OnDeck Funded $591M to Small Businesses in Q1
May 8, 2018
OnDeck’s originations were $591 million in Q1 of this year, according to their earnings report, up 3% year-over-year. 29% of that was generated by funding advisors, OnDeck’s term for brokers.
They reported a total net loss of $1.9 million.
Compared to the same quarter last year, OnDeck’s Cost of Funds Rate increased from 5.9% to 6.8%, the 15+ Day Delinquency Ratio decreased from 7.8% to 6.7%, the Net Charge-off Rate decreased from 14.9% to 10.9%, and their average APR increased from 44% to 46%.
During the Q&A, OnDeck CEO Noah Breslow said that they had a strong quarter with Chase originations and that their second major bank is on track to be announced later this year.
Shopify’s Funding Automation Key to Its Growth
May 2, 2018
Canadian e-commerce company Shopify (NYSE:SHOP) has a business funding arm called Shopify Capital that issued $60.4 million in merchant cash advances in Q1 this year, according to the company’s earnings report yesterday.
The funding operation offers an MCA product exclusively to merchants that are customers of Shopify. The company helps small business owners create online stores, with products ranging from web design to marketing and analytics. Currently, Shopify supports more than 600,000 small businesses worldwide.
Shopify Capital was launched in April 2016, but a company representative said it wasn’t until April 2017 that it started using algorithms 100 percent to automate offers of capital to merchants.
“What Shopify can see is a lot of patterns in a merchant’s [online] store,” a company spokesperson told AltFinanceDaily. “How engaged is that merchant? What has their GMV (Gross Merchant Volume) been? How spotty is their GMV? How often do they sell? There’s a bunch of different factors that help us predict GMV going forward. And as [our] algorithm gets better and smarter, we are able to get more granular in our offers.”
Many of Shopify Capital’s small business owner clients are new business owners who would not qualify for loans from banks, but need money to expand their businesses.
“Business owners typically spend copious hours putting an application together and funds typically take two to three weeks to receive,” a different Shopify spokesperson said. “Shopify Capital is designed to provide our merchants with timely access to Capital without putting them through additional financial stress…[And] merchants receive financing based on our predictive technology to determine what makes sense for their business in their trajectory.”
Shopify was founded in 2004 and is headquartered in Ottawa, Canada.
Lendr Launches New Business Debit Card
April 9, 2018
Chicago-based Lendr is launching a new business debit card program, according to an announcement the company made at LenditFintech.
This will give them the ability to fund business owners in real-time via an instant access virtual Mastercard followed up with a traditional plastic card. This system is different than pushing funds to a merchant’s existing bank debit card, which fellow online lenders Kabbage and LendingPoint announced at LendIt.
“The idea is to offer a product that makes access to capital as easy as ‘1-2-3,’” CEO Tim Roach told AltFinanceDaily. “We will have the ability to deposit funds on the Mastercard in real time, making the process seamless for our clients.”
Kabbage, LendingPoint to Offer Real Time Funding Via Push Payments
April 9, 2018
Kabbage and LendingPoint each separately announced today that they will soon be able to get funds into their customers’ business accounts instantly and 24/7 via their pre-existing bank debit card. Hopes for this are not brand new. Last October, OnDeck announced a partnership with Ingo and Visa that would provide this convenience to borrowers, although this has not yet come to fruition, according to an OnDeck spokesperson. This is also not Kabbage’s first foray into real-time loan funding.
“We launched [a real-time loan product] through the debit network three years ago and we were really excited about the results,” said Kabbage co-founder Kathryn Petralia . “Our customers really liked it, [but] our challenge was that we couldn’t get broad enough coverage. Only a small percentage of our customers were able to use it…so we’re excited about our partnership with Ingo because it gives us the ability to broaden this to about 90 percent of our customers.”
Kabbage has entered into a relationship with Ingo and has plans to make this service available to customers this summer. One might wonder why, on a weekend, a merchant needs money and can’t wait until Monday?
