[John Galt]

In all honesty WCF, you are very combative. It happens a lot on this site. Enough so that Sean actually asked me to block certain people that like to flame without intelligence over a year ago. All the things they flamed about turned out to be true (meaning my statements were correct and prescient). Good debate is not flaming and doesn't have to be. There is a lot of ignorance on this site and while you may be intelligent enough to debate, it doesn't have to turn into an argument with personal attacks. The MCA business is a place without barriers to entry so we get a lot of kids and felons who like to wield their swords as the biggest swinging dicks (WS euphemism). You are smart enough not to join that crowd. Think about that.

[WestCoastFunding]

In all honesty WCF, you are very combative. It happens a lot on this site. Enough so that Sean actually asked me to block certain people that like to flame without intelligence over a year ago. All the things they flamed about turned out to be true (meaning my statements were correct and prescient). Good debate is not flaming and doesn't have to be. There is a lot of ignorance on this site and while you may be intelligent enough to debate, it doesn't have to turn into an argument with personal attacks. The MCA business is a place without barriers to entry so we get a lot of kids and felons who like to wield their swords as the biggest swinging dicks (WS euphemism). You are smart enough not to join that crowd. Think about that.

You should talk to your buddy Karen before lecturing about combativeness. Asking her to clarify what she means leads to all types of unhinged ranting. You know it. Feel free to discuss with her if you have any consistency. Right? Or nah?

[jotucker1983]

You should talk to your buddy Karen before lecturing about combativeness. Asking her to clarify what she means leads to all types of unhinged ranting. You know it. Feel free to discuss with her if you have any consistency. Right? Or nah?

I do agree with you West in that the quality of discussions seems to be going down on here lately. It seems as though there's way too many people on here with a need to be "right", rather than a need to spark an elaborate, detailed, discussion about whatever the topic is.

[Karen37a]

John,

I beg to differ. There is a serious danger to our industry and it is non vetted , hasty , Regulation from outsiders( govt) who have no clue how this industry or Finance works.There are people who are for Regulation, people against it, and people who think some sort industry controlled self regulation is the way to go.When money is involved and people are not profitable, the gloves come off and they are swinging very low low low in these so called debates. Even when people are profiting they are protecting their "turf"

People have different strategies and viewpoints on sales and marketing and in the end.... The proof is in the pudding.My opinion is that that people are not going to want to hear that their business strategy is off, because then they have to look in the mirror, stop blaming others and be held accountable for their success or failures.Hard to give newbies advice when you get snide comments from people saying "that doesn't work", when in fact it works for thousands nationwide, it just didn't work for them because they were doing something wrong.

No Excuse Mentality.

Regulation is not the key to people making more money because it kicks out some of the competition . It shrinks the funding allocations of companies and isos because there are less investors and money.

People should not resort to low blows in arguments when they are out matched and if they do, they cant cry foul when someone swings back harder. Elaborate conversations do not include jabbing at someone or making snide remarks or having a confrontational quality or tone in everything they say or do.

Ps . The gang style jumping on people has actually decreased, I think because there was a shake out in the industry. The last few months the quality has actually gone UP. ( All but Regulation debates ).

This weekend I will try to post a more detailed explanation on my opinion of Regulation, I almost have carpal tunnel. Then I am not discussing it again , One woman's opinion.

[jotucker1983]

John,

I beg to differ. There is a serious danger to our industry and it is non vetted , hasty , Regulation from outsiders( govt) who have no clue how this industry or Finance works.

That's why I believe we should continue to make efforts to be on the frontlines, crafting industry regulation rather than continuing to operate as if regulation (wide scale) is never going to happen.

People have different strategies and viewpoints on sales and marketing and in the end.... The proof is in the pudding.My opinion is that that people are not going to want to hear that their business strategy is off, because then they have to look in the mirror, stop blaming others and be held accountable for their success or failures.

Regulation is not the key to people making more money because it kicks out some of the competition

I'm not sure why you keep making the argument, that people discussing "regulation" are only doing so because it will help them close more sales?

