Mr. Merchant: Help ME, Help YOU
September 25, 2015
As we close the 3rd Quarter in the Year Of The Broker, I thought that it might be imperative to blow off some steam. Industry forums, commentators and media reporters often rant on Brokers and Lenders by disclosing the inefficiencies of such parties. But I have yet to see (or hear) of anyone making a particular “rant” on the most crucial element in our industry, The Merchant. So if you would allow me the liberty to do so, I would like to take a couple of moments to provide these rants as many of you might have the same “pet peeves” with the merchants you are currently assisting (or trying to assist).
Help ME, Help YOU
Mr. Merchant please Help ME, Help YOU. We all know the situation of why you returned my call, email, etc., you are in need of some working capital for your business because conventional sources are either not lending to you altogether, or they can’t work within the time frame that you need the capital in.
But I can’t help YOU, unless you first help ME in the process by being as efficient as you can in terms of your level of organization. You operate a $350k – upwards to $10 million business, why is it that you are so unorganized to the point where you can’t seemingly tell your head from your rear? Below are just “some” of things that Mr. Merchant, YOU need to work on.
Not Meeting Basic (Elementary) Deadlines
We would be at the very end of the closing process only for you to send over an expired driver’s license because you never updated it, or your SOS filing is inactive because you didn’t pay the $50 annual filing fee, or you are late filing your taxes and didn’t put in an extension. These are basic (elementary) deadlines Mr. Merchant, how is it that you are not staying on top of them?
Bank Statements Are Out Of Order
We need your bank statements to analyze your sales, cashflow, balances, etc. to determine approval terms/conditions. Why is it that your fax has pages that are totally out of order, pages missing, etc.? Why is it that many times you don’t even know where your bank statements are and we have to wait 3 or 5 days for you to “find” them? We are in the Year of 2015 Mr. Merchant, have ever heard of a tool called “Online Banking”? You can easily log in and forward your statements over in PDF format by email within 5 minutes.
Can’t Find Financials
So Mr. Merchant, you are requesting $200,000 plus from my platform and the Underwriter needs to take a look at last year’s Tax Return, Prior Year Financials and YTD Financials. But similar to your Bank Statements, you have no clue where these documents are. Mr. Merchant, how can you run a $5 million plus business, but not know where your Company’s Financials are?
Bad Credit
The average FICO score in the country is about 693, yet Mr. Merchant, your FICO score is under 500, or 520, or 575. As an entrepreneur, you know that you are supposed to keep your credit clean as much as possible, yet you routinely tell me that you haven’t pulled your credit in a while and you don’t know what’s on your report. There are free sources like Credit Karma, Credit Sesame and your Credit Card Issuer to get your credit score/reporting ranges for free, yet you don’t use them?
Running The Business On Overdraft Protection
Mr. Merchant, my financing is based on a daily or weekly fixed payment, how can I approve you when you have no money in your business bank account and you run the business on overdraft protection?
Not Disclosing Liens, Bankruptcies, Or Landlord/Mortgage Issues
During my pre-qualification, I asked you if you had any prior liens or bankruptcies, I also asked if you were behind on your landlord or mortgage payments. You flat out said no. Did you not think we were going to find late in the 11TH Hour of the closing process, that you have a $150,000 tax lien without a payment plan on it? Which means we just did all of this work, for nothing?
Excessive Cash Advance Stacking
Mr. Merchant, tell me how does this make sense? Why would you take out excessive advances on top of one another without calculating the fact that you would be paying 25% to sometimes 40% of your gross monthly revenue in cash advance payments? Then after doing so, you come to me complaining about why no one will help you get from under these “evil” Cash Advance companies?
Sending Fake Statements and Financials
And this is the ultimate pet peeve! So Mr. Merchant, you are in such desperate need of a high priced Cash Advance, that you are willing to go to prison for it by sending over fake bank statements and financials? Why on Earth would you risk your freedom in such a manner?
Final Word
As Brokers and Lenders, we are always hammered in the media about our inefficiencies, but nobody says anything about the flat out (sorry to say) stupid behavior of merchants that we serve.
Mr. Merchant, please help ME, help YOU, or should I say help US as an industry help YOU, by just doing the basic (elementary) of things that will assist us in securing the best alternative financing deals in the marketplace, all designed to help grow, develop and sustain your business.
