The LendIt Story
February 12, 2017
The LendIt Conference was supposed to be a smallish local meetup for New York-based members of the online lending community. But founders Jason Jones and Bo Brustkern soon discovered they had the makings of a big annual industrywide national convention. And before long, they found themselves replicating their successful American show on other continents.
To understand how the trade show was born and how it’s matured, flash back about seven years. In 2010, Jones and Brustkern were putting together venture capital deals when they happened onto the fledgling peer-to-peer lending movement. “Consumer credit was something we weren’t all that knowledgeable about, but we could see the market was large,” recalls Jones. “There was a clear opportunity that was structural in the market, and there were stable, consistent returns.” So the two of them launched one of the first P2P funds.
Their lending business soon took off, but Jones and Brustkern felt they were working in a void. The industry lacked community, and they decided to do something about it. Jones contacted his friend, Dara Albright, who had been organizing a series of crowdfunding conferences for Wall Street starting in mid 2011.
To heighten the credibility of the new confab, Jones, Brustkern and Albright decided to seek the help of Peter Renton. They didn’t know Renton personally but considered him “the voice of the industry,” Jones says. Renton had nurtured and sold off two printing businesses and used the proceeds to take up online lending as a hobby. He had also launched the Lend Academy in 2010 to teach the world about peer-to-peer lending. Somehow, he had also found the time to develop a following for himself as a blogger.
In early January of 2013, Jones and Albright cold-called Renton to gauge his interest in putting on a show. As fate would have it, Renton had just made a New Year’s resolution to launch a conference for lenders and was receptive to joining up. Together, they put a plan in action.
The originators put up their own money and worked together daily from January to June of 2013, when the first show convened. They secured space that would contain 220 people and calculated their break-even point as 200 attendees. “This was never intended to be a profitable enterprise,” Jones says of those early days. “This was something we all wanted to do for the community. We thought that if we wanted it, others would want it.”
More than 400 people registered for that first conference. “We had a line literally out the door,” Jones notes. “We had to shut off registration. We ended up squeezing about 375 people into that first event. It was completely shocking to us.” From the beginning, attendees came from all over the world. “That’s when I learned China had a P2P industry,” Jones says.
After the initial event, Jones, Brustkern and Renton formed a unified company. Renton brought in Lend Academy, while Jones and Brustkern added their investment fund. The conference also became part of the united company. Ever since, a holding company has owned all three businesses. Dara went on to launch Fintech Revolution TV and continues to support LendIt.
From the initial attendance of 375, the U.S. conference grew to 975 attendees in 2014, 2,500 in 2015, 3,500 in 2016 and a projected 5,000 for this year. About 33 percent of attendees come from the fintech industry, 23 percent are investors, 23 percent are service providers, 14 percent are banks and 2 percent come from government, the media and other backgrounds, Jones says. At first, many of the attendees come from the ranks of CEOs and managing partners, but that’s changing as the industry comes to view the conference as an annual convention where lower-ranking members of an organization can learn about the business, he notes.
Meanwhile, the exhibition floor is becoming an increasingly important component of the show. The gathering attracted 18 exhibitors in 2013, followed by 47 in 2014, 112 in 2015, 177 last year and an expected 210 this year. “We’re transforming from a conference-led event to an expo-led event,” Jones says. This year, exhibitor booths will occupy a 120,000 square-foot hall in New York’s Jacob K. Javits Convention Center.
The U.S. LendIt conferences alternate between San Francisco and New York City, renting larger spaces as the show has grown, Jones explains. Two years ago, the gathering seemed cramped in the gigantic New York Marriott Marquis near Times Square, he says, necessitating this year’s move to the Javits Center. Javits is designed for conventions with at least 10,000 attendees so the show is a little small for that venue, he admits. But the facility could become LendIt’s long-time New York home as growth continues, he predicts.
Jones traces some of the growth in exhibitors to the expansion of the fintech industry. “You have a meeting of the start-ups with the more traditional players who are rethinking their businesses and how to apply the new technology that’s being developed into their businesses,” he says.
Conferences that compete with LendIt in the fintech category are proliferating because of the nature of industry, in Jones’ view. As soon as fintech companies are launched, the internet quickly makes them national or even international in scope, he says. At the same time, the anonymity of cyberspace creates a need for gatherings that provide face-to-face meetings, he maintains. “They live online,” he says. “The spend their year online so there is a need for a convention to meet with their peers, their clients, their service-providers, their customers, their suppliers. There is a need for that physical connection.”
The increase in fintech conferences is also driven by content-related companies that provide articles on fintech innovation. Those sites have regarded conferences as money-makers that complement their journalistic endeavors, Jones says. For example, TechCrunch, an online publisher of technology industry news, puts on the TechCrunch Disrupt conferences in San Francisco, New York City, London and Beijing. In another example, Business Insider conducts the IGNITION conference.
Those forces – the internet, globalization and web-based publishing – are making themselves felt in the convention business in general, not just in fintech, Jones notes. Event-related companies trade at roughly 12 times EBITDA (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization), he says, characterizing the convention business as “a very healthy category of our economy.”
Still, the fintech field’s crowded with more than 30 conferences, but LendIt is succeeding because of its early start and an emphasis on community, according to Jones. “We come from the industry,” he contends. “People are happy with what we can produce. They love our content so they come to learn.” Because the conference has become established, the media outlets focus on covering it, which encourages businesses to use it as a stage for introducing products or announcing mergers and acquisitions, he maintains.
Jones views LendIt and Money20/20 as the largest pure-play fintech conferences. The latter, which attracts 11,000 attendees, focuses on payments and contains a “layer” of fintech, while LendIt specializes in lending and likewise offers a “layer” of fintech, he says. Payments and lending represent the two biggest categories in fintech, so the structure of the shows makes sense, he suggests. By chance, Money20/20 occurs in the fall and LendIt takes place in spring, creating what he considers a “nice balance” that encourages prospective attendees to go to both shows.
Finovate holds a rival fintech conference that focuses more narrowly on innovation than do the LendIt and Money20/20 shows, Jones says. A competing bank securitization conference offers information on lending but doesn’t address fintech in great detail, he says.
While LendIt has been coming of age in the U.S., it’s also gained siblings in Shanghai and London. The Chinese edition of the show, which made its debut in 2014, ranks as the largest fintech show in Asia. The Chinese fintech market has grown to at least five times the size of any other market in the world, and it’s home to four of the world’s five largest fintech companies, Jones says. “We were completely blown away,” he says of learning about the industry during a visit to China.
Despite the language barrier and the challenges of dealing with an unfamiliar culture, LendIt has managed to prosper in China. Through a joint venture with a local financial think tank, LendIt helped produce annual Chinese events known as the Bund Summit for two years with attendance capped at 500. For the third year, LendIt parted ways with its partner and recast the show as a larger event. After the change, the confab, now called the Lang Di Fintech Conference, attracted 1,200 attendees, making it China’s largest. “There’s a ton of future opportunity,” Jones predicts of the China endeavor. “We want to be the annual convention for the Chinese fintech industry.”
