Results 26 to 40 of 40
-
07-11-2024, 03:32 PM #26
- Join Date
- Jun 2024
- Posts
- 4
-
07-11-2024, 03:40 PM #27
David Allen Capital Class of 2024
-
07-11-2024, 04:28 PM #28
- Join Date
- Mar 2014
- Location
- Florida
- Posts
- 2,977
Dave Lambert, Business Development
dave@fcbankcard.com
Merchant Services Consultant
High Risk Merchant Payment Solutions
SBA 7(a) Loans & Short-Term Funding
T/VM: 727-291-7890
Office: 727-233-1111
Skype: fc-financial
-
07-11-2024, 04:30 PM #29
- Join Date
- Mar 2024
- Posts
- 23
-
07-11-2024, 05:14 PM #30
- Join Date
- Mar 2014
- Location
- Florida
- Posts
- 2,977
Dave Lambert, Business Development
dave@fcbankcard.com
Merchant Services Consultant
High Risk Merchant Payment Solutions
SBA 7(a) Loans & Short-Term Funding
T/VM: 727-291-7890
Office: 727-233-1111
Skype: fc-financial
-
07-11-2024, 05:24 PM #31
- Join Date
- Mar 2024
- Posts
- 23
I read that article from debanked in which at the end of the article it says, "It may have all been for naught because the parties actually settled the case two weeks prior to the decision, according to the public docket (See Index No: 2021-00877)." Would this mean that the parties settled as the merchant could have possibly been held accountable for the funds received? The point I am making here is that MCA whether considered a loan or not is something that is borrowed and is "expected' to be paid back and parties can still be held accountable. Saying it's not a loan doesn't create less penalties for non-repayment it's just word jargon for legalese. The only difference between the loan and MCA is the lending on the grounds for future receivables but let me ask you a question, would you loan someone some money if you didn't expect some type of future receivable?
-
07-11-2024, 05:28 PM #32
- Join Date
- Mar 2024
- Posts
- 23
-
07-11-2024, 05:59 PM #33
- Join Date
- Feb 2017
- Posts
- 3,455
It means they settled because the lawyers worked it out to some Middle grounds and it was cheaper that way. It doesn't mean that the actual case law would have come out in favor of one side or the other. When you see a settlement, you cannot bring a proof to anything.
With a loan, I don't really care if you profit it or not. Your future receivables don't bother me, I hope you're profitable but I don't care. I just care about the principle and interest. A future receivable is not a fancy jargon term, it is an actual reality, as legalese as that sounds it has been accepted, that future fruit that you produce comes to me at a rate that we are predetermining now. I don't care the market value later. However, if there is no fruit then I obviously don't get it. I'm only getting the next 500 tons of grapes at this price. If there's 500 tons of grapes.
In legal discussion, you always must keep definitions consistent so that you don't confuse what you thought should be the truth with what actually ends up being the truth.
-
07-11-2024, 06:52 PM #34
- Join Date
- Mar 2024
- Posts
- 23
Okay if they settled, it could also/possibly mean the merchant would have been held fully responsible so either way the merchant would have possibly had to pay on this debt whether he settled or not. If you don't care if the loan is going to bring profits, then writing the loan would be risky which would create more of the possibility of the person to default. Also read what I wrote "Saying it's not a loan doesn't create less penalties for non-repayment it's just word jargon for legalese" said nothing about future receivables being fancy jargon. You didn't answer the question: Would you loan someone some money if you didn't expect some type of future receivable? Yes, we are on the same page the MCA are based on receivables, but I am not ever going to agree that something that was given to me with expectation of me returning is not a loan just my personal opinion and you don't have to agree. Appreciate the banter.
-
07-12-2024, 01:12 AM #35
- Join Date
- Mar 2014
- Location
- Florida
- Posts
- 2,977
but I am not ever going to agree that something that was given to me with expectation of me returning is not a loan just my personal opinion and you don't have to agree. Appreciate the banter.
