Stolen Deals? How One Funder Used Technology to Say ‘No More’
March 14, 2017
It’s another chapter in the saga of stolen deals, a problem that shops all over the country seem to be grappling with. For Miami-based Greenbox Capital, company CEO Jordan Fein hoped it was something that they didn’t have to worry about. But believing it was better to be safe than sorry, Greenbox launched a 90-day probe to review all controls and personnel to see if theft existed in their organization and how it was being done. They weren’t too happy with the results, which determined that there was indeed employee theft taking place.
Sources across the industry have told AltFinanceDaily that some employees will do things that make it easy to catch them, while others say that their tactics are constantly evolving. Disabling the USB ports isn’t enough, they say, since personal smart phones can be used to covertly steal data by simply taking pictures of a computer screen. Some say that apps like Snapchat are even making it increasingly easy for them to erase the evidence trail.
For Greenbox Capital, the probe convinced them that being a funding company meant they also needed to become a top-notch security company, especially since they are being entrusted with sensitive information. It’s their ISOs’ deals they have to protect, they say. Understanding how important that is, the company designed proprietary software to monitor the actions of all users on their system, which allows them to know who clicked on what when, and for how long. But that wasn’t enough, they insist. They also developed algorithms to detect suspicious behavior and their security team receives an alert whenever it gets triggered.
And it’s not just what someone clicked on or downloaded, they say, since their system also analyzes phone call activity, texting activity, wifi activity and the number of absences from one’s desk. The implication from that, of course, is that they must be incorporating video surveillance, which they confirmed they are.
They’re not alone. Chad Otar, CEO of Excel Capital Management, an ISO based in New York City, says that when it comes to their office, they have “eyes and ears everywhere.” Otar explains that because commission payouts can be so high, even experienced salespeople can feel tempted to risk their jobs to get their hands on good leads. Some will try to use different emails accounts on the office computer, using their private ones to transact information they’re not supposed to. To prevent that, they’re using Google Vault. “It allows us to monitor all emails going out and coming in from everyone’s account that is linked to the server,” he explains. “And if they try to access another email account, it blocks them.”
But even while threats like Snapchat exist, Otar says some employees will take a low-tech approach and hide valuable information in the trash bin and then offer or attempt to “take out the trash.”
For Greenbox, thanks to their new platform, they were actually able to catch two employees who were stealing data and actually selling deals on the black market.
A black market?
To put such behavior in perspective, 3 years ago, the name and phone number for someone qualified and interested in working capital could fetch $200 through normal lead channels. These days, sources say it can cost several thousand dollars in marketing just to fund a single deal and that a good lead is worth more than gold.
Greenbox believes that all companies should stop and take a close look at the controls they have in place to catch internal theft. Determined to prevent what they found from ever happening again, they say they now have the tightest internal controls in the industry and advise all businesses to rethink their approach to data security. “As it stands today there is no safer place to send your deals,” company CEO Jordan Fein says.
Of note, readers should stand to realize that getting caught might not just mean embarrassment or termination. Last year, a former MCA sales rep pled guilty to attempted criminal possession of computer related material for being on the receiving end of stolen deal information and using it. Since then, other companies have privately suggested that this was not the only deal-stealing situation that has involved law enforcement and that data theft is a serious offense.
Excel Capital Management‘s Otar says that if you create a sense of pride and loyalty in your workplace, your own employees will report any bad behavior they witness to you.
For Greenbox Capital, they believe their cloud-based system and advanced algorithm is not just about funding more deals, it’s about protecting the integrity of the entire process and maintaining trust.
Stealing deals? it’s not worth the risk.
Some Alternative Funders See Pot As Next Big Market Opportunity
October 17, 2016
For some funders, marijuana is not just about sewing their wild oats. Rather, they see the business potential of being early to what’s expected to be a highly profitable and long-lasting party.
Indeed, for the right type of funder, doling out money to marijuana-related businesses is a promising market—certainly in the short term because these companies are so capital-starved. Because marijuana is still classified by the feds as an illegal drug, many related businesses can’t even get a bank account much less access to bank loans or more traditional funding. Many alternative funders are also unwilling to lend to marijuana-related businesses, which has left a significant void that’s beginning to be filled by opportunistic private equity investors, venture capitalists and others.
Meanwhile, rapidly shifting public opinion and state-centered initiatives bode well for what many estimate is a multi-billion dollar market. Indeed, industry watchers say marijuana funding will eventually be an even stronger niche than lending to alcohol producers, tobacco companies or pharmaceuticals because of all the ancillary business opportunities related to medical marijuana use.
“I think it’s probably the biggest opportunity we’ve seen since the Internet,” says Steve Gormley, managing partner and chief executive at Seventh Point LLC, a Norwalk, Connecticut-based private equity firm that invests in the cannabis industry. “Consumption continues to grow and demand is there,” he notes.
Despite shifting public opinion, legalized marijuana use is still quite controversial. So, all things considered, it takes a particularly thick-skinned funding company—one that has no moral objectives to marijuana and is also willing to accept a significant amount of legal, business and reputational risk—to throw its hat in the ring.
One of the biggest challenges keeping banks and many mainstream funders at bay is that cannabis remains illegal under law. Despite numerous attempts by proponents to scrap marijuana’s outlaw status, the DEA recently dealt out a significant blow by opting to maintain the status quo. This means that for the foreseeable future marijuana remains a Schedule I drug, on par with LSD and heroin, and as a result many lenders will choose to remain on the sidelines for now.
It remains promising, however, that over the past several years, the federal government has taken a more laissez-faire approach, giving individual states the authority to decide how they will deal with legalizing marijuana use. Forty-two states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories of Puerto Rico and Guam have adopted laws recognizing marijuana’s medical value, according to the Marijuana Policy Project, an advocacy group. Four states—Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and Colorado—as well as the District of Columbia have gone even further. They allow the recreational use of marijuana for adults, with certain restrictions. Meanwhile, marijuana initiatives are on the November ballot in numerous states.
As these changes have percolated, forward-thinking alternative funders have been dipping their toes in the market—getting an early start on a market that’s hungrily looking for growth capital. “The last couple years there have been fewer investors than capital needed, but we believe that tide is changing,” says Morgan Paxhia, managing director and chief investor of Poseidon Asset Management LLC in San Francisco, an investment management company founded in 2013 to invest exclusively in the cannabis industry.
Paxhia says he’s starting to see more venture capitalists, lease-finance companies and private equity investors willing to provide liquidity to marijuana-based companies that are seeking to grow. The short-term cash advance marketplace, however, is not there yet. The challenge is finding funders willing to do the business with them.
“The people that are building these businesses have to always be worried about their cash. It’s not a given that they’ll get new additional investment,” Paxhia says. “Most people are quick to brush it aside. They won’t give it a minute to take a serious look at it and understand that it is already a multi-billion dollar market growing at 30 percent annualized for the next several years,”
A QUIETLY GROWING INDUSTRY
There are a number of private investors and venture capitalists who have spent the last several years researching and ramping up to invest in what they see as a goldmine of business opportunities. Many of these companies aren’t shy about publicly expressing their support for change.
“We see this as an opportunity of a lifetime to witness a societal change and we want to be a part of it,” says Paxhia who together with his sister runs a $10 million investment fund.