Although it’s difficult to set up operations in China, cooperation has prevailed there in at least some areas. “The government has been quite supportive,” Jones says of of Chinese officials. “They appreciate what we’re trying to do there.” In January, LendIt launched its Chinese language daily news feed.
Thousands of miles away, the European-based LendIt confab ranks second in size on that continent only to the European version of Money20/20, Jones says. Attendance at the London-based LendIt show numbered 450 in 2014, which was its initial year. It climbed to 800 in 2015 and reached 925 last year.
Putting on the European event requires much less effort than the Asian version because it’s almost an extension of the U.S. original, he says. It’s dominated by firms from the United Kingdom but draws a smattering of companies from other European nations. Crossing borders presents challenges for European fintech companies, which keeps the industry’s companies smaller there than in the U.S. and China, but that may change, he believes. “There’s a lot of innovation there, but they still have a ways to go,” he says.
To handle its far-flung operations, LendIt relies on 20 full-time employees, 11 contractors and 10 people working in a joint venture in China for a total of 41 staff members. “These events are incredibly large shows, and we constantly feel understaffed,” Jones says. That feeling prevails despite recent additions to the staff, he notes.
And additional opportunity beckons in myriad locations. “The challenge is, do you have a bunch of conferences all over the world, or do you do a beachhead and pull people to those three events?” Jones wonders aloud when asked about the future. “For the moment, we have made the strategic decision to stick with these three events and go deeper with them. But there are so many opportunities all around the world. We’re constantly being asked to come to different countries.” Then, too, LendIt could convene smaller, one-day events around the glove as feeders to the three main conventions, he allows. “That’s something we’re batting around now.”
The established two-day conferences could also grow into three-day affairs – but not right away, Jones suggests. “We’re totally running out of time,” he says of trying to cram in all the speakers and exhibitors that LendIt would like to present. Stretching the format could create conflicts because some participants attend other events immediately before or after LendIt.
Notable LendIt speakers have included Larry Summers, who’s served as Harvard president and U.S. Treasury Secretary; Karen Mills, former administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration; John Williams, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco; and Peter Thiel, venture capitalist and member of the Trump transition team. This year, attendees can look forward to meeting the robot that represents Watson, the IBM computer. Watson will take the stage to field questions about fintech. For Jones, however, creating a conference isn’t just about the big-name speakers be they human or mechanical. “People who are lesser-known can be really fascinating,” he says.
Whoever handles the speaking duties, the LendIt Conference executives vow that they’re in it for the long run as the fintech industry’s annual convention during both boom times and economic slumps. As Jones puts it: “We want to be a reflection of our industry.”
What Shakeout? Breakout Capital Secures $25 Million Credit Facility
February 8, 2017
Put a tally up on the board for small business lenders in 2017. McClean, VA-based Breakout Capital, which just announced a move into a larger office last week, has also secured a $25 million credit facility with Drift Capital Partners. Drift is an alternative asset management company.
Breakout is young by today’s industry standards, founded only two years ago by former investment banker Carl Fairbank, who is the company’s CEO. And don’t count them out just because they’re not in New York or San Francisco. Washington DC’s Virginia suburbs have become somewhat of a hotspot for fintech lenders. OnDeck, Fundation, StreetShares and QuarterSpot all have offices there, Fairbank points out. “And Capital One is right up the street,” he adds while explaining that the community has a strong talent pool that is familiar with creative lending. Breakout has already grown to about 20 employees and they’re still growing, he says.
Fairbank considers Breakout to be a more upmarket lender, whose repertoire includes serving the near-prime, mid-prime customer. CAN Capital and Dealstruck had focused on this area and both companies stopped funding new business in 2016. As I point this out, I ask if that suggests that segment is perhaps too difficult to make work.
“Candidly, that’s the part of the market that I feel the best about,” he says matter of factly. The company tries to product-fit deals based on the borrower, and will even make monthly-payment based loans. “I think the subprime side with the stacking and the debt settlement companies is a very very difficult place to play right now,” he says, adding that they have worked with subprime borrowers using their original bridge program but that they’ve kind of pulled back from doing those. As with all programs regardless, their goal is to graduate merchants into better or less costly products later on. We have helped merchants move on to get SBA loans, he maintains.
That all sounds very hands on, and part of it is, Fairbank confirms while asserting that technology does indeed do a lot of the legwork. “There’s absolutely a human element to underwriting these deals,” he says. He also agrees with much of what RapidAdvance chairman Jeremy Brown wrote in a AltFinanceDaily op-ed titled, The New Normal. Both Breakout and RapidAdvance refer to themselves as technology-enabled lenders, an acknowledgement that tech is a component of the company, not the entire company itself.
“I think we will see the beginning of the demise of fully automated, no manual touch funding,” Brown wrote in his article.
Brown also predicted that the legal system will ultimately impose order on some industry practices like stacking or that a state like New York could take a public policy interest in products he believes have legal flaws. As he was writing that, Governor Cuomo’s office published a budget proposal that redefined what it means to make a loan in the state. And it leaves much to be desired, some sources contend. Two attorneys at Hudson Cook, LLP, for example, published an analysis that demonstrates how its wording is ambiguous and far-reaching.
“What they really need to do is take the time to think through the implications and basically do a full study of the market to ensure that what they’re pushing forward is going to have the desired consequences,” Breakout’s Fairbank offers on the matter.
This doesn’t mean he’s anti-regulation. The company already holds itself to high standards and customer suitability and is a founding member of the Coalition for Responsible Business Finance.
“I personally do believe that there’s bad forms of lending or cash advances in the market and I’m sure that’s what Cuomo thinks as well but at the same time, it’s getting pushed very quickly and they really really ought to step back and do the research to understand the broader implications and to understand what exactly they’re trying to accomplish,” he maintains.
His pragmatism extends to the OCC’s proposed limited fintech charter, which he finds intriguing, assuming it gets buttoned up. “I believe it’s a concept worth pursuing,” he says, explaining that regulators will need to get comfortable with unsecured lending.
In the meantime, he’s optimistic about Breakout’s prospects. “In a time when institutional appetite for alternative finance companies has dried up, we believe our ability to raise a credit facility in this market speaks volumes about what we have already accomplished, our position as a leading player in the space, and our prospects for strong, but measured, growth,” Fairbank is quoted as saying in a company announcement. The company was also invited and joined the Task Force for the PLUM Initiative, a collaboration between the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Milken Institute to more effectively provide capital to minority-owned businesses throughout the United States. The Task Force consists of a very select group of industry leaders, who are in positions to improve access to capital in underserved markets, according to the announcement.