Leave the business asap - You are clueless - the reason that MCA can be sold at a FACTOR RATE" vs an INTEREST RATE is it a purchase of future sales without a specified repayment date. That is a true MCA - read and understand any contract from any funder in the MCA market. Truth be known - a merchant cannot default on a true MCA if their revenue decreases.Dave Lambert, Business Development
dave@fcbankcard.com
Merchant Services Consultant
High Risk Merchant Payment Solutions
SBA 7(a) Loans & Short-Term Funding
T/VM: 727-291-7890
Office: 727-233-1111
Skype: fc-financial
-
07-12-2024, 09:10 AM #36
- Join Date
- Feb 2017
- Posts
- 3,455
It "could also" - yes, but what I pointed out, and you don't get, is that it's not a proof either way. Previous case law in NY has clearly stated that it's not a loan. Like I keep saying, if it's a loan, then it's usury and illegal. If MCAs are legal, they cannot be in the category of loans. What is established case law with precedent in NY state is that an MCA is not a loan. https://debanked.com/2023/02/new-leg...y-in-new-york/
You have to also define the word "responsible". If he is responsible because of fraud, or if he's responsible to forcibly pay it back whether or not there's a business in the mix? There may be a level of responsibility going on, but that level will define if it's a loan or not. Not all responsibility creates liability.
Next, future receivables is not fancy jargon. It's a defined term that is approximately not-yet-earned income.
In answer to your question: I would never lend money to someone who I didn't expect to pay. Otherwise, it's called throwing money out windows. The correct term of discussion is "obligation" to pay. With a loan, there is an "obligation" to pay no matter what the future may bring about; an MCA there is only "obligation" to pay as long as what I purchased (the future receivables) are being generated.
"Expected" to come back is an assumption and investments are also "expected" to profit. The difference is that investments and futures and MCAs are not "required" to come back. Nothing is 100% guaranteed, but a loan is "secured" by the person, a PG, his house, whatever, and an MCA is not "secured" by much other than the hope that the company will remain in business. With a loan, I don't care if their company has gross revenue anymore. Let them take it out of their savings/real estate/inventory/shirt. If I lend someone a $100,000 mortgage, I DON'T CARE if they're profitable on the deal or not, I care that I can collect my $100,000 (+interest). That is not "future receivables", that happens to be a secured loan. An unsecured loan means that I can't directly foreclose on their real estate, but I can certainly sue them, and I will try to forcibly get them to sell their assets to pay me back.
I'll be more explicit: I don't give a heck about future receivables once the loan is made. Dip into your savings, go get a 2nd job, I don't care, just pay me principal (and interest, if it's not an interest-free loan).
With an MCA, if the merchant is a billionaire, but the company venture went bankrupt (i.e. some communists came and burned the store down), the MCA that the funder gave him is lost.
You're never going to agree? You don't have the ability to be wrong? If you specify which type of "expectation" you are referring to, then I think it will be easier to agree. Your opinion is either uninformed or incomplete, because NY state disagrees with you, and if you start peddling loans and charge 50% APR, you're going to lose the case in court and potentially go to jail.
-
07-12-2024, 09:16 AM #37
- Join Date
- Mar 2024
- Posts
- 23
Last edited by SamuelH; 07-12-2024 at 09:19 AM.
-
07-12-2024, 09:30 AM #38
- Join Date
- Feb 2017
- Posts
- 3,455
Bro, I know where you're coming from: You defined "expectation" wrong and therefore made all MCAs into loans. Just because you don't understand where I'm coming from and you don't have the energy to read a thought-out argument, doesn't make my logic circular. You clearly don't do much debating and just likely just watch news commentary about politics with lots of name-calling. You still haven't double-checked me with ChatGPT. I'm telling you, if you start peddling "loans" at 125% APR, you will get in trouble.
-
07-12-2024, 09:57 AM #39
- Join Date
- Mar 2024
- Posts
- 23
I appreciate the convo and advice! Much success and great day.
-
07-15-2024, 10:27 AM #40
- Join Date
- Jul 2024
- Posts
- 3
iso rep
hi im an iso rep i work over at raptor advance and i would love to speak to you about doing buisness together - Sam Grossman
ISO Relations
C . 347-745-0783
O . 860-419-7905
Sam@raptoradvance.com
www.raptoradvance.com
Similar Threads
-
Can't get your deal funded?
By CJO1988 in forum Deal BinReplies: 1Last Post: 01-23-2024, 10:41 PM -
A plus paper with 730 CS looking for monthly w good terms
By viper066 in forum Deal BinReplies: 7Last Post: 09-27-2021, 12:50 PM -
need a home for your deal or you need a deal funded paying 18% commission to all new
By lucrativefundinggroup in forum PromotionsReplies: 9Last Post: 04-12-2017, 12:27 PM -
This Question Can Lead to More Closed Deals...Good Rates/Terms
By Harrymetrix in forum PromotionsReplies: 0Last Post: 09-28-2016, 05:49 PM -
Trying To get better Terms on deal for 80K
By Jstarr in forum Deal BinReplies: 8Last Post: 11-17-2014, 07:55 PM