[FHFunding]

Well Ryan and Ricky, please tell me the difference between these two hypothetical transactions. Ricky you will find that your statement is incorrect. My apologies in advance to make you actually have to think.

********WHAT WE DO NOT NOT NOT DO**********

DEBT SETTLEMENT (what we DO NOT DO) (or is it "Advance Settlement"...we all know advances are debts/loans and not anything else if we are being honest):
$100,000 owed at $16,667 per month in daily payments

factor rate 1.33 over 6 months; original net amount to merchant ~$75,000 (or less after closing costs are removed from net amount raising the factor rate actually)

3 months into a 6 month advance duration, payments lowered to $5000 per month by a debt settlement company through tortious interference (but more importantly because the company can't sustain paying out a year's worth of equity in 4 months plus having to contribute more through "stacking" or "reverse ponzi schemes" as I like to call them, but that's another conversation)

remaining duration extended by 3.3x times therefore the ROI for the MCA company goes way down (~70% decrease in ROI) and the risk to their capital goes way up (proportionally)

lump sum payment to the MCA company $0

**************WHAT WE DO DO DO, DO*****************

DEBT REFINANCE (what we DO):
$100,000 owed at $16,667 per month in daily payments

factor rate 1.33x over 6 months

3 months into a 6 month advance duration, we do a lump sum pay off

lump sum pay off $87,375 to the MCA company on the $100,000 "remaining balance"

MCA company gets their 5.5% per month on their money like they would on a 1.333 over 6 months w/ daily payments and they can re-advance the money/put it out new/recycle it/etc)



Every MCA company (that understands return on capital and return of capital) that we deal with do our deals ALL DAY LONG especially when they find out that there are multiple stacks on the file and their risk has exponentially increased with each stack.

Please, again, tell me how DEBT SETTLEMENT and DEBT REFINANCE are same the same thing and then I can tell you that you know nothing about finance or return on or of capital.

Perhaps I am wrong and 2 + 2 really does = fish

The bottom line, is that original 'total payback' is not being paid back. In your example, the MCA company is getting $12,625 less than what is stated on the contract. You are using the word 'interest' which is the difference here. It's a very clear stated payback amount on an MCA. Anything less than that is technically considered a default. Most MCA companies won't default the client if an agreement is reached - but it's exponentially harder to get a merchant an MCA once they have 'settled' on a prior MCA. I don't think any broker on here would risk their direct lender relationships - or risk the chance that they will never be able to do another MCA for whichever client takes part in this.