“Our customers are always looking to expedite the process,” Petralia said, “not because they’re desperate for cash, but because they really are desperate for time, and they don’t want to spend a bunch of time reconciling their bank accounts [and] making sure the funds have arrived. This is a much cleaner way for them to get access to capital.”
Meanwhile, as part of an announcement by LendingPoint today, the company said that later this year it will be able to “instantly disburse loans to approved borrower accounts through their debit cards, 24/7/365.” This will be facilitated through the TabaPay platform, which also enables LendingPoint borrowers to use their debit card to make loan payments.
Pearl Beta Funding Decision a Boon to MCAs, as Long as They’re True to Their True-ups
March 26, 2018While the recent Champion Auto Sales, LLC et al. v Pearl Beta Funding, LLC decision was a win for MCA companies because it determined at the appellate level that an MCA contract issued by Pearl Beta Funding to Champion Auto Sales “was not a usurious transaction,” many lawyers are saying that, more than anything, this decision has demonstrated the importance of having strong contracts with merchants.
So what made Pearl Beta Funding’s contract so strong in the eyes the judges?
“I would say that there were a variety of factors,” said Steven Berkovitch, who represented Pearl Beta Funding in this case along with lawyers from DLA Piper. “The first thing that the judges look for is if there’s a way for the merchant to modify their payments.”
This, in essence, is what is known as the “true-up” in an MCA contract. More specifically, Berkovitch said that the true-up is a contractual obligation on the part of an MCA funder to adjust the daily payment it receives from a merchant to more accurately reflect the percentage of receivables it is owed.

Pearl Beta Funding CEO Sol Lax takes this seriously. He told AltFinanceDaily: “Our front line servicing guys are well trained to respond when a merchant says ‘My deposits are down, my business is down, can I do something?’ They’re trained to know that the answer is ‘Yes. Send us some bank statements, we’ll look at it and we’ll adjust accordingly.’”
In this case, Berkovitch said that Champion Auto Sales did not use the true-up clause and did not request a payment modification when it was available to them.
“We have, literally, dozens upon dozens of cases where we’ve done the true-up,” Lax said. “So, it’s not just a contract. If [an MCA company] violates the true-up in practice and a merchant calls you and you say ‘hell no,’ that would be, not just a contractual violation, that would put a hole in your true-up clause.”
Many have remarked on how the decision of this case has already impacted the MCA industry. Berkovitch can see that himself. After the case was decided, he said that opposing attorneys have contacted him to withdraw their cases against his other MCA company clients.
Lax acknowledges, with modesty, what this decision means for the MCA industry at large: “You have a safe harbor now for the first time where, if you have a well-drafted contract, then you have active compliance [and] you’re pretty well off. Until this was settled in court, it was still up in the air.”
But Lax doesn’t take this victory for granted.
“You may still see challenges on specific [fact] patterns where a client can show that they had called, they asked for a true-up, and they were told ‘No true-up is available. You got to pay or we’re going to take all of your stuff,’” Lax said. “If they can show a pattern like that, then the MCA company is in trouble. They’ll have a hole blown right through their contract.”
The Underwriters – How A Small Team Is Turning Underwriting Into Big Business
March 13, 2018
A keen eye can spot a good deal. And for New York-based Central Diligence Group, an underwriting-focused company founded in 2015 by four partners, it has been a boon for business. The company has lately been providing its underwriting expertise to a wider variety of clients, including some outside the MCA space.
“We started to gear towards a more underwriting-centric model [where] a deal would come in, we underwrite it once, we assess the risk, we determine what box it would fall under and where it would qualify, and depending on what that pedigree of information [was], we would essentially [fulfill] the full underwriting [job,]” said Nick Gregory, one of the founding partners at Central Diligence.
Initially, the company provided underwriting services mostly to smaller funders, syndication brokers and ISO clients that service MCA merchants in the construction and trucking businesses, among others. But close to three years later, its roster of clients is far more diverse.
