[jotucker1983]

I thought people might be able to realize that I was exaggerating to make a point. Suggesting that one should "make a case" for a second position is absurd.

No, it's not absurd.

2nd positions should be viewed on a case-by-case situation, depending on how much the payments combined with the 1st and 2nd position will be taking from the merchant's monthly gross. Under no circumstance should a merchant be getting a 3rd, 4th, etc. position, the 1st and 2nd positions should already be taking "enough" of the merchant's monthly gross sales deposits.

But like I said, if that's how you operate your shop, if these merchants run into issues as a result of your stacks, you could be in for some trouble down the line.

This is why we need to do something in terms of regulating our industry because, it's "deliberate" actions like this that do nothing but invite Regulators to come knocking on the door if more merchants fall into issues due to these stacks.

A lot of these Brokers just want to make money in an extremely competitive industry, and a lot of the Merchants doing the stacks just want to get some additional capital. It's the Funders that are funding these positions that need to be called out on the carpet so the nonsense stops.