Results 26 to 46 of 46
-
02-24-2015, 06:05 PM #26
- Join Date
- Sep 2014
- Posts
- 720
That's why I played it off quick lol.
Again, YSC is a great lender and the guys over there are some of the few, real closers I've dealt with in the industry. Just having a little fun.
-
02-24-2015, 06:08 PM #27
just trying make a buck over here
-
02-24-2015, 06:19 PM #28
Well OnDeck is losing money every month and they are charging more than 50% APR. Try telling a merchant you don't even break even at that rate, but it's the truth.
-
02-24-2015, 06:26 PM #29
-
02-24-2015, 06:34 PM #30
Does anyone know WHO bought out Pearl? Why the secrecy? Maybe it was OnDeck, and they will use Pearl for all their declines? And that would explain where all their money is going to...
-
02-24-2015, 06:37 PM #31
-
02-25-2015, 12:54 AM #32
- Join Date
- Mar 2014
- Posts
- 20
This acquisition and product adjustment is just like a p/e firm acquiring Tesla and adjusting the manufacturing facilities to make Ford Escorts. What's the logic
-
02-25-2015, 07:06 AM #33
- Join Date
- Jun 2014
- Posts
- 195
good analogy.
I wonder if all the decline shops out there are seeing more deal flow since Pearl changes over to a traditional funder
-
02-25-2015, 09:56 AM #34
-
02-25-2015, 11:38 AM #35
Well, Pearl is now paying off other funds, so there is definitely a move in the right direction
-
02-25-2015, 11:47 AM #36jotucker1983Guest
Interesting point of view, well, I have included my opinions on a number of things you said below. To begin though, I don't believe that Pearl Capital's Fico Score cut-off is that high (550) but more along the lines of somewhere under 500, also if they aren't funding anything pass a 2nd position anymore then what is wrong with that decision?
1.) No Merchant Should Get Anything Beyond A 2nd Position
No merchant should get anything pass a 2nd position, I have seen merchants with 4th position stacks and NSFs everywhere since the 3rd and 4th stack was funded. The merchant goes from being what this industry defines as a "Premium A" or "B" Merchant, to being what you might define as an "F" merchant based not on their actual operating history, but based on the fact there's four companies with a fixed daily pull in there. That just makes absolutely no sense.
A 2nd position in and of itself, while it could violate the terms and conditions of the 1st position lender, should only be done when it makes total sense. For example, take a merchant that might qualify for $100,000 with about $1.2 - $2 million in sales, let's say he's at 35% paid on the 1st position deal with a balance totaling around $55,000. A 2nd position of let's say $25,000 - $35,000 because the 1st position lender refuses to initiate a renewal until they are at 60% pay-down, would make sense. Anything more than that is excessive and makes no sense.
2.) No Merchant With Extremely Bad Credit Should Be Funded
Not sure how you market, but I don't believe these advances/loans should be used to save a business from going under. If your fico average/calculation is coming in under 480, the risk on the deal is just too excessive. There has to be numerous other creditors that the merchant isn't paying so what makes any Underwriter in this space think the merchant is going to pay them when our creditor position is one of the easiest to circumvent? If the merchant is taking the advance/loan at literally the last minute before the business files bankruptcy, then he has absolutely no intention of paying back the advance/loan.
Finally, I personally have always hated the business practice of bashing one company to promote your own/another one. If you want to promote another company, then just promote the benefits and features of working with another company. But to bash another company in attempt to make another firm look more "promising" is just a bad business practice.
Those are my opinions.Last edited by jotucker1983; 02-25-2015 at 11:51 AM.
-
02-25-2015, 11:50 AM #37
- Join Date
- Dec 2013
- Posts
- 4,713
Chambo what does it mean for you that they are now paying off others... ?
-
02-25-2015, 12:02 PM #38
- Join Date
- Sep 2014
- Posts
- 720
If it aint broke, don't fix it lol, enough said. I'm sure Pearl's competitors are thrilled with this change of direction.
-
02-25-2015, 01:56 PM #39
it means that the children have left the playground and the adults have come in to clean up. Jo Tucker's post hit it out of the ballpark.
Keep it up with 4th, 5th & 6th positions. Just keep your mouth shut and take your medicine like a man when the feds come in and regulate the predators.
-
02-25-2015, 01:57 PM #40
-
02-25-2015, 01:59 PM #41
- Join Date
- Jun 2014
- Posts
- 195
All I have been saying is simply this:
With Pearl now doing a more standard product..6-7 month 1.35 factor rate it must be really great for guys like Yellowstone and all the others that fund high risk and declined deals
-
02-25-2015, 02:01 PM #42
- Join Date
- Dec 2013
- Posts
- 4,713
Chambo its not as easy..i tell all new funders to remember the warning they give at the circus " DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME"
-
02-27-2015, 06:57 AM #43
- Join Date
- Jun 2014
- Posts
- 195
I wanted to follow up on my earlier post from the beginning of the week:
At this point it is really clear that the current Pearl barely resembles the old pearl and because of that guys like Yellowstone and Cresthill are snapping up the old pearl deal flow. I spoke with Isaac from Yellowstone this week and he told me that their submissions and in house funding were up over 20% a day from just 2 weeks ago.
So for all of you who keep posting that I do not know my ass from my elbow the proof is in the pudding
-
02-27-2015, 07:01 AM #44
While I appreciate the endorsement and I can confirm we are up significantly since the Pearl transaction was consummated. Please not post on a public forum about conversations we have just to grab deal flow for yourself
-
02-27-2015, 07:02 AM #45
- Join Date
- Jun 2014
- Posts
- 195
Most of that deal flow gets sent to your company so not sure what your issue is
-
02-27-2015, 08:06 AM #46
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Posts
- 2
There are plenty of us here at Yellowstone ready to get those high risk / declined deals funded, it's a win /win for both the ISO and YSC. If you have any deals you want to send over, we would love to have them.
-Sal
646-561-2892
Similar Threads
-
The Banks Behind The Funders
By admin in forum Merchant Cash AdvanceReplies: 24Last Post: 01-19-2016, 09:39 PM -
Best Funders to Syndicate with?
By Andy in forum Merchant Cash AdvanceReplies: 6Last Post: 01-07-2015, 12:11 PM -
Top 10 funders
By MCA in forum Merchant Cash AdvanceReplies: 26Last Post: 11-06-2014, 06:31 AM -
Worst Funders?
By michaelh in forum Merchant Cash AdvanceReplies: 31Last Post: 10-08-2014, 06:32 AM -
Funders NOT Brokers
By hotrod4Data in forum Merchant Cash AdvanceReplies: 19Last Post: 09-30-2014, 05:22 PM