Over the past six to eight months, Central Diligence has been working with a west coast-based credit card processing company with a portfolio of over 100,000 clients, according to Andrew Hernandez, another Central Diligence partner. The credit card processing company has just built out its own MCA product, but they don’t have an underwriting team, which is where Central Diligence comes in. Hernandez said that this company, the identity of whom he could not disclose, just renewed its contract with them.
Another unique client is an institutional investor, with offices in New York and Dallas, that just formalized a new working relationship with Central Diligence over the last week to go beyond just underwriting and into the realm of funding and servicing. According to Hernandez, this client is looking to make investments in MCA at the higher end of the market.
“In our space, $50,000 to $250,000 is pretty easy to come by, but $250,000 to $1 million, not so much,” Hernandez said. “So they see that there’s a gap with small businesses…and they’re using us to do [due] diligence [on companies.]”
Finally, Central Diligence is finishing an agreement with another unconventional client, an overseas mortgage company with interest in MCA. According to Hernandez, it is looking to execute a kind of beta test in the U.S. and then take the business model to Europe if it works.
In addition to the four founding partners, who work as underwriters, there are four additional underwriters and two junior underwriters for a total of ten on staff.
Hernandez attributes these new opportunities to the reputation they have built in the MCA space, including the 10+ years of experience that each of the founding partners have.
“Because of our experience and history in the space, a lot of our relationships have been built because of our credibility,” Hernandez said. “That’s the most important.”
Minority-Owned Businesses Present Opportunities for Online Lenders
February 27, 2018
Research consistently shows that minority-owned businesses have a harder time accessing capital than other businesses. Online financing has the potential to change this.
Most of the online funding process is based on objective factors such as your business type and revenue. When you apply for funds online, it’s harder to discern things like the color of your skin or your ethnicity—factors which research shows can sometimes play into the face-to-face lending process, even though it’s illegal and immoral. What’s more, applying for funds online eliminates the stigma that keeps many minority-owned businesses from walking into a bank to apply for a loan, according to industry participants.
“Many minorities are hesitant to go into a bank,” says Louis Green, interim president of The National Minority Supplier Development Council, which provides business development opportunities for certified minority-owned businesses. He says the growth of online lending platforms will potentially open more doors for minority-owned businesses to get much-needed capital to operate and expand.
“The beauty of things on the Internet is that it has the ability to take away discriminatory issues,” says Green, who is also the chief executive of Supplier Success LLC, a Detroit-based business that offers online business financing solutions.
Certainly, minority-owned small businesses are a large and growing market. There were 8 million minority-owned firms in the U.S. as of 2012, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. Minority-owned firms represented 28.8% of all U.S. firms in 2012.
Historically, however, minority-owned businesses have had trouble getting access to credit for a host of reasons, and recent research suggests the problems persist.
A report published in November by the Federal Reserve Banks of Cleveland and Atlanta examines the results of an annual survey of small business owners. The report found that while many minority small businesses were profitable, a significant majority faced financial challenges, experienced funding gaps and relied on personal finances.
Some of the trouble obtaining financing may have discriminatory underpinnings. For instance, a recent working paper by researchers at Utah State University, Brigham Young University and Rutgers University, among others, suggests that minorities were more highly scrutinized for loans than other applicants. For instance, African American “mystery shoppers” underwent a higher level of scrutiny and received a lower level of assistance than their less-creditworthy Caucasian counterparts, according to the study.
Also, African American testers were asked significantly more often about their marital status and their spouse’s employment. This “marks another and even illegal differential experience for these minority entrepreneurial consumers compared with the Caucasian shoppers,” the study finds.
To be sure, other factors are also likely to blame. For instance, the average credit score of a minority small-business owner is 707, which is 15 points lower than the overall average for small-business owners in the U.S., according to a 2016 study by credit bureau Experian.