Do you think everyone saying we need to address the out of control stacking, the hiring of people without a background check, and having other checks/balances in place, are only doing so because they can't quote, unquote "sell"? I'm not even sure where you are coming from with that argument lol.

[MCNetwork]

Personally, I'm all for some type of regulation. It's necessary for any type of lending product (yeah yeah I know MCAs are a purchase of future sales but who are we kidding). I support industrywide disclosure requirements, rate limitations and other measures to prevent lender abuses, protect business owners and in turn legitimize the MCA industry. The industry's insistence on being self-regulated is not practical, realistic or advisable. Everyone benefits from the certainty of uniform rules and regulations. I'm encountering too many business owners who've been stacked to the gills with advances by fast talking salesmen resulting in long term financial difficulty. I feel regulation would help curtail these types of abuses by raising the barriers to entry for anyone looking to become a funder or ISO.

[WestCoastFunding]

Personally, I'm all for some type of regulation. It's necessary for any type of lending product (yeah yeah I know MCAs are a purchase of future sales but who are we kidding). I support industrywide disclosure requirements, rate limitations and other measures to prevent lender abuses, protect business owners and in turn legitimize the MCA industry. The industry's insistence on being self-regulated is not practical, realistic or advisable. Everyone benefits from the certainty of uniform rules and regulations. I'm encountering too many business owners who've been stacked to the gills with advances by fast talking salesmen resulting in long term financial difficulty. I feel regulation would help curtail these types of abuses by raising the barriers to entry for anyone looking to become a funder or ISO.

Absolutely agree.

I look at it like this: I think about how I would feel if a family member who owned a small business received communication from a broker asking them to send over their personal info and bank statements to get them a financing. Would I feel comfortable with that? Hell no. They could have good intentions or they could be bad actors. But it takes a lot of work to vet a broker. National licensing requiring something like $1,000 fee, bonding and background check to see if you've been convicted of a financial scam doesn't seem unreasonable.

[Karen37a]

T
I'm not sure why you keep making the argument, that people discussing "regulation" are only doing so because it will help them close more sales?

Do you think everyone saying we need to address the out of control stacking, the hiring of people without a background check, and having other checks/balances in place, are only doing so because they can't quote, unquote "sell"? I'm not even sure where you are coming from with that argument lol.

I have been told personally by a few people that exact thing as they giggled and also one person who argues with me constantly on here posted he thinks it would be a good solution because it lessens competition.Another said it would be a great benefit. I am not looking up old posts to find the comment.

I do not think EVERYONE who wants some sort of regulations (or lets say checks and balances or standard algorithms or Esoteric scoring model, because REg is a nasty word that opens up a ****storm) cant sell, but it isnt a coincidence that some of the loudest advocates for regulation are the ex mca brokers who didnt make it in this industry or a few who are trying to gain market share or others that ROI is so far off from pricing wrong...then they have to point to something external for the reason for the failure.

If I thought that they knew what they were doing I wouldn't be so opposed to it; but people creating boxes to duplicate a brokers job or usefulness is ridiculous.Trying to automate sales and take the human element out is also a fools folly. Trying to say you can offer these Low low rates, when I KNOW your roi and cost of doing business wouldn't sustain the activity is also a sign of fraud, deceit or bad business practices from someone who just doesn't know better ( yet) or does but thinks he can correct after the fact.

I wouldnt even care if I didn't feel like it was atheist scientists trying to recreate the big bang theory and open the universe and drag us all into Hell thru a vacuum

There are serious parts to the model or solution that are missing. And again maybe I give people more credit then they deserve. I think they are doing something that destroys us purposely or for revenge because no one could be that stupid. I take that back maybe they do not know and are.

MCN said this( The industry's insistence on being self-regulated is not practical, realistic or advisable. Everyone benefits from the certainty of uniform rules and regulations. I'm encountering too many business owners who've been stacked to the gills with advances by fast talking salesmen resulting in long term financial difficulty)

I agree on a standard of uniform rules or code of conduct ( take the R word out ) in regards to underwriting. And its not locking up the client so they can never get a second restricting them.

