exact scenario is what legislators are using to discuss why MCA needs to be regulated
    pcfunder, you're saying good things, but you're shifting positions here. You were describing the predatory nature of the MCAs and brokers. This was not a predatory situation. Are you saying "everyone is at fault" or are you saying "funders are at fault" or are you saying "brokers are evil"? Is it about being predatory, or is it about obeying no stacking clauses? Many A-paper funders would be the biggest offender for stacking banks and SBAs, IOU would be the one that comes to mind first, a monthly payment or even a factor is not looked at as a position.

    I'm not saying any of these things are mutually exclusive, there are scenarios where they're all true, but you keep blaming different actors for "THE" reason, then it's hard to pin your argument down.

  20. #45
    Senior Member Reputation points: 216519
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    3,334

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Henry-Seacoast View Post
    Everyone in capital markets defines themselves and the relationships they keep by what business they are willing to do and whom they are willing to work with. The cream always rise to the top. The bottom feeders will always be bottom feeders.
    Like on this statement from Kevin.

  21. #46
    Senior Member Reputation points: 19024
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    236

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael I View Post
    that is not the mca industry. that is the bottom 1% . here is a list from last year which numbers probably doubled of what the mca industry as a whole is https://debanked.com/2019/08/the-201...rs-by-revenue/ . One or 2 companies doing wrong things that might get closed down ,does not close down the billions that go out to HELP business
    How is the bottom 1% 50k 1.499 70 days 7% fee?

    I would say the majority of A paper lenders get their business from their own marketing or renewals of brokers who fell off or lost contact with the lender. Which is why their revenue is high. Guys like us who can't compete in the big-budget ad space can 9/10 only generate (or purchase) data of merchants who have been stacked, shopped around, or low credit.

    been doing this for 6 years now, the majority of deals I've funded have been high risk. it's very rare (from my experience) to have a merchant who qualifies for A position 12-24 month terms. I would say out of 100 subs a month maybe 10-15 go to A paper and only a handful actually get approved. Once again my experience.

    I use to work for an A paper lender before I left and opened up my own shop and guess what? we had a broker in house who would broker our declines out because they didn't qualify for our products. That's where the majority of our revenue came from as agents.

    if you're telling me you never stacked a merchant or funded a 2nd, 3rd,4th,5th,6th,7th position you're lying.

  22. #47
    Senior Member Reputation points: 76187
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    508

    Quote Originally Posted by abfunders View Post
    pcfunder, you're saying good things, but you're shifting positions here. You were describing the predatory nature of the MCAs and brokers. This was not a predatory situation. Are you saying "everyone is at fault" or are you saying "funders are at fault" or are you saying "brokers are evil"? Is it about being predatory, or is it about obeying no stacking clauses? Many A-paper funders would be the biggest offender for stacking banks and SBAs, IOU would be the one that comes to mind first, a monthly payment or even a factor is not looked at as a position.

    I'm not saying any of these things are mutually exclusive, there are scenarios where they're all true, but you keep blaming different actors for "THE" reason, then it's hard to pin your argument down.
    ehh I dunno maybe I'm just crazy

  23. #48
    Senior Member Reputation points: 301165
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    3,313

    Quote Originally Posted by FCG View Post
    How is the bottom 1% 50k 1.499 70 days 7% fee?

    I would say the majority of A paper lenders get their business from their own marketing or renewals of brokers who fell off or lost contact with the lender. Which is why their revenue is high. Guys like us who can't compete in the big-budget ad space can 9/10 only generate (or purchase) data of merchants who have been stacked, shopped around, or low credit.

    been doing this for 6 years now, the majority of deals I've funded have been high risk. it's very rare (from my experience) to have a merchant who qualifies for A position 12-24 month terms. I would say out of 100 subs a month maybe 10-15 go to A paper and only a handful actually get approved. Once again my experience.

    I use to work for an A paper lender before I left and opened up my own shop and guess what? we had a broker in house who would broker our declines out because they didn't qualify for our products. That's where the majority of our revenue came from as agents.

    if you're telling me you never stacked a merchant or funded a 2nd, 3rd,4th,5th,6th,7th position you're lying.
    of course i do . For me personally we are at 50/50 for A paper to b-f paper. but even in the b-f 80% is at the 5-7 months.I barely do a 70 day 1.499 and how much do you think these default guys actually fund? i can not imagine more than a couple of million a month at max. Now add in the billions that square kabbage paypall bluvine etc. do alone plus the billions that on deck rapid bfs kapitus credibly reliant and the such, than add all the b guys billions and the 3rd 4th positions at 3 months. what percent is these 2 months 1.499 with 7% in fees will you say it is?
    I can be wrong but in a ten billion dollar industry i think saying these 70 days deals are even less than 1%

  24. #49
    Senior Member Reputation points: 19024
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    236

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael I View Post
    of course i do . For me personally we are at 50/50 for A paper to b-f paper. but even in the b-f 80% is at the 5-7 months.I barely do a 70 day 1.499 and how much do you think these default guys actually fund? i can not imagine more than a couple of million a month at max. Now add in the billions that square kabbage paypall bluvine etc. do alone plus the billions that on deck rapid bfs kapitus credibly reliant and the such, than add all the b guys billions and the 3rd 4th positions at 3 months. what percent is these 2 months 1.499 with 7% in fees will you say it is?
    I can be wrong but in a ten billion dollar industry i think saying these 70 days deals are even less than 1%
    Yea but Square,Paypal, and Kabbage are different products. I wouldn't consider funders who don't accept iso's part of the equation. Bluevine is an MCA disguised as a LOC. The other big companies named spend millions on marketing a year so I would expect their revenue to be up there. They also retain merchants by kicking isos off if they don't meet quotas or when iso's don't survive and close shop. With new c-f paper lenders popping up every day, I would say the 40-120 payment space is the majority of the industry (From my experience). I truly hope they regulate and not try and shut the industry down as a whole. Ive always been one to say our entry barriers are way too low. Hopefully some good comes out of this.

  25. #50
    Senior Member Reputation points: 301165
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    3,313

    Quote Originally Posted by FCG View Post
    Yea but Square,Paypal, and Kabbage are different products. I wouldn't consider funders who don't accept iso's part of the equation. Bluevine is an MCA disguised as a LOC. The other big companies named spend millions on marketing a year so I would expect their revenue to be up there. They also retain merchants by kicking isos off if they don't meet quotas or when iso's don't survive and close shop. With new c-f paper lenders popping up every day, I would say the 40-120 payment space is the majority of the industry (From my experience). I truly hope they regulate and not try and shut the industry down as a whole. Ive always been one to say our entry barriers are way too low. Hopefully some good comes out of this.
    Why not? Again we are discussing the comment against the whole mca industry and to an outsider they are all the same.Read the heading to this thread and first post again.

    Next as a separate topic on what a broker main business is it depends on how you market and brand yourself .If you have strategic partnership with people at banks that refer you over their declines you will have 90% A deals. If you primarily do sba /bank type products and do mca as a bridge product you will see 85% A paper. If You google ad word market you will have 80% A paper. If you are calling live leads age transfer etc. you will see 50/50. if you are cold calling ucc bought from a reseller that advertise on this site you will see at most 10% A paper. I do it all and it averages us at 50/50.
    I would love to know if someone doing any of the above see drastically different percentages



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


INDUSTRY ANNOUNCEMENTS

SubcontractorHub, Lendica partner
BoA launches business loan marketplace
Quickbooks adds new LOC product


DIRECTORY