Fundera Raises $11.5 Million
September 17, 2015
NEW YORK–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Fundera, the online credit marketplace for small businesses, today announced an $11.5 million Series B funding round led by Susquehanna Growth Equity with participation from previous investors including QED Investors, Khosla Ventures and First Round Capital, bringing the company’s total funding to date to $15 million.
Since the most recent financial crisis, small business owners have been underserved by traditional banks with small business loans down from their pre-recession high. As a result, they have been forced to turn to online lenders to find the capital they need to grow. The majority of small business loans originated by online lenders are sourced through predatory offline loan brokers who engage in deceptive practices and take exorbitant fees to market certain lenders over others, driving up the cost of loans to borrowers. This unethical behavior takes advantage of small business owners, often putting them into loans that they do not fully understand or cannot reasonably repay.
America’s small business owners deserve better. Fundera was created to disrupt the loan broker ecosystem and make the process of getting a small business loan as transparent, fair and accountable as possible. Fundera utilizes software to create a seamless common application which enables borrowers to apply to multiple pre-screened lenders in a matter of minutes, clearly presenting funding options while encouraging competition among lenders. Fundera’s customer success team acts as an impartial advocate on behalf of borrowers and the company produces content to educate and allow borrowers to make informed financing decisions. Additionally, this past August, Fundera helped lead the creation of a Small Business Borrowers’ Bill of Rights that brought together a coalition of major industry players with the goal of eliminating predatory lending, and which is quickly becoming the gold standard for fairness in online lending.
Fundera will use this latest round of funding to accelerate its mission of making small business lending more transparent and helping small business owners grow through the responsible use of credit. The company plans to expand its team of dedicated loan specialists and engineers, develop and refine its borrower experience, and continue to build new products that help empower borrowers to choose the best loan for their business.
“Everyday throughout America small businesses which represent the lifeblood of our economy are being taken advantage of by online lenders and brokers,” said Fundera founder and CEO, Jared Hecht. “By creating a transparent marketplace that lays out a small business owners’ loan options and empowers them with tools to choose the best option for their business, Fundera is revolutionizing how small business owners access credit while creating a software solution that is disrupting the loan broker industry.”
Susquehanna Growth Equity shares the company’s passion for empowering consumers and affecting structural changes in the financial space. Scott Feldman, Managing Director at Susquehanna Growth Equity and newly appointed member of Fundera’s Board of Directors, echoes this sentiment: “At Susquehanna, we look for holistic teams that demonstrate true passion for their mission. As early investors in Credit Karma, we understand the Fundera model and have experience in helping companies transform areas of credit and financial services that empower consumers to win.”
Small business credit is one of the few industries where the Internet has had minimal impact when it comes to empowering borrowers and providing them the buying power they need to come out on top, and Fundera is bringing that change to small businesses nation-wide.
Fundera launched in February 2014 and has established itself as the most-trusted online marketplace for small business owners. To date, Fundera has helped secure over $60 million in credit to more than 1,200 small business owners across the country in industries including retail, restaurants, and creative contractors. The company is based in New York City.
About Fundera
Fundera is the most-trusted online marketplace that connects small business owners with the best funding providers for their businesses by working with prescreened lenders to assemble the highest quality funding sources. Fundera was co-founded in 2013 by GroupMe co-founder Jared Hecht and successful software entrepreneur Rohan Deshpande to bring transparency, accountability, and fairness to the online lending industry at large. The company has raised $15 million from Susquehanna Growth Equity, QED Investors, Khosla Ventures, First Round Capital, Lerer Ventures, SV Angel, and angel investors Aaron Levie, Scott Belsky, Strauss Zelnick, Rob Wiesenthal, David Rosenblatt and David Tisch, and is based in New York City. To learn more or get started on a loan application, please visit www.fundera.com.
About Susquehanna Growth Equity
Susquehanna Growth Equity, LLC (SGE) invests in growth stage technology companies in the software, information services, internet and financial technology sectors. The firm is backed by a unique and patient capital base that allows management teams the freedom and flexibility to maximize growth. Notable prior investments in marketplace companies include CreditKarma (financial management platform with 40 million members), BStock Solutions (overstock inventory liquidation marketplace) and Globaltranz (marketplace for transportation services). To learn more, please visit us at www.sgep.com.