Even so, the bias issue remains a stark possibility in at least some cases. A 2010 report by the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) offers data to show that minority-owned firms are less likely to receive bank loans than non-minority-owned firms. Among all minority firms, 7.2 percent received a business loan from a bank compared with 12.0 percent of non-minority firms, according to the report. High sales minority-owned firms were more likely to receive bank loans with 23.3 percent receiving this source of startup capital. By contrast, 29.2 percent of high sales non-minority firms received bank loans, the data shows.
To be sure, it’s very difficult to prove discrimination when a bank loan is denied. A few years ago, a mortgage banker who asked not to be named, says he suspected discrimination when an Asian couple he worked with was denied a small bank loan. While he didn’t have rock solid proof, he felt the bank’s stated reasoning for turning down the loan was unjustified and he tried going to bat for the couple. His efforts were rebuffed, however, and the loan was denied.
Based on the size of the loan and the couple’s finances, the banker says the loan would have easily been approved by an online provider that was looking only at objective factors. “They see the numbers they’ve been given and calculate risk and make decisions based purely on numbers,” he says.
Indeed, this is where online lending has already shown significant potential. Alicia Robb, a research fellow at the Atlanta Federal Reserve who co-authored the November report by the Cleveland and Atlanta Federal Reserves, says when controlling for credit score and other business-related factors, the data shows that minority businesses have a better shot at getting loans approved online than they do at a large or small bank.
Industry participants say the online funding process can be a boon for minority business owners because it strips subjective reasoning out of the decision-making process. Instead of presenting themselves, applicants are presenting what their business looks like financially, and funders are making highly automated decisions based on the information provided.
“Humans make terrible decisions. The more you can eliminate human bias in the process the better,” says Kathryn Petralia, co-founder and president of Kabbage. She says 95 percent of the online lender’s customers have an entirely automated experience, which includes validating their identity using digital processes. “We never see a picture of them or know anything about their ethnicity or demography,” she says.
Even funders who do ask for photo identification say that doesn’t happen until after applicants have been approved. And even then, it’s just to “make sure that the person you are funding is actually the person you are funding and no one is trying to defraud you,” says Isaac D. Stern, chief executive of Yellowstone Capital LLC, a MCA funder in Jersey City, N.J. “Online financing is colorblind. It doesn’t matter if [you’re] white or Hispanic or black,” he says.
Dean Sioukas, chief executive of Magilla Loans, an online search engine that matches prospective borrowers and lenders, has hope that the anonymity of the online funding process could eventually make the off-line process more equitable for all applicants. After accepting a number of solid proposals from viable lending opportunities—without knowing any personal information about the applicant—his hope is that whatever biases a loan officer may previously have had will dissipate, he says. Funding decisions should only be made on objective criteria, he says. “The rest has no place in the process.”
While in theory online lending should improve access to funds for minority-owned businesses, several industry observers say barriers remain.
One major challenge is getting the news out to minority business owners, many of whom don’t know about the online funding opportunities that exist, says Lyneir Richardson, executive director of The Center for Urban Entrepreneurship and Economic Development, a research and practitioner-oriented center at Rutgers Business School in Newark, N.J.
He suggests online lenders and funders need to do a better job of connecting with minority-owned businesses and explaining what they have to offer. He works with about 300 entrepreneurs, 70 percent of whom are minority-owned businesses. He’s held this position for 10 years, but says he’s never been approached by an online lending company to market its services, speak at one of his events, provide funding advice to business owners or in any other capacity.
“There is an opportunity for online small business lenders to market and make known, particularly to minority business owners, that they have viable, market rate lending products that can help them grow,” he says.
One caveat is that rates online are often higher than traditional bank loans, so there is a trade-off for minority-owned businesses, says Brett Barkley, a senior research analyst in the community development department at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, who co-authored the November report.
Other research from the Federal Reserve shows that satisfaction levels were lowest at nonbank online lenders for both minority- and nonminority-owned firms compared with borrower satisfaction levels at small banks and large banks, he says. The satisfaction levels seem to be related to higher interest rates and “lack of transparency,” he adds. While the study doesn’t define the latter term, the findings could “point to confusion regarding the actual terms of the loan,” Barkley says.
