Regulatory Paranoia and the Industry Civil War
April 11, 2014Stacking is on everyone’s minds in the merchant cash advance (MCA) industry but that war is little more than smoke compared to the fire burning in our own backyard. One of the major topics of debate at Transact 14 has been Operation Choke Point, a federal campaign against banks and payment processors to kill off the payday lending industry and protect consumer bank accounts. Caught in the mix are law abiding financial institutions, some of which if affected, could potentially disrupt the merchant cash advance and alternative lending industries. Both have become heavily dependent on ACH processing. Could their strength become their Achilles heel?
Indeed, there was a rumor circulating around the conference that a popular ACH processor in the MCA industry is no longer accepting new funding companies. I know the name but was not able to confirm it as fact. There is a two-fold threat on the horizon:
1. The probability that ACH processors in this industry are also processing payments for payday lenders or other high risk businesses.
2. The likelihood that a bank or ACH processor would take preemptive action and terminate relationships with merchant cash advance companies and alternative business lenders, not because it’s illegal but as a way to make their books squeaky clean.
The sentiment at the conference however was that MCA providers and alternative business lenders had little need to worry. While Operation Choke Point specifies online lenders, they are narrowly defined as businesses making loans to consumers. MCA and their counterparts do not fall under that scope, even if they themselves lend exclusively online.
Is regulation coming?
There seems to be both a call for and paranoia about regulation, especially in the context of stacking merchant cash advances and daily repayment business loans. On the popular online forum DailyFunder, several opponents of stacking are under the impression that regulators will be busting down doors any day now to put an end to businesses utilizing multiple sources of expensive capital simultaneously. Many insiders who have had their merchants stacked on view the issue as both a legal and a moral one. Opponents get worked up about it for many reasons. They believe any one or multiple of the following:
- The merchant can’t sell something which has already been contractually sold to another party.
- That the merchant ends up borrowing and selling their future revenues at their own peril, endangering their cash flow and their business.
- That the stackers endanger the first lender or funder’s ability to collect.
- That the merchant taking on stacks won’t be eligible for additional funds with the first company, hurting the retention rate.
Stacking is not illegal, but it may be tortious interference. That allegation is the one that gets thrown around the most, but it’s important to recognize that actual damages are an integral part of any such case. If I stack on your merchant and the deal performs as expected for you, then what damages would you have suffered? But if I stack on your deal and it defaults 3 weeks later, you might be able to allege that I was the cause of it.
Insiders on DailyFunder’s forum that wonder how they might be able to get stacking to stop, only need to follow the example of what a few select funders are already doing, going on the offensive. The first thing one west coast MCA company does when they have a merchant default is find out if there was a stack that came on top of them. If they find out who it was, they send the offending funder a bill for the outstanding balance. That may sound cheesy, but given their industry prowess and litigious nature, they said that some stackers quietly mail them a check, rather than risk things escalating to the next level. The threats only hold weight of course if you’re actually prepared to bring the case to court.
I’ve spoken with dozens of proponents for stacking, many of sound character, high intelligence, and business acumen. They buck the stereotype of stackers as sleazy wall street guys with pinky rings. Few of these proponents believe that future revenue is a precise asset. It’s been said that, “future revenues are unknowable and possibly infinite. A business should be able to sell infinite amounts of these future revenues if there are investors out there that will buy them.” The general consensus on this side of the aisle is that a 2nd position stack, or “seconds” are here to stay. There’s a sense of calm and conviction, as if seconds were a boring subject of little contention. Many are okay with thirds “if the math works” but discomfort sets in on fourths, fifths and beyond. If they believe it’ll be a good investment, they’ll do the deal. They scoff at the notion that they’d willingly chance putting a merchant out of business since that would jeopardize their own investment.
To date, I’ve seen no data to support that stacking causes merchants to go out of business. I would not be surprised if there was a correlation between defaults and stacks, but that would not imply causation. A business that is on its way towards bankruptcy regardless may be able to obtain a few stacks in the process as a last ditch effort to stave it off. When the business finally fails, it may appear to look like the stacks caused it, even if they didn’t.
For those that don’t want to play cat and mouse with threats and lawsuits, there’s a growing call for regulation, both self-regulation and federal. That call feeds off the paranoia that regulators are knocking at the industry’s door already anyway.
