Interesting situation

**AlexSMF** · 01-29-2016, 02:18 PM

Hey guys. Just came across an interesting situation that I cannot wrap my head around and wondering if anyone can make sense of this to me. Spoke with an ISO that sent in his deal to what he thought was a direct funder. The "direct funder" then turns around and sends the deal to a real direct funder that approves the deal for a very large amount of money. (I know its legit because I have the contract...then again maybe it could be made up but Ill get down to the bottom of that shortly) The guy that is middle manning this between the ISO and the actual direct funder then turns around to the ISO and tells him that he is not paying him anything on this deal BEFORE the merchant has yet to sign contracts.

I am not advocating ever doing that, but if one was to screw someone over, would they not first wait to have the money before announcing that they are not paying them? What is to stop the ISO from calling the merchant and saying not to take the deal and coming up with a good reason for it?

Just trying to figure out if I am missing something here or is this some new gimick that someone else has experienced before.

**J.Celifarco** · 01-29-2016, 02:22 PM

Originally Posted by AlexSMF

Hey guys. Just came across an interesting situation that I cannot wrap my head around and wondering if anyone can make sense of this to me. Spoke with an ISO that sent in his deal to what he thought was a direct funder. The "direct funder" then turns around and sends the deal to a real direct funder that approves the deal for a very large amount of money. (I know its legit because I have the contract...then again maybe it could be made up but Ill get down to the bottom of that shortly) The guy that is middle manning this between the ISO and the actual direct funder then turns around to the ISO and tells him that he is not paying him anything on this deal BEFORE the merchant has yet to sign contracts.

I am not advocating ever doing that, but if one was to screw someone over, would they not first wait to have the money before announcing that they are not paying them? What is to stop the ISO from calling the merchant and saying not to take the deal and coming up with a good reason for it?

Just trying to figure out if I am missing something here or is this some new gimick that someone else has experienced before.

nothing about that makes any sense. If the guy is trying to screw the ISO over why would he tell them. Did he think the merchant already signed. Also why would he send the deal to an ISO or a direct funder with no ISO agreement in place.. Whole thing make no sense

**MCNetwork** · 01-29-2016, 02:22 PM

I guess you have to find out why the middle man doesn't want to pay the ISO in the first place. There's more to this story...

**AlexSMF** · 01-29-2016, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by J.Celifarco

nothing about that makes any sense. If the guy is trying to screw the ISO over why would he tell them. Did he think the merchant already signed. Also why would he send the deal to an ISO or a direct funder with no ISO agreement in place.. Whole thing make no sense

My thoughts exactly. None of this makes any sense so I was hoping someone else had a similar experience that can shed some light on it. Why tell someone that you are gonna screw them before the merchant even accepted the deal?? And it makes no sense to an ISO to lie about it because he is taking away his own leverage. Now someone can offer him a worse deal and he is forced to take it because at least they will pay him on it?? Makes no damn sense.

**MCNetwork** · 01-29-2016, 02:35 PM

I would guess there is no real ISO agreement between the ISO and middleman. That's why anything goes...

**J.Celifarco** · 01-29-2016, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by MCNetwork

I would guess there is no real ISO agreement between the ISO and middleman. That's why anything goes...

Thats not true I broker deals for a bunch of ISO's and I have an ISO agreement with everyone of them. This is the reason so many people have a bad perception of co-brokering deals. If everything is done right and handled professionally it can be a very beneficial relationship for both partiesw

**Chambo** · 01-29-2016, 02:47 PM

who needs regulation? We are cannibalizing ourselves

**AlexSMF** · 01-29-2016, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by Chambo

who needs regulation? We are cannibalizing ourselves

I honestly dont think the story was credible. I was just wondering if anyone else came across the same story as this was regarding a very large file that has been shopped around in the space. You either have to have balls the size of saturn or just be a complete moron to tell someone in advance that you are not paying them before you yourself have even secured the the merchant.

**AndyYSCISOdept** · 01-29-2016, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by AlexSMF

I honestly dont think the story was credible. I was just wondering if anyone else came across the same story as this was regarding a very large file that has been shopped around in the space. You either have to have balls the size of saturn or just be a complete moron to tell someone in advance that you are not paying them before you yourself have even secured the the merchant.

You can rest assured if that happened to a broker we would've heard it from their lips on here within 15 minutes about "This scumbag broker screwed me..."etc etc

**FCF Fund** · 01-29-2016, 02:58 PM

3 sides to every story, the ISO, super broker and the truth. Too many variables and if I was a gambling man there is something the ISO left out of the whole equation to which why the super broker is confessing to not paying him especially before contracts are signed.

**AlexSMF** · 01-29-2016, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by FCF Fund

3 sides to every story, the ISO, super broker and the truth. Too many variables and if I was a gambling man there is something the ISO left out of the whole equation to which why the super broker is confessing to not paying him especially before contracts are signed.

My thoughts too. This story was so bizarre and this particular deal has been shopped around with a few shops thatI figured someone else must of heard the same story as well and possibly knew a bit more than what I had so far.

**WhoisKingsley** · 01-29-2016, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by AlexSMF

Hey guys. Just came across an interesting situation that I cannot wrap my head around and wondering if anyone can make sense of this to me. Spoke with an ISO that sent in his deal to what he thought was a direct funder. The "direct funder" then turns around and sends the deal to a real direct funder that approves the deal for a very large amount of money. (I know its legit because I have the contract...then again maybe it could be made up but Ill get down to the bottom of that shortly) The guy that is middle manning this between the ISO and the actual direct funder then turns around to the ISO and tells him that he is not paying him anything on this deal BEFORE the merchant has yet to sign contracts.