If you impose regulations add to it a prepayment addendum feature that kicks in when we switch them,so its not monopolistic and the merchant has freedom of choice without being penalized.

[WestCoastFunding]

Let me condense that argument:

Q: Why are you against all regulation?
A: Because some people on the Daily Funder are for some regulation!!!!!!

[Andy]

Good morning everyone,

This past week my colleagues and I in the CFC spent 2 days in Albany meeting with a dozen different senators and staffers to discuss part EE of the proposed 2017 NYS budget.

If part EE was put in the budget it would effect every aspect of doing business in NYS for funders and brokers mostly due to heavy restriction and licensing requirements.

The scariest part of this is most states look to New York and if it is passed we think they will likely follow in similar fashion.

If you are looking to get involved and have a say in the future of doing business in NYS.

Myself and most of the members of CFC along with our lobbyists will be at Lendit next week.

If you would like to have a meeting to get involved in the CFC below is my contact information.

Thanks!
Isaac D. Stern
Isaac@yellowstonecap.com
cell (917) 743-8369

To get this thread back on topic-

Check this out, this is pretty disturbing.

http://debanked.com/2017/03/new-york...ll-businesses/

Scary (but unfortunately not too surprising) that NYS is spreading misinformation to the general public.

Regarding regulation/licensing I do not think anyone is saying, "No this industry should never be regulated." Speaking for myself, my position is simply that this is not the correct way to do it. A poorly written licensing bill should not be snuck into a budget. There has been no discussion to the economic impact of the proposed changes. The implications of this have not been thoroughly reviewed. My position is that some regulation or licensing is not necessarily a bad thing, but needs to be much more carefully crafted with open communication and input from all parties that would be affected.

[WestCoastFunding]

To get this thread back on topic-

Check this out, this is pretty disturbing.

http://debanked.com/2017/03/new-york...ll-businesses/

Scary (but unfortunately not too surprising) that NYS is spreading misinformation to the general public.

Regarding regulation/licensing I do not think anyone is saying, "No this industry should never be regulated." Speaking for myself, my position is simply that this is not the correct way to do it. A poorly written licensing bill should not be snuck into a budget. There has been no discussion to the economic impact of the proposed changes. The implications of this have not been thoroughly reviewed. My position is that some regulation or licensing is not necessarily a bad thing, but needs to be much more carefully crafted with open communication and input from all parties that would be affected.

I'd much prefer it at the national level. But I don't think that will happen with Congress anytime soon.

[Chambo]

Let me condense that argument:

Q: Why are you against all regulation?
A: Because some people on the Daily Funder are for some regulation!!!!!!

I think a better question for the people adamantly against the State or Feds coming in is "so you think our industry should go on unregulated? If not, what do you propose?"

That question would separate the "just leave me alone and let me do whatever I want" people, from more serious people looking towards the future of the industry

[Karen37a]

The answer is .....I propose industry wide checks and balances for underwriting guidelines and a code of conduct with all companies/ funders participating.. (without having massive state and federal guidelines imposed ).

A persistancy level that must be met. % of payments and dollar amounts capped at a certain level ( this is where the disagreement comes in) A paper think one way and D another, and the D paper is stacking behind the A paper who didn't want the % to go that high.

A meeting of the minds between A paper and D paper

I have a certain "code of conduct" and comfort level when making recommendations..and it isnt 4th , 5th , 6th positions. I think I did a 3rd once or twice .

Restrictions on people becoming an Iso unless they have a background in Finance and can prove they have the ability to run an office,compliance wise. Requirements for new brokers to sign on with a reputable Iso if they do not meet certain tests.

Barring people from labeling themselves as "Direct Funders" unless they participate x amount on a certain amount of the deals or have a Goldman prime Oppenheimer or credit line etc coming behind them, or money under mgt, or they are an accredited investor with x amount funded.

