[Bestinthebiz]

Who is good at coming in at 5th, 6th and 7ths?

[SFC]

Debt Collectors

[ryan $]

There are so many weird funding companies, weird names youve never heard of funding all the **** deals.

[Parkview Advance]

PM sent

[ridextreme]

If you're chasing after 7th position funders you should instead be chasing after a new career...

[J.Celifarco]

Who is good at coming in at 5th, 6th and 7ths?

Seriously? 5th, 6th and 7th positions, these are the reasons you are seeing regulation being passed in different states. You and the other bottom feeders are going to be the death of this industry

[ryan $]

Seriously? 5th, 6th and 7th positions, these are the reasons you are seeing regulation being passed in different states. You and the other bottom feeders are going to be the death of this industry

You mostly see these on high volume deals with issues. restricted industry, defaults, etc.

Every bottom tier lender hops in for 30 days for 20k when they are doing 250k a month

[FlexibleCapitalSolutions]

Seriously? 5th, 6th and 7th positions, these are the reasons you are seeing regulation being passed in different states. You and the other bottom feeders are going to be the death of this industry

Lol I feel like I have seen HFG on every crappy deal I come across. But I am no-one to judge, I personally do not deal with this type of paper either but that doesn't give me the right to call anyone a bottom feeder.

Apparently you feel entitled enough to judge, so what do you suggest someone with a 500 credit score do if they need a set amount of money and they can only get it by combining a few positions ?

Do you suggest they just go out of business?

I understand your position, and why some funders hate this, if you are in a priority position, but then again you are in a priority position, if you underwrote correctly you will have no issues recovering your capital.

Many times these added positions keep the merchant a-float and lets the first and second position get paid.

But back to my original question, do you suggest that people are banned from any options if they have crappy credentials, let them die out because they are not as qualified and well capitalized as you?

[J.Celifarco]

Lol I feel like I have seen HFG on every crappy deal I come across. But I am no-one to judge, I personally do not deal with this type of paper either but that doesn't give me the right to call anyone a bottom feeder.

Apparently you feel entitled enough to judge, so what do you suggest someone with a 500 credit score do if they need a set amount of money and they can only get it by combining a few positions ?

Do you suggest they just go out of business?

I understand your position, and why some funders hate this, if you are in a priority position, but then again you are in a priority position, if you underwrote correctly you will have no issues recovering your capital.

Many times these added positions keep the merchant a-float and lets the first and second position get paid.

But back to my original question, do you suggest that people are banned from any options if they have crappy credentials, let them die out because they are not as qualified and well capitalized as you?

LOL wow do you have the wrong company. First of all we are an ISO so doubt you can see us on any deal. Second of all ask anyone on this forum who knows us they know we don't touch these deals. We are 80% probably higher first position deals and nothing really over a second. So before assuming you know who I am you don't

To your other points there is no situation where a 4th, 5th or higher position in anyway helps the client. You are hurting the business more than they already are and putting a nail in their coffin for the hopes of making a little money. If you had a solution for the client that would actually help them then yes you should try, but 20k over 30 days at a 1.50 does not help someone. The best thing to tell that person is that another position will not help you and that they should look into other options. Dont try to justify these programs because there is no way that they can help any company ever. The couple of dollars you make on the file gives the entire industry a bad name and puts targets on all of our backs for regulators.

[FlexibleCapitalSolutions]

LOL wow do you have the wrong company. First of all we are an ISO so doubt you can see us on any deal. Second of all ask anyone on this forum who knows us they know we don't touch these deals. We are 80% probably higher first position deals and nothing really over a second. So before assuming you know who I am you don't

To your other points there is no situation where a 4th, 5th or higher position in anyway helps the client. You are hurting the business more than they already are and putting a nail in their coffin for the hopes of making a little money. If you has a solution for the client that would actually help them then yes you should but 20k over 30 days at a 1.50 does not help someone. The best thing to tell that person is that another position will not help you and that they should look into other options. Dont try to justify these programs because there is no way that they can help any company ever. The couple of dollars you make on the file gives the entire industry a bad name and puts targets on all of our backs.

my mistake I though you were a different company then.

