[HDF]

And, at proper capacity, if the computer can't recognize it, the human couldn't either so, you have to re-request docs anyways.

Ok, so that right there is the game changer. I'm sure however that top down needs to meet bottom up in terms of client acquisition at some point. But where? At what level does the productivity gained by the lender/funder benefit the broker/ISO? Or better stated perhaps, broker/ISO does the same amount of work and recon, and actually may spend more time in the process than less all said and done. Yet Funder/Lender benefits from economies of automation.

Still, I am a buyer of the opportunity and real FinTech for once. Not the paper chase.

[Cfairbank]

And, at proper capacity, if the computer can't recognize it, the human couldn't either so, you have to re-request docs anyways.

Ok, so that right there is the game changer. I'm sure however that top down needs to meet bottom up in terms of client acquisition at some point. But where? At what level does the productivity gained by the lender/funder benefit the broker/ISO? Or better stated perhaps, broker/ISO does the same amount of work and recon, and actually may spend more time in the process than less all said and done. Yet Funder/Lender benefits from economies of automation.

Still, I am a buyer of the opportunity and real FinTech for once. Not the paper chase.

Fair points, and this may be much more applicable to our partners than a traditional MCA funder. As we've seen in this chain, a clear complaint of Breakout by a number of ISOs has been our lack approvals due to our differentiated underwriting model; but that is coupled with a recognition that if we make an offer, it typically won't be beat. And I'm pretty sure our reputation as a "safe" place to send apps is clear.... we receive tens of thousands of apps, and haven't even been accused of mismanaging one.... So if this technology allows a broker that views us as difficult to send us an app, with no extra work except pressing "send", but the potential to receive a real-time approval that is unlikely to be beat (even if that was the only approval of 10 submitted), does that make it worth it for the brokers that view us as difficult (especially since they know we won't backdoor apps)? And that's just the immediate benefits...

[Karen37a]

Fair points, and this may be much more applicable to our partners than a traditional MCA funder. As we've seen in this chain, a clear complaint of Breakout by a number of ISOs has been our lack approvals due to our differentiated underwriting model; but that is coupled with a recognition that if we make an offer, it typically won't be beat. And I'm pretty sure our reputation as a "safe" place to send apps is clear.... we receive tens of thousands of apps, and haven't even been accused of mismanaging one.... So if this technology allows a broker that views us as difficult to send us an app, with no extra work except pressing "send", but the potential to receive a real-time approval that is unlikely to be beat (even if that was the only approval of 10 submitted), does that make it worth it for the brokers that view us as difficult (especially since they know we won't backdoor apps)? And that's just the immediate benefits...

Carl,

They see you as "difficult" because of the tighter underwriting guidelines( and fewer approvals ) because you are A "plus"paper. Not the difficulty of sending the application ( once you get everything uploaded you hit send...just type in different funders email address). Or your CRM system sends it out with a hit of a button...you just choose which button

Tighter guidelines and more stips -=A paper-=better rates.
( and that's the way it should be)

And again for those who didn't see ( standard applications with no company name on it= more chances for backdooring.)That application will be passed around like candy to kids at a carnival, everyone claiming its theirs...I've seen applications where it was clear that someone chopped off the top of the application and photoshop their company name on it or just patched together photocopied it).

I have a compliance rule that we always get a new application with our company name on it, even if the other was blank and dated within 30 days. No one should ever allow noncompany specific application, nondifferrencieted...it opens up a new can of worms..people pulling credit all over the place.



Fishing in the wrong pond


The benefit of doing business with your company and companies like yours is getting the A-plus paper great rates and safety of knowing you are not being backdoored.

There will be low approval ratios and lower submissions,...smaller market of people who are just below banking grade but slightly above mca, who actually want/need money.

They are also harder to close because they are not "desperate" and can go anywhere they choose..."Close" meaning get the initial documents in and application ( thats the hard part)

its way harder to do ...and sometimes not worth it

[CraaaCraaa Radio]

Carl,

They see you as "difficult" because of the tighter underwriting guidelines( and fewer approvals ) because you are A "plus"paper. Not the difficulty of sending the application ( once you get everything uploaded you hit send...just type in different funders email address). Or your CRM system sends it out with a hit of a button...you just choose which button

Tighter guidelines and more stips -=A paper-=better rates.
( and that's the way it should be)

And again for those who didn't see ( standard applications with no company name on it= more chances for backdooring.)That application will be passed around like candy to kids at a carnival, everyone claiming its theirs...I've seen applications where it was clear that someone chopped off the top of the application and photoshop their company name on it or just patched together photocopied it).