An Mca Certificate for newbies ( they have one just getting started ) then a Compliance exam for brokers , Managers and Isos ( the latter being harder) and continuing Ce requirements (2 years)

Then we must address the backdooring of sales. No first to close rules, that leaves open a hole in the system for brokers to lose their file at the close. Detailed Denial reasons..not just "esoteric scoring model"

Reverse non competes

there are some potential answers since you all asked..I have more. Just not the govt stepping in which causes havoc.

[Chambo]

Karen, I believe this was already tried. NAMAA tried to set this up with white papers. Was it CAN or ON DECK that also sent out white papers on conduct?

Too many small players out there who tried to fly under the radar. WIDE was the first company I ever heard of stacking deals....mostly On Deck and CAN at first, but once it gathered steam, none of these smaller firms wanted to play by the rules anymore. "Hey if someone is out there making money this way, might as well be me" was the attitude.

So many the adults do need to come in and supervise the sandbox afterall?

[Karen37a]

Chambo ,

I am not sure. I am a small player and Iso 2 offices. Not a funder yet. 2 years in the business as of this Day.

Its my MCA anniversary. I feel older.

I believe that having a second position is sometimes better than consolidating the whole thing( because of double dipping), its when people get crazy with the 4th 5, 6 7, that it goes crazy

[HDF]

Maybe Happy Horse **** is waiting for some regs before he opens his wallet any further. JK

It will be interesting if nothing else.

[Funder Mark]

There will be some form of regulation eventually. The real question becomes what kind, and can we do to make it beneficial? I believe rate, terms and stacking should be last on the list. First there should be some kind of process for companies to work as funders and ISO's. Once we do that, many of the bad players will be forced to get out. Once that is in place, there will be work on what fees can be charged. At that point, companies will be competing on rates, terms and positions, where the market will force out the dumb and weak funders. At that point, 90% of the problems the industry has will be resolved.

[jotucker1983]

.....but it isnt a coincidence that some of the loudest advocates for regulation are the ex mca brokers who didnt make it in this industry or a few who are trying to gain market share or others that ROI is so far off from pricing wrong

Lol, no Karen.....

https://www.commercialfinancecoalition.com/about-cfc/

http://www.marketplacelendingassociation.org/

http://innovativelending.org/

Look at the players on those three lists just as a "start". Those aren't Ex-MCA brokers or "wanna-be" Funders/Lenders who can't pick up market share. Those are, quite frankly, the top names in our business. So you are wrong Karen, the loudest advocates for Regulation are actually the Top Dog/Big Name Players.

It's actually the small guys who don't want regulation, because most of the unethical behavior (insane stacking) is coming from the small guys.

.....but people creating boxes to duplicate a brokers job or usefulness is ridiculous. Trying to automate sales and take the human element out is also a fools folly.

Lol, Karen I know you come from a completely different Generation, but in 2017 a significant portion of the new deal origination is occurring from online marketing and online activity. And it's the Top Dog/Big Name Players that have the marketing budgets to compete in that arena, thus, one of the MAIN reasons for their continued dominance/growth.

I agree on a standard of uniform rules or code of conduct ( take the R word out ) in regards to underwriting.

What makes a funder/lender uniquely profitable is their underwriting model (secret sauce), there's no way you can put a uniform standard of "underwriting" across the board, especially considering some funder/lenders specialize in A/B Paper, while some specialize in C/D/E Paper. Plus you hate regulation, but your proposal here would be far worse than any type of regulation I've been proposing.

[Karen37a]

John this is what I just typed >>>The answer is industry wide checks and balances for underwriting guidelines and a code of conduct with all companies funders participating.. (without having massive state and federal guidelines imposed ).

A persistancy level that must be met. % of payments and dollar amounts capped at a certain level ( this is where the disagreement comes in) A paper think one way and D another, and the D paper is stacking behind the A paper who didn't want the % to go that high.


(That does not mean that I think A paper is going to turn into D paper and D paper into A...I said ...persistancy levels must be met and a Certain % of the gross avg daily balance should not be breached. This number is fluctuating between A paper Standards and D Paper ...a meeting of the minds on the Max dollar amount must be set...and it isnt 10% or 12% , nor 50%-75%.)