NAMAA
In regards to self-regulation, insiders have been looking to the North American Merchant Advance Association (NAMAA) to create rules and become an enforcer. It’s no secret that their members are opponents of stacking, but as a powerful body of industry leaders, they’re up against a threat of their own, antitrust laws. Creating rules and enforcing them could be construed as anti-competitive. In truth, a lot of the MCA industry’s growth over the last 2 years can be attributed to stacking. A private association of the largest players actively working to establish rules to squash the fast growing segment of new entrants could indeed be perceived as anti-competitive.
But that doesn’t mean NAMAA is powerless to promote their views. Following in the footsteps of the Electronic Transactions Association, they could create a set of best practices, host workshops, and offer courses and sessions to train newcomers on these best practices. Such benefits and opportunities are a standard in the payments industry, but nothing like it is available in MCA or alternative business lending.
But is it too late for self regulation?
With all the government enforcement occurring in the rest of the financial sphere, fears of imminent federal involvement in MCA and alternative business lending are not unfounded… or are they?
In the wake of the financial crisis, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was formed to protect consumers in financial markets. The CFPB was instrumental in Operation Choke Point and they would be the most likely federal agency to field complaints about stacking. Unlike the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency which has jurisdiction over banks, the CFPB’s oversight extends to non-bank financial institutions. They’re the wild card agency that has financial companies across the nation on their heels.
I had the opportunity to speak with a former lead attorney of the CFPB off the record today about the definition of consumer. Could a small business be construed as a consumer? The short answer was no. The long answer was that there is no specific definition of consumer at the CFPB but it was meant to represent individuals. Although businesses at the end of the day are run by individuals, I got a pretty confident response that the CFPB would not have jurisdiction over a business lending money to a business, even if it was a very small 1 or 2 man operation. If they were acting in a commercial capacity, then they’re no longer consumers.
The other side of her argument was that it would take up too much resources to take on a case where the victim class was basically outside of their scope. The CFPB already has enough on their plate.
Is the government busy?
I also spoke with a few lobbyists and payments industry attorneys off the record and the unilateral response was that MCA and alternative business lending were not on any agenda, nor does the government have the resources to juggle something that is basically…insignificant in their eyes.
In the grand scheme of financial issues, a few billion year in small business-to-business financing transactions isn’t worth anyone’s breath. “A business acting in a business capacity was unhappy with a business contract they entered into? Take it up in civil court,” I imagine a regulator might say.
Regulators aren’t completely in the dark about MCA. Just a month or two ago, several industry captains and myself included were contacted by the Federal Reserve as part of a research mission to basically find out what this industry even was. The feds appear to have stumbled upon the MCA industry as part of their research into peer-to-peer lending. Who would’ve thought a 16 year old industry could be so stealthy?
If the big PR machines like Kabbage, Lending Club, and OnDeck Capital didn’t exist, I’m inclined to believe no one in the government would’ve heard of MCA for at least another 10 years. In 2014, they’re just now discovering it.
My gut tells me we’re a long way from any kind of regulatory enforcement. In a session I attended at Transact 14 today, a former member of the Department of Justice and a current member of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency both offered examples of cases that took 3-8 years before there was an enforcement action. In each scenario, they alerted the parties there was a problem and they were given time to correct it. They had to show progress along the way and eventually when no such progress was made after years of warnings, they acted.
In the conversation of regulation, alternative business lending and MCA are relatively tiny. Lending Club does more in loan volume each year than the entire MCA industry combined. So long as there’s no fraud involved, small business-to-business financing transactions are not likely to make it on the agenda for federal regulators for a long time. That doesn’t mean it won’t be there some day in the future.
I think it was Brian Mooney, the CEO of Bank America Merchant Services that said in the Transact 14 roundtable discussion that if something feels wrong in your gut, don’t do it. Debra Rossi, the head of Wells Fargo Merchant Services added that you can’t tell a regulator, “I didn’t know.” Keep those suggestions in the front of your mind.
No police
For the foreseeable future it’s on us as an industry to find a resolution to stacking. There’s no such thing as the cash advance police. On one side is tort law. On the other is creating best practices and actively educating newcomers. That’s where the blood boiling debates need to turn to. After all, there’s already a large crowd that yawns over seconds, a group that wholeheartedly believes a stack is just as legitimate as a first position deal.