Contacts
Brew Media Relations
Ashley Hopkins, 646-517-7544
fundera@brewpr.com
Lead Management Fundamentals: How to purchase qualified leads
September 16, 2015
“I’ll never buy another lead again,” says a disgruntled sales person after failing to close quickly leads. Being in the lead business, I hear this all the time. Rarely do you hear, “I’ll never advertise again.” Yet, in many cases 99% of the people who see your ad won’t buy your product or your service. (Advertising serves other purposes like branding, but for most small businesses, advertising is to produce sales.)
I once did a consulting job for a company that sold uniforms to Fire and Police depts. Their shtick was to send out catalogs every quarter and hope that 0.25% of those receiving the catalogs bought. Compare that to the Victoria’s Secret catalog that gets 11% of its catalog receivers to purchase. Uniforms are not as sexy as lingerie. But there is a huge gap between 11% and .25%. Even with such a small return on its catalog, this company was profitable.
In the lead business, the standard is raised even higher. A 0.25% response rate on leads does not work because you will typically pay a higher cost for a lead campaign than an advertising campaign. Besides, lead campaigns are a more targeted approach rather than the rapid fire shot gunning of advertising.
A good lead campaign should be bringing the buyer and seller together. A good lead campaign may only close 5% to 25% of the leads purchased. The percentages vary according to the industry. By comparison, on average only 2% to 3% of the clicks in a Google Merchant Cash Advance PPC campaign convert to sales. A reputable lead generation company can provide better averages than Google and in the MCA industry, it can deliver leads at a lower cost. There is real value in purchasing qualified leads.
Where I see most companies make a mistake in purchasing leads is that they focus on price rather than qualitative aspects of the leads. One of the most basic questions to ask is how the lead generation company defines a lead. (Data brokers like to say they are selling leads. Instead they are selling you contacts. Contacts are not leads. Contacts are information.)
A lead is a merchant who is in the market to buy a product or a service and is somewhere along the buying cycle and is willing to discuss purchasing the product or service with vendor(s). The real key phrase is “somewhere along the buying cycle and is willing to discuss with vendor(s).” This implies intent on the part of the merchant. Without intent to purchase, the merchant is simply window shopping.
The second area to focus on when purchasing fresh leads is to find out how the leads are qualified and optimized. Many lead generation companies rely on data scoring to qualify their leads. They simply scrub the leads against a database and those leads that meet a certain score are considered qualified. There is no attempt made to discover the intent of the merchant.
Lead generation is a people to people business. Phone qualification is the best qualifying approach. Phone qualified leads are some of the best optimized leads on the market because a good lead company will make sure that the merchants meet the minimum standards, that they have demonstrated intent to purchase, and that the expectations have been set on what is to happen next. (As can be expected, phone qualified leads offer some of the highest contact ratios as well.)
If you want to close more leads, make sure that the leads you are buying meet the criteria above. If you do, you will see your sales soar.
Who’s On Your Fantasy Funding Team?
September 14, 2015
A few years ago, a friend of mine was dropped by the funding brokerage he worked for and put on the waiver wire. He was promptly picked up by a competitor and today ranks among one of the top closers in the industry. It was one of the strangest moves of the season because his numbers had been really good month after month. It turned out that he was turned loose for earning too much money, something the firm wasn’t content with.
Even though he was compensated on a commission-only basis, he was apparently putting the company over their salary cap. That of course begged the question, why was there a compensation cap for a top performer, somebody who was directly leading to the firm’s growth? For what it’s worth, he was entitled to approximately 20% of the company’s gross commission revenue. So on every deal funded the company took home the other 80% of the commission. This worked for both parties until the closer started earning well into the six figures, at which point they told him he wasn’t allowed to earn more than a certain amount.
Although discouraged by the sudden limitation, he continued to work hard to prove why the cap should be removed. It wasn’t. Soon afterward he found himself on the waiver wire.
He was replaced by two rookies fresh out of college who were willing to do the same job for a lot less, but neither had any experience in the field.
As someone who has been active in this industry for nearly a decade, I’ve watched this scenario play out dozens of times.
- Firm needs top talent to grow
- Firm hires Talent
- Talent produces
- Firm grows
- Firm doesn’t like that Talent is making so much
- Firm fires Talent or Talent quits
As the firms gallop off to the next scouting combine to find somebody younger and more malleable, the pool of experienced talent is dispersed across a sea of competitors. A consequence of this is that each of those companies become more evenly matched and it becomes increasingly difficult to stand apart from the crowd.