But to your points:

" there is no situation where a 4th, 5th or higher position in anyway helps the client."

Who are you to decide this? are you God?

"You are hurting the business more than they already are and putting a nail in their coffin for the hopes of making a little money."

How could you possibly know this, again who are you to decide this or make a blanket statement like this?

"20k over 30 days at a 1.50 does not help someone."

Who are you to decide this?
wouldn't the owner of the business be more qualified to decide this than you?

"The best thing to tell that person is that another position will not help you and that they should look into other options."

If you are in this industry and you stay away from these types of deals, you know what type of conditions they are in, please give some examples of other realistic options for people in these positions. (since you clearly know everything)

"Dont try to justify these programs because there is no way that they can help any company ever."

I am not justifying anything, I am just curious what gives you the confidence to make all these statement and make decisions from your high horse on who needs or should take what, when and how.

What if one day something happens to your business(es) and you are no longer able to sustain daily operations but you have put in years of work to build it up and you need it to feed your family? Lets say, for whatever reason your credit and liquidity don't allow you to obtain traditional financing (Pandemic crushed you for example). Would you like to live in a world where you have the option to take expensive money but have a chance to fight for your business? or should you just have to go out of business because another grown adult that is not in your situation decided that they don't like this type of funding so too bad for you.

I am not justifying any type of funding, I just find blanket statements and opinions such as yours very interesting, becareful what you wish for life has a funny way of humbling you. I believe that everything should be fully disclosed to merchants, absolutely everything, even if it kills the deal but I still believe business owners should have the right to make their own decisions.

ALL IMO

[TheUnderwritingProdigy]

my mistake I though you were a different company then.

But to your points:

" there is no situation where a 4th, 5th or higher position in anyway helps the client."

Who are you to decide this? are you God?

"You are hurting the business more than they already are and putting a nail in their coffin for the hopes of making a little money."

How could you possibly know this, again who are you to decide this or make a blanket statement like this?

"20k over 30 days at a 1.50 does not help someone."

Who are you to decide this?
wouldn't the owner of the business be more qualified to decide this than you?

"The best thing to tell that person is that another position will not help you and that they should look into other options."

If you are in this industry and you stay away from these types of deals, you know what type of conditions they are in, please give some examples of other realistic options for people in these positions. (since you clearly know everything)

"Dont try to justify these programs because there is no way that they can help any company ever."

I am not justifying anything, I am just curious what gives you the confidence to make all these statement and make decisions from your high horse on who needs or should take what, when and how.

What if one day something happens to your business(es) and you are no longer able to sustain daily operations but you have put in years of work to build it up and you need it to feed your family? Lets say, for whatever reason your credit and liquidity don't allow you to obtain traditional financing (Pandemic crushed you for example). Would you like to live in a world where you have the option to take expensive money but have a chance to fight for your business? or should you just have to go out of business because another grown adult that is not in your situation decided that they don't like this type of funding so too bad for you.

I am not justifying any type of funding, I just find blanket statements and opinions such as yours very interesting, becareful what you wish for life has a funny way of humbling you. I believe that everything should be fully disclosed to merchants, absolutely everything, even if it kills the deal but I still believe business owners should have the right to make their own decisions.

ALL IMO

This is essentially the same thing as a ponzi scheme in a sense. You're taking money from 1 lender to be able to cover the payments of another. It's a terrible cycle that they never get out of and it does nothing for the renewal game. Merchants who have over 3 positions have no grasp of their business or finances.

