[jotucker1983]

John Celifarco,

I understand the argument about what if the deal is with a broker that's not an efficient sales rep, but my concern is what if that's not the case and you actually have two competent reps on the deal?

We are already seeing profit compression in our space and this situation could turn into profit compression on steroids.

So it could go like this....

- XYZ Funding Company approves Billy's Plumbing for $50,000 with a 1.14 buyrate on a 6 month payback.

- Both John Celifarco and John Tucker have been working with Billy and also have the deal from XYZ Funding Company for Billy's Plumbing, but neither Celifarco or Tucker know about the situation initially.

- Tucker calls Billy and says I can do $50,000 with a 1.20 and a 6 month payback with XYZ Funding Company. Tucker email/faxes him the agreement. Billy says great, he will look over everything tonight and said to call him first thing in the morning to get it moving.

- But when Tucker hangs up, 15 minutes later, Celifarco calls and tells Billy he can do $50,000 with a 1.22 on a 6 month payback with XYZ Funding Company. Billy tells Celifarco that he's been talking to this guy named John Tucker about signing up with XYZ Funding Company as well, with pricing at 1.20 on 6 months, with the $50,000 approval. Billy asks Celifarco if he can beat the pricing? Celifarco says yes and tells Billy he will call him back first thing in the morning and asks Billy to not sign Tucker's Agreement yet.

- Celifarco calls Billy first thing in the morning with the offer now at $50,000 with a 1.18 on a 6 month payback, Billy accepts, Celifarco tells Billy he will call him back within 20 minutes while he gets the Agreement typed up.

- Tucker calls about 10 minutes after they hang up, Billy fills Tucker in on the entire situation of speaking with Celifarco and how the deal is now down to 1.18 and asks Tucker if can he beat Celifarco's offer? Tucker then immediately drains the deal down to a 1.15 for $50,000 on a 6 month payback. Billy says great, he'll do the deal, just get him over the new paperwork. Tucker hangs up with Billy to then go to Underwriting for the new contract.

- Celifarco calls back, Billy tells him that Tucker has taken the deal down to 1.15, and now Celifarco takes the deal down to a 1.14 with hopes that he can get Billy to renew in 3 - 4 months and finally earn revenue off of the relationship.

[J.Celifarco]

John Celifarco,

I understand the argument about what if the deal is with a broker that's not an efficient sales rep, but my concern is what if that's not the case and you actually have two competent reps on the deal?

We are already seeing profit compression in our space and this situation could turn into profit compression on steroids.

So it could go like this....

- XYZ Funding Company approves Billy's Plumbing for $50,000 with a 1.14 buyrate on a 6 month payback.

- Both John Celifarco and John Tucker have been working with Billy and also have the deal from XYZ Funding Company for Billy's Plumbing, but neither Celifarco or Tucker know about the situation initially.

- Tucker calls Billy and says I can do $50,000 with a 1.20 and a 6 month payback with XYZ Funding Company. Tucker email/faxes him the agreement. Billy says great, he will look over everything tonight and said to call him first thing in the morning to get it moving.

- But when Tucker hangs up, 15 minutes later, Celifarco calls and tells Billy he can do $50,000 with a 1.22 on a 6 month payback with XYZ Funding Company. Billy tells Celifarco that he's been talking to this guy named John Tucker about signing up with XYZ Funding Company as well, with pricing at 1.20 on 6 months, with the $50,000 approval. Billy asks Celifarco if he can beat the pricing? Celifarco says yes and tells Billy he will call him back first thing in the morning and asks Billy to not sign Tucker's Agreement yet.

- Celifarco calls Billy first thing in the morning with the offer now at $50,000 with a 1.18 on a 6 month payback, Billy accepts, Celifarco tells Billy he will call him back within 20 minutes while he gets the Agreement typed up.

- Tucker calls about 10 minutes after they hang up, Billy fills Tucker in on the entire situation of speaking with Celifarco and how the deal is now down to 1.18 and asks Tucker if can he beat Celifarco's offer? Tucker then immediately drains the deal down to a 1.15 for $50,000 on a 6 month payback. Billy says great, he'll do the deal, just get him over the new paperwork. Tucker hangs up with Billy to then go to Underwriting for the new contract.