Instead of waiting for a referee to call foul on somebody, I think 2014 is the year to realize that you might be stuck in the room with the person you hate. Could you bring yourself to tolerate them for years to come?
Blind spot
We should consider that the greatest threat to the industry may not come from within, but from outside. More than 50% of MCA/alternative business lending transactions are repaid via ACH. Government action on ACH providers or the banks that sponsor them could end up hitting this industry as collateral damage.
One metric that banks and regulators consider is the return rate of ACHs, namely the percentage of ACHs rejected for insufficient funds or rejected because the transactions weren’t authorized. Daily fixed debits run the risk of rejects and boost the return rate. Could the frequency of your rejects eventually scare the processor into terminating the relationship? With the pressure they’re getting from the Department of Justice, there’s always the possibility.
Data security is another sleeping giant to consider. Do you keep merchant data safe? Are you protected from hackers?
Know your merchant. The push towards automated underwriting seems dead set on eliminating humans from the analysis. But what if the algorithm misses something and loans get approved to facilitate a money laundering scheme? Or what if it approves a known terrorist?
Paranoia
If you’re paranoid you’re doing something wrong, then maybe you are doing something wrong even if there’s no current law against it. Follow your gut, create value, and work together. Who knows, maybe one day there will be an ETA-like organization for MCA and alternative business lending. Now is a good time to be proactive.
Join Me at Transact 14
April 1, 2014
I’ll be at the ETA’s Transact 14 Conference in Las Vegas next week (Apr 8 – 10) wearing my journalist hat for DailyFunder. DailyFunder is currently the only publication dedicated to merchant cash advance and alternative lending and is a media sponsor of this year’s event. All attendees will be able to pick up a free copy of the latest issue of the magazine at designated distributions bins.
If you’re on the fence about going, allow me to convince you. The Annual ETA hosted conference is more than a social event or meet and greet. It’s a chance to ink deals, forge partnerships, and learn about opportunities that you’ll never hear about from the comfort of your office. Of course you’ll only get out of it what you put into it. The Who’s Who of payments and financing will be all in one place. Are you one of them?
CNBC will be broadcasting the event live. It’s been reported that this year’s show has enlisted a record amount of exhibitors.
Going to be our biggest show in history! MT @MWarehouse: Who's going to #ETATRANSACT next week in #Vegas? pic.twitter.com/5zFiUm8qbY
— Jason Oxman (@joxman) April 1, 2014
I’ll be taking photos and jotting down notes for both the live blog and post show recap for the May/June issue of the magazine. So if you’ve got something cool to show off, email me at sean@merchantprocessingresource.com or sean@dailyfunder.com and I’ll be happy to come pay you a visit.
pre-registration for the event closes in less than 5 hours but you’ll be to get tickets on site.
And of course if you’re planning to bring your wolf pack to Vegas, you might want to read DailyFunder’s helpful tips on how to keep your wolf pack in check. 😉
Hope to see you there.
The Growing Divide
February 28, 2014
It wasn’t too long ago that everyone in this industry knew everyone else. If not personally, then at least through their credit inquiries or UCC names. You crossed paths and acknowledged each other. It was a small world then. Today, not so much.
As the barriers to entry have remained low, the simplicity of ACH repayment has drawn in people by the thousands to become brokers, syndicates, and funders. Anyone can be any one of those three or all three at the same time. There’s still the originals out there, the guys who go to the trade shows and visit offices regularly to stay in touch. But then there’s another crowd, the newcomers that don’t file UCCs, attend shows, or interact much with everyone else. They’re funding a half million, a million, or even $5 million a month and no one really knows they exist except for their own clients. The merchant cash advance industry which was once a shadowy market in its own right now has its own shadowy sector within it.
At the Factoring 2014 conference in April, the President of Fora Financial is poised to debate the Business Development manager of Credit Cash on the subject of whether or not merchant cash advance transactions are true sales. The truth is that I have seen so many variations of funding contracts out on the street that the merits of that debate may be flawed. No one knows what a merchant cash advance is anymore. It’s a point I argued in You Can’t Ask How Big it Is Without Defining What it is in January’s issue of DailyFunder.
The industry is made up of people that deal in daily payments. How these deals are structured vary widely. Indeed there is a growing divide.