I am not advocating ever doing that, but if one was to screw someone over, would they not first wait to have the money before announcing that they are not paying them? What is to stop the ISO from calling the merchant and saying not to take the deal and coming up with a good reason for it?

Just trying to figure out if I am missing something here or is this some new gimick that someone else has experienced before.

Agree- 3 sides to this story.

#1- The ISO should have had the merchant on lock and is the ONLY one that should relay any type of offer AND assure the merchant all transparency throughout the process. If ANYONE including another ISO or Funder calls, it should be brought to the Originators attention immediately. We're working with personal information- It is NOT okay for this crap to happen anymore.

#2- Your ISO should have done research. Shame on him.

#3- Send the ISO to me i'll get it done and get him paid

**FUNd** · 01-29-2016, 05:14 PM

^ABC Amanda.

**Collector** · 01-29-2016, 05:32 PM

Sounds like this was just a strong arm move! If one feels tougher than the other to blatantly take a deal away without any compensation then you have re-evaluate who you are doing business with in the first place. Most likely that broker is just new to the industry..otherwise you would have had a stronger relationship with a funder that can get it done for you directly!

jotucker1983 · 01-29-2016, 07:48 PM

Originally Posted by AlexSMF

My thoughts exactly. None of this makes any sense so I was hoping someone else had a similar experience that can shed some light on it. Why tell someone that you are gonna screw them before the merchant even accepted the deal?? And it makes no sense to an ISO to lie about it because he is taking away his own leverage. Now someone can offer him a worse deal and he is forced to take it because at least they will pay him on it?? Makes no damn sense.

From an external point of view, just looks like you have an unscrupulous back-dooring broker screwing over a naive broker who refused to read any of the various articles, publications and discussions posted about how to vet your prospective partners.

I hate to be mean lol, but a broker lacks basic business acumen if he fails to do proper research on who the hell he's partnering with. In my opinion, that is flat out irresponsible.

So some guy emails you saying he's a direct funder and promising to "fund the world," then you just up and start sending him deals? Did you Google his company? Is the company registered anywhere? See any press releases about equity rounds of capital being raised by the company? Is the company licensed anywhere? Who is the CEO of the company? How many deals have they done so far and what is their volume to date? Are they listed on the BBB? How many employees are at the company? How long have they been in business?

If you refuse to vet your partner, you are asking to be back-doored, ripped off, scammed and cheated out of commissions because you are too lazy (or naive) to vet who the hell you are partnering with.

**AlexSMF** · 01-30-2016, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by jotucker1983

From an external point of view, just looks like you have an unscrupulous back-dooring broker screwing over a naive broker who refused to read any of the various articles, publications and discussions posted about how to vet your prospective partners.

I hate to be mean lol, but a broker lacks basic business acumen if he fails to do proper research on who the hell he's partnering with. In my opinion, that is flat out irresponsible.

So some guy emails you saying he's a direct funder and promising to "fund the world," then you just up and start sending him deals? Did you Google his company? Is the company registered anywhere? See any press releases about equity rounds of capital being raised by the company? Is the company licensed anywhere? Who is the CEO of the company? How many deals have they done so far and what is their volume to date? Are they listed on the BBB? How many employees are at the company? How long have they been in business?

If you refuse to vet your partner, you are asking to be back-doored, ripped off, scammed and cheated out of commissions because you are too lazy (or naive) to vet who the hell you are partnering with.

I agree Joe, but my thought process was even more basic than that. I honestly did not believe the story and was trying to figure out the motive but couldn't. Story is not believable because why in the world would someone tell you that they are not paying you before the merchant has even signed the deal or accepted the terms in principal?? If you sent me a deal to co-broker and I go and get an approval from a funder, reach out to the merchant and go over the details with him, the merchant says to me "send me contract and Ill look it over", then I call you before the merchant has even agreed to terms and tell you "hey Joe, thanks for this deal but Im not paying you IF the merchant closes..." Makes no sense. I was thinking that the story the ISO mentioned was BS but that didn't make any sense to me either. Why start yourself out in a weak position by saying, "hey can you do this file, ill pretty much take anything because the other guy isn't even paying me in the first place???" That makes no sense as you have zero leverage. Keep in mind that this ISO has never spoken to me before until yesterday, so he wouldn't even know if I am an honest person or not and whether I would take advantage of his situation or not...Obviously I would not but he does not know that. Maybe all of our IQ's aren't low enough to comprehend the motivation behind this.

**Michael I** · 01-30-2016, 07:00 PM

Mine might be low enough to understand . Lol
I have had an ISO send me a deal once that I had a solid approval from on deck .75k 18 months even though credit was rough (josh back then told me it was probably a mistake but if system gave approval we can fund)The ISO told me no thanks I decided to syndicate on the deal and close him on 40k 1.49 for 3 months . Now at that point I was very tempted to tell the ISO take a hike and close the deal with on deck myself and decide later if I will or will not pay him .
Knowing the ISO is being a scumbag makes it very tempting to say screw you .

Honestly I am still not sure if I did the ethical thing of not "stealing" that deal

Thread Tools

Display