I am not giving away my companies checks and balances that helps me manage myself my company and the brokers deal flow.If you do not know what I am referring to sorry


HDF

happy Horse has not given me $1 yet ( remember he is a frugal conservative person) , nor my other friends . I had infrastructure in place then I put a halt on the lending of my monies and my friends/partners when I saw certain companies about to implode .( I really do not know everything and thought, wtf is going on,I need to figure out who I am going to get skin in the game with) Plus. I can not do everything.I am having a hard enough time getting these files in pdf format and out the door while keeping lunatics in line who tell me they are going to start an Seo campaign or set up a table at a flea market and hand out flyers and business cards.


In the words of Roberto Duran..No mas no mas ( since i act/ look Latina lol )

[WestCoastFunding]

The thought of Industry-wide checks and balances is a fairy tale believed by one person. If it were possible it would have been done already.

[Karen37a]

Better a fairy tale then monetary regulations, suitability tests, accredited investors , accredited brokers ( on a smaller scale ) , surety bonds and massive compliance costs.

Ps . Regulations are state and Federally imposed industry wide checks and balances on steroids ..too much to type

word salad


Stranger danger


waving bye ***

[WestCoastFunding]

What makes a funder/lender uniquely profitable is their underwriting model (secret sauce), there's no way you can put a uniform standard of "underwriting" across the board, especially considering some funder/lenders specialize in A/B Paper, while some specialize in C/D/E Paper. Plus you hate regulation, but your proposal here would be far worse than any type of regulation I've been proposing.

Exactly.

She seems to think that funders will all get together and decide what is the maximum amount a merchant can be leveraged. But here's the thing: EVERY 1st position funder believes their offers ALREADY ARE the maximum debt that the merchant can service. If they thought the merchant could handle a larger debt load, they would have funded them with a larger facility.

And how do you enforce the caps when any funder not part of the agreement can just step-in and fund additional positions? Think about it: why would Marcus or YSC agree to this plan, knowing it will crush their business model and will just lead to someone else filling the stacking space?

So this whole idea that the funders will all get together and decide an across-the-board cap is a fantasy. It's nonsensical. Will never happen. If it were possible it would have been done already.

And you're right: what Karen is proposing is 100 times worse than any regulation being proposed. I don't think she noticed the glaring unintended consequences of such bad ideas.

[Karen37a]

West
Thats what compliance and regulations are. And that IS what is going to be forced on everyone but WORSE..they might require 100k balances in bank accounts for brokers to be vetted, not just the Iso, brokers of the iso, even worse things opening up a Pandora's box.And I talked with certain A paper companies owners and D paper owners in length Loonngggggggggggg time ago about the % and across the board caps to see if their could be some happy medium you fool. And I realized then it would be nearly impossible to get everyone to the table to agree. " nearly impossible" . So do not post what i "think"

Also My words were and I quote ( months and months ago) If Cn Cap continues to do what they are doing they will be going under and taking the brokers who have books of business with them. Regulators will be watching and stepping in for us to create the % cap and the result will be to restrict money like the Doody Frank and volcker act. And it is ON THE RECORD and I am not a mind reader. They thought I was over reacting .. too big to fail theory.I will never be able to explain it to you, and you will never see it until AFTER the fact. Thats why some people move ahead of the curve or leave before destruction,its called " selling into the high".

I have other self imposed industry restrictions that would work to stop things from happening but I am never typing it on a board because it would be like I am Harry Truman dropping the A Bomb on YOU, not me. I am going to survive, with deep pockets coming behind me to mop things up.My money is private money not coming from a credit line.And hopefully my trusted Lenders syndication partners still like my money and business, because I do not want to do it alone. I am too old and tired.(But I can if I have to)

I was asked by certain A paper . You have this money coming behind you, you will be vetted , why do you care if they impose regulations? Answer. Because I do not like massive compliance and the additional fees and massive paperwork, I am against police states and I think it will be a pandoras box like they did in the stockmarket, then mortgage.