At the same time, there are also some alternative funders who dabble in this space and won’t discuss it publicly—partly because of the perceived stigma and partly out of concern that their financial backers won’t approve. To cover themselves, some are only willing to deal with companies that have hard assets. Often times the rates they offer are much higher than businesses in other industries with comparable financials would pay.
Andrew Vanam, founder of Rx Capital Funding LLC, an ISO in Norwalk, Connecticut, who focuses on the healthcare and medical industry, has helped a handful of few marijuana-related businesses get funding in the past few years and would love to help facilitate more deals. But he says it’s extremely difficult to find lenders that are willing to fund cannabis-related businesses as well as offer reasonable rates. Many of the files he generates in the cannabis space have incredible financials, positive cash flow, and month-on-month growth. However, lenders still treat these businesses as high-risk and offer rates so high it’s not even worth bringing back to a client. Instead, “they are taking hard money loans from private investors that put these cash advance offers to shame,” he says.
ASSESSING THE RISKS
Certainly there are risks to funding marijuana businesses. In Colorado—one of the first states to legalize the recreational use of marijuana—values are getting lofty, and people are overpaying for properties that house marijuana-related businesses, notes Glen Weinberg, a partner in Fairview Commercial Lending, a hard-money lender with offices in Atlanta and Evergreen, Colorado.
Weinberg has financed between 75 and 100 commercial real estate loans where marijuana businesses were involved, but says recently he’s shied away. “I’m not comfortable with the valuations at a lot of these marijuana properties,” he says.
Even investors who are bullish on the space urge caution. “If you’re in a [nationwide] market that is growing at about 64 percent per year, that rising tide floats all boats, but there’s a lot of risk, so you have to be careful,” says Chet Billingsley, chief executive of Mentor Capital Inc., a public operating company in Ramona, California, which acquires and provides liquidity for medical and social use cannabis companies.
Billingsley says he has learned some hard lessons through his dealings with about nine marijuana-related companies. For example, he recently won a court judgment against a company that Mentor had supplied with millions of dollars in cash and stock. The company later balked at the terms of the deal and tried to renege, but Mentor ultimately prevailed in court. Still, Billingsley says Mentor went through many unnecessary hassles and racked up $300k in legal costs over the course of its two-and-a-half-year legal battle.
Many business owners in the marijuana space started out during a period when it w as completely illegal. Often these companies march to the beat of their own drum; to protect themselves, lenders need to do more than offer a standard funding contract and hope for the best, Billingsley says.
“The contract has to be solid and it has to be explained in detail to the marijuana operator who is often not sophisticated with regard to contracts.” If you leave things open to interpretation, you’re likely to end up in court, where anything can happen, he cautions.
Companies that fund cannabis businesses say they have very extensive vetting processes—so much so that they turn away a good portion of requests. Jeffrey Howard, managing partner of Salveo Capital in Chicago, says about two-thirds of the companies that come across his desk don’t make it past the company’s initial criteria. “We see a ton of companies and business plans from companies seeking capital to raise money,” he says. “We are going to be very selective about who we invest in and how much.”
Gormley, of Seventh Point, leverages all the same resources he would if he were buying any retail or production manufacturing outfit. He does extremely invasive vetting of the individuals involved and uses private detectives to help.
It many cases it comes down to the business’s management team, according to Paxhia of Poseidon Asset Management. “All the businesses are very early-stage and most companies have a very short track record, so you have to place a greater emphasis on the people,” he says.
OPPORTUNITIES ABOUND
Despite the risks, funders that work in the marijuana space say they are filling an important need by providing capital to marijuana-related businesses. For Gormley of Seventh Point, it’s a calculated risk in an area he’s been following for quite some time. “How often do you get to be part of history, and how often do you get to participate in a burgeoning market?” he says.
Industry participants stress the many funding opportunities aside from companies that cultivate and distribute the plant. Indeed, there are many ancillary businesses that provide products and services geared towards patients and cannabis users without having anything to do with the actual plant.
Howard of Salveo Capital, says his company is gearing up to provide private equity and venture capital to several marijuana-related businesses through its Salveo Fund I and will only make select investments into companies that “touch the plant.” The goal is to eventually have $25 million of committed capital to invest in multiple early-stage companies that offer ancillary products and services to the marijuana industry. “We think there’s more exciting opportunities than ‘touch the plant’ investments,” he says.
Crowdfunding platforms are another avenue for companies in the marijuana space. This type of funding hasn’t yet been utilized to its full potential, industry watchers say.
Eaze Solutions, a San Francisco-based provider of technology that optimizes medical marijuana delivery, is one example of a company that turned to crowdfunding. It raised part of a $1.5 million infusion to fund its expansion via the crowdfunding site AngelList in 2014. Loto Labs, in Redwood City, California, is another example. It raised more than $220k via Indiegogo to fund production of its Evoke vaporizer. There’s also CannaFundr, an online investment marketplace for companies in the cannabis industry to gain access to capital.
Seth Yakatan, co-founder of Katan Associates in Hermosa Beach, California, suggests that crowdfunding will become more of an option for certain types of cannabis based companies, specifically those that aren’t as closely tied to the actual production of the plant. “Until federal regulations change, it’s going to be hard to raise money for an entity where you are actively engaged in the cultivation, distribution or sales of a product that’s federally illegal,” says Yakatan, whose company invests in and advises cannabis-related companies that have a biotech or pharmaceutical orientation.
Because laws on legalized marijuana are still in limbo, industry watchers say the market is still many years away from being mainstream. “Public perception will be similar to alcohol in 10 years from now,” predicts Weinberg of Fairview Commercial Lending, adding that he expects banks to enter the funding arena in five to 10 years.
In the meantime, alternative funders who can stomach risk continue to pave the path for others. Howard of Salveo Capital expects private equity investors, venture capitalists and other alternative players to continue playing a big role in getting the nascent industry off the ground.
“I strongly believe that in the interim there’s a significant advantage for players like us to be funding and to be in on the ground floor of this industry before it changes,” Howard says.
Indeed, many alternative funders believe the potential upside significantly outweighs possible negative consequences. “The perceived risk at this point is far greater than the actual risk,” says Paxhia of Poseidon Asset Management.
Funding The Great White North
September 13, 2016
As of last year, 98 percent of Canada’s employers were small businesses compared to 0.3 percent (2,933) large companies. Given this and what we know about Canada’s banking oligarchy, dominated by five large banks, it was inevitable that American alternative lenders would go looking for greener pastures in Canada.
When OnDeck set foot in the country two years ago, it accelerated the alternative lending movement by offering loans up to $150,000 CAD. But OnDeck wasn’t the first to discover the Canadian market. Merchant cash advance companies such as Principis Capital and AmeriMerchant (today Capify) have been there since 2010. Principis actually draws close to 15 percent of its business volume from Canada. But the credit that’s due to OnDeck is for expanding the horizons of small businesses who have been conditioned to think that lending begins and ends with banks. The crop of Canadian alternative lenders who do not otherwise have the resources for similar blitzkreig marketing are pleased with the industry’s promotion in general.
“We are happy that some of the bigger US players are coming up here and they are spending millions of dollars on advertising,” said Bruce Marshall, vice president of British Columbia-based Company Capital. “These companies raise awareness of the industry to a higher level and with us being a smaller company, we can ride on their coattails,” he said.