Emotions are running high in 2014 and some grievances are practically coming to blows. Stacking is as polarizing a debate as Obamacare. There are folks that believe there is no precedence for dealing with stacking, but stacking is as old as MCA.
Many years ago it was cut and dry. If one company purchased the future revenues of a small business, it was contractually impossible for a second company to buy that same block of future revenues. “How could someone else buy what has already been sold?” so the argument went…
In 2007-2008, stacking was a merchant problem, whereby small business owners would devise ways to get double or triple funded in a very short amount of time so that each company didn’t know about the other until long after the money had been wired. Much of the arguments in favor of stacking back then came from the merchants themselves who felt that MCA contracts bordered on being unlawfully restrictive because it prevented them from obtaining virtually any outside financing unless the MCA was satisfied in full. Without the capital to satisfy their entire outstanding MCA balance, they were locked into renewing with the same company indefinitely with little leverage to negotiate future terms, so the argument went…
Today, it’s the funding companies that bear the brunt of criticism from their peers for stacking, mainly because they do it willingly and are not being deceived by merchants. It is perceived as a funder problem.
In March of 2008 (a full 6 years ago), the Electronic Transactions Association (ETA) established the following guidelines on the issue in their MCA white paper:
In order to effectively manage risk and prevent a merchant from becoming over-extended, merchants should not knowingly be allowed to “stack” advances (obtaining an additional advance when an outstanding balance on a previous advance exists). In the event additional advances are sought, the original advance should be paid off directly to the previous Merchant Cash Advance Company [MCAC] by the new MCAC (to ensure that the merchant does not retain funds due to the previous MCAC) with a portion of the proceeds given on the current advance.
The ETA calls for many common sense standards such as fair retrieval rates, sound underwriting, and legal collections practices. The advice is timeless and I suggest everyone read it. The industry might be growing apart but many of the fundamentals are the same.
Still, with the new crowd of near-anonymous funders, it is impossible to know what everyone’s intentions are. Given the low barriers to entry, there’s also the question as to whether or not the newcomers are legally prepared to book such deals. The industry is fraught with risks and always has been.
I just hope that as the divide grows, we are all united by a common goal, acting in the best interest of small businesses.
Split Funding is Here to Stay
August 21, 2013
I’ll say it for the hundredth¹ time, the advantage of split-funding is the ability to collect payments back from a small business that has traditionally had average, weak, or poor cash flow. Let’s put that into perspective. There is a distinct difference between a working business with poor cash flow and a failing business. A failing business is typically not a candidate for merchant cash advance or similar loan alternatives.
Poor cash flow could be the result of paying cash up front for inventory that will take a while to turn over. A hardware store with a healthy 50% profit margin may be able to turn $10,000 worth of inventory into $15,000 in revenue over the course of the next 90 days. The only problem is that the full $10,000 must be paid in full to the supplier on delivery.
Enter the merchant cash advance provider of old that discovers the hardware store has had a fair share of bounced checks in the past, mainly because of the timing of payments going in and out. Cash on hand is tight, the credit score is average, but the profit margin is there. Most lenders would take a pass on financing a transaction that carries legitimate risk such as this one does, that is until the ability to split-fund a payment stream became possible.
Advocates of the ACH method tout that it’s just so much easier to set up a daily debit and scratch their heads and wonder, “man, why didn’t we think of just doing ACH in the first place?”
The thing is, people did think of it and they concluded that for a large share of the merchants out there that needed capital, it didn’t make financial sense to try and debit out payments every day with the hope that there would always be cash available to cover them. Banks have had a hard enough time collecting just one payment a month, so what makes 22 payments in a month so much more likely to work?
I’m not inferring that there is something wrong with the daily ACH system that has taken the alternative business lending industry by storm. There’s plenty of situations for which that may be the best solution, especially for businesses that take little or no credit card payments. My point is that the split-funding method isn’t going to shrivel up and die. It’s here to stay. So long as businesses have electronic payment streams, they will be able to leverage them to obtain working capital.
When it comes to splitting card payments however, it’s important for a business to have faith in the payment processor. Reputation, compatibility with payment technology, and the assurance that the business will be able to conduct sales just as it always has are important. If you’re a funder, ISO, or account rep, it’s your responsibility to make sure that those three factors are addressed. A lot of processors are willing to split payments but they haven’t all made a name for themselves in the industry. Integrity Payment Systems (IPS) comes to mind as one that almost everyone works with and I’ve been in touch with Matt Pohl, the Director of Merchant Acquisition of IPS for some time. He’s been nice enough to share a little bit about what makes a split partner special, and what has made them particularly stand out in the merchant cash advance industry.