Some online firms have taken steps to make pricing more transparent by using the SMART Box disclosure agreement, a comparison tool developed by the online lending industry to help small businesses more fully understand their financing options. There are currently three different versions of the SMART Box disclosure –for term loans, lines of credit, and merchant cash advances.
This “is a really important metric,” says Petralia of Kabbage, which offers the tool to customers.
Green, the interim president of NMSDC, says that helping its 12,000 minority-owned business members gain access to capital is a major goal for the organization. While online financing is still a largely “untapped resource” for minority businesses, it makes borrowing money easier and more appealing. “It holds great promise for minority-owned businesses, but I think the reality hasn’t met that promise yet,” he says.
Banks, Alt Funders Continue to Compete for Small Business
February 13, 2018
The alternative small-business finance industry owes its very existence to banks’ reluctance to lend money to mom-and-pop shopkeepers, tradespeople and restauranteurs, but bankers’ tight fists may be loosening. Small-business owners are reporting better results when they apply for bank loans.
In fact, small entrepreneurs succeeded in landing bank loans 37 percent of the time in the fourth quarter of 2017, up from 29 percent a year earlier, according to the 1,341 merchants surveyed for the most recent quarterly Private Capital Access Index report provided by Dun & Bradstreet and Pepperdine University’s Graziadio School of Business and Management.
“That’s a big change. It’s outside the margin of error and outside normal statistical variation,” Craig R. Everett, assistant professor of finance at Pepperdine and director of the Graziadio and Dun & Bradstreet Private Capital Markets Project, tells AltFinanceDaily. He’s comparing the shift to patterns established in the nearly six years the quarterly index has pegged small-business trends.
But the effects of bankers’ increased willingness to lend to small businesses may prove a bit muted in the alternative funding industry. That’s partly because Pepperdine and Dun & Bradstreet define small businesses as having up to $5 million in annual revenue. Alt funders often deal with much smaller enterprises that could still fail to capture the attention of bank loan officers, says Noah Grayson, managing director of South End Capital in Encino, Calif. “If you’re making $5 million in gross revenue, that’s a pretty robust business,” he says of his clients.
Then there are the borrowers whose companies seem small in that they employ just a few people but might rake in $5 million on a single contract – like contractors who specialize in heavy construction equipment or have a presence in the aviation business – but aren’t profitable enough to qualify for bank loans, says Gene Ayzenberg, CEO of PledgeCap, a company with offices on Long Island and in Manhattan that specializes in business and personal loans secured by collateral.
Besides, lots of alternative lenders don’t regard gross revenue as the measure of a business. “I would look at what kind of resources and infrastructure the business has to define what is small and medium-sized,” says David Obstfeld, CEO of New York-based SOS Capital. Many alt lenders cite the importance of net over gross.
The size of prospective borrowers aside, banks are probably lending to small merchants more often these days because small businesses are becoming more profitable in today’s relatively healthy business climate and thus stand a better chance of qualifying for credit, Everett says. The recent reduction in corporate taxes will also improve profits and make small businesses more credit-worthy, he says.
The change in bank lending volume seems tied to those financial gains and doesn’t appear to be linked to any shift in policy among bankers, Everett notes. But new policies at the Small Business Administration could prompt the banking community to view small-business loans more favorably, according to Grayson. The SBA is increasing the percentage it guarantees for some loans and reducing the amount required for a down payment on some loans, he notes. That could make life more difficult for some alternative lenders because most of the small-business loans made by major banks, like Wells Fargo and Chase, are SBA loans, he says. The SBA did not provide details regarding the changes by press time.
Regardless of what’s making banks loosen their grip on the purse strings, merchants are feeling more optimistic – or at least less gloomy – about obtaining bank loans in the near term, the study by Pepperdine and Dunn & Bradstreet indicates. In the fourth quarter of last year, 55 percent of small-business owners predicted difficulty in raising financing in the next six months, down from 61 percent a year earlier, the survey shows.