I have a compliance rule that we always get a new application with our company name on it, even if the other was blank and dated within 30 days. No one should ever allow noncompany specific application, nondifferrencieted...it opens up a new can of worms..people pulling credit all over the place.



Fishing in the wrong pond


The benefit of doing business with your company and companies like yours is getting the A-plus paper great rates and safety of knowing you are not being backdoored.

There will be low approval ratios and lower submissions,...smaller market of people who are just below banking grade but slightly above mca, who actually want/need money.

They are also harder to close because they are not "desperate" and can go anywhere they choose..."Close" meaning get the initial documents in and application ( thats the hard part)

which is why some salespeople "pot shi*" saying" i closed so and so much a/b paper", its way harder to do ...and sometimes not worth it

This thread is not strictly about Breakout, it was created to help users/members know what banks and or lenders are still available via the funders directory of debanked. I am quite sure that Breakout will continue to fund and will continue to offer stellar programs to borrowers and the Iso's that submit. Me saying hard to get approvals doesn't equate to they are not a good lender. It means call breakout speak to the ISO department and learn the product. That should be done with all lenders that are signed up. How can you be competitive if you don't know the ins and outs of the financial product.

[Karen37a]

This thread is not strictly about Breakout, it was created to help users/members know what banks and or lenders are still available via the funders directory of debanked. I am quite sure that Breakout will continue to fund and will continue to offer stellar programs to borrowers and the Iso's that submit. Me saying hard to get approvals doesn't equate to they are not a good lender. It means call breakout speak to the ISO department and learn the product. That should be done with all lenders that are signed up. How can you be competitive if you don't know the ins and outs of the financial product.

World of MCA ....Carl asked a question. I answered it.

People offered solutions and commentary. I am stating what I know first hand from my perspective in regards to the specific comments and solutions that were offered...some are off target

That has nothing to do with you posting a helpful list of Funders and a general description of what you think they specialize in...and its not an exact science. You were posting information to be helpful.

[CraaaCraaa Radio]

World of MCA ....Carl asked a question. I answered it.

People offered solutions and commentary. I am stating what I know first hand from my perspective in regards to the specific comments and solutions that were offered...some are off target

That has nothing to do with you posting a helpful list of Funders and a general description of what you think they specialize in...and its not an exact science. You were posting information to be helpful.

That's all it's about helping your fellow brethren

[Cfairbank]

Carl,

They see you as "difficult" because of the tighter underwriting guidelines( and fewer approvals ) because you are A "plus"paper. Not the difficulty of sending the application

The benefit of doing business with your company and companies like yours is getting the A-plus paper great rates and safety of knowing you are not being backdoored.

This was the original point I was trying to address — and I'll say it again: we do not ONLY fund A+ paper or "low risk" paper as viewed through the eyes of a broker. You are right, the product our ISO’s, who don’t do much volume with us and, therefore, don't look for the the characteristics that allow us to "de-risk" a customer, only see us as an A+ shop. But we do leverage multiple de-risking strategies that may be completely irrelevant to standard MCA underwriting, but allow us to take a customer you view high risk (B or C) be able to make that customer a "near prime" risk and approve with A-paper pricing. But we don’t just offer “one” product, and through our hybrid product, for example, we can fund a credit profile many would view as high risk, but we have structured the product in such a way that we are de-risking our position sufficiently to provide better rates and an optimized financing structure than they could get elsewhere.

Fishing in the wrong pond

Agreed, brokers are not, nor should they be, our primary source or focus for client acquisition. But our top brokers are fantastic partners and we have no plans to stop funding with brokers.

And again for those who didn't see ( standard applications with no company name on it= more chances for backdooring.)That application will be passed around like candy to kids at a carnival, everyone claiming its theirs...I've seen applications where it was clear that someone chopped off the top of the application and photoshop their company name on it or just patched together photocopied it).

Who said standard app?? Use any app you want and name the fields whatever you want and place them wherever you want on the app. Ultimately, as long a human can decipher something and that something isn't a complete, one-time outlier, a computer, leveraging so many more datapoints, can do it and do it better... and better and better with each accurate result. While I won't get into our internal methodologies, google search for a simple ML diagram and you should be able to see at a very high level how a full feedback loop works and why it is so powerful... and why humans don't stand a chance of beating it.

[Karen37a]

This was the original point I was trying to address — and I'll say it again: we do not ONLY fund A+ paper or "low risk" paper as viewed through the eyes of a broker. You are right, the product our ISO’s, who don’t do much volume with us and, therefore, don't look for the the characteristics that allow us to "de-risk" a customer, only see us as an A+ shop. But we do leverage multiple de-risking strategies that may be completely irrelevant to standard MCA underwriting, but allow us to take a customer you view high risk (B or C) be able to make that customer a "near prime" risk and approve with A-paper pricing. But we don’t just offer “one” product, and through our hybrid product, for example, we can fund a credit profile many would view as high risk, but we have structured the product in such a way that we are de-risking our position sufficiently to provide better rates and an optimized financing structure than they could get elsewhere.



