[jotucker1983]

Agreed @Jotucker especially since moving into 2nd position you have a pay history to review in statements. I think it makes even more sense if the daily ACH can be lowered with this new deal, further lowering the risk of default. Once you get into the 3rd and 4th positions you are playing with fire. Merchant will usually need to keep stacking in order to stay afloat.

Right, it's a crazy cycle. The brokers come in and stack the merchant to high hell, then those same brokers come right back in and look to sell the merchant a "consolidation" to "improve his cashflow"......the same cashflow that they were responsible for screwing up in the first place.

[AndyYSCISOdept]

Right, it's a crazy cycle. The brokers come in and stack the merchant to high hell, then those same brokers come right back in and look to sell the merchant a "consolidation" to "improve his cashflow"......the same cashflow that they were responsible for screwing up in the first place.

You mean like the banks and mortgage companies that sold people 5 mortgages on their houses in the early to mid 2000's?

[bizloanbroker]

whatever, Scam Chanin go F#%&* yourself

the list is way bigger then those 2 that came out of second source

[J.Celifarco]

You mean like the banks and mortgage companies that sold people 5 mortgages on their houses in the early to mid 2000's?

yep and we all know where that got us

[isaacdstern]

have not heard the nickname Scam Chanin in a while....lol

[AndyYSCISOdept]

have not heard the nickname Scam Chanin in a while....lol

Never had the pleasure.

[Chambo]

Right, it's a crazy cycle. The brokers come in and stack the merchant to high hell, then those same brokers come right back in and look to sell the merchant a "consolidation" to "improve his cashflow"......the same cashflow that they were responsible for screwing up in the first place.

and our good friends at the Dept of Justice look at this as predatory....and we all know what happens to predatory lenders.

[Natan]

I'm surprised no one offered the 5th position yet as its likely only a few weeks away.

[brokerCompany]

lesson to the next ISO best to keep your chest thumping 4th position from being advertised on this board. This has become a great resource for merchants to check out brokers and lenders. You are a pimp who will not last in the industry

[Michael I]

whatever, Scam Chanin go F#%&* yourself

can someone explain this one as it just went right over my head

[Chambo]

can someone explain this one as it just went right over my head

I assume the intent her eis that Wall Funding is owned by Jay Keller, former CEO of Second Source, which was owned by Sam Chanin

[Michael I]

I assume the intent her eis that Wall Funding is owned by Jay Keller, former CEO of Second Source, which was owned by Sam Chanin

oh i knew jay worked there , didn't realize he was ceo

[CpepeWBL]

Jay runs a great company, and has a very solid team with him at Wall.

[Austin@SCP]

A lot of talking going on about this deal, I understand where the intent to fund a 4th that high for a merchant could be questionable on ethics, but unless you know the entire situation about the merchant it really isn't a position to speak on the validity of being good or not for the merchant. All I'm going to say is healthcare, multi-location, $40+MM per year in revenue, but tax liens present and needed funds within 3 days because Medicare was slow paying a lot more than usual (got to love the govt).

The intent of the post is not gloating, it is just showing the abilities of good quality funders. We have had the same quality of deals funded by the guys at Pearl and YSC as well so I see nothing bad about them either, it's just we weren't of DF at the time those deals were funded or we'd give them a shout out as well.

[isaacdstern]

Thanks Austin!

[Austin@SCP]

Thanks Austin!

You are very welcome. All good things working with you guys.

[CreditGuy]

could be questionable on ethics, but unless you know the entire situation about the merchant

Is definitely not even remotely questionable on ethics, because it ignores the lenders and their contract rights ahead of you. You can try to justify it all you want, but you and Wall both knowingly had a merchant sign contracts and take funds that violated the terms of lenders' contracts executed prior. If you placed the 2nd and 3rd too, you are a habitual offender.

This behavior is textbook tortious interference. If I were you, I would PM the admin and beg him to delete this thread so it can't be used against you in court when one of the prior three lenders, if not all of them, sue you in civil court. Not only does it have you confessing to the tort, but it also shows premeditation and a lack of remorse based on how vigorously you are defending your tortious actions.

Bonus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKGeHuln08A

[brokerCompany]

No shame in the business when you are making $$$. Short sighted indeed

[HFS]

The way I see it as long as you fall under rule 501 of the Securities Act of 1933 you are good to go. lol

[HFS]

No shame in the business when you are making $$$. Short sighted indeed

Im going to strongly disagree. "No shame" in risking a business into bankruptcy or default is WEAK.

[Austin@SCP]

Who doesn't love some good ole Adam Sandler...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LAnmnS0-9g

[sigmundpannu]

I agree with credit guy. Anyone whose been in this business long enough knows which lenders have no stacking clauses. The minute a merchant tells me they have an advance with a lender I know has a no stacking clause I tell them I'm not their guy. But if they make enough calls they'll find someone who doesn't care at all about them and their well being who will happily stack them.

[ADiamond]

op: you want a 5th and 6th?

[Michael I]

So beside for kalamata every lender will fund on top of regular financing. I have never seen an "A first position lender" ask to see terms on his bank loan or invoice factoring etc to see if they can " stack" on them . Now who decides where to draw the line . Is it the bank?the factoring company? The so called first position lenders ? The second position lenders ? Or companies like wall that will go what ever position as long as in their minds it makes sense for them and the merchant.
I have had enough of the double Standards and each thinking they know where to draw the line .
Bottom line it's the lenders money and the merchant decision on what they want to do . It is not the ISO job to be a moral compass on what to do

[brokerCompany]

I have seen swift charge a fee on a stacking merchant. But no moral compass from the ISO to the lender from the merchant makes a weak foundation that even regulation cannot save.