At trade shows and happy hours, it’s not uncommon for top players to openly question what would happen if they all joined forces to create a funding dream team of sorts. And while such cohesion rarely actually happens, I can’t help but imagine if given the opportunity to build the best team to win, who I would pick.
Top talent is expensive. I know this because I recently spent 89% of my budget in a fantasy football auction draft to acquire just three players. And last year I spent a similar percentage on only four players and won the entire league. My thought process was to build a team that was centered around the best of the best. Previous years of conservative play led to mediocre results and I wanted to change that.
Today, there are hundreds of alternative business financing companies and thousands that can be considered brokers. There’s a lot of decent teams out there but few that are built around a group of all stars. And oddly, some companies seem to be dumping their best and brightest on purpose, just like I described previously. That might lead to improved margins for the firm, but probably won’t help them win in the long run.

Here’s something to think about while you’re watching Monday Night Football. If you had to build your company around a core group of talented people, who would you pick? Don’t worry about whether or not they’re available or if they fit into your budget. Those are obstacles that can be overcome.
Here’s a list of positions to help you imagine your fantasy funder:
- 1 Senior Manager
- 2 Underwriters
- 2 Closers
- 1 Flex Spot
- 1 Admin
- 1 Collector
- 1 Tech Person
Good luck!
3rd Circuit Affirms FTC’s Role as Cybersecurity Cop
September 10, 2015
Under the Federal Trade Commission Act, the FTC has broad powers to regulate unfair and deceptive business practices. The FTC has interpreted these powers to include the regulation of cybersecurity measures used by businesses to protect customer data. If the FTC believes that a company’s cybersecurity measures are unreasonably inadequate, it may bring a suit against the company for what it deems an ‘unfair’ act.
This is exactly what the Commission decided to do in its recent suit against Wyndham Worldwide Corporation. On three different occasions, Wyndham’s computer systems were hacked and consumers’ personal data was accessed and stolen. In its complaint, the FTC alleged that the security breaches were a result of Wyndham’s failure to use adequate measures to safeguard its customers’ data. The FTC argued that Wyndham’s security measures were so lax that it constituted an ‘unfair’ act under federal law. Wyndham moved to dismiss the complaint and argued that the FTC lacked the authority to regulate cybersecurity under the unfairness prong of the FTC Act.
The trial court denied Wyndham’s motion and the Third Circuit upheld the decision. In its opinion, the Third Circuit noted that the FTC Act purposely does not list specific unfair acts. Rather, the Act was intended to be flexible and capable of evolving along with changing business practices. Therefore, the Circuit Court held that the FTC had authority to regulate cybersecurity.
The decision is noteworthy for alternative small business funders and brokers that electronically receive and store volumes of personal customer data. Companies must be aware that the FTC expects them to maintain a certain standard of cybersecurity and those that fail to meet that standard may be subject to enforcement actions. It is also clear that the FTC is making cybersecurity a top priority as just yesterday it held the first of a series of conferences on data security strategies.
Companies in the small business finance space would be wise to compare the FTC’s recommendations with their current cybersecurity procedures.
FTC v. Wyndham Worldwide Corp., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14839 (3d Cir. N.J. Aug. 24, 2015)
Alternative Funding: Over The Top Down Under
September 2, 2015
San Francisco had its gold rush, Oklahoma had its land rush and now Australia is experiencing a rush of alternative funding. After a slow start a few years ago, foreign and domestic companies have been flocking to the market down under in the last 18 months.
As many as 20 new alt-funders are doing business in Australia, but that number could swell to a hundred, said Beau Bertoli, joint CEO of Prospa, a Sydney-based alternative funder. “The market in Australia has been very ripe for alternative finance,” Bertoli, said. “We see an opportunity for the alternative finance segment to be more dominant in Australia than it is in America.”
Recent entrants to the embryotic Australian market include Spotcap, a Berlin-based company partly funded by Germany’s Rocket Internet; Australia’s Kikka Capital, which gets tech backing from U.S.-based Kabbage; America’s Ondeck, which is working with MYOB, a software company; Moula, which began offering funding this year but considers itself ahead of the curve because it formed two years ago; and PayPal, the giant American payments company.