While other companies are making adjustments or in his opinion, continuing to make questionable underwriting decisions, Fairbank thinks his formula for success works. “I think that we do look at deals differently than most folks because I intentionally built the core of my underwriting team with folks who are not from this space so they take a more traditional approach and mix it with some of the greatest aspects of alternative finance.”
Analysis: New York’s Lender/Broker Licensing Proposal
February 7, 2017
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s proposed budget includes a legislative proposal to “allow the Department of Financial Services (“DFS”) to better regulate the business practices of online lenders.”1 This legislation, which would amend Section 340 of the Banking Law, could have a dramatic impact on lending and brokering loans to New York businesses, as such lenders would have to obtain licenses to engage in business-purpose lending and could only charge rates and fees expressly permitted under New York law.2 It may impact the secondary market for merchant cash advances. If passed, the licensing requirements will take effect January 1, 2018.
The proposed law would amend NY Banking Law § 340 to require anyone “engaging in the business of making loans” of $50,000 or less for business or commercial purposes to obtain a license. The term “engaging in the business of making loans” means a person who solicits loans and, in connection with the solicitation, makes loans; purchases or otherwise acquires from others loans or other forms of financing; or arranges or facilitates the funding of loans to businesses located or doing business in New York.
Although the proposed law would require a license only for a person who “solicits” loans and makes, purchases or arranges loans, the DFS takes the position that the licensing law (as currently enacted) applies broadly and that “out-of-State entities making loans to New York consumers . . . are required to obtain a license from the Banking Department.”3 As a result, there is probably no exemption from licensing for a person who does not “solicit” loans in New York.
The potential impact of the legislation is significant.
Potential Impact on Lenders:
Licensing Required and Most Fees Prohibited. New York law already requires a lender to obtain a license to make a business or commercial loan to individuals (sole proprietors) of $50,000 or less if the interest rate on the loan exceeds 16% per year, inclusive of fees. The proposed law would require any person who makes a loan of $50,000 or less to any type of business entity and at any interest rate to obtain a license. And a licensed lender is governed by New York lending law that regulates refunds of interest upon prepayment;4 and significantly limits most fees that a lender can charge to a borrower, including prohibiting charging a borrower for broker fees or commissions and origination fees.5
Essentially, the DFS will regulate lenders who originate loans to businesses of $50,000 or less in the same manner as consumer loans of less than $25,000. The proposed law would exempt a lender that makes isolated or occasional loans to businesses located or doing business in New York.
Potential Effect on Choice-of-Law. The proposed law could lead courts to reject contractual choice-of-law provisions that select the law of another state when lending to New York businesses. With new licensing requirements and limits on loans to businesses, a court could reasonably find that New York has a fundamental public policy of protecting businesses from certain loans, and decline to enforce a choice-of-law clause designating the law of the other state as the law that governs a business-purpose loan agreement.
For example, the holding of Klein v. On Deck6 might have come out differently if New York licensed and regulated business loans at the time the court decided it. In the Klein case, a business borrower sued On Deck claiming that its loan was usurious under New York law. The loan contract included the following choice-of-law provision:
“[O]ur relationship including this Agreement and any claim, dispute or controversy (whether in contract, tort, or otherwise) at any time arising from or relating to this Agreement is governed by, and this Agreement will be construed in accordance with, applicable federal law and (to the extent not preempted by federal law) Virginia law without regard to internal principles of conflict of laws. The legality, enforceability and interpretation of this Agreement and the amounts contracted for, charged and reserved under this Agreement will be governed by such laws. Borrower understands and agrees that (i) Lender is located in Virginia, (ii) Lender makes all credit decisions from Lender's office in Virginia, (iii) the Loan is made in Virginia (that is, no binding contract will be formed until Lender receives and accepts Borrower's signed Agreement in Virginia) and (iv) Borrower's payments are not accepted until received by Lender in Virginia.”
The court concluded that this contract language showed that the parties intended Virginia law to apply. However, the court also considered whether the application of Virginia law offended New York public policy. The court compared Virginia law governing business loans against New York law governing business loans, and decided that the two states had relatively similar approaches. As a result, the court found that upholding the Virginia choice-of-law contract provision did not offend New York public policy.
The loan amount in the Klein case was above the $50,000 threshold for regulated loans in the proposed New York law, so this exact case would not have been affected. However, the court’s analysis in the Klein case would have been the same for loans of $50,000 or less. Accordingly, the new law could cause a New York court to reject a contractual choice-of-law provision.
Effect on Bank-Originated Loans. This proposed law apparently would not directly affect loans made by banks that are not subject to licensing under the statute.7 But, the law would require non-banks that offer business-purpose lending platforms that partner with FDIC-insured banks to obtain a license to “solicit” loans. And, it is possible, that the DFS could later, by regulation or examination, prohibit such licensees from soliciting loans at rates higher than permitted under New York law.
Potential Impact on Merchant Cash Advance Companies:
The proposed law imposes a license requirement if a person “purchases or otherwise acquires from others loans or other forms of financing.” New York law does not define the term “other forms of financing.” However, the DFS may consider merchant cash advance transactions to be a regulated transaction for which licensing is required.
As written, only purchasing or acquiring other forms of financing, such as a merchant cash advance, might require a license. As a result, the proposed law only has the potential for affecting the sale and syndication of merchant cash advances. It is unclear whether buying only a portion of a merchant cash advance, or “participation” could require a license, or if only purchasing the entire obligation could require a license.
Potential Impact on Brokers:
Because the new law would require a license to “arrange or facilitate” a business loan of $50,000 or less, ISOs and loan brokers would need a license. As mentioned above, a licensed lender is prohibited from charging broker fees or commissions. It is not clear at the moment whether an ISO or loan broker could contract directly with the borrower for a commission.8
1 See https://www.budget.ny.gov/pubs/executive/eBudget1718/fy18artVIIbills/TEDArticleVII.pdf, page 243. Although not discussed in this article, the proposal would also impose new licensing requirements on certain consumer lenders.
2 A licensed lender may impose a rate in excess of the 16% civil usury limit in New York, but is still subject to the 25% criminal usury limit. See, New York Banking Law § 351(1) and New York Penal Law § 190.40.
3 See http://www.dfs.ny.gov/legal/interpret/lo991206.htm The term “solicitation” of a loan includes any solicitation, request or inducement to enter into a loan made by means of or through a direct mailing, television or radio announcement or advertisement, advertisement in a newspaper, magazine, leaflet or pamphlet distributed within this state, or visual display within New York, whether or not such solicitation, request or inducement constitutes an offer to enter into a contract. NY Banking Law § 355.
4 NY Banking Law § 351(5).
5 NY Banking Law § 351(6).
6 Klein v. On Deck Capital, Inc., 2015 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2231 (June 24, 2015).
7 See NY Banking Law § 14-a; 3 NY ADC 4; NY Gen. Oblig. Law § 5-501.
8 See NY Gen. Oblig. Law § 5-531 that limits fees that brokers can charge on non-mortgage loans to not more than 50 cents per $100 loaned.