“That’s an improvement, but I still think it’s an alarmingly high number,” Ayzenberg says of those findings. “Before they even start worrying about how their operations are going and how good their product is, one in two businesses is already worrying that their bank is not going to be able to fulfill their needs. They shouldn’t have to have those fears.”
So, banks are becoming a bit more likely to loan to small businesses but still aren’t throwing open the flood gates to create a flood of funding. That’s true of banks that qualify as large and those classified as small.
American banks tend to be either small community institutions or huge national concerns that are swallowing up the remaining mid-sized regional banks, observers agree. Between 80 and 90 banks control assets of $10 billion or more and thus qualify as large, while thousands of small banks have more limited resources, says David O’Connell, an Aite Group senior analyst.
Large and small banks exhibit about the same degree of ambivalence toward small-business loans. Banks can mitigate the downside of the loans because they have funds to hire staffs and buy technology to analyze risk, O’Connell says. Executives at small banks can avoid potential problems with small-business loans because they’re often dealing with prospective borrowers who were their high school or college classmates, he notes.
Whether banks are large or small, they have their reasons to deny loans to small businesses. Perhaps foremost among the rationales for denying loans to small businesses is the cost of underwriting, says O’Connell. Banks simply can’t make enough money on the loans to pay the cost of processing them, he says, adding that, “It’s a long-standing problem.” For example, a bank can make a profit by loaning $2 million at prime plus 2 percent, but can’t cover the underwriting costs of an $80,000 loan that also earns prime plus 2 percent. The underwriting costs would be the same in both cases, he notes.
Banks became even more ambivalent about loaning to small businesses after the Great Recession struck in 2008, O-Connell continues. They didn’t want to repeat the mistakes of the freewheeling period that preceded the economic catastrophe. About the same time, private equity and hedge funds began madding more capital available to alternative lenders, he says. Meanwhile, technology and alternative data sets helped the alternative industry understand risk and reduce underwriting costs, he maintains.
Banks also find it more expensive to loan to small businesses these days because the Dodd-Frank Act has increased compliance costs, Everett points out. “Red tape and reserve requirements for the banks have all increased under Dodd-Frank, so making loans to small businesses is less cost-effective than it was before.” Banks now need upwards of $1 billion in assets under management to remain viable, and they feel compelled to expand their staffs to follow all the new rules for lending, he says.
What’s more, bankers still exercise extreme caution when it comes to extending credit to small businesses because stores or restaurants often fail and then the business or the owner defaults on the loan, Everett says. That’s why banks often require business-loan applicants to demonstrate two years of profitability to qualify for credit, he notes. Higher interest that can mitigate that risk, but state usury laws often capping rates at 36 percent or less, Everett notes. New York, for example, limits banks to 16 percent, he says.
State usury laws don’t apply to factoring or merchant cash advances, and that enables alternative funders to charge more for the use of funds, Everett says. “If it’s not called a loan and what the customer is paying is not called interest, then it’s not subject to state usury laws,” he says.
Obstfeld puts it this way: “In would be great to be in a business where nobody defaults. The rates we charge at SOS Capital are necessary to cover our losses and be profitable at the same time.”
The high cost of obtaining funds in the alternative market could eventually prompt the federal government to intervene with regulation but that probably won’t happen anytime soon, Everett predicts. O’Connell agrees, noting that in the current political climate the government has little appetite for new restrictions on a major source of capital for thousands of small businesses.
Because alternative funders have greater flexibility than banks in how much they can charge for access to credit, banks have sometimes formed referral relationships with alt funders to hand off small-business borrowers. “That looks good on paper and makes great headlines, but it’s harder to do in real life,” O’Connell maintains, because the bank loses control of the customer experience. If the alt funder doesn’t manage customers’ expectations effectively, the bank might have to take the blame – at least in some consumers’ minds, he contends. He’s surveyed bankers and found them feeling “really mixed” about such partnerships.
