Results 51 to 75 of 87
-
04-17-2019, 04:31 PM #51
- Join Date
- Mar 2017
- Location
- Nunya
- Posts
- 830
-
04-17-2019, 04:33 PM #52
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
- Posts
- 54
BS
-
04-17-2019, 04:34 PM #53
- Join Date
- Oct 2013
- Location
- Designer
- Posts
- 586
Its no more riskier sending Credibly a deal then it is Ondeck or Kabbage or any other
big lender (actually Kabbage is riskier, because they clearly express they now
own the deal, as well as paying peanuts). Some companies also give much less than 90 days exclusivity.
As soon as a merchant makes it public that he's looking for money,
anyone who is spending significant revenue on acquisition or knows what they're doing, can and/or will
get access to that information.
One of my systems has the merchant tell us who they're working with, who they're being pitched by,
who they've worked with in the past, how many mailers they've recently received, how many calls a day they get, and other financial statistics about their business, before we're even discussing if they want a loan.
Most inside sales teams (at real companies) have considerable marketing budgets many times larger than the Isos submitting to the funder, so they're busy enough on their own stuff. And if you think
duplicate submissions are bad, duplicate leads are even worse, as they are way more prevalent.
Everyone here is working on the same merchants, unless your source is word of mouth referrals
from a close personal/business relationship, or you're providing a financial service outside of cash advance.
www.UccRadar.com - Are There Really Growing Trees filled with Merchant Cash Advance Leads?
-
04-17-2019, 04:34 PM #54
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
- Posts
- 54
-
04-17-2019, 04:37 PM #55
- Join Date
- Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,202
They know EXACTLY how much they earn from stacking deals from ISOs that eventually or initially funded away. That's what they have an internal sales team for (along with "purchased leads" which is a convenient veil over their captive application pipeline. Purchased leads are mostly stacking opportunities as well. A specialty.). Another group with hands everywhere and can't answer simple questions.
-
04-17-2019, 04:44 PM #56
I dont know why anyone has issues with anything he is saying here. After 90 days if you didnt fund the deal with them they have the right to do whatever they want. I dont even work with credibly so I have no reason to defend them except I dont see an issue with this practice. When someone submits a deal to them they are paying an underwriter to underwrite the file an admin to enter the data in their system and who know what other expenses they have. If the ISO decided to fund the deal at another bank it is not their responsibility to ensure that you are able to refi the merchant down the line.
If ISO's didnt shotgun deals to 10 different companies this wouldnt be an issue. Submit to the bank you plan on funding with and a backup. Most people on here should be able to look at a deal and have a clue what the banks they work with will be offering. There are 2 sides to this and as ISO's we need to realize these funders have overhead and are going to do what they have to to pay bills. As long as they are following what is laid out in their ISO agreement I dont see any issue with anything that Gary is sayingJohn Celifarco
Managing Partner
Horizon Funding Group
3423 Ave S
Brooklyn, NY 11234
T: (347) 773-3990 | F: (718) 795-1990
Linkedin: Profile
Email: john@horizonfundinggroup.com
-
04-17-2019, 04:53 PM #57
- Join Date
- Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,202
Ok John, fair enough. So if Kapitus "immediately" stacked a client of yours that you took to only 2 funders and you (& merchant) accepted a competing offer from Rapid rather than from Kapitus, you'd be fine with it?
-
04-17-2019, 04:57 PM #58
I have never had that issue with those banks so the hypothetical situation doesnt apply. If I know a bank is going to contact my merchants that I dont fund with them after 90 days because that is in their ISO agreement then I am going to expect it. Credibly has it in their ISO agreement that they do, so now it is up to each ISO to decide if they want to work with them. They arent hiding what they are doing, they are being completely transparent about it
John Celifarco
Managing Partner
Horizon Funding Group
3423 Ave S
Brooklyn, NY 11234
T: (347) 773-3990 | F: (718) 795-1990
Linkedin: Profile
Email: john@horizonfundinggroup.com
-
04-17-2019, 04:58 PM #59
also you are saying immediately after funding, this is after 90 days. If you have good client control post funding you wont have this issue. Anyone doing it immediately after funding is breaking the terms of an iso agreement so that I would have an issue with
John Celifarco
Managing Partner
Horizon Funding Group
3423 Ave S
Brooklyn, NY 11234
T: (347) 773-3990 | F: (718) 795-1990
Linkedin: Profile
Email: john@horizonfundinggroup.com
-
04-17-2019, 05:00 PM #60
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Posts
- 4,318
I will always have a problem with a 1st position funder (who lost out to another 1st position funder) sending that deal to get stacked by using their inside sales team as cover.
I wonder how Rapid feels about Credibly doing this, being they despise stackers. Here their direct competition may be hurting their portfolio.
-
04-17-2019, 05:10 PM #61
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Posts
- 4,318
[QUOTE=J.Celifarco;118924They arent hiding what they are doing, they are being completely transparent about it[/QUOTE]
They haven’t been upfront. They’ve been evasive. A simple yes or no from them will work: do they stack their competitors if an ISO funds a deal submitted to them with a competitor.
If yes, the message they’re sending is this: if you submit with us but fund elsewhere, out inside sales team may very well stack you.
It’s one thing to use my lead and try and fund in house. It’s another to take my lead, stack my deal, compensate me zero, ruin my chance at renewal (while you potentially renew thru their stacker) and I get $0 in return.
