[Michael I]

Both Wall and Pearl were born out of the biggest scumbag shop to ever exist, 2nd Source Funding.

They make these newbies shops look like choir boys

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

[bizloanbroker]

whatever, Scam Chanin go F#%&* yourself

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

[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

[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.

[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