Katherine C. Fisher is a partner in the Hanover, MD office of Hudson Cook, LLP. Kate can be reached at 410-782-2356 or by email at kfisher@hudco.com.
Confessions of a Fintech Chief Data Scientist
January 8, 2017
My name is Justin Dickerson. For most of 2016, I was the Chief Data Scientist at Snap Advances (Snap), a funding company of merchant cash advances based in Salt Lake City, Utah. I can’t discuss my awesome work at Snap for obvious reasons. And fortunately, I don’t need to in order to make the key points I want to convey through this article. That’s because I’ve also been a senior level data scientist at two other companies, and I’m also a well-regarded statistician who holds one of the most prestigious credentials offered by the American Statistical Association.
One discovery over the past year prompted me to start collecting my thoughts for this article. I was looking at the financial performance of On Deck Capital (the largest company in the alternative fintech industry which is also publicly traded) through the first nine months of 2016 relative to the same period in 2015. Gross revenue increased more than $22 million while net income for the same period fell nearly $50 million. I’m not an accountant, but that doesn’t sound good to me. And let’s face it, this fact doesn’t surprise anyone in our industry, especially given what’s happening at CAN Capital. But one interesting and overlooked fact is worth considering. According to my Linkedin search, there were between 30 and 40 data scientists (all levels) working for On Deck Capital during the same time period in which they lost $50 million. So, not only does On Deck Capital lose a lot of money, it appears they need a lot of intellectual horsepower to figure out how to do so.
And here we are today. We’re looking at an industry full of companies trying to navigate the abyss of hyper-aggressive originators and spiraling default rates. If you’re a Chief Data Scientist for one of these companies, you’re undoubtedly feeling the heat from your management team. The problem is simple. How do you grow your business (or even stabilize it) in an environment where you have to take too many uncomfortable risks? We’ll ignore the fact this question has plagued much larger industries for many years (e.g., trying to compete against Wal Mart in the retail space). Boards of Directors in alternative fintech have short memories and believe this is a unique problem to their industry and era. As a result, data scientists are at a premium as they’re seen as key players in how to resolve this crisis and steer their companies to safe harbors. Well, here is my opinion. They’re dead wrong, and here is why.
Data Scientists Are Tactical, not Strategic
This statement may end up being the most controversial thing said in the data science industry this year. But let me make my case. Of those 30-40 data scientists working for On Deck Capital, more than 80% of them have a Master’s degree in a field of study synonymous with data science. Specifically, many of them attended Columbia University’s Master’s degree program in Operations Research. The four required courses for that degree are: Optimization Models and Methods, Introduction to Probability and Statistics, Stochastic Models, and Simulation. From there, students can choose from one of six concentrations (all but one of which are targeted toward quantitative methods). Further, students selected for this program already have highly refined quantitative skills as demonstrated by the pre-requisite courses for admission (e.g., multivariate calculus, linear algebra, etc.). So, in essence, the program takes really smart quantitative people (quants) and makes them even smarter quants, while sprinkling in 6 elective courses which may or may not provide an opportunity to learn something about the “real” world of business.
Make no mistake, the students attracted to programs such as these generally aren’t the professionals you send to meet with investors and pitch them on new strategic directions for a company. They are the professionals who sit in cubicles and spend their days writing code. They are experts in programming languages such as R, Python, Java, Scala, and many others. Ironically, they are enslaved to similar rules which govern the same supervised machine learning algorithms they create each day. They aren’t allowed to “get out of the box” and see the “forest through the trees.” If I’m portraying them as a bit robotic, that’s intentional on my part.
I don’t want to leave the impression data scientists can’t think for themselves. Specifically, those who earn a PhD are known to have such skills and are often praised for their abilities to rise above the technical chains of their existence and offer strategic direction to an organization. But they are few and far between in the data science factory found deep in the bowels of companies like On Deck Capital. Instead, more and more alternative fintech companies seek out the same “cookie-cutter” data scientist who can check off the same boxes on the hiring list. This means the data scientist role is relegated to a part of the company lacking diversity of thought, creativity, and the organizational respect needed to save a company from itself.
The Law of Diminishing Returns
One of the most intelligent questions asked of me within the alternative fintech industry was, “do we really have enough data to justify so many data scientists?” As a Chief Data Scientist, you always want to answer that question with an emphatic, “YES!” Even better, you may tell your management team you need even more data scientists to make a “real and lasting contribution to the company.” After all, the existence of your team depends on it. But when you’re away from the management team and thinking about the structure of your department, the honest Chief Data Scientist knows the company is at risk of experiencing the law of diminishing returns.
All of us can recognize the law of diminishing returns from our freshman year Economics course. In short, it’s the concept of achieving less than a one to one relationship between an additional unit of input relative to the resulting measured output. For example, the reduction in default rate for a financial product is hardly ever proportional to the number of data scientists employed by the company to predict default rates. In fact, I would argue once you have more than two or three data scientists, even the largest organizations would have a difficult time justifying the payroll investment based on proportional gains in default rate management.
So, why do companies like On Deck Capital have so many data scientists? I believe it’s more akin to the comfort food we all like to eat in the winter. There is hardly anything as satisfying as my grandmother’s homemade chili during a cold Utah night. And the more of it I get, the warmer I feel! The problem is the chill of winter eventually fades and the light of day shone on financial statements eventually begs the question of whether we’ve simply eaten too much.
Make no mistake, NO organization needs endless amounts of data scientists to be successful. In fact, I would argue two or three excellent data scientists armed with superior data science/machine learning platform technology such as those offered by IBM, Microsoft, or DataRobot is more than enough to guide an organization to success. The key when thinking about staffing a data science department is to think in terms of credibility. If I have three data scientists each armed with PhD training, 15 years of industry experience, and the tools (such as a great machine learning platform) to do the mundane parts of data science usually done by legions of Master’s degree data scientists, am I more credible in the organization than I am with 30 quants who all grew up in an economy where nothing bad ever happened to financial institutions? If you want your data scientists to help your organization, you’ve got to be willing to let them into the board room and present digestible recommendations for action. So the question becomes, do I have a team that is credible enough to meet such a standard?
The Supremacy of Domain Expertise
I learned a lot during my time as a Chief Data Scientist. Since leaving Snap, I’ve established two companies. The first is Crossfold Analytics. This is my data science consulting company. We only serve the fintech industry and we spend most of our time building real-time machine learning prediction services for small to mid-sized fintech companies. And I think we’re darn good at it! The second company is Crossfold Capital. This is my independent sales organization (ISO) focusing on merchant cash advance, business loan, and factoring products. It was when I established Crossfold Capital that I learned the most valuable lesson of all about data science in alternative fintech. Nothing will ever replace the experience of working in the trenches of the business (what I call “domain” expertise). In alternative fintech, this is generally working within the trenches of a sales organization. If I could go back in time and start over as Chief Data Scientist at Snap, I would start my job by underwriting files and selling merchant cash advances for a month. Absolutely nothing I learned in math, statistics, or any quantitative subject can replace what I’ve learned running my own ISO in just the past two months. I wish every alternative fintech company would adopt a training program for data scientists that allowed them to spend their first month in the field calling on clients and working with potential customers. If you understand the business, you can bring immeasurable value to your company by blending that understanding with your technical skills as a data scientist. I truly believe such an approach could take the power of a data scientist and magnify it three-fold. Otherwise, you end up having a rogue department of quants that people in the trenches of the business either don’t understand or don’t trust.