-
04-17-2019, 05:15 PM #62
I understand where you are coming from completely. All I am saying is if it is in their ISO agreement that they can contact deals that dont fund after 90 days then expect them to contact them and try to get the deal funded. If you have a problem with that then choose not to work with them. This is why its important to understand each companies ISO agreement
John Celifarco
Managing Partner
Horizon Funding Group
3423 Ave S
Brooklyn, NY 11234
T: (347) 773-3990 | F: (718) 795-1990
Linkedin: Profile
Email: john@horizonfundinggroup.com
-
04-17-2019, 05:18 PM #63
- Join Date
- Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,202
-
04-17-2019, 05:20 PM #64
- Join Date
- Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,202
-
04-17-2019, 05:26 PM #65
he said if they dont fund the deal in 90 days their in house sales will contact them. I take that as they will doing what they have to in order to fund the deal no matter the position. I give him credit for being honest because I believe that will make some people not send them deals
John Celifarco
Managing Partner
Horizon Funding Group
3423 Ave S
Brooklyn, NY 11234
T: (347) 773-3990 | F: (718) 795-1990
Linkedin: Profile
Email: john@horizonfundinggroup.com
-
04-17-2019, 05:28 PM #66
I dont expect him to come out and say we stack deals but I believe that was what he implied. If its not then he can say its not but reading the comments that is what I took from it
John Celifarco
Managing Partner
Horizon Funding Group
3423 Ave S
Brooklyn, NY 11234
T: (347) 773-3990 | F: (718) 795-1990
Linkedin: Profile
Email: john@horizonfundinggroup.com
-
04-17-2019, 07:02 PM #67
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Posts
- 1,367
If ISO relationship is so important to Credibly when you email their declines in 90 days do you CC the ISO who submitted the deal to you and include them in that email as well?... waiting 3 times the time frame sounds to me like a nice way of saying we wait until hopefully the ISO forgot about the submission.
-
04-17-2019, 07:05 PM #68
WOW, this is like a WWE tag team pile on here!
Bottom line (much like the whole Peak Solutions mess) is that you got your answer. "Join Credibly" answered...the way THEY wanted to answer. If the answer isn't good enough for you,...DO NOT SEND THERE. End of story. They aren't going to answer the question the EXACT WAY or with EXACT WORDING you want. So now what are you going to do? Go on for another ten pages demanding the answer your way?
-
04-17-2019, 07:09 PM #69
You KNOW they have a sales floor. You KNOW they take submitted & not funded files and sop/sell them. I would be surprised to find one fund out there that doesn't do/try this. Most of them do not have to though these days with all the multiple submission & back dooring that goes on...they just kind of sit back and the file will inevitably come back to them.
As far as killing you potential renewal? How is what they are doing ANY DIFFERENT from any other ABC ISO calling up merchant and stacking them? The merchant is still stacked. You going to cry to every ISO in American that your renewal got crushed because the merchant chose to sign the paper? It has happened to all of us at some point and time. It sucks, yeah,...but THIS IS THE LIFE WE HAVE CHOSEN. I DIDN'T QUESTION (a lil Moe Green right before Passover)
-
04-17-2019, 07:40 PM #70
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Posts
- 4,318
There’s a pretty big difference between a 1st position funder sending an ISO submission to their inside sales to send out to stack their competitors, and some random ISO calling UCCs and stacking them. The biggest difference is NO ONE is sending ABC the merchant info.
Let’s go even further, if stacking deals using your inside sales team to send files to other funders is cool, why isn’t Credibly stacking their own deals?
Lastly, if Credibly wants to dance around answering specific concerns, that’s their right. But their evasive bull**** is noticeable. This could all be avoided by them just saying “we will not stack your submissions”. But they don’t.
-
04-17-2019, 07:50 PM #71
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Posts
- 4,318
Isn’t Credibly part of the SFBA (Small Business Finance Association)?
Funny how the SBFA wants to institute best practices for brokers, while they have places like Credibly that is potentially stacking other members.
Maybe before lecturing brokers on best practices, the SBFA needs to look inward.
-
04-17-2019, 08:49 PM #72
- Join Date
- Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,202
It is noteworthy that the big money that top funders supposedly spend on marketing, their internal brokers, and of course, in this case "leads" tugs on everyone's heartstrings apparently.
But the smaller ISO shop can submit their hard earned apps and leads and be told "you knew what you were getting into". Pardon us for asking a few questions.
-
04-18-2019, 02:01 AM #73
- Join Date
- Aug 2018
- Posts
- 725
-
04-18-2019, 02:04 AM #74
- Join Date
- Aug 2018
- Posts
- 725
-
04-18-2019, 08:27 AM #75
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Posts
- 4,318
Similar Threads
-
Great file! Truck sales with floor plan needs second position over $100k
By Princess in forum Deal BinReplies: 2Last Post: 01-25-2018, 11:21 AM -
Retail Store 500k to 1m a month in sales. Seeking 4th position.
By CashAdvanceKing in forum Deal BinReplies: 7Last Post: 07-11-2016, 12:35 PM -
Retail internet sales - 130k / month
By Acufund in forum Deal BinReplies: 8Last Post: 05-19-2016, 02:45 PM -
Floor Rate?
By fundgorilla in forum Merchant Cash AdvanceReplies: 28Last Post: 08-29-2014, 05:22 PM -
Advance monthly sales for retail and food services
By CO1 in forum Merchant Cash AdvanceReplies: 2Last Post: 05-06-2013, 04:17 PM