Company Capital has been operating as a balance sheet lender for five years and has provided term loans, working capital loans, merchant cash advances and ‘cash lines’ which are similar to lines of credit. For lenders such as Company Capital which makes loans in the range of $30K – $50K, the presence of bigger players like OnDeck saves them from consumer education-oriented marketing campaigns. “We cannot compete with the advertising of big companies but it works in our favor of creating awareness and becoming more mainstream,” Marshall noted.
And this not only helps the Canadian companies but also smaller US companies that feel comfortable entering a market with a leader. OnDeck’s presence nudged Chad Otar, founder and managing partner of New York-based commercial finance brokerage Excel Capital Management into considering Canada as a viable market. “We saw OnDeck go there and thought that there is some kind of money we can make,” he said.
But for OnDeck, Canada might just as well be another large US state. Most American companies including OnDeck, Principis Capital and Excel Capital run their Canadian operations remotely, treating it much like an extension to their US business with similar products.
“Our range of business is virtually the same in Canada as in the US. We don’t need to have an operation center there,” said Jane Prokop, CEO of Principis Capital. The company approaches Canada just like the US with accounts and customer service being handled in a similar fashion. “It’s a very manageable extension of the US market,” Prokop said. “It’s a smaller market so someone who enters Canada cannot expect the same kinds of volume as in the US.”
It also certainly helps to be spread across the same time zones and in such close proximity where a majority of the country also speaks the same language. If it was that easy though, shouldn’t we have seen more companies doing this?
“The fundamentals of the Canadian market are different. Our banks are established and trusted and in general do quite a good job, so the opportunity for market expansion is different than in the US,” said Jeff Mitelman, CEO of Thinking Capital, one of the country’s first alternative lenders.
Prior to Thinking Capital, Mitelman founded and ran Cardex, Canada’s first ISO which offered lending products with payment services. And that competitive edge helped him recently to partner with payment solution company Everlink to expand its customer base and offer loans online. The company previously secured credit facilities worth $125 million from two of the biggest banks in the country, The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and Nova Scotia.
Picking up the same strategy, some American companies decided to bank on these big banks (pun intended) for their success. For instance with Kabbage, it made sense to license its automated platform to Nova Scotia Bank and to rely on them to deploy capital while Kabbage provides the technology and customer experience. “We saw that Canada is ripe for technology but the differences in regulation among other things made us go the partner route,” said Peter Steger, head of business development at Kabbage.
The advantages of having an incumbent customer base, the brand equity and the supply of capital usually outweighs the costs and inconveniences of maneuvering in an unfamiliar business environment that only a few firms have the bandwidth for, some companies contended.
Secondly, there is a lack of reliable and robust data necessary for making lending decisions. Since only a handful of large financial institutions dominate the landscape, the data reported is limited to a small number of players and the outputs from credit bureaus may not be sufficient for making a credit decision. “The availability and access to government and financial data is scarce in Canada compared to other markets,” said Jeff Mitelman. “Most of the data relationships that fintech companies rely on, need to be developed on a one-to-one basis and is often proprietary information.”
Having the data presented in the right format can save a lot of underwriting time. Companies in Canada find the government and financial data available to be scanty and in less than ideal form. David Gens, CEO of Vancouver-based Merchant Advance Capital noted that Canadian merchants are slower to adopt technology which adds to the woes of online lenders. “Believe it or not, some Canadian merchants still use fax,” he said.
Even as the country plays catch up, Canadian lenders consider the market to be large enough for many players. “At this time, education is more important than competition,” said Mitelman.
Canada’s geographical dispersion and regional differences however are peculiar. The four provinces of Quebec, Alberta, Ontario and British Columbia make up 86 percent of the population and the greater part of the economic activity. And Quebec is often avoided, in part because of the bilingual mandate that requires businesses to advertise and produce materials in French. OnDeck and Company Capital both do not operate there, for example.
The cultural differences can also determine how customer relationships are handled, and being a part of that culture has given Canadian companies an upper hand. “It does definitely help to have a home advantage in terms of understanding the local peculiarities,” said David Gens. “Marketing to Canadian merchants is also different — being aggressive might not work very well here and they like to know they are dealing with someone nearby.”
For financial brokers such as Otar, Canadian usury laws can appear restrictive. As per Canadian interest rate rules, Under Section 347 of the Criminal Code (Canada), interest rates exceeding 60 percent per annum are termed “criminal rates of interest” and “interest” in the Criminal Code is broadly defined as a broad range of fees, fines and expenses which includes legal expenses.
“US lenders have had to change their way of doing business. Since, APR is less here, if your product is a loan contract, you will be restricted and you will have to service low risk for low rates,” said David Gens.
Even so, the business emerging out of Canada may now be supplemental for American lenders and the potential for growth beneficial to diversification.
Stairway to Heaven: Can Alternative Finance Keep Making Dreams Come True?
April 28, 2016
The alternative small-business finance industry has exploded into a $10 billion business and may not stop growing until it reaches $50 billion or even $100 billion in annual financing, depending upon who’s making the projection. Along the way, it’s provided a vehicle for ambitious, hard-working and talented entrepreneurs to lift themselves to affluence.
Consider the saga of William Ramos, whose persistence as a cold caller helped him overcome homelessness and earn the cash to buy a Ferrari. Then there’s the journey of Jared Weitz, once a 20 something plumber and now CEO of a company with more than $100 million a year in deal flow.
Their careers are only the beginning of the success stories. Jared Feldman and Dan Smith, for example, were in their 20s when they started an alt finance company at the height of the financial crisis. They went on to sell part of their firm to Palladium Equity Partners after placing more than $400 million in lifetime deals.
The industry’s top salespeople can even breathe new life into seemingly dead leads. Take the case of Juan Monegro, who was in his 20s when he left his job in Verizon customer service and began pounding the phones to promote merchant cash advances. Working at first with stale leads, Monegro was soon placing $47 million in advances annually.
Alternative funding can provide a second chance, too. When Isaac Stern’s bakery went out of business, he took a job telemarketing merchant cash advances and went on to launch a firm that now places more than $1 billion in funding annually.
All of those industry players are leaving their marks on a business that got its start at the dawn of the new century. Long-time participants in the market credit Barbara Johnson with hatching the idea of the merchant cash advance in 1998 when she needed to raise capital for a daycare center. She and her husband, Gary Johnson, started the company that became CAN Capital. The firm also reportedly developed the first platform to split credit card receipts between merchants and funders.
BIRTH OF AN INDUSTRY
Competitors soon followed the trail those pioneers blazed, and the industry began growing prodigiously. “There was a ton of credit out there for people who wanted to get into the business,” recalled David Goldin, who’s CEO of Capify and serves as president of the Small Business Finance Association, one of the industry’s trade groups.
Many of the early entrants came from the world of finance or from the credit card processing business, said Stephen Sheinbaum, founder of Bizfi. Virtually all of the early business came from splitting card receipts, a practice that now accounts for just 10 percent of volume, he noted.
At first, brokers, funders and their channel partners spent a lot of time explaining advances to merchants who had never heard of them, Goldin said. Competition wasn’t that tough because of the uncrowded “greenfield” nature of the business, industry veterans agreed.