- Celifarco calls back, Billy tells him that Tucker has taken the deal down to 1.15, and now Celifarco takes the deal down to a 1.14 with hopes that he can get Billy to renew in 3 - 4 months and finally earn revenue off of the relationship.

Joe that is where selling comes in, you have sell yourself, your company and why they should work with you... What you described here is what we are all dealing with everyday on all our deals.. What difference does it make if you are competing at the same bank or at different banks. The buy rates are not that dramatically different across the board that if you have a A paper merchant if I get an offer from X bank and you go to Y bank the offers will be close. The only difference is at the same bank it is a more even playing field because you are operating on the same buy rates.. At the end of the day it is no different then any other deal you compete on, you either win or you lose. Just be faster and better then the guy you are competing against and you will be fine

[FUNd]

Joe that is where selling comes in, you have sell yourself, your company and why they should work with you... What you described here is what we are all dealing with everyday on all our deals.. What difference does it make if you are competing at the same bank or at different banks. The buy rates are not that dramatically different across the board that if you have a A paper merchant if I get an offer from X bank and you go to Y bank the offers will be close. The only difference is at the same bank it is a more even playing field because you are operating on the same buy rates.. At the end of the day it is no different then any other deal you compete on, you either win or you lose. Just be faster and better then the guy you are competing against and you will be fine

Tend to agree. There's no prize for 2nd place on a deal. You win or lose, just like anything worth doing in life. I should also add that rarely does a deal come down to just pricing. Good rapport has allowed me to sell deals even .10 over a competitors offer for the same term in some scenarios.

[jotucker1983]

You guys might not agree with me right now, but if this becomes common practice across the industry I think you guys might come over to my side eventually, after seeing from a holistic view how bad a policy this is.

Joe that is where selling comes in, you have sell yourself, your company and why they should work with you...

Tend to agree. There's no prize for 2nd place on a deal. You win or lose, just like anything worth doing in life. I should also add that rarely does a deal come down to just pricing. Good rapport has allowed me to sell deals even .10 over a competitors offer for the same term in some scenarios.

Guys, both of these statements are 100% accurate when we are competing with different products from different companies.

- For example, in the example between me and Celifarco with the Plumbing merchant, Celifarco could be pushing a premium product from an MCA, I could be pushing premium product in the form of an Alt. Business Loan.

- These are two totally different products in terms of value points, I could convince the merchant that having a fixed payment, a real business loan and being able to build his business credit is much better so that eventually he could be approved for more traditional lending products.

- Obviously, Celifarco could counter by saying the MCA is better because the merchant wouldn't have fixed payments during his slow season and that the renewal process is more efficient because he wouldn't have to pay "interest on top of interest" during the renewal stage.

- In addition, we can both sell the value points of the Funder or Lender, such as online reporting, better customer service, etc., etc.

But if Tucker and Celifarco are selling the same product from the same company, with the same buyrate, we are competing against ourselves. I'm competing against my own deal lol.

I have to speak up on this because understand something, in this situation the only people that get hurt are the brokers, Tucker and Celifarco. The lender is still getting their 1.14 buyrate, the only entity in this chain that's getting hurt is the broker, as he has to continue to cut his commissions down as he competes against his own damn deal that his "Partner" has given to another broker in the marketplace.

Deal exclusivity is about respect guys. It's a Funder/Lender's way of protecting a broker's commissions after he has invested his time, energy, and creativity to close a merchant. Now, if 5 business days pass and there's no movement on the deal to the point where the deal is "dead", then if another Broker submits that file with it "alive again" then that other Broker should now take over deal exclusivity.

Hell, if you want to put the exclusivity at 3 business days, that's fine. But 0 days is unacceptable and it doesn't protect the broker's time, energy and creativity invested into a deal at all.

Also maybe I need to change my username on here, people seem to think my first name is Joe lol. My name is John Tucker guys