My Recommendation to Alternative Fintech Companies
Based on what I’ve learned as an alternative fintech data science professional, I would make three recommendations to all companies in our industry. First, hire diverse talent. It’s imperative a data scientist knows enough about coding to be effective at building predictive models. But I would trade extensive coding expertise for a data scientist who also had a Bachelor’s or Master’s degree in business administration. We don’t need an army of robots in data science. We need gifted thinkers who also happen to have advanced technical skills. Second, don’t “over-eat” even though it can be cold outside. More data scientists aren’t going to solve your problems. In fact, hiring the same type of data scientist only encourages “group-think” which can actually be very detrimental to your organization. Focus on building a credible data science department, not a massive data science department. Finally, put your smartest people in the dirt of the business. Have them spend a week underwriting files. Then send them to sell your products with one of your ISO managers. Don’t treat your data scientists as fragile figurines. As a good friend of mine from Texas says about his gun collection, “they may be worth a lot, but they’re so dirty from hunting you wouldn’t know it!”
I hope my confessions help your organization navigate both fair seas and choppy water.
A True Rapid Advance For Mark Cerminaro
December 16, 2016
In the 1999 film “Any Given Sunday,” Al Pacino plays a pro football coach whose obsession with winning has torn apart his family. He’s also plagued by a meddlesome team owner, challenged by an offensive coordinator who’s after his job, and vexed by a talented but narcissistic backup quarterback. But none of that stops the coach from reaching deep inside to deliver a stirring halftime pep talk to his dispirited losing team. Assuring his players that life and football are both games of inches, he beseeches them to look into the eyes of the men around them. “You’re going to see a guy who will go that inch with you,” he declares. “Either we heal now as a team or we will die as individuals.” The players rally and explode onto the field.
It’s a scenario the sales staff can’t get enough of at RapidAdvance, a Bethesda, Md.-based alternative small-business finance company with more than 200 employees. Mark Cerminaro has screened a clip of the scene countless times in a company conference room to fire up his crew. Salespeople emerged from those meetings eager to make that extra phone call, provide the telling detail on an application or do whatever else it would take to taste the victory of making the sale. For Cerminaro, the movie and the sales meetings embodied his penchant for winning ethically through teamwork, dogged persistence and great customer experience. That credo has helped propel him to top management at RapidAdvance and has earned him accolades from once-skeptical financial services peers.
Cerminaro’s story begins in his hometown of Highland Park, N.J., where he experienced a small-town vibe but enjoyed easy access to New York City, Philadelphia and the Jersey Shore. He graduated in a class of 85 students from the local public high school, playing varsity football, basketball and baseball. Summers, he worked construction, did landscaping, delivered flowers and umpired Little League. “It was a great place to grow up,” he says.
In high school, Cerminaro sometimes went along for the ride when his sister, who was five years older, was choosing a college. On a visit to Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., Cerminaro stood in the student center and gazed out at the campus. “I’m going to come here and play football,” he told himself.
He made good on that vow when his high school football team made a reputation for itself, and Georgetown was among the schools that recruited him. Besides, it made sense to go there because he was interested in studying politics and going to law school. Growing up with a father who was chairman of the local Democratic Party, Cerminaro had his eye on eventually becoming governor of New Jersey.
Playing for the NFL on the way to the governor’s mansion seemed like a good idea, too. But Cerminaro, a quarterback, blew out his throwing arm two years into his collegiate football career. His dreams of making the pros died, but that left more time for academics. He plunged into a series of four rigorous internships, three of them in politics. He served two in the Clinton White House and one on Capitol Hill with Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J. He fondly recalls talking to President Bill Clinton for five minutes before a state dinner. Then two hours later, after spending time with heads of state, the President called out, “There’s Mark, my fellow Hoya.” Cerminaro will never forget it.
In the end, however, the fourth internship won out. Although Cerminaro hadn’t studied business or finance too much, he landed an internship in the local Washington, D.C., office of Morgan Stanley. If nothing else, it would help him manage his investments some day, he reasoned. However, he soon approached the operations manager and some senior brokers and offered to take on duties they didn’t want to fulfill. He had decided to learn about operations, and taking on extra work without additional compensation was in line with his new habit of figuring out what steps would take him where he wanted to go in life.
Cerminaro earned his managerial license with Morgan Stanley and accepted a job as associate branch manager in the Washington, D.C., office, managing and training new financial advisors. He considered the position great exposure to sales, management, operations and compliance – “elements that have paid dividends in the growth of my career,” he notes.
Early in Cerminaro’s tenure at Morgan Stanley, the company sent him for training with about 300 other new employees at 2 World Trade Center in Manhattan. The date was Sept. 10, 2001. When the trainees reported to the office the next day, they were in a 64th-floor conference room when they heard an explosion and saw shreds of paper floating past the windows. They didn’t realize yet that a terrorist-controlled jetliner had hit next door at 1 World Trade Center.
As they evacuated down a stairwell, the trainees heard and felt the concussion of the second plane that hit their building. “I’m 22 years old and I may be about to die,” Cerminaro remembers thinking. “Make sure my family knows I love them,” he prayed. He made it out and was greeted with smoke, debris, the flashing lights of emergency vehicles and panic in the streets. He walked to a restaurant some family friends operated in Little Italy and borrowed a working phone to call his family in New Jersey and let them know he was OK.
Returning to the D.C. office of Morgan Stanley, Cerminaro got back to work. He loved the entrepreneurial spirit at the company, but as the years passed he realized he was unlikely to amass enough power in the giant firm to dictate how it would operate, grow and change. So he was interested when someone he knew at Morgan Stanley told him about RapidAdvance, then a two-year-old company with about 20 employees. “I saw the opportunity to be part of building a company – that’s what drew me to RapidAdvance,” he recalls.
In 2007, Cerminaro interviewed with Jeremy Brown, who was RapidAdvance’s CEO at the time and has since advanced to chairman. “It was apparent that Mark had a well thought-out, well-articulated plan for sales,” Brown says of his first impression. “He had a presence about him, a command that said this guy a real leader – somebody who could make a long term component of the company.”