Some of the initial funding came from the funders’ own pockets or from the savings accounts of their elderly uncles. “I’ve met more than a few who had $2 million to $5 million worth of loans from friends and family in order to fund the advances to the merchants,” observed Joel Magerman, CEO of Bryant Park Capital, which places capital in the industry. “It was a small, entrepreneurial effort,” Andrea Petro, executive vice president and division manager of lender finance for Wells Fargo Capital Finance, said of the early days. “A number of these companies started with maybe $100,000 that they would experiment with. They would make 10 loans of $10,000 and collect them in 90 days.”
That business model was working, but merchant cash advances suffered from a bad reputation in the early days, Goldin said. Some players were charging hefty fees and pushing merchants into financial jeopardy by providing more funding than they could pay back comfortably. The public even took a dim view of reputable funders because most consumers didn’t understand that the risk of offering advances justified charging more for them than other types of financing, according to Goldin.
Then the dam broke. The economy crashed as the Great Recession pushed much of the world to the brink of financial disaster. “Everybody lost their credit line and default rates spiked,” noted Isaac Stern, CEO of Fundry, Yellowstone Capital and Green Capital. “There was almost nobody left in the business.”
RAVAGED BY RECESSION
Perhaps 80 percent of the nation’s alternative funding companies went out of business in the downturn, said Magerman. Those firms probably represented about 50 percent of the alternative funding industry’s dollar volume, he added. “There was a culling of the herd,” he said of the companies that failed.
Life became tough for the survivors, too. Among companies that stayed afloat, credit losses typically tripled, according to Petro. That’s severe but much better than companies that failed because their credit losses quintupled, she said.
Who kept the doors open? The firms that survived tended to share some characteristics, said Robert Cook, a partner at Hudson Cook LLP, a law office that specializes in alternative funding. “Some of the companies were self-funding at that time,” he said of those days. “Some had lines of credit that were established prior to the recession, and because their business stayed healthy they were able to retain those lines of credit.”
The survivors also understood risk and had strong, automated reporting systems to track daily repayment, Petro said. For the most part, those companies emerged stronger, wiser and more prosperous when the crisis wound down, she noted. “The legacy of the Great Recession was that survivors became even more knowledgeable through what I would call that ‘high-stress testing period of losses,’” she said.
ROAD TO RECOVERY
The survivors of the recession were ready to capitalize on the convergence of several factors favorable to the industry in about 2009. Taking advantages of those changes in the industry helped form a perfect storm of industry growth as the recession was ending.
They included making good use of the quick churn that characterizes the merchant cash advance business, Petro noted. The industry’s better operators had been able to amass voluminous data on the industry because of its short cycles. While a provider of auto loans might have to wait five years to study company results, she said, alternative funders could compile intelligence from four advances within the space of a year.
That data found a home in the industry around the time the recession was ending because funders were beginning to purchase or develop the algorithms that are continuing to increase the automation of the underwriting process, said Jared Weitz, CEO of United Capital Source LLC. As early as 2006, OnDeck became one of the first to rely on digital underwriting, and the practice became mainstream by 2009 or so, he said.
Just as the technology was becoming widespread, capital began returning to the market. Wealthy investors were pulling their funds out of real estate and needed somewhere to invest it, accounting for part of the influx of capital, Weitz said.
At the same time, Wall Street began to take notice of the industry as a place to position capital for growth, and companies that had been focused on consumer lending came to see alternative finance as a good investment, Cook said.
For a long while, banks had shied away from the market because the individual deals seem small to them. A merchant cash advance offers funders a hundredth of the size and profits of a bank’s typical small-business loan but requires a tenth of the underwriting effort, said David O’Connell, a senior analyst on Aite Group’s Wholesale Banking team.
The prospect of providing funds became even less attractive for banks. The recession had spawned the Dodd-Frank Financial Regulatory Reform Bill and Basel III, which had the unintended effect of keeping banks out of the market by barring them from endeavors where they’re inexperienced, Magerman said. With most banks more distant from the business than ever, brokers and funders can keep the industry to themselves, sources acknowledged.
At about the same time, the SBFA succeeded in burnishing the industry’s image by explaining the economic realities to the press, in Goldin’s view.The idea that higher risk requires bigger fees was beginning to sink in to the public’s psyche, he maintained.
Meanwhile, loans started to join merchant cash advances in the product mix. Many players began to offer loans after they received California finance lenders licenses, Cook recalled. They had obtained the licenses to ward off class-action lawsuits, he said and were switching from sharing card receipts to scheduled direct debits of merchants’ bank accounts.
As those advantages – including algorithms, ready cash, a better image and the option of offering loans – became apparent, responsible funders used them to help change the face of the industry. They began to make deals with more credit-worthy merchants by offering lower fees, more time to repay and improved customer service. “The recession wound up differentiating us in the best possible way,” Bizfi’s Sheinbaum said of the changes.
His company found more-upscale customers by concentrating on industries that weren’t hit too hard by the recession. “With real estate crashing, people were not refurbishing their homes or putting in new flooring,” he noted.
Today, the booming alternative finance industry is engendering success stories and attracting the nation’s attention. The increased awareness is prompting more companies to wade into the fray, and could bring some change.
WHAT LIES AHEAD
One variety of change that might lie ahead could come with the purchase of a major funding company by a big bank in the next couple of years, Bryant Park Capital’s Magerman predicted. A bank could sidestep regulation, he suggested, by maintaining that the credit card business and small business loans made through bank branches had provided the banks with the experience necessary to succeed.
Smaller players are paying attention to the industry, too, with varying degrees of success. Predictably, some of the new players are operating too aggressively and could find themselves headed for a fall. “Anybody can fund deals – the talent lies in collecting the money back at a profitable level,” said Capify’s Goldin. “There’s going to be a shakeout. I can feel it.”
Some of today’s alternative lenders don’t have the skill and technology to ward off bad deals and could thus find themselves in trouble if recession strikes, warned Aite Group’s O’Connell. “Let’s be careful of falling into the trap of ‘This time is different,’” he said. “I see a lot of sub-prime debt there.”
Don’t expect miracles, cautioned Petro. “I believe there will be another recession, and I believe that there will be a winnowing of (alternative finance) businesses,” she said. “There will be far fewer after the next recession than exist today.”
A recession would spell trouble, Magerman agreed, even though demand for loans and advances would increase in an atmosphere of financial hardship. Asked about industry optimists who view the business as nearly recession-proof, he didn’t hold back. “Don’t believe them,” he warned. “Just because somebody needs capital doesn’t mean they should get capital.”
Further complicating matters, increased regulatory scrutiny could be lurking just beyond the horizon, Petro predicted. She provided histories of what regulation has done to other industries as an indication of the differing outcomes of regulation – one good, one debatable and one bad.
Good: The timeshare business benefitted from regulation because the rules boosted the public’s trust.
Debatable: The cost of complying with regulations changed the rent-to-own business from an entrepreneurial endeavor to an environment where only big corporations could prosper.
Bad: Regulation appears likely to alter the payday lending business drastically and could even bring it to an end, she said.
Still, regulation’s good side seems likely to prevail in the alternative finance business, eliminating the players who charge high fees or collect bloated commissions, according to Weitz. “I think it could only benefit the industry,” he said. “It’ll knock out the bad guys.”
Having Problems With Leads? Don’t Feel Alone
April 24, 2016
Having problems with leads? Don’t feel alone. Funders and lead providers say response rates to offline marketing have been cut in half while the price of pay-per-click campaigns has skyrocketed. They blame intense competition in an increasingly crowded field of funders, market saturation by lead generation companies, better email spam filters and comparison shopping by small-business owners who are becoming more savvy about how much they need to pay for merchant cash advances and loans.