The new entrants are joining ‘pioneers’ that have been around a few years, like Prospa, which has been working for three years with New York-based Strategic Funding Source, and Capify (formerly AUSvance until it was consolidated into the international brand Capify), which came to market in 2008 with merchant cash advances and started offering small-business loans in 2012.
Some don’t take the newcomers that seriously. “There are small players I’ve never heard of,” said John de Bree, managing director of Capify’s Sydney-based office, in a reference to local Australian funders. “The big ones like OnDeck and Kabbage don’t have the local experience.”
But many players view the influx as a good sign. “I think it’s an endorsement of the market,” Bertoli said. “There’s more publicity and more credibility for what we’re doing here in terms of alternative finance.” It’s like the merchant who gets more business when a competing store opens across the street.
Besides, the market remains far from crowded. “I’m not concerned about the arrival of OnDeck and Kabbage because it really does validate our model,” maintained Aris Allegos, who serves as Moula CEO and cofounded the company with Andrew Watt.
The market’s relatively small size – at least compared to the U.S. – doesn’t seem to bother players accustomed to the heavily populated U.S., a development some observers didn’t expect. “I’m very surprised,” de Bree said of the American interest in Australia. “The American market’s 15 times the size of ours.”
Others see nothing but potential in Australia. “This is a market that will evolve over time, and we think the opportunity is enormous,” said Lachlan Heussler, managing director of Spotcap Australia.
Some view the Australian rush to alternative finance not so much as a solitary phenomenon but instead as part of a worldwide explosion of interest in the segment, driven by banks’ reluctance to provide loans since the financial crisis, de Bree said.
Viewed independently or in a larger context, the flurry of activity in Australia is new. “The boom is probably only getting started,” Bertoli maintained in a reference to the Australian market. “Right now, it’s about getting the foundation of the market established.”
To get the business underway in Australia, alternative funders are alerting small-business owners and the media to the fact that alternative funding is becoming available and teaching them how it works, de Bree said. “Half of our job is educating the market,” noted Heussler.
New players are building the track record they need to bring down the cost of funds, according to Allegos. “Our base rate is 2 percent or 3 percent higher than yours,” he said, adding that the cost of funds is more challenging than gearing up the tech side of the business.
Although the alternative-lending business started later in Australia than in the United States and lags behind America in in exposure, it’s maturing rapidly, said de Bree. Aussie funders are benefitting from the lessons their counterparts have learned in the U.S., he said.
But the exchange of information flows both ways. Kabbage, for example, chose to enter the Australian market with a local partner, Kikka. Kabbage learned from its earlier foray into the United Kingdom that it makes sense to work with colleagues who understand the local regulatory system and culture, said Pete Steger, head of business development for Atlanta-based Kabbage.
Such differences mean that risk-assessment platforms that work in the United States or Europe require localization before they can perform effectively in Australia, sources said.
Sydney-based Prospa, for example, got its start three years ago and has been working ever since with New York-based Strategic Funding Source to localize the SFS American risk-assessment platform for Australia, said Bertoli, who shares the company CEO title with Greg Moshal.
Moula, which has headquarters in Melbourne, sees so many differences among markets that it decided to build its own local platform from scratch, according to Allegos.
One key difference between the two markets is that Australia does not have positive credit reporting. “We have nothing that even comes close to a FICO score,” said Allegos. The only credit reporting centers on negative events, he said.
Without credit scores from credit bureaus, funders base their assessments of credit worthiness largely on transaction history. “It’s cash-flow analytics,” said Allegos. “It’s no different from the analysis you’re doing in your part of the world, but it becomes more significant” in the absence of positive credit reporting, he said.
Australia lacks credit scores at least partly because the country’s four main banks control most of the financial sector and choose not to release credit information, sources said. The banks have warded off attacks from all over the world because the regulatory environment supports them and because their management understands how to communicate with and sell to Australian customers, sources said.
The big banks – Commonwealth Bank, Westpac, Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, and National Australia Bank – set their own rules and have kept money tight by requiring secured loans and long waiting periods, Bertoli said. It’s difficult for merchants who don’t fit into a “particular box” to procure funding, he maintained. “It’s almost like an oligarchy,” Allegos said of the banks’ grip on the financial system.
Eventually, the banks may form partnerships with alternative lenders, but that day won’t come soon, in Allegos’ estimation. It could be 12 months or more away, he said.