The impact of such partnerships hasn’t been as great as some anticipated. “We were quite nervous when we heard that JPMorgan would be using OnDeck’s platform,” recalls Obstfeld. “However, it’s been quite some time that they’ve been doing that and it hasn’t seemed to make a dent – at all – in alternative lending.”
But alternative funders can provide borrowers with advantages that banks can’t match. Some alternative lenders can approve a client’s application in a few hours and wire funds to the recipient the same day, Grayson says. Steve Hauptman, chief operating officer at SOS Capital, notes that banks can require weeks or even months to respond to an application.
That’s why SOS Capital customers sometimes obtains funding from the company as a bridge to keep operating while they’re waiting for an SBA bank loan or to take advantage of an opportunity that requires a quick response, Obstfeld says.
The advantages of the alternative funding industry don’t end there. SBA bank loans require more paperwork than is needed for a merchant cash advance, which can slow the process even further as the client assembles the documentation, Obstfeld notes.
In addition, banks can simply seem slow to respond to the needs of the market. “Banks are banks – they’re never going to be able to do the things we can do,” says Obstfeld. “If one product becomes an issue, we can pivot and create new product tomorrow. It takes banks years to get approval for something new.”
Then there are cards. Besides an increase in banks’ willingness to lend to small businesses, merchants are finding it easier to obtain business credit cards, the index provided by Pepperdine and Dun & Bradstreet finds. In the fourth quarter of last year, 65 percent of survey respondents applied successfully for cards, compared with 51 percent in the corresponding period a year earlier.
Easier access to credit cards might not make merchants less likely to apply for loans, Everett says. “Usually, credit cards are a backup plan,” he notes. “They’re the poor man’s line of credit. It’s a very high interest rate.” Most businesses would prefer to open a line of credit from a bank with a lower interest rate. Many cardholders use cards only for travel expenses or to ease short-term cash-flow issues, he says.
Finding the right credit card poses a challenge, even for those who are adept at online searches, says Grayson of South End Capital. In addition, many business credit cards carry a low spending limit. A business might qualify for a $5,000 credit limit on the card but could receive a $50,000 loan, he adds. “A card generally doesn’t fill their needs,” he declares.
Others have a slightly different view of business cards. “Once you get approved, it’s easy money,” Obstfeld says of business credit cards. However, cards can’t finance some of the actions that cash from merchant cash advances can cover, such as buying out a partner or opening a second location, he notes.
Moreover, the fact that competitors exist – whether they’re banks, card issuers or other alternative lenders – doesn’t necessarily threaten existing alt funders, according to Hauptman. Remember that banks and alternative lenders aren’t offering the same products, he says. Those products, such as bank loans, factoring and merchant cash advances, each have advantages and disadvantages, which prompt merchants to pursue the vehicles that are right for them, he says.
Having banks and nonbanks in the mix can even prove complementary, too. Pumping more funds into the small-business economy from any source can result in a healthier environment that offers more opportunities for all, Ayzenberg says.
The real danger resides not so much from direct competition but rather from failing to keep pace with the alternative lending industry’s introduction of new products, falling behind in the quest to speed up the decision-making process granting funding or neglecting to obtain technology that eases the application process, Grayson says.
In one recent development, some alternative lenders aren’t reviewing credit histories, he notes. Instead they look just at deposits and can extend credit based just on that, Grayson notes. That’s somewhat like a merchant cash advance, but it’s offered at single-digit rates and on favorable terms, he says. “A lot of lenders are making it very simple for borrowers to get money now,” he continues, concluding that alt funding firms that can’t afford to make such improvements probably can’t remain in business.
Though some players will inevitably disappear, the alternative small-business funding industry in general seems likely to survive so long as banks remain reticent about lending to small businesses – the situation that gave rise to the alternative industry in the first place.





