Clicks that cost $5 each seven years ago now command a price of nearly $125, says Isaac Stern, CEO of Yellowstone Capital LLC, Green Capital and Fundry. “Pay-per-click marketing has gotten out of control,” he laments. “So you need a hefty, hefty budget to compete in that world.” He reports spending $600,000 to $700,000 a month on internet marketing, compared to $100,000 monthly on direct mail.
Even when the price of individual clicks isn’t measured in hundreds of dollars, the cost of the multiple clicks required to create a lead can mount up, according to Michael O’Hare, CEO of Blindbid, a Colorado Springs, Colo.- based provider of leads. If it takes 15 clicks that cost $25 each to obtain a lead, that comes to $375, he notes. Still, some companies manage to use key words that cost $8 or so per click to get decent leads for less than $100, he says.
While the cost of pay per click is exploding, the response to direct mail marketing is declining precipitously, says Bob Squiers, who owns the Deerfield, Fla.-based Meridian Leads. The percentage of small-business owners who respond to advertising they receive in the mail has fallen from 2 percent just a few years ago to 1 percent now, partly because they receive so many mailings from so many more lead-generation companies, he says. “There weren’t too many people doing direct mail into this space five years ago,” he notes. His company’s leads range in price from pennies to $60, he says.
While Blindbid and Meridian both specialize in finding leads by sending out direct mail pieces and then qualifying the respondents in phone conversations, one of their competitors, Lenders Marketing, takes a different approach, according to Justin Benton, sales director for the Camarillo, Calif.-based company. Benton’s data-driven method combines his company’s databases with the databases of financial institutions. He cultivates relationships with the banking industry’s executives to facilitate that process, he says, and his company does not make phone calls to qualify leads.
But placing too high a value on data gives rise to two problems, the way O’Hare views the search for leads. First, analyzing the data creates plenty of challenges, he says. Second, human beings just aren’t rational enough in their decision-making to fit data-driven profiles or cohorts, he maintains. “The holy grail is to find some algorithm that will predict that a merchant needs funding, and they can then find these people through massive data,” he says with skepticism.
Whatever path a company takes to finding and verifying leads, it pays to establish three elements before classifying them, O’Hare says. First, prospects should qualify financially for credit or advances. Second, prospects should demonstrate a genuine interest in obtaining funding, as opposed to less-than-serious “tire kicking.” With both of those characteristics in place, O’Hare informs prospects they can expect to hear from funders.
Blindbid also wants to guide the expectations of the funders who are calling the leads, O’Hare says. To that end, the vendor invites funders to listen to recordings of the phone calls it makes to qualify leads. Just the same, funders should bear in mind that they may not receive the same reception when they contact the lead, he cautions. “We see it all the time, he says. “We speak to the merchant in the morning and they’re pleasant. Then in the afternoon when they speak to the funder or the broker, the merchant is grumpy.”
Retailers’ mood swings aside, funders can soon gauge the quality of the leads they’re buying. “You can’t judge a lead on cost, Squiers admonishes. “Judge them by performance.” However, performance fluctuates according to the funder’s sales skills, product offering and product knowledge, he maintains.
Meanwhile, the problems plaguing the lead business should prompt funders to become creative in their approach to finding prospects. That’s why even vendors who make their living selling leads encourage funders to search for prospects on their own. “We always advise generating your own leads,” says Benton. “The only leads you can truly count on are the ones you generate yourself.”
Knowing where to look for leads can require a thorough grasp of what’s happening in a particular market. “You can look at what industries are hot,” O’hare suggests. The trucking business is heating up, for example, because so many truckers need funding to buy expensive equipment to meet new requirements for electronic logs, he says. Meanwhile, the recession has wracked the martial arts industry, so dojos might require funding for marketing to help them recover, he notes.
Understanding every industry in that much detail isn’t practical, so lead generation companies urge funders to specialize in just a few niches. Building a network of customers who know each other can result in referrals, Benton observes. It also soothes skeptical prospects, he notes. “Once you say I’ve worked with Fred down at Tony Roma’s – they can feel more comfortable, especially if you’ve done it in the same city,” he maintains.
Whether leads arise internally or come from a vendor, funders have to work them properly to succeed in closing deals, lead-generating companies agree. “The real key is being consistent and persistent,” Benton says. “Research has shown the average lead is called 1.3 times, so once you make that second call you are ahead of the curve.” He advocates that funders use their CRM system by taking copious notes on their calls, setting up nurture campaigns and following up with leads in an organized manner.
And don’t forget that at least some prospects are getting pummeled with calls. “A lot of brokers are carpet bombing – they’re on the phone all day,” says O’Hare. “I talked to one guy who said he makes 400 or 500 calls a day on a manual dial. I’d like to do a video of that.
SCORCHED EARTH – Controversial Bill Could Eliminate Marketplace Lending, Merchant Cash Advance and Nonbank Business Loans in Illinois (and starve small businesses in the process)
April 9, 2016
The State of Illinois wants to make it a Class A misdemeanor for providing small businesses with quick, easy working capital.
The world’s strangest bill, dubbed the Small Business Lending Act, could send marketplace lenders, nonbanks, and merchant cash advance companies to prison for up to 1 year if applicants don’t submit at the very least, their most recent six months bank statements, the previous year’s tax return, a current P&L, a current balance sheet, and an accounts receivable aging.
Loans in which the monthly payments exceed at least 50% of the business’s monthly net income would be illegal, which implies that any business that is either breaking even or running at a loss would be banned from obtaining a loan from alternative sources.
This is not an April Fools’ prank. Not even preemption granted under the National Bank Act or Federal Deposit Insurance Act is safe.
Introduced into the State Senate under the pretense that it would squash predatory lenders, the bill’s licensing and compliance proposal would also effectively outlaw marketplace lending and securitizations by making the sale of loans illegal unless it’s to a bank or another state-licensed party. Even merchant cash advances are referenced specifically but almost as an afterthought and defined in such a way that even traditional factoring companies may be in jeopardy.
No licensee or other person shall pledge, assign, hypothecate, or sell a small business loan entered into under this Act by a borrower except to another licensee under this Act, a licensee under the Sales Finance Agency Act, a bank, savings bank, community development financial institution, savings and loan association, or credit union created under the laws of this State or the United States, or to other persons or entities authorized by the Secretary in writing. Sales of such small business loans by licensees under this Act or other persons shall be made by agreement in writing and shall authorize the Secretary to examine the loan documents so hypothecated, pledged, or sold.
At a time when most fintech lenders are advocating for smart regulation, the State of Illinois apparently wants to end all nonbank commercial finance under $250,000 completely, with the exception of one organization (which we’ll get to shortly).
There are some exemptions granted under this proposal of course. Loans over $250,000 aren’t subject to it, nor are any loans made by Illinois-based banks or credit unions, that is unless they are acting as the agent for another party like say perhaps a marketplace lender.
Hidden inside is also an exemption for nonprofit lenders, a loophole left open for Accion Chicago, the nonprofit masterminds behind the bill who seem to want the entire state’s lending market all for themselves.