Clearly, the role of the credit card processor has diminished over the last couple years when it comes to merchant funding. ACH/Lockbox models have become more prevalent which created a sales mindset that switching a merchant account was more of a hindrance than a necessity. Some argue the decline in profit margin on residuals, due to price compression, made it no longer worth the time and effort to make an aggressive pitch to switch the merchants processing. ISOs also argue that too often merchants have reservations to switch processors because of previous bad experiences, cancellation fees, or because they simply know its not necessary in order to be funded. This is where it’s important to have the RIGHT split partner, not just any split partner
What makes Integrity Payment Systems a “special” split partner is the fact we control the settlement of the merchants funds, in house. IPS is partnered with First Savings Bank (FSB), which allows us a unique way of moving money. Because of our state-of-the-art settlement system and direct access to FSB’s Federal Reserve window, we eliminate the necessity of having layers of financial institutions behind the scenes that merchants funds typically filter through. This is a HUGE benefit to cash advance companies for several reasons. First, we implement the fixed split % when we receive the request, in real time. This allows the deal to be funded quicker. Secondly, since we handle the settlement process we have access to the raw authorization data which allows us to provide comprehensive reporting on a daily basis from the previous days activity. But also we can do true next day deposits, including Friday, Saturday, and Sunday funds available for the merchant on Monday morning. This is especially valuable when selling to restaurants/bars, or any other industry with a lot of weekend volume. Lastly, IPS makes outbound calls to merchants, on behalf of the sales agent and cash company, to download and train the merchant on their terminal. A confirmation email is sent to the agent which includes any batch activity so the deal can fund.
As an added example of this, on the last week of every month, the merchant boarding and sales support team fully understands that our MCA partners have monthly funding goals they need to reach. The IPS team goes above and beyond to ensure merchants get setup properly in time so those accounts can be funded before the month is over. We have a motto at IPS that the sales force are our #1 customers, and nowhere is that more apparent than by the way we take over all the heavy lifting once the agent gets the signatures on our contract. We firmly believe that by helping the agent by taking over the boarding process, that this will allow them to do what they do best, sell more deals!! A lot of competitors expect the agent to be involved in the boarding process, and that’s valuable time that takes them away from selling.
IPS has opened their doors to every MCA company that wishes to have an exceptional split funding partner/processor. We have all the necessary tools to provide this service the right way, and we want the opportunity to earn the business of every working capital provider out there. You don’t have to listen to a sales pitch from me, because I strongly believe that our reputation in the cash advance space speaks for itself. We would love the opportunity to talk to any MCA provider about a few additional services we offer utilizing our settlement system that will allow ISOs to fund more deals.
– Matt Pohl
(847) 720-1129
Integrity Payment Systems
One thing I can personally attest to about Integrity is their human factor. You can actually meet some of their team and see inside their office in the fun youtube video below:
Getting deals done
Ultimately, the financing business is about getting deals done and there are countless small businesses that just won’t ever be a candidate for ACH repayment. Heck, for many years the merchant cash advance industry wasn’t even a financing industry of its own, but rather it was one of many acquisition tools for merchant account reps. (See: Before it Was Mainstream). Technically it still is. You don’t want to sign up a merchant for processing and then have to move the account because the processor doesn’t split or because there is no dedicated customer service. I’ve been in that situation before personally and it’s a nightmare.
There’s a reason this website which is dedicated mainly to merchant cash advance is called the Merchant Processing Resource. You can’t know everything about cash advance without knowing about merchant processing. Get acquainted!
If you’d like to read the lighter side of Merchant Cash Advance History, you just might want to check out MCA History in Honor of Thanksgiving. 😉
¹ I said it for the 99th time on the Electronic Transactions Association’s Blog in Preserving the Marriage Between Merchant Cash Advance and Payment Processing
Subprime Lending and The ETA Expo in Vegas!
April 12, 2012Are we really still saying “banks aren’t lending”? We are, and apparently everybody else is too, because it’s still true. Time Magazine just published a piece that promotes the idea that bank lending is so dead that people wouldn’t even lend money to themselves. Could this be more evidence that banks are no longer necessary to a recovery or economic growth?
