[Sean Cash]

That is not the insane part to me...the insane part to me is the automated underwriting...there are so many factors to take into consideration when you decide to give a business an advance...how about the #1 thing like verifying if a merchant is current on their rent...how is a computer going to do that??? I think the model is nuts...but hey thats just me

I think it's kind of like Wonga, the UK based payday lender that almost bought OnDeck. Their whole model was to fund EVERYTHING and then try to find factors that may have contributed to defaults later and tweak their system to limit approvals. Different rules seem to apply when you can burn through millions of dollars "just to test things out" and then raise another 100 mil once you think you see a trend and a "possible way" to become profitable.

[Mmarano]

It's all something Normal folks like us don't understand. Some firms are specifically designed to take losses. I don't get it. My partner and I banter over this quite a bit. I have wayyy tooo much pride to torch 75 Million. That's what kabbage raised. Probably have a gun to the head to deploy that money.

[Capital Stack]

their doing like $30 mil a month already and im sure trying to turn a profit

[Chambo]

their doing like $30 mil a month already and im sure trying to turn a profit

NO WAY they are profitable yet with two year terms...

[AndyYSCISOdept]

It's all something Normal folks like us don't understand. Some firms are specifically designed to take losses. I don't get it. My partner and I banter over this quite a bit. I have wayyy tooo much pride to torch 75 Million. That's what kabbage raised. Probably have a gun to the head to deploy that money.

Agreed...losing money is in the DNA of some but not all MCA companies, and trust me when I say, "The difference is painfully obvious"