Illinois State Senator Jacqueline Collins Introduced This Bill
Senator Collins introduced the legislation as an amendment to Senate Bill 2865 on April 6th. A former journalist, she’s now the chairwoman of the Illinois Senate Financial Institutions Committee. Among her self-professed accolades is that she “has played a key role in addressing predatory lending and high foreclosure rates in Chicago through legislation that protects homebuyers and homeowners with subprime mortgages.” She lists the Mortgage Rescue Fraud Act, the landmark Sudan Divestment Act and the Payday Loan Reform Act among her major legislative accomplishments.
It’s no surprise then that sections of the bill are borrowed straight out of the Payday Loan Reform Act. Collins isn’t acting on her own however…
Chicago City Treasurer Kurt Summers
In January, Senator Collins joined Chicago City Treasurer Kurt Summers in a call for “new legislation to protect small business owners from misleading and dishonest predatory lenders.” In a closed-door hearing, the committee supposedly heard from business owners, advocates and elected officials on predatory lending.
“Chicago’s small business community deserves protection from the unchecked greed of predatory lenders,” Treasurer Summers said. “While access to capital is the number one concern of small business owners across the state, bank and commercial loans continue to decline, steering them to underhanded lenders. As we continue to urge banking partners to increase their local investment, this new, common-sense legislation would ensure transparency in lending that so often puts our entrepreneurs at risk.”
Of note is his use of the phrase “banking partners” since this bill has bankers all over it, as we’ll get into shortly. Summers represents the Chicago Mayor’s office and the Mayor’s office says they’ve launched this campaign thanks to partners like Accion Chicago.
Hon. Kurt Summers, Treasurer, City of Chicago from City Club of Chicago on Vimeo.
Accion Chicago and the Mayor’s Office
Last year, Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced a joint campaign with Accion Chicago to help small businesses avoid predatory lending.
Accion Chicago, ironically makes business loans themselves, having originated 535 loans totaling $4.8 million in 2014 with a maximum loan size of $100,000.
Who is Accion Chicago really?
The Small Business Lending Act virtually ensures that small business loans under $250,000 only be facilitated by banks and nonprofits. Isn’t it convenient then that Accion Chicago is not only a nonprofit, but also funded and staffed by banks?
According to their 2014 annual report, Citibank and JPMorgan Chase were two of their three largest supporters (the third was the US Treasury!). Below are some of the figures:
$100,000+
- Citibank
- JPMorgan Chase
$50,000 – $99,999
- Bank of America
$20,000 – $49,999
- Fifth Third Bank
- PNC Bank
- U.S. Bank
$5,000 – $19,999
- American Chartered Bank
- Alliant Credit Union
- BMO Harris Bank
- First Bank of Highland Park
- First Eagle Bank
- First Midwest Bank
- Ridgestone Bank
- State Bank of India
- The PrivateBank
- Wells Fargo Bank
About a dozen more banks gave less than $5,000.
JPMorgan Chase has also been a partner of the annual Taste of Accion fundraising event, and was the lead sponsor in 2014, a spot that costs $30,000. Benefactor sponsorships which cost $20,000 each were comprised of American Chartered Bank, Capital One, Northern Trust Company, and Wintrust Bank. And the lesser sponsorships? Again, mostly banks.
You know who hasn’t donated to Accion Chicago? Marketplace lenders and merchant cash advance companies.
Accion Chicago raised only $1.4 million in 2014 from public support, the bulk of which came from banks or related traditional financial institutions. So is it just a coincidence that this predatory lending bill they’re supporting grants exemptions to all the banks from compliance?
Accion Chicago’s 2014 Board of Directors includes executives from:
- American Chartered Bank (chairman)
- First Eagle Bank
- JPMorgan Chase
- Ridgestone Bank
- MB Financial Bank
- Talmer Bank & trust
- Citibank
- First Midwest Bank
The 2014 committees were made up almost entirely of bank executives from:
- First Eagle Bank
- The PrivateBank
- Ridgestone Bank
- U.S. Bank
- JPMorgan Chase
- Forest Park National Bank & Trust Co.
- MB Financial Bank
- FirstMerit Bank
- Wintrust Bank
- Standard Bank & Trust Co.
- First Midwest Bank
- Wells Fargo Bank
- Seaway Bank & Trust Co.
- Metropolitan Capital Bank
- Evergreen Bank Group
- First Financial Bank
- PNC Bank
Thanks to the impartial work of these good citizens, they have discovered that small businesses should only be working with banks or nonprofits funded and staffed by banks and have craftily devised a bill to legislate all the alternatives out of existence.
If this was really about predatory lending, then they screwed up big time
All coincidences aside, some of the bill’s rules have nothing to do with protecting borrowers, like the required $500,000 surety bond to become licensed for example. Compare that to California’s $25,000 licensed lender surety bond. And the restriction on being able to sell or securitize a loan, how does that help small businesses?
These requirements and others suggest that it’s about preventing all alternatives from existing in the marketplace, rather than predatory alternatives. The losers would undoubtedly be small businesses and the Illinois job market. Senator Collins and Treasurer Summers, both of whom have a strong track record of empowering their constituents financially, may have underestimated or overlooked the likely negative consequences of this bill.
The nonbanks
Several nonbank trade groups are reportedly in the process of formulating a response.
The Commercial Finance Coalition for example, a nonprofit coalition of financial technology companies, told AltFinanceDaily that they are concerned about the impact this will have on the Illinois job market and will indeed have representatives on the ground in Illinois.
They also wanted to make known that they welcome support from marketplace lenders, nonbanks and merchant cash advance companies in these efforts and that interested parties should email Mary Donahue at mdonohue@commercialfinancecoalition.com
To contact Senator Jacqueline Collins who introduced the bill, call her at 217-782-1607.
The Dual Aura of Fora – How Two College Friends Built Fora Financial and Became the “Marketplace” of Marketplace Lending
February 16, 2016A recent Bloomberg article documented the hard-partying lifestyle of two young entrepreneurs who struck it rich when they sold their alternative funding business. The story of their beer-soaked early retirement in a Puerto Rico tax haven came complete with photos of the duo astride horses on the beach and perched atop a circular bed.
But two other members of the alternative-finance community have chosen a different path despite somewhat similar circumstances. Jared Feldman and Dan B. Smith, the founders of New York-based Fora Financial, are about the same age as the pair in that Bloomberg article and they, too, recently sold an equity stake in their company. Yet Smith and Feldman have no intention of cutting back on the hours they dedicate to their business or the time they devote to their families.
They retained a share of Fora Financial that they characterized as “significant” and will remain at the head of the company after selling part of it to Palladium Equity Partners LLC in October for an undisclosed sum. Palladium bought into a company that has placed more than $400 million in funding through 14,000 deals with 8,500 small businesses. It expects revenue and staff size to grow by 25 percent to 35 percent this year.
The deal marks Palladium’s first foray into alternative finance, although it has invested in the specialty-finance industry since 2007, said Justin R. Green, a principal at the firm. His company is appointing two members to the Fora Financial board.
Palladium, which describes itself as a middle-market investment firm, decided to make the deal partly because it was impressed by Smith and Feldman, according to Green. “Jared and Dan have a passion for supporting small businesses and built the company from the ground up with that mission,” he said. “We place great importance on the company’s management team.”
Negotiations got underway after Raymond James & Associates, a St. Petersburg, Fla.-based investment banking advisor, approached Palladium on behalf of Fora Financial, Green said. RJ&A made the overture based on other Palladium investments, he said.
