[loan]

What are the major differences between the top 2 players in the market now?

[MechantLoans]

one is public the other is not

[mcg168]

One actually approves deals and is very easy to deal with....the other declines almost everything and then shops your deals to one of their outside sales companies which ultimately funds the deal themselves and you get cut out.

[bizloanbroker]

One uses common sense underwriting and funds solid deals and one funds using their "revolutionary algorithm" and defaults at a high 20's rate

Anyone want to guess which one is which????

[mcg168]

One uses common sense underwriting and funds solid deals and one funds using their "revolutionary algorithm" and defaults at a high 20's rate

Anyone want to guess which one is which????

ha - I dont think either use common sense underwriting to be honest, but thats a benefit you lose when you get offers within hours, sometimes minutes.

So i'm honestly not sure which one your referring to.

[MCAVeteran]

One has an mca and loan product while the other only has a loan product

[MCAVeteran]

One actually approves deals and is very easy to deal with....the other declines almost everything and then shops your deals to one of their outside sales companies which ultimately funds the deal themselves and you get cut out.

Any litigation proof of this? That seems like a serious practice if it has merits

[CreditGuy]

one funds using their "revolutionary algorithm" and defaults at a high 20's rate.

I see you trotting this line out again and again, and in light of the CAN IPO thread yesterday I reread ODC's securitization prospectus. Of note, from that prospectus:

"Any Trigger Event shall occur as of any Monthly Reporting Date;
c. The three month average Delinquency Ratio was greater than 16.00%"

If you were correct, which you are not, then ODC would have **** the bed when it comes to the securitization facility. But, just to drive the point home further, it should also be noted that later in that same document they provide default rates by vintage, which can be seen below. The entire time they've been in business they have been using what you call a "revolutionary algorithm", and as you can see the principal loss rate for the most recent fully seasoned vintage in 2011 is 6.32%.

ilMilVS.png

Later in the prospectus, in the Cash Flow Analysis section, the following statement is made:

"DBRS assumed a range of 6.38% to 7.50% as its base case loss figure."

That is after a very thorough review of ODC's books, process, defaults, modeling, "revolutionary algorithm", etc. DBRS arrived at the conclusion that even on the high side, ODC's loss rate on a % of principal basis in 7.5%. Using the "weighted average remaining term of approximately 8.4 months" from the Rating Rationale section, that still only puts the annualized loss rate at 10.71%, which is far below your constant citation of a "high 20s default rate".

The DBRS prospectus is rather dated at this point though, so let's take a look at some of the disclosures from the S-1! Here's the charge off ratio (% of principal) chart showing 2012-2014 from the S-1 IPO filing. Note that the 2013 vintage is trending under the 2012 vintage curve.

ADwmp5r.png

For further clarification, take a look at this chart showing net charge off ratios (% of principal). You will note that 2012 is 6.9% and after 10 months of seasoning the 2013 vintage is at 6.2%, which indicates improving loss rates given the average loan duration is 8.4 months.

LE30Dc6.png

Now, perhaps you are privy you some insider knowledge about ODC that wasn't made available when they were audited by DBRS for the securitization pool or when they were audited by Goldman and Deutsche Bank leading up to the IPO, but I doubt that. I think you are just butt hurt that they canned you as a partner and take every opportunity to try to bad mouth them as some petty act of revenge.

[Chambo]

Any litigation proof of this? That seems like a serious practice if it has merits

Ed, this is totally true. Has been for years. They used to send the bulk of their declines out to DCC in CT. They also used to referr business to MCC.

[Chambo]

Credit Guy...they didn't submit their full book for review, that's why.

[ADiamond]

edit

[CreditGuy]

Credit Guy...they didn't submit their full book for review, that's why.

I'm aware that the entire book wasn't included in the securitization; however, the vintage table is representative of all originations not just those in the pool. That's pretty plain to see from the unit and volume figures for each vintage.

[CreditGuy]

I'll also add that the S-1 data is representative of the entire portfolio's performance.

[Batter UP]

BOI is better than both can and ondeck

[GRP Funding]

I'll also add that the S-1 data is representative of the entire portfolio's performance.

No way. The average term, risk score, gross annual sales, and especially TIB are much higher. % of gross being collected is very low. The merchants in that package were also 65% renewals.

[CreditGuy]

No way. The average term, risk score, gross annual sales, and especially TIB are much higher. % of gross being collected is very low. The merchants in that package were also 65% renewals.

You realize the S-1 isn't a "package", right? It's the prospectus for the public offering and per SEC rules must disclose the performance of the company as a whole. You can't pick and choose parts of the portfolio to be included. That would be a massive SEC violation.

[GRP Funding]

You realize the S-1 isn't a "package", right? It's the prospectus for the public offering and per SEC rules must disclose the performance of the company as a whole. You can't pick and choose parts of the portfolio to be included. That would be a massive SEC violation.

So you're saying that their entire portfolio is $200M and has an average TIB of 12 yrs?

[Guy In The Know]

You realize the S-1 isn't a "package", right? It's the prospectus for the public offering and per SEC rules must disclose the performance of the company as a whole. You can't pick and choose parts of the portfolio to be included. That would be a massive SEC violation.

Dude, don't bother with data and facts here. Know your audience. This is the dregs.

[CreditGuy]

Reading comprehension is hard I suppose.

[Guy In The Know]

One uses common sense underwriting and funds solid deals and one funds using their "revolutionary algorithm" and defaults at a high 20's rate

Anyone want to guess which one is which????

You do realize that their S1 shows SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT

smh

[Funder Mark]

BOI is better than both can and ondeck

Who is BOI? I have heard several people mention them, but know nothing about them.

[Jared_Weitz]

Who is BOI? I have heard several people mention them, but know nothing about them.

Bank Of Internet......

[aredmond]

Bank Of Internet......

Does BOI offer advances and/or accept new ISO's? Looking through their website it looks like they are more of a traditional bank than a MCA provider. Also heard that name tossed around but never did any digging until now...

[Chambo]

does boi offer advances and/or accept new iso's? Looking through their website it looks like they are more of a traditional bank than a mca provider. Also heard that name tossed around but never did any digging until now...

nope

[Funder Mark]

So what does BOI do then in the industry?