We recently scolded the Huffington Post over an article casually claiming that businesses had no financing options other than to pawn off their jewelry. That led us to create a mini-petition in which many players within the Merchant Cash Advance industry could politely inform them of their omission. We are happy to report that individuals from more than 40 MCA companies have participated in the petition so far. “40?! Only 40?!!” If you think 40 is small, you should keep in mind that there are only so many MCA companies in the country. We encourage anyone who has not participated to do so HERE.
Huffington Post hasn’t responded yet but we expect they will be forced to as the emails keeping rolling in!
————————
Woo-hoo! Vegas!! YEAHH!!! (April 17th – April 19th)
As the Merchant Cash Advance industry has evolved, we find it kind of interesting that the we have adopted the Electronic Transactions Association Expo has our own official trade show. Split-processing or ACH collection are both electronic payments, but we believe piggybacking on other industries could potentially be keeping MCA in the shadows. Whenever there’s a trade show, whether it be payment processing, restaurant associations, or other, the Merchant Cash Advance guys seem to show up but they’re never hosting the event.
Now that the volume of MCA transactions per year is in the billions of dollars, it may be time to starting pulling ourselves out of the booths and onto the big stage. Don’t get us wrong. The ETA Expo is the most valuable place for the MCA space to meet, greet, close deals, learn, partner up, promote yourself, and party, and it’s important that we maintain a big presence there. We can’t help but imagine what could be if wholesalers, equipment vendors, distributors, and retail business owners were coming to the Annual Merchant Cash Advance Industry Expo. Attendees would get pez dispensers shaped like credit card terminals and the candy would be green and shaped like money. As long as we had pez, we wouldn’t need a big fancy dance show:
Thoughts on this anyone? Are you going to be at the ETA Expo? Comment below.
The point of sale isn’t what it used to be
December 16, 2011
“I’m sorry sir but our credit card machine just went down. Can you wait 11 minutes while I activate a card reader on my iPhone so I can take your payment?”
11 minutes. That’s how long it took Sean, the founder of the Merchant Processing Resource to set up a merchant account with Square. The point of sale is changing quickly. Dial-up terminals are becoming more and more like their carbon copy imprint predecessors and there’s no way to stop the changing tide. According to Square, 1 out of every 8 merchants in the U.S. uses Square to process credit cards.
The revolution in payments seems to have gone over the heads of Merchant Cash Advance (MCA) providers, a financial industry that purchases future card revenues of small businesses. If the big MCA players have plans in the works to overcome the obstacle of capturing revenues, they certainly haven’t made them public.
We first sounded the warning bell to the industry back in May, 2011, in an article that characterized the modern merchant as having four methods of accepting electronic payments: Desktop POS software, a terminal, PayPal, and mobile payment software. This payment makeup directly leads to rising costs of the MCA product. The ultimate result of our warning was…nothing. MCA providers have for the most part shrugged off the changes in the point of sale, rather than stay ahead of the curve. It’s a shame.
The Electronic Transactions Association (ETA) recently created a certification, a nationally recognized level of excellence for the payment industry employed to become true professionals. A Certified Payment Professional (CPP) will be best equipped to work with business owners and they are required to be knowledgeable on the subject of MCA, as indicated in the CPP handbook. The reverse is unfortunately not required of those employed in the MCA industry, where underwriters mostly hail from the worlds of lending or leasing. Bankcard is certainly not their strong point.
There is a big void of bankcard knowledge in the risk assessment of MCAs. Underwriters are accustomed to reviewing “batch data,” the amount settled out by a merchant, normally once at the end of the day. But press an underwriter for an explanation of where the batch came from, if the technology was PCI compliant, or what would happen to their interchange rates if they delayed settlement for a few days, and you’ll likely catch them scratching their head.