You are not in the know and you will never be. You do not try to think or absorb what I am saying, you ignore reason, state the same things I am saying then say you didn't say it( when its printed in writing)... Its like im talking to a *******

Chambo asked a simple question to find reasoning in someone's semi opposite opinion, MCN has some different view points than I do and HDF has polar opposite opinions of most things.I still like them, they semi like me.jk And you told John Galt that he is my buddy because he sided with me. I think we spoke 5 times. He is extremely intelligent, next time I chat with him I am going to re-read Mise, ayn rand, friedman, Keynes to keep up lol There are 100 or more friends of mine business associates and brokers on here or watching. I wont out them so you can yell at them, or they yell at you .
You argue like you are a rat in the corner one day away from bankruptcy, cause the seo calls are not coming in and all your hopes are placed on decreased competition.Steering people towards things that are good for you and you only, is not the way to go And no one's really listening to your opinions anyway

Pet peeve of mine is when old men, who know nothing about Finance, sit around the table or outside dunkin donuts sun morning, talking about politics and finance and if they are heads of state and George Soros. Maybe it makes you feel good to have a debate with people, ( with no results or solutions) like those old men do. The only reason I respond to you is I wanted to let people see the ignorance of the people who want speedy regulation(with no plan, hastily vetted) and their self serving purpose and lack of proprietary planning and fiduciary responsibilities.

You attack so that the person doesn't share their opinion anymore, then you can have a monopoly on foolish ideas with noone challenging you. You said in essence numerous times that I "pull the woman card" play victim. I am just amazed at all the butts you kiss all over the boards, then a woman or someone you perceive to be smaller than you says something and you make an attempt to bully them. I see you do it all the time. Wrong woman though.And THATS why i say, i make more money than you, to shut you up, You are like a chiwawawa at my heels constantly. But I do not like to kick small dogs.
I will be posting my reasons for not wanting it in detail and the chaos that I think it will cause . If it has to be done( in a very limited capacity ) it has to be orderly. I will never be responding to you going forward. You are now officially on ignore.Go nip at someone else's heels.

[Karen37a]

John,

I have never seen you "propose" anything and if you did, I missed it thru all the negative attacks by your buddy. Or didn't read it because of all the negativity.Propose it again or post it if you like so I can see it and others. or post the link I will read it.

One thing cant be proposed. Lowering commission and rates so that people go out of business.

No one is taking and RISK of lending money, losing it or even 15 % of it,or even being a MCA broker or Iso and paying for costs of doing business leads rent, brokers payroll, possibility of getting sued, a clawback paid to broker who quit, etc etc for 5%,, let alone 2-3% Ill buy a higher yield bond and get 9% and sit by my pool. And I do not need your west friend jumping in saying you cant get 9% on a bond, then having my best friends and partners tell you the yields on every equity investment and bond from china thru india to the usa.. Then another one of my partners telling you the pimco strategy , the other about REits.Please save the debate.

John you are a nice guy but I am scared of a guys proposals who thinks 2/3% commission is the right commission to charge when their is an industry with a 15-20% default ratio, maybe higher because some companies fudged the numbers or post massive losses to investors.

This is alternative financing, high risk with no collateral and the price has to reflect that. That and the future losses we are GOING to incur and cost of doing business...we are not the bank.Not only does it have to reflect that. We are not doing this to eeek out a living for a salary. No one would dare to take the risk and drama associated with all this.

I see this as a last resort to financing even when its A paper, then D paper is really the last last last resort. These people cant go to the bank,cant get a credit card for more than 10k on their personal finance, do not have business credit, have no idea who and what dun and bradstreet are, filed extension on taxes twice, yet make 500k a month and want 500k at 10% for 5 years. You do not have the right to tell a D paper company what risk and rate they are giving to people who are the last last last resort. They make the choice to take that risk with the percived default ratios and the merchants are not babes in the woods.