Agreed, brokers are not, nor should they be, our primary source or focus for client acquisition. But our top brokers are fantastic partners and we have no plans to stop funding with brokers.



Who said standard app?? Use any app you want and name the fields whatever you want and place them wherever you want on the app. Ultimately, as long a human can decipher something and that something isn't a complete, one-time outlier, a computer, leveraging so many more datapoints, can do it and do it better... and better and better with each accurate result. While I won't get into our internal methodologies, google search for a simple ML diagram and you should be able to see at a very high level how a full feedback loop works and why it is so powerful... and why humans don't stand a chance of beating it.

I am not going to debate this . Like I debated the regulations issues, certain a paper collapsing before they actually did.

I do have a computer science degree and fully understand ocr ...even quant strategies. ( computers dont have a chance against a trained sales force of brokers live, or underwrting)

in plain english......reading a pdf or application quickly is of no use to salespeople or Isos or closers, It doesnt help in anyway.nor computer generated algorithm approvals because there i s no way that it isnt going to be eventually manually approved....if you did there would be more defaults.

Gl with it.

[Cfairbank]

I am not going to debate this . Like I debated the regulations issues, certain a paper collapsing before they actually did.

I do have a computer science degree and fully understand ocr ...even quant strategies. ( computers dont have a chance against a trained sales force of brokers live, or underwrting)

in plain english......reading a pdf or application quickly is of no use to salespeople or Isos or closers, It doesnt help in anyway.nor computer generated algorithm approvals because there i s no way that it isnt going to be eventually manually approved....if you did there would be more defaults.

Gl with it.

And now I remember why I stayed away from these boards. Unnecessary insults, "absolute truths" based on uninformed information that makes arguments pointless. One of my favorite quotes by mark twain: "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

[abfunders]

And now I remember why I stayed away from these boards. Unnecessary insults, "absolute truths" based on uninformed information that makes arguments pointless. One of my favorite quotes by mark twain: "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

Carl, QuarterSpot is a good example of what you are probably looking for.
Online form to fill out some of the details from our app.
You don't want an entire app. You just want the basic details for a soft offer. Put in the name, DOB, SSN of merchant for soft pull and upload the app. Maybe the EIN to double-check if it's been submitted recently. Perhaps you'll need to put something about how current balances work to prevent us from sending you clients who have recently stacked.

Upload the bank statements, and you have your automated answer? Does that make sense?

You don't need OCR for that. Just the broker to be able to read the chicken-scratch.

[WhoisKingsley]

I am not going to debate this . Like I debated the regulations issues, certain a paper collapsing before they actually did.

I do have a computer science degree and fully understand ocr ...even quant strategies. ( computers dont have a chance against a trained sales force of brokers live, or underwrting)

in plain english......reading a pdf or application quickly is of no use to salespeople or Isos or closers, It doesnt help in anyway.nor computer generated algorithm approvals because there i s no way that it isnt going to be eventually manually approved....if you did there would be more defaults.

Gl with it.

Our industry is just like any other and this needs to be understood and the ignorance that is looked at in your point of view is only damaging to your business whether you like it or not.

The only difference are those industries have already taken out the human “sales” and replaced it with “brands” and a true online presence and the ability to compete AND aren’t afraid to compete even though many of them are brokers and work with the same direct “vendors”.

Take auto insurance with all of the online apps etc. and then your smaller brokers that also go to those larger direct ones, the smaller bad credit kinds- then you have your walk in local guys that shop your credit to hell. 10 years ago I was going to a local person and using anything I could to get a discount! Now, I go online- shop- chose- print my sh*t, put it in my car and I'm driving.

Yes, Brenda at auto insurance world is still in business with her "residual accounts" and special agreements with certain auto insurance companies for the people she services that work for certain corporations, hospitals... etc. Are you putting the puzzle pieces together here? It will be the same thing - with some major partnerships and drastic application and UW changes - this is the future.

Carl is right in many ways and we have had many (many) convos about every serious industry topic and there is not one aspect that he has/is not researching and at the end of the day it's about the consumer and their experience. BUT to turn it around- the Broker is the largest market that brings in many direct sales for the funders- so how is our experience then in turn our experience we provide to them? and after they are funder? and so on... and so on.

The biggest issue we have is our growth in both need, tech - but the limited amount of minds/hands in the right places.