Cerminaro joined RapidAdvance as national sales director and began building a sales structure and team based on some of the elements of Morgan Stanley’s sales model. Developing KPIs, or key performance indicators, helped him measure progress. “You had to roll up your sleeves and get involved in every aspect of things,” he said of working for a startup in a fledgling industry. The company’s outbound call center came up with sales leads, and he cut and pasted them from an Excel spread sheet and divvied them up among the five or six account executives.
Cerminaro wanted to teach that handful of salespeople to function as business advisors and help them become the single point of contact for clients. His salespeople guided small-business owners through the application process and stayed in contact with them after the sale. He emphasized doing right by customers, teammates and the company as a whole. It was a vision that inspired the team.
“Mark was a great mentor and provided me a lot of guidance and tutelage over the years,” says Devin Delany, who started as an account executive at RapidAdvance and has moved up to director of sales. “His real mission was to create a sense of family and he executed on that to the fullest extent, creating a close knit team of upward of 40 folks who really care about one another.”
That sales “family” used dialogue marketing to refocus attention on prospects who had fallen out of the sales cycle. In those days they used a product-driven sales pitch based on merchant cash advances. Third-party partners included credit card processors and credit card ISOs. Brokers came onto the scene later.
Soon after Cerminaro arrived at RapidAdvance, the financial crisis struck. The company managed to navigate the troubled times and emerged with improved underwriting skills, a better understanding of leading indicators and a truer grasp of how its portfolio performs. Something else happened, too.
As traditional lines of credit dried up during the recession, small businesses that didn’t accept credit cards began to search for working capital. In response, Cerminaro, Brown and Joseph Looney, RapidAdvance’s chief operations officer and general counsel, sat down and outlined a plan to offer small-business loans as well as MCAs. “That effort really redefined who RapidAdvance was,” Cerminaro says of the new loans. “We went from a single-product company to now being more of a solutions-based company,” he maintains. “We were able to shift from selling a product to doing needs-based analysis with our clients and focusing on what was the right solution for them.”
Cerminaro found it exciting to develop the loan program and oversee sales, but he was looking for more. He turned part of his attention to business development and even expanded his purview to include marketing. The company was thinking along the same lines. In 2010, RapidAdvance promoted him to senior vice president, sales and marketing. “As the company has grown we have had different needs, and we leaned on Mark and his skill set every time we made a change,” Brown says. “Every time we made a change he has stepped up and done what’s asked of him.”
Producing one of the industry’s first national television ad campaigns highlighted Cerminaro’s period as senior vice president. “We were the pioneers in being able to market through that medium,” he says. “It was absolutely scary at the same time. It was a massive investment for us and we had no idea whether it would pan out.” The sales staff were waiting in anticipation when the phones began ringing after the public saw the commercial. “The original spot we put together still tests well and drives a lot of traffic,” he notes. Viewers find a tune featured in the ad sticks in their minds and can’t help humming it – sometimes when they’d prefer they didn’t, he adds.
Then came another promotion. In 2013, just before Detroit-based Rockbridge Growth Equity LLC acquired RapidAdvance, Cerminaro was named chief revenue officer and became responsible for all revenue-generating activities and all of the company’s front end efforts. The company had grown significantly over the years, but the merger increased financial backing and thus accelerated growth, he says. For him, that meant pursuing a new type of partner company – asset-based lenders and factoring companies. It wouldn’t be easy. “The traditional lending market had a lot of misconceptions about our industry,” Cerminaro admits. “A lot of people in that business were very critical.”
But Cerminaro made the rounds of trade shows and visited conference rooms until he succeeded in winning the hearts of bankers, according to Will Tumulty, RapidAdvance’s CEO. “Mark and his team have developed partnerships in the commercial lending space,” Tumulty says. “There are a number of companies that have historically viewed working-capital funding as a competitor. We don’t see ourselves competing with those companies. Mark and his team have worked with those companies to get merchants what they need.”
As a testament to Cerminaro’s success in that quest, the Commercial Finance Association named him to its 2016 list of “40 under 40” achievers. He was the only person from alternative small-business funding to make that venerable list of prominent young lending executives. He helped spur his company on to other awards, too. The RapidAdvance Bethesda office was chosen for The Washington Post Top Workplaces 2016 list, and the RapidAdvance Detroit office made the list of 101 firms recognized as Metro Detroit’s 2016 Best and Brightest Companies to Work For.
Meanwhile, Cerminaro was successfully courting mega retailers, says Brown. When the possibility of becoming a partner with Office Depot arose, Brown felt hopeful but remained skeptical because of the long lead time required to convince so many executives in such a large corporation. “But mark was dogged,” he says. “It took him probably a year to land and close the deal and negotiate the agreement and sign the account. He went to countless meetings down in Florida. He participated in endless conference calls, but mark got the deal done. It’s a relationship we’re proud of, and he is singularly responsible for closing that deal.”
In those encounters with Office Depot execs, Cerminaro displayed savvy and professionalism, Brown says. They’re traits that will continue to pay off not only for RapidAdvance but for the entire industry, maintains RapidAdvance’s Looney. “He’s out there with lots of big banks and other potential partners,” says Looney. “He’s a good face for the industry.”
For Cerminaro, it’s satisfying to see RapidAdvance become all he dreamed it could be. But that still comes in second for him and differentiates him from the coach played by Al Pacino. Cerminaro’s the kind of guy who asked his father to be his best man and now has a wife and two sons of his own. “Your family and your loved ones are by far more important than anything else in your life,” he says.
AI Sales Assistant Penetrating Alternative Finance Raises $34 Million in Series B Round
December 15, 2016
Wondering how your competition always seems to be so on top of their game? They might be using an artificially intelligent sales assistant. Such technology was reported on last month when AltFinanceDaily learned that it had penetrated the alternative business financing industry through at least one company named AI Assist. AI Assist is powered by Conversica, a Foster City, CA-based technology firm that announced it had raised $34 million in a Series B round on Wednesday led by Providence Strategic Growth Capital Partners L.L.C. More than 1,000 companies across technology, automotive, higher education, finance, insurance, real estate and hospitality are using Conversica.
“Conversica’s AI technology has helped IBM be smarter about engaging our prospective customers and maximizing their value as they move through our sales funnel,” Kevin Pollack, head of IBM’s Global Email Marketing Practice, is quoted as saying in a press release. “Not only have we freed up resources within the marketing team and gained immediate value in the form of qualified sales opportunities, we are also seeing how AI can help transform our entire business moving forward.”
For Roman Vinfield, who launched a merchant cash advance ISO in 2015, it changed his life. “I hadn’t heard anything like an artificial-intelligence sales assistant,” said Vinfield. “The results we got within a month of using it were unbelievable.” Within the first month, Vinfield made $35,000 in revenues by spending just $4,000 and he eventually reduced his staff of 24 to 4 people. He’s since launched AI Assist, the exclusive reseller of Conversica to the alternative finance industry.