The potential partnership looked good from the other point of view, too. “We wanted to make sure it was the right partner,” Feldman said of the process. “We wanted someone who shared the same vision and knew how to maximize growth and shareholder value over time and help us execute on our plans.”
It took about a year to work out the details of the deal Feldman said. “It was a grueling process, to say the least,” he admitted, “but we wanted to make sure we were capitalized for the future.”
The Palladium deal marked a milestone in the development of Fora Financial, a company with roots that date back to when Smith and Feldman met while studying business management at Indiana University.
After graduation, Feldman landed a job in alternative funding in New York at Merchant Cash & Capital (today named Bizfi), and he recruited Smith to join him there. “That was basically our first job out of college,” Feldman said.
It struck Smith as a great place to start. “It was the easiest way for me to get to New York out of college,” he said. “I saw a lot of opportunity there.”
The pair stayed with the company a year and a half before striking out on their own to start a funding company in April 2008. “We were young and ambitious,” Feldman said. “We thought it was the right time in our lives to take that chance.”
They had enough confidence in the future of alternative funding that they didn’t worry unduly about the rocky state of the economy at the time. Still, the timing proved scary.
Lehman Brothers crashed just as Smith and Feldman were opening the doors to their business, and all around them they saw competitors losing their credit facilities, Smith said. It taught them frugality and the importance of being well-capitalized instead of boot-strapped.
Their first office, a 150-square-foot space in Midtown Manhattan, could have used a few more windows, but there was no shortage of heavy metal doors crisscrossed with ominous-looking interlocking steel bars. The space seemed cramped and sparse at the same time, with hand-me-down furniture, outdated landline phones and a dearth of computers. Job seekers wondered if they were applying to a real company.
“It was Dan and I sitting in a small room, pounding the phones,” Feldman recalled. “That’s how we started the business.”
At first, Smith and Feldman paid the rent and kept the lights on with their own money. Nearly every penny they earned went right back into the business, Feldman said. The company functioned as a brokerage, placing deals with other funders. From the beginning, they concentrated on building relationships in the industry, Smith said. “Those were the hands that fed us,” he noted.
By early 2009, Smith and Feldman started raising capital from friends and family members so that they could fund deals themselves. About that time, they developed a computer platform to track the payments they received from funding companies where they placed deals.
Smith and Feldman’s first credit facility came from Entrepreneur Growth Capital. The stake enabled them to begin handling deals on their own instead of passing them along to funders. At the same time, they expanded their computing platform to handle entire deals.
From there, Smith and Feldman expanded their computing capability to help with accounting, underwriting and other functions. A combination of staff and outside developers guided the platform’s evolution. Today, three full-time in-house tech people handle programming.
Smith and Feldman emphasize that they don’t consider Fora Financial a tech company, but Green said the company’s platform helped cinch the deal. “We view Fora Financial as a technology-enabled financial services company,” he maintained.
While building the platform and expanding the business, Fora Financial secured mezzanine financing from Hamilton Investment Partners LLC, a company that bases its investments on the strength of management teams. “I am industry-agnostic,” said Douglas Hamilton, managing partner and and cofounder. “Dan and Jared are one of the best young teams I have encountered in my 35 years of doing private investing.”
Meanwhile, Fora Financial moved six times to larger accommodations. The company’s 116 employees now occupy 26,000 square feet in Midtown, with half of the staff working in direct sales and the other half devoted to back office, underwriting, finance, IT, customer service, collections and legal duties.
Seventy percent of the company’s business flows from its inside sales staff and the rest comes from ISOs, brokers and strategic partners, Feldman said. “Most of the industry is the opposite,” he noted.
Finding salespeople presents a challenge in New York, where they’re in great demand. “We’ve invested a lot of money in finding the right salespeople,” Feldman said. “We also have to make sure that we’re right for them.” The sales staff includes recent graduates and experienced people from other sectors of financial-services or other businesses, Feldman noted.
“We don’t hire from within the industry,” Smith added. “From Day One, we’ve been training our staff our way and not bringing in tainted brokers.” That way, the company can make sure salespeople hew to the company’s ethical approach to business, he maintained. It’s part of creating a company culture, he said.
The Fora Financial culture also includes strict compliance with state and federal regulation because until recently Smith and Feldman owned the entire company, Feldman said. “Regulatory compliance is a core value with us and has been for some time,” he noted, adding that it’s also resulted in conservatism and due diligence.
Those traits have not gone unnoticed, according to Robert Cook, a partner at Hudson Cook, LLC, a Hanover, Md.-based financial-services law firm that has worked extensively with the company. “Fora was one of the first clients in this small-business funding area that took compliance to heart,” Cook said. “As time has gone on, we’re seeing more and more companies make compliance part of their culture, but Fora was one of the early adapters in this area.”
Top management at alternative finance companies often talk about compliance, and the discussion too often ends there and doesn’t filter down through the ranks, Cook said. But that’s not the case at Fora Financial, he maintained. “It’s throughout the organization,” he said of the company Smith and Feldman founded. “From a compliance attorney’s standpoint, that’s always a great sign.”
Nurturing a penchant for compliance and dedicating a company legal and compliance department to pursuing it became a factor in Palladium’s decision to become involved with the company, Feldman said.
The focus on compliance also spread to the way Fora Financial brings brokers on board, Smith said. The company scrutinizes potential partners carefully before taking them on, he maintained.
“We probably missed out on some business as the industry grew because we were more cognizant of doing things the right way, but that paid off in the long run and some of our competitors have followed suit,” Smith said.
Compliance first became particularly important when Fora Financial added small-business loans to their initial business of providing merchant cash advances. They began making loans because lots of businesses don’t accept cards, which serve as the basis for cash advances.
On a cash basis, the current portfolio is 75 percent to 80 percent small-business loans. Loans started to surpass advances during the fourth quarter of 2014. The shift gained momentum after the company began funding through its bank sponsor, Bank of Lake Mills, in the third quarter of 2014.
Growth of loans will continue to outstrip growth of cash advances because manufacturers, construction companies and other businesses usually don’t accept cards, Smith said. If a customer qualifies for both, Fora Financial helps decide which makes the most sense in a specific case, Feldman added.
“We don’t sell our loans – we carry everything on the balance sheet and assume the risk,” Feldman said. “If it’s not good for the customer, it’s going to come back and hurt the performance of our portfolio over time,” he noted.
That thinking helped the company recognize the importance of adding loans to the mix. “We were one of the first companies (in the alternative-finance industry) to get our California lending license,” Feldman said. The company obtained the license in 2011 and got to work on lending. Offering loans required some retooling because the underwriting criteria differ so much from those in the cash advance business, Feldman said.
With the help of several law firms, they made sense of regulation from state to state and began offering the loans one state at a time, Smith said. “We wanted to make sure we rolled it out the right way,” Feldman noted.
As the company was changing, Smith and Feldman saw a need to rebrand. Initially, they called their company Paramount Merchant Funding to reflect their merchant cash advance offerings. When they added small-business loans to the mix, they used several additional names. Now, they’ve brought both functions and all of the names together under the Fora Financial brand. Fora means marketplace in Latin and seems broad enough to cover products the company might add in the future, Feldman said.