[TheUnderwritingProdigy]

LOL wow do you have the wrong company. First of all we are an ISO so doubt you can see us on any deal. Second of all ask anyone on this forum who knows us they know we don't touch these deals. We are 80% probably higher first position deals and nothing really over a second. So before assuming you know who I am you don't

To your other points there is no situation where a 4th, 5th or higher position in anyway helps the client. You are hurting the business more than they already are and putting a nail in their coffin for the hopes of making a little money. If you had a solution for the client that would actually help them then yes you should try, but 20k over 30 days at a 1.50 does not help someone. The best thing to tell that person is that another position will not help you and that they should look into other options. Dont try to justify these programs because there is no way that they can help any company ever. The couple of dollars you make on the file gives the entire industry a bad name and puts targets on all of our backs for regulators.

Thank you, John! You're absolutely right here. There is no scenario where a merchant having over 3 open positions makes any sense. These SCUM LENDERS (you know who you are, get ****ed), that come in past the 3rd position are the reason why the MCA industry is getting unnecessary attention from lawmakers when you see people like ESENOW, for example, putting out $5k $749/day deals. There is no renewal game on positions like this and lenders like this give a bad name to the industry.

[ryan $]

LOL wow do you have the wrong company. First of all we are an ISO so doubt you can see us on any deal. Second of all ask anyone on this forum who knows us they know we don't touch these deals. We are 80% probably higher first position deals and nothing really over a second. So before assuming you know who I am you don't

To your other points there is no situation where a 4th, 5th or higher position in anyway helps the client. You are hurting the business more than they already are and putting a nail in their coffin for the hopes of making a little money. If you had a solution for the client that would actually help them then yes you should try, but 20k over 30 days at a 1.50 does not help someone. The best thing to tell that person is that another position will not help you and that they should look into other options. Dont try to justify these programs because there is no way that they can help any company ever. The couple of dollars you make on the file gives the entire industry a bad name and puts targets on all of our backs for regulators.

This isnt true.
One deal I remember off the top of my head, kept taking short term 1.49's over and over and over. Always paid back. And it worked for her.
Was a car dealer, that got a significant discount for paying cash for cars.
It worked for her. The high cost was justified, and she made it work.

There are scenarios where a 30 day 1.50 will work. And where the short term high cost is justified, with the associated risk.

In alot of scenarios renewing a 1st or 2nd, makes less sense than stacking, paying a factor on remaining balances already factored. Renewals shoot that remaining balance up higher than a 1.50 (1.36 x 2 = 1.72 on 50% of the Advance? - add that with the original 1.36 on 50% of the advance - and where do you end up? lets say someone renews 3 times, it gets even worse. You can argue that stacking makes more sense in some cases.

[J.Celifarco]

This isnt true.
One deal I remember off the top of my head, kept taking short term 1.49's over and over and over. Always paid back. And it worked for her.
Was a car dealer, that got a significant discount for paying cash for cars.
It worked for her. The high cost was justified, and she made it work.

There are scenarios where a 30 day 1.50 will work. And where the short term high cost is justified, with the associated risk.

In alot of scenarios renewing a 1st or 2nd, makes less sense than stacking, paying a factor on remaining balances already factored. Renewals shoot that remaining balance up higher than a 1.50 (1.36 x 2 = 1.72 on 50% of the Advance? - add that with the original 1.36 on 50% of the advance - and where do you end up? lets say someone renews 3 times, it gets even worse. You can argue that stacking makes more sense in some cases.

Yes there is always a one off where anything can make sense, but for the large majority of businesses these loans in no way help and just make a bad situation worse. To speak in absolutes was wrong there is always the off cases but for the vast majority of businesses, these deals make bad situations worse.

[Hedley Lamarr]

Who is good at coming in at 5th, 6th and 7ths?

Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe........

[Michael I]

business owners are capable of making there own decisions what will help or hurt there business. Funders can decide how risky and aggressive they want to fund.

[FundingTap123]

Who is good at coming in at 5th, 6th and 7ths?

IMAP
Torro
East Shore
AJ Equity
Cooper Asset
HFH
Noble Funding
Spartan
Mantis
Last Chance
Yellowstone
Wide Merchant
Ironwood Finance
Main Street
ML Factors