“We’ve gone way beyond the theoretical,” Conversica CEO Alex Terry told Fortune. A demo given by Vinfield of AI Assist, demonstrated that its artificial intelligence can communicate with merchants over emails in a way that is indistinguishable from a human. According to Fortune, Terry said the sales assistant software has proven so effective for some customers that recruiters have even mistaken the software for a human and tried to make a hire. Other contacts have sent in thank-you notes and flowers, he added.
Conversica has raised more than $56 million since inception. Providence, who led the Series B round, also owns stakes in Hulu and the Yankees Entertainment & Sports Network (YES Network). Conversica’s technology is only available to this industry via AI Assist.
Alternative Funders Bid Adieu to 2016, Show Renewed Optimism for 2017
December 12, 2016
After getting pummeled in 2016, many alternative funders have licked their wounds and are flexing their muscles to go another round in 2017.
“The industry didn’t implode or go away after some fairly negative headlines earlier in the year,” says Bill Ullman, chief commercial officer of Orchard Platform, a New York-based provider of technology and data to the online lending industry. “While there were definitely some industry and company-specific challenges in the first half of the year, I believe the online lending industry as a whole is wiser and stronger as a result,” he says.
Certainly, 2016 saw a slowdown in the rapid rate of growth of online lenders. The year began with slight upticks in delinquency rates at some of the larger consumer originators. This was followed by the highly publicized Lending Club scandal over questionable lending practices and the ouster of its CEO. Consumers got spooked as share prices of industry bellwethers tumbled and institutional investors such as VCs, private equity firms and hedge funds curbed their enthusiasm. Originations slowed and job cuts at several prominent firms followed.
Despite the turmoil, most players managed to stay afloat, with limited exceptions, and brighter times seemed on the horizon toward the end of 2016. Institutional investors began to dip their toes back into the market with a handful of publicly announced capital-raising ventures. Loan volumes also began to tick up, giving rise to renewed optimism for 2017.
Notably, in the year ahead, market watchers say they anticipate modest growth, a shift in business models, consolidation, possible regulation and additional consumer-focused initiatives, among other things.
MARKETPLACE LENDERS REDEFINING THEMSELVES
Several industry participants expect to see marketplace lenders continue to refocus after a particularly rough 2016. Some had gone into other businesses, geographies and products that they thought would be profitable but didn’t turn out as expected. They got overextended and began getting back to their core in 2016. Others realized, the hard way, that having only one source of funding was a recipe for disaster.
“Business models are going to evolve quite substantially,” says Sam Graziano, chief executive officer and co-founder of Fundation Group, a New York-based company that makes online business loans through banks and other partners.
For instance, he predicts that marketplace lenders will move toward using their balance sheet or some kind of permanent capital to fund their loan originations. “I think that there will be a lot fewer pure play marketplace lenders,” he says.
Indeed, some marketplace lenders are starting to take note that it’s a bad idea to rely on a single source of financing and are shifting course. Some companies have set up 1940-Act funds for an ongoing capital source. Others have considered taking assets on balance sheet or securitizing assets.
“The trend will accelerate in 2017 as platforms and investors realize that it’s absolutely necessary for long-term viability,” says Glenn Goldman, chief executive of Credibly, an online lender that caters to small-and medium-sized businesses and is based in Troy, Michigan and New York.
BJ Lackland, chief executive of Lighter Capital, a Seattle-based alternative lender that provides revenue-based start-up funding for tech companies, believes that more online lenders will start to specialize in 2017. This will allow them to better understand and serve their customers, and it means they won’t have to rely so heavily on speed and volume—a combination that can lead to shady deals. “I don’t think that the big generalist online lenders will go away, just like payday lending is not going to go away. There’s still going to be a need, therefore there will be providers. But I think we’ll see the rise of online lending 2.0,” he says.
Despite the hiccups in 2016, Peter Renton, an avid P2P investor who founded Lend Academy to teach others about the sector, says he is expecting to see steady and predictable growth patterns from the major players in 2017. It won’t be the triple-digit growth of years past, but he predicts investors will set aside their concerns from 2016 and re-enter the market with renewed vigor. “I think 2017 we’ll go back to seeing more sustainable growth,” he says.
THE CONSOLIDATION EQUATION
Ron Suber, president of Prosper Marketplace, a privately held online lender in San Francisco, says victory will go to the platforms that were able to pivot in 2016 and make hard decisions about their businesses.
Prosper, for example, had a challenging year and has now started to refocus on hiring and growth in core areas. This rebound comes after the company said in May that it was trimming about a third of its workforce, and in October it closed down its secondary market for retail investors. Suber says business started to pick up again after a low point in July. “Business has grown in each of the subsequent months, so we are back to focused growth and quality loan production,” he says.
Not long after he said this, Prosper’s CEO, Aaron Vermut, stepped down. His father, Stephan Vermut, also relinquished his executive chairman post, a sign that attempts to recover have come at a cost.
Other platforms, meanwhile, that haven’t made necessary adjustments are likely to find that they don’t have enough equity and debt capital to support themselves, industry watchers say. This could lead to more firms consolidating or going out of business.
The industry has already seen some evidence of trouble brewing. For instance, online marketplace lender Vouch, a three-year-old company, said in June that it was permanently shuttering operations. In October, CircleBack Lending, a marketplace lending platform, disclosed that they were no longer originating loans and would transfer existing loans to another company if they couldn’t promptly find funding. And just before this story went to print, Peerform announced that they had been acquired by Versara Lending, a sign that consolidation in the industry has come.
“I think you will see the real start of consolidation in the space in 2017,” says Stephen Sheinbaum, founder of New York-based Bizfi, an online marketplace. While some deals will be able to breathe life into troubled companies, others will merge to produce stronger, more nimble industry players, he says. “With good operations, one plus one should at least equal three because of the benefits of the economies of scale,” he says.
Market participants will also be paying close attention in 2017 to new online lending entrants such as Goldman Sachs’ with its lending platform Marcus. Ullman of Orchard Platform says he also expects to see more partnerships and licensing deals. “For smaller, regional and community banks and credit unions—organizations that tend not to have large IT or development budgets—these kinds of arrangements can make a lot of sense,” he says.
A BLEAKER MCA OUTLOOK
Meanwhile, MCA funders are ripe for a pullback, industry participants say. MCA companies are now a dime a dozen, according to industry veteran Chad Otar, managing partner of Excel Capital Management in New York, who believes new entrants won’t be able to make as much money as they think they will.
Paul A. Rianda, whose Irvine, California-based law firm focuses on MCA companies, likens the situation to the Internet boom and subsequent bust. “There’s a lot of money flying around and fin-tech is the hot thing this time around. Sooner or later it always ends.”
In particular, Rianda is concerned about rising levels of stacking in the industry. According to TransUnion data, stacked loans are four times more likely to be the result of fraudulent activity. Moreover, a 2015 study of fintech lenders found that stacked loans represented $39 million of $497 million in charge-offs.