Smith and Feldman are contemplating what form those future products might take, but they declined to mention specifics. “We’re constantly getting feedback from customers on what they need that we’re not currently delivering,” Feldman said. “We have ideas in the pipeline.”
Despite changes in the business, Smith and Feldman have managed to remain true to timeless values in their personal lives. Smith grew up near Philadelphia in Fort Washington, Pa., and Feldman is a native of Roslyn, N.Y. Both now reside in Livingston, N.J. and occasionally ride the train together to work in New York. Smith is married and has two children, while Feldman and his wife recently had their first child.
“We’re at it everyday,” Feldman said of their work-oriented lifestyle. “When we’re out of the office, we’re traveling for work. So is the rest of the team. We’re only going to go as far as our people.”
And what about that other pair luxuriating in the Caribbean? As Feldman put it: “New Jersey is a long way from Puerto Rico.”
—
Learn more about Fora Financial at www.forafinancial.com
Generating Leads and Acquiring Borrowers Not Easy in Business Lending
July 21, 2015
“Banks are almost always losing money on small business lending,” said Manish Mohnot, TD Bank’s Head of Small Business Lending, on a panel at the AltLend conference in New York City. It’s a loss leader within the small business segment, he explained, because banks want to bring in deposits.
Funding Circle’s Rana Mookherje concurred. “Banks just can’t make a loan under $500,000 profitably,” he said.
It’s a conundrum few outside banking think about. When consumers and businesses picture banks, they might think of loans, but when banks think of consumers and businesses, they think of deposits. The sentiment amongst the experts at AltLend was that traditional banks and alternative business lenders were not competing with each other for the same customers because each party was after a different objective.
And even when banks think about loans, because obviously they do, they just don’t approach them the way that alternative business lenders do. To that end, ApplePie Capital CEO Denise Thomas said, “Most community banks are looking to make loans backed by an asset. They just don’t want to underwrite [loans] one by one under a million dollars.”
Bankers are genuinely surprised by how alternative lenders subjectively or manually approach business loans, a subject covered just yesterday here on AltFinanceDaily. Charles Green, the Managing Director of the Small Business Finance Institute and moderator of the New Pioneers panel said he never saw banks use bank transaction history to make underwriting decisions in his 35 years of banking.
The factors paraded as being more important above everything else in alternative lending today have apparently been non-factors in traditional lending for years. “There is no substitute for banking information when reviewing a client for approval,” said Andrew Hernandez, a co-founder of Central Diligence Group, in Do Bank Statements Matter in Lending? Business Lenders and Consumer Lenders Disagree. These kind of statements are mind-blowing in traditional lending circles.
Nevertheless, banks watch in awe as alternative lenders not only make small commercial loans, but do it profitably. But how they source borrowers isn’t rocket science. Jim Salters, the CEO of The Business Backer pointed out that some alternative lenders are marketing on a large scale by running TV or radio commercials. But that level of investment isn’t for everyone, especially younger companies.
“Direct mail isn’t sexy, but it converts,” said Candace Klein, the Chief Strategy Officer of Dealstruck. She also said that her company is doing radio advertising.
Matt Patterson of Expansion Capital Group is well versed in digital marketing and incorporates SEO and online paid advertising such as Facebook in his strategy. There’s a difference in the conversion rate in advertising on Facebook versus something like Google, he explained. On Google, business owners are looking for something whereas on Facebook they stumble across it.
Everyone agreed that Pay-Per-Click marketing such as Google Adwords was very expensive in this competitive landscape.
Jim Salters, CEO of The Business BackerBut where can funders and lenders reliably turn to acquire deal flow cost effectively? Salters revealed the industry’s worst kept secret, brokers. The Business Backer acquires about half of its volume from brokers and the other half directly, according to Salters.
“The broker channel is one of the most cost effective channels for us,” said Klein, who would not say on the record exactly how much of Dealstruck’s total business was from brokers.
Patterson agreed with the favorable ROI of using brokers, but saw benefits to communicating with small businesses directly. “Everything about that relationship is better when you’re talking directly to that merchant,” he said. And yet, “our direct leads convert much lower than our broker leads will,” he added.
The panelists generally agreed that this was because brokers have essentially already gathered the documents and closed the deal by the time the lender or funder is finally seeing it.
But aren’t brokers and humans the antithesis of tech-based lending?
Brett Baris, the CEO of up-and-coming lender Credibility Capital said, “We were actually a little surprised by how much a human is needed.” Baris’ company acquires most of its leads through a partnership it has with Dun & Bradstreet. Most of their borrowers are prime credit quality.
“The human element is very important to get the higher quality borrowers to the finish line,” Baris noted. TD’s Mohnot was not surprised. For applicants doing $5 million to $6 million a year in revenue, they want somebody to walk them through the loan process, he opined.
“Merchants love talking to people,” Patterson said. “Some of that comes from the frustration of calling their bank and not being able to talk to people.”
But would that mean the assumptions about automation are wrong? Not quite, explained Mohnot. It’s the younger business owners who have the impulse desire to do things fast or online, he said.
And Klein said that observing merchant behavior at least at her company has shown that those all too eager to apply for a loan in an automated online fashion are typically looking for smaller amounts like $20,000 to $40,000. Meanwhile Dealstruck’s loan minimum is $50,000.
Not everyone is as fortunate as Baris, who is able to generate leads through the trust inherent in a conversation that originated with a D&B rep, but real actual bank declines are making their way to alternative lenders. They’re not the holy grail that everyone thinks they would be though.
“Conversions tend to be lower from bank leads because they’re expecting 6% and are insulted when they hear [a higher %],” said Klein. And Salters who refers to his company as a “turndown partner of choice for upstream lenders,” shared how hard it is for a bank to partner with an alternative lender in the first place. Years ago, banks were aghast by his hands-on, manual underwriting approach that he felt was his company’s core competency. The banks were afraid their regulators would freak out over something so subjective.
And yet Merchant Cash and Capital’s founder, Stephen Sheinbaum and Credit Junction’s CEO Michael Finkelstein both told an audience that they saw banks as collaborative partners.
Meanwhile, Dealstruck actually has a graduation system where merchants graduate out of their loan program and become eligible for a real bank loan. Klein explained that a small business could be referred to them by the bank and then after a couple of years of good history, they’ll refer it back to them.
The acquisition secret however seems to be in finding your strength. ApplePie is focused exclusively on franchises. Expansion Capital Group has formed relationships with several trade organizations. Credibility Capital goes hand-in-hand with D&B.
Still, there is no doubt that the broker channel is alluring, but it can be a slippery slope. Raiseworks CEO Gary Chodes cautioned that “brokers are incentivized to follow the money.” Klein also expressed concern. She knows firsthand how challenging brokers can be since she’s had to terminate some in the past for bad behavior.
“Transparency is extremely important,” Finkelstein proclaimed in regards to the customer experience. This means that lenders can’t simply work off the ROI metric alone. But that ROI is the envy of banks nationwide.
Banks want to refer their clients to alternative lenders because if they get approved, then the lender is going to deposit those funds at their bank, Mohnot alluded.
It would seem that there is not one particular methodology that works better than all the others to acquire a borrower and that’s okay. Alternative lenders struggling to maximize their ROI can take comfort in the fact that banks, with all the resources they have at their disposal, accepted a long time ago that it was impossible to even make money at all in small business lending.
If you’re at least in the black, you’re probably doing just fine…