Even as the financial system evolves, deep-seated differences will remain between Australia and the U.S. Most Americans and Australians speak English and share many views and values, but the cultures of the two countries differ greatly in ways that affect marketing, Bertoli said. “In your face” advertising that can work well with “loud, confident” Americans can offend the more “laid-back” Australian consumers and business owners, he said.
Australians have become tech-savvy and comfortable with online banking, but they guard their privacy and often hesitate to reveal their banking information to a funding company, Allegos said. The entrance of OnDeck and Kabbage should help familiarize potential customers with the practice of sharing data, he predicted.
Cost structures for businesses differ in Australia from the U.S., Bertoli noted. Australian companies pay higher rent and have to pay minimum wages set much higher than in the United States, he said. Published reports set the Australian minimum wage at $13.66 U.S. dollars. The higher costs down under can take a toll on cash flow. “Take an American scorecard and apply it to Australia?” Bertoli asked rhetorically. “You just can’t.”
Distribution’s not the same for commercial enterprises in the two countries, Bertoli maintained. Despite having about the same geographic area as America’s 48 contiguous states, Australia has a population of 23 million, compared with America’s 322 million.
No matter how many people are involved, changing their habits takes time. Australian merchants prefer fixed-term loans or lines of credits instead of merchant cash advances, Bertoli said. In many cases Australian merchants simply aren’t as familiar as Americans are with advances, Allegos said.
Besides, the four big banks in Australia tend to solicit merchants for credit and debit card transactions without the help of the independent sales organizations and sales agents. In the U.S., ISOs and agents play an important role in explaining and promoting advances to merchants, Bertoli said. Advances make sense for merchants because advances adjust to cash flow, and they help funders control risk, but just haven’t caught on in Australia, Bertoli said. Australians resist advances if too many fees are attached, said Allegos.
Pledging a portion of daily card receipts might seem too frequent, too, he said. Besides, advances are limited to merchants who accept debit and credit cards, while any business could conceivably choose to take out a loan, said de Bree.
Advances have to compete with inventory factoring, which has become a massive business in Australia, according to Heussler. The business can become intrusive because funders may have to examine balance sheets and talk to customers, he said.
Australia’s reluctance to turn to advances, leaves most alternative funders promoting loans and lines of credit. Prospa, for example, uses some brokers to that end but also relies on online connections, direct contact with customers, and referrals from companies that buy and sell with small and medium-sized businesses.
“Anyone that touches a small business is a potential partner,” said Heussler, including finance brokers, accountants, lawyers and even credit unions, which have the distribution but not the product.
Moula finds that most of its business comes from well-established companies and that loans average just over $27,000 in U.S. currency and they offer loans of up to more than $77,000 U.S. The company offers straight-line, six- to 12-month amortizing loans.
Using a model that differs from what’s common in the U.S., Moula charges 1 percent every two weeks, collects payments every two weeks and charges no additional fees, Allegos said. A $10,000 (Australian) loan for six months would accrue $714 (Australian) in interest, he noted.
Spotcap Australia offers a three-month unsecured line of credit and doesn’t charge customers for setting it up, Heussler said. If the business owner decided to draw down, it turns into a six-month amortizing business loan for up to $100,000 Australian. Rates vary according to risk, starting at half a percent per month but averaging 1.5% per month.
If companies have all of the necessary information at hand, they can complete an application in 10 minutes, Allegos said. Moula has to research some applications offline if the company’s structure deviates too greatly from the usual examples – much the same as in the U.S., he maintained. The latter requires strong customer-service departments, he said.
Kikka uses a platform based on the Kabbage model, which gives 95 percent of customers a 100-percent automated experience, Steger said. “It goes to show the power of our automation, our algorithms and our platform,” he maintained.
Spotcap prefers to deal with businesses that have been operating for at least six months, Heusler said. The funder examines records for Australia’s value-added tax and other financials, and it likes to connect with the merchant’s bank account. Spotcap can usually gain access to the account information through cloud-based accounting systems and thus doesn’t require most companies to download a lot of financial documents, he noted.
Despite the differences between the two countries, banking regulations bear similarities in Australia and the United States, sources said. In both nations the government tries harder to protect consumers than businesses because they assume business owners are more financially savvy. For consumers, regulators scrutinize length of term and pricing, sources said, and on the commercial side the government is concerned about money laundering and privacy.