Your Seo campaigns and sterlie inaffective cold calls do not hear what I hear on the phone, about their gambling loss, boat they bought, yacht, mistress, drug habit. All you see is a business in business for 7 years with a 580 credit score making 200k a month who is telling you he wants money for "marketing and inventory" You needed to stop for a moment and think. "how does this cartoonish girl pull off 1 default in 2 years and high renewals"



Back to reality and the Shark tank. I am out

(This isnt a battle of who has the best proposals and editing skills,this is finding a solutiion to a problem.. post if you like, id like to see it)

[WestCoastFunding]

West
Thats what compliance and regulations are. And that IS what is going to be forced on everyone but WORSE..they might require 100k balances in bank accounts for brokers to be vetted, not just the Iso, brokers of the iso, even worse things opening up a Pandora's box.And I talked with certain A paper companies owners and D paper owners in length Loonngggggggggggg time ago about the % and across the board caps to see if their could be some happy medium you fool. And I realized then it would be nearly impossible to get everyone to the table to agree. " nearly impossible" . So do not post what i "think"

Also My words were and I quote ( months and months ago) If Cn Cap continues to do what they are doing they will be going under and taking the brokers who have books of business with them. Regulators will be watching and stepping in for us to create the % cap and the result will be to restrict money like the Doody Frank and volcker act. And it is ON THE RECORD and I am not a mind reader. They thought I was over reacting .. too big to fail theory.I will never be able to explain it to you, and you will never see it until AFTER the fact. Thats why some people move ahead of the curve or leave before destruction,its called " selling into the high".

I have other self imposed industry restrictions that would work to stop things from happening but I am never typing it on a board because it would be like I am Harry Truman dropping the A Bomb on YOU, not me. I am going to survive, with deep pockets coming behind me to mop things up.My money is private money not coming from a credit line.And hopefully my trusted Lenders syndication partners still like my money and business, because I do not want to do it alone. I am too old and tired.(But I can if I have to)

I was asked by certain A paper . You have this money coming behind you, you will be vetted , why do you care if they impose regulations? Answer. Because I do not like massive compliance and the additional fees and massive paperwork, I am against police states and I think it will be a pandoras box like they did in the stockmarket, then mortgage.

You are not in the know and you will never be. You do not try to think or absorb what I am saying, you ignore reason, state the same things I am saying then say you didn't say it( when its printed in writing)... Its like im talking to a *******

Chambo asked a simple question to find reasoning in someone's semi opposite opinion, MCN has some different view points than I do and HDF has polar opposite opinions of most things.I still like them, they semi like me.jk And you told John Galt that he is my buddy because he sided with me. I think we spoke 5 times. He is extremely intelligent, next time I chat with him I am going to re-read Mise, ayn rand, friedman, Keynes to keep up lol There are 100 or more friends of mine business associates and brokers on here or watching. I wont out them so you can yell at them, or they yell at you .
You argue like you are a rat in the corner one day away from bankruptcy, cause the seo calls are not coming in and all your hopes are placed on decreased competition.Steering people towards things that are good for you and you only, is not the way to go And no one's really listening to your opinions anyway

Pet peeve of mine is when old men, who know nothing about Finance, sit around the table or outside dunkin donuts sun morning, talking about politics and finance and if they are heads of state and George Soros. Maybe it makes you feel good to have a debate with people, ( with no results or solutions) like those old men do. The only reason I respond to you is I wanted to let people see the ignorance of the people who want speedy regulation(with no plan, hastily vetted) and their self serving purpose and lack of proprietary planning and fiduciary responsibilities.

You attack so that the person doesn't share their opinion anymore, then you can have a monopoly on foolish ideas with noone challenging you. You said in essence numerous times that I "pull the woman card" play victim. I am just amazed at all the butts you kiss all over the boards, then a woman or someone you perceive to be smaller than you says something and make an attempt to bully them. I see you do it all the time. Wrong woman though.And THATS why i say, i make more money than you, to shut you up, You are like a chiwawawa at my heels constantly. But I do not like to kick small dogs.
I will be posting my reasons for not wanting it in detail and the chaos that I think it will cause . If it has to be done( in a very limited capacity ) it has to be orderly. I will never be responding to you going forward. You are now officially on ignore.Go nip at someone else's heels.

I see I live factor rate free in your head.