Although Rianda does not see the situation having far-reaching implications as say the Internet bubble or the mortgage crisis, he does predict a gradual drop off in business among MCA players and a wave of consolidation for these companies.
“I do not believe that the current state of some MCA companies taking stacked positions where there are multiple cash advances on a single merchant is sustainable. Sooner or later the losses will catch up with them,” he says.
Rianda also predicts that the decrease of outside funding to related industries could have a spillover effect on MCA companies, causing some to cut back operations or go out of business. “Some companies have already seen decreased funding in the lending space and subsequent lay off of employees that likely will also occur in the merchant cash advance industry,” he says.
THE REGULATORY QUESTION MARK
One major unknown for the broader funding industry is what regulation will come down the pike and from which entity. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency that regulates and supervises banks has raised the issue of fintech companies possibly getting a limited purpose charter for non-banks. The OCC also recently announced plans to set up a dedicated “fintech innovation office” early in 2017, with branches in New York, San Francisco and Washington.
There’s also a question of the CFPB’s future role in the alternative funding space. Some industry participants expect the regulator to continue bringing enforcement actions against companies. In September, for instance, it ordered San Francisco-based LendUp to pay $3.63 million for failing to deliver the promised benefits of its loan products. Ullman of Orchard Platform says he expects the agency to continue to play a role in the future of online lending, particularly for lenders targeting sub-prime borrowers.
Meanwhile, some states like California and New York are focusing more efforts on reining in online small business lenders, and it remains to be seen where this trend takes us in 2017.
MORE CONSUMER-FOCUSED INITIATIVES ON HORIZON
As the question of increased regulation looms, some industry watchers expect to see more industry led consumer-focused initiatives, an effort which gained momentum in 2016. A prime example of this is the agreement between OnDeck Capital Inc., Kabbage Inc. and CAN Capital Inc. on a new disclosure box that will display a small-business loan’s pricing in terms of total cost of capital, annual percentage rates, average monthly payment and other metrics. The initiative marked the first collaborative effort of the Innovative Lending Platform Association, a trade group the three firms formed to increase the transparency of the online lending process for small business owners.
Katherine C. Fisher, a partner with Hudson Cook LLP, a law firm based in Hanover, Maryland, that focuses on alternative funding, predicts that more financers will focus on transparency in 2017 for competitive and anticipated regulatory reasons. Particularly with MCA, many merchants don’t understand what it means, yet they are still interested in the product, resulting in a great deal of confusion. Clearing this up will benefit merchants and the providers themselves, Fisher notes. “It can be a competitive advantage to do a better job explaining what the product is,” she says.
CAPITAL-RAISING WILL CONTINUE TO POSE CHALLENGES
Although there have been notable examples of funders getting the financing they need to operate and expand, it’s decidedly harder than it once was. Renton of Lend Academy says that some institutional investors will remain hesitant to fund the industry, given its recent troubles. “It’s a valuation story. While valuations were increasing, it was relatively easy to get funding,” he says. However, industry bellwethers Lending Club and OnDeck are both down dramatically from their highs and concerns about their long-term viability remain.
“Until you get sustained increases in the valuation of those two companies, I think it’s going to be hard for others to raise money,” Renton says.
Several years ago, alternative funders were new to the game and gained a lot of traction, but it remains to be seen whether they can continue to grow profits amid greater competition and the high cost of obtaining capital to fund receivables, according to William Keenan, chief executive of Pango Financial LLC, an alternative funding company for entrepreneurs and small businesses in Wilmington, Delaware.
These companies continue to need investors or retained earnings and for some companies this is going to be increasingly difficult. “How they sustain growth going forward could be a challenge,” he says. Even so, Renton remains bullish on the industry—P2P players especially. “The industry’s confidence has been shaken. There have been a lot of challenges this year. I think many people in the industry are going to be glad to put 2016 to bed and will look with renewed optimism on 2017,” he says.
Prior to this story going to print, small business lender Dealstruck was reportedly not funding new loans and CAN Capital announced that three of the company’s most senior executives had stepped down.
i2B Capital Provides $4 Million Revolving Line of Credit to CFG Merchant Solutions
November 8, 2016NEW YORK–(BUSINESS WIRE)–i2B Capital (www.i2bcap.com), a provider of direct financing to niche-market financial entrepreneurs, is pleased to announce the closing of a $4 million asset-based revolving line of credit with an accordion to $6 million with CFG Merchant Solutions (CFGMS). CFGMS is a privately owned and operated specialty finance company focused on providing working capital to small and mid-sized businesses (Merchants) in the U.S. that are historically underserved by traditional financial institutions.
Said Mr. Larry L. Curran II, CEO of i2B Capital, “CFGMS gave us the perfect opportunity to apply asset-based lending principals to non-traditional receivable assets in an early stage specialty finance company. CFGMS is a new division of an established finance business with traditional bank financing; however, these receivable assets were excluded from the existing borrowing base. The CFGMS management team is seasoned, backed by private equity, and enabled with technology—exactly what we look for in our target customer. Additionally, they have grown their financed receivables more than 500% since beginning the process.”
Barbara Anderson, Chief Operating Officer at i2B Capital commented, “Our goal over the initial 18-month funding commitment is to prepare CFGMS for more traditional institutional financing in the future. To accomplish that we will provide the growth capital along with our commercial lending expertise to help them prepare for the disciplined reporting requirements and credit processes at the next level.”
William Gallagher, President of CFGMS said, “Obtaining an asset-based loan against our non-traditional asset class within our first year of operation is instrumental in allowing us to execute on our growth strategy, and achieve some very aggressive portfolio and revenue targets. We had to work through several considerations with i2B due to the age and size of the portfolio, but through mutual collaboration we were able to put in place a facility that will enable us to take our business to the next level.”
CFGMS is a subsidiary of CapFlow Funding Group, a commercial finance company that offers an array of products such as factoring, purchase order finance, and asset-based loans. Both companies are headquartered in Rutherford, New Jersey. CFGMS with additional offices in New York City is a direct funder providing working capital to small businesses. They are entrepreneurs who understand first-hand the challenges of acquiring flexible and timely financing. CFGMS combines proprietary analytics and technology, with common sense underwriting to provide fast and efficient access to capital. Programs include Small Business Advance, Merchant Cash Advance, and Invoice Factoring. For more information about CFGMS contact William Gallagher at wgallagher@cfgms.com or visit www.cfgmerchantsolutions.com.
i2B Capital is headquartered in Fort Collins, Colorado with offices in Herndon, Virginia. The company provides senior debt and direct asset investments for growth capital to qualifying entrepreneurs and equity-backed emerging specialty finance companies throughout the United States. For more information about i2B Capital contact Barbara Anderson at 703-871-3993 or banderson@i2bcap.com, or visit www.i2bcap.com.
Contacts
i2B Capital
Barbara Anderson, 703-871-3993
banderson@i2bcap.com