Regulation of commercial funding will probably intensify, however, to ward off predatory lending, Bertoli said. Government will consult with businesses before imposing rules, he said. A couple of alternative business funders aren’t transparent with their pricing and they charge several fees – that sort of behavior will encourage regulation, Allegos said.
“I know they’re watching us – and watching us very closely,” he added.
In general, however, the Australian government supports alternative finance, Bertoli said, because they want there to be options other than the four big banks and wants small business to have access to capital. Small businesses account for 46 percent of economic activity in Australia and employ 70 percent of the workforce, he noted, saying that “if small businesses are doing badly, the economy is doing badly.”
Hence the need, many in the industry would say, for more alternative funding options in Australia.
Letter From the Editor – September/October 2015
September 1, 2015
If you hadn’t noticed, we’ve got an executive on the cover of this issue. And why shouldn’t we? However alternative the industry’s roots might be, today’s small business funders are more like bankers than ever before.
But they didn’t all start off that way. Some of the industry’s leaders come from modest backgrounds outside of finance and we explore one of those stories in this edition.
Jared Weitz got his start in the industry at a company that was founded before the financial crisis. And that got me wondering if the funders that have been around for a decade or more possessed some secret recipe or knowledge that made them so successful. In The Decade Club, we reached out to several leaders to hear their perspectives and glean advice for you, the reader, somebody who potentially has not been in this business for at least ten years.
And if you’re new and just now walking through the industry’s front door, you’ll want to make sure your deals don’t slip out the back door. As some brokers have shared here, there is a potential for a deal to end up somewhere you may not have intended it to.
There is a reason that the term ‘deal’ is most often used to describe some of the business financing products we cover and that’s because at the heart of each transaction is a deal worked out between at least two commercial entities. A small business is still a business (just smaller) but there are folks that don’t exactly agree. I consider it important to point out the distinction and the extent to which the differences are respected in American culture. Even if you disagree with my assessment, surely there are opinions and viewpoints where we can find common ground.
A wide array of ideas has been shared lately and some of those have been expressed more vocally and more publicly than others. One thing that I have learned is that there is no perfect concept or methodology for success in this business. All you can try to do is serve your clients and yourselves as best you can.
–Sean Murray
Debt Settlement: A Partner to Alternative Lenders?
August 23, 2015
Call it the flip side of the coin, the part of the universe that helps consumers get out of debt, rather than take more on. Debt settlement, as it’s called, has a bit of a murky reputation thanks to a number of unscrupulous players that operated prior to the implementation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule in 2010.
On October 27th, five years ago, for-profit companies that sold debt relief services over the phone could no longer charge a fee before they settled or reduced a customer’s unsecured debt.
“That law forever changed the industry for the better,” said a company representative at National Debt Relief (NDR), a New York City-based debt settlement firm.
Located right in front of the Bull at 11 Broadway, NDR occupies two floors and employs over four hundred people. And while it may seem that their business model is at odds with the dozens of loan brokers that operate in the neighborhood, they’re actually finding ways to work together.
“We’re monetizing their declines,” said a company representative. Indeed, alternative lenders like to talk about the amount of loans they can issue, but thousands of consumers are ultimately declined.
What those consumers do next and where they go is a storyline that doesn’t get much attention. NDR offers to the consumer an alternative route to become debt free in 36 months.
“NDR is enrolling thousands of consumers per month,” said a company representative. The A+ BBB rating and firm regulatory compliance has enabled them to land several strategic partnerships in this industry ranging from merchant cash advance com- panies to peer-to-peer lenders.
“We’ve found that 36% of declines from alternative lenders fit our criteria,” said a company representative. Too much debt is one obvious reason that applicants are getting declined from some of these companies in the first place. And to that end, NDR strives to provide them relief. One condition however is that the client not use credit while in the program.
NDR operates in 42 states and requires a minimum of $10,000 of unsecured debt to be eligible. They are also an accredited member of the American Fair Credit Council, a consumer credit advocacy association that touts the strictest code of conduct in the industry.
At the 2015 LendIt Conference in NYC, NDR stood out as a Gold Sponsor.
“Everybody wanted to know what we did,” said Michael Drehwing who was there as the company’s representative. “I told them we want to monetize your declines. How simple is that?”






























