[WhoisKingsley]

So I wanted to see what some of you guys thought about this practice. I've ranted and raved about this before, but I notice that it continues to happen from time to time with partners of mine.

What do you guys think of Funders/Lenders who randomly change the renewal compensation rules throughout the middle of the relationship, which end up being in stark contrast to the original Broker/ISO Agreement that you signed?

* You start out signing a Broker/ISO Agreement with compensation rules that state you will be paid for the lifetime of the client as long as they renew/reload, aren't past due, etc.

* Then, randomly throughout the middle of the relationship, you get a random email about how they are "changing the rules" and now implementing new deal minimums along with other provisions in order to keep getting paid on your renewals.

What is the damn point of signing an Broker/ISO Agreement, if they are just going to randomly change the rules as we go along?

Anybody else deal with this and if so, how do you handle it?

This type of practice pisses me off because, I structure my business based on my renewal/residual portfolio. I build up my portfolio for a couple of months, then "sit back" a bit because the porfolio can carry me through for a good period of time going forward.

But when they keep screwing around with the renewal rules, the "foundation" starts to get shakey. I'm independent, pay for my own healthcare, pay for my own expenses, and configure my own marketing plans, so what in the hell is the problem about continuing to pay renewals for the lifetime of the client like we originally agreed upon?

Big picture. Everyone is going off on regulating the industry and disclosures but no one ever talks about regulating the "Partnership" that direct providers have with the wholesale companies (ISOs) that work with them. It's insane because different ways of "selling", servicing, and brokering (verb) is the same with most companies but we do not have a set "rule" set around the process.

In regards to John's post- like any other agreement within a Partnership, if there are current contracts that are in place while a "new rule" is passed, the contract that is in standing should remain with the older "rule" until it is expired OR a DATE should be given when the rule goes into effect. THAT MEANS, if you have a file that is up for renewal tomorrow and the rule was passed a month ago and started yesterday, the first contract expired and your renewal falls under the new rule. Yes, there are times when there are exceptions when/if a file does not run smoothly and if it is on the direct company- they should take responsibility and appease their agent just as they appease their contract holders. Many of you will disagree, but that is how Companies and Partnerships operate. Our "industry" or "Merchant Cash Advances" aren't any different than any other model and basic process and operational rules shouldn't be any different. If something changes in the middle of your relationship that doesn't reflect HOW YOU do business with them, question it, challenge it, and agree to it. If you have a book of business with a specific company, you should be able to review your partnership and if you feel you need more, less, or revisions to have an unique partnership, SAY SOMETHING. A Direct Partner would rather understand your business goal and how their product will be included and how your agreement should be structured.

If your ORIGINAL AGREEMENT states that you will be paid for the lifetime of the client BUT then the agreement also states that it can be changed for any reason throughout the lifetime of the agreement... then expect anything to happen. The "legal" jargon in some ISO agreements are so condescending and evil and you really have to have relationships built on understanding rather than just that piece of paper.

I know MANY people are seeing the changes with renewals. Just think now of who you are sending deals to. Where do you think they will be in 6 months? A year? Where's your renewals? Who's buying their book? Who's buying their lists? Hmm...