I once personally experienced this firsthand when a relatively new MCA firm sent a 3rd party site inspector to visit a clothing store prior to approval. The inspector’s report and photographs indicated that there was no physical credit card terminal on site but that a USB swiping unit was attached to a desktop computer at the register to accept card payments. The MCA provider declined the deal based on the report since the lack of a credit card machine flew in the face of the processing statements they received. I appealed the case to the CEO, who responded by e-mail with, “The merchant is showing $7,000 a month in credit card sales but when we visited the store, there’s apparently no credit card machine there. The statements we have must be fabricated.” Flabbergasted, I pointed out that the merchant uses desktop POS software and a swiping unit and that it had been verified in the inspector’s report. The last e-mail I received from the CEO was, “I don’t know what you mean by their computer accepting credit cards. Is this PayPal? We don’t do PayPal. We only fund merchants who process on site and they don’t seem to process on site. The deal remains declined.”
Just because I haven’t cited the name of the company, doesn’t mean this exchange wasn’t real. It was and It’s even more embarrassing because their goal was to be in the top three largest funders of MCA in the country. They’re still in business but they’ve suffered some major setbacks.
USB card readers have been in use for a long time and we recently had the pleasure of hearing from Richard Freedkin, the Co-founder of USBSwiper.com. We asked if the mobile pos software revolution was impacting the desktop industry. He shared this, “I don’t think that the USB card readers are being threatened per se… however; I believe that the Mobile Payments industry will make a dent. There will always be people using computers for their POS especially at more fixed locations and Internet access is much cheaper than mobile phone data plans that are required for processing to work.”
And while he’s probably right that the desktop POS experience isn’t going away, they’re not standing on the sidelines either. “We are also about 6 weeks from releasing our new beta version of our software for iPad, iPhone, iPod Touch and Android systems. We will also have a swiper for that platform as well. So we will offer the best of both worlds.”
Great firms innovate so we’re waiting…waiting…waiting for the MCA players to follow suit. If 1 out of 8 merchants are using Square, then the MCA industry is ignoring at least 1 out of every 8 merchants or failing to capture total card revenues from their merchants that use it.
Besides, technology companies like Roam Data are claiming that their mobile payments device has 3x the capabilities of Square. With Text2Pay, you can just SMS text someone funds or better yet, FaceCash allows consumers to make payments using their phone and their FACE!
Capturing payments directly from a merchant account is what made the MCA industry so popular but it could also be their downfall. If a merchant can activate a new account in 11 minutes, then surely there must be an increased focus on the overall banking and financial picture of a small business before purchasing future revenues. That might be where underwriters with lending backgrounds excel but if they don’t know bankcard, then they don’t know squat.
The point of sale isn’t what it used to be…
– The Merchant Cash Advance Resource
Learn Merchant Cash Advance or Else…
December 15, 2011If you don’t know about Merchant Cash Advance (MCA), you’re not qualified to work in the payments industry! As indicated by the Electronic Transactions Association (ETA), Certified Payment Professionals (CPPs) should be savvy with MCA financing. According to the ETA: “The [new] CPP program sets the standard for professional performance in the payments industry and is a symbol of excellence. It signifies that an individual has demonstrated the knowledge and skills required to perform competently in today’s complex electronic payments environment.”
CPP candidates can preview exam sample questions in the official handbook, one of which asks:
An established merchant that processes $25,000 in bank card transactions per month has no marketing budget, but has been offered a sponsorship opportunity. What product/solution should the payments professional recommend?
The answer is “merchant funding” AKA MCA. Believe it folks. The MCA financing product is here to stay, has benefitted thousands of businesses, and payment professionals must be well versed in it if they are to become certified.
But there is more than a test to become a CPP.
[The ETA says] to be eligible to sit for the CPP examination, candidates must demonstrate the following qualifications:
|
|||||||||
|
CPP candidates will then be required to sit for and pass a Certified Payments Professional written examination. Upon successful completion of the exam and the attainment of the CPP credential, certificants will be required to meet renewal / recertification requirements every three years, to include continuing professional education from ETA / QSP’s or the successful completion of the test.
|
The next exam dates are May 1 – 31, 2012. You can learn more about registering and what it mean to be a CPP on the ETA’s official site. And don’t forget to learn about Merchant Cash Advance. 🙂
The Intriguing History of the Automated Clearing House (ACH)
April 26, 2023
The Automated Clearing House (ACH) was born in the 1970s as a response to the inefficiencies of paper-based transactions, and it’s been revolutionizing the world of electronic payments ever since.
In the late 1960s, the United States was facing a mounting problem: the rapid growth in paper checks. Banks were drowning in a sea of paper as they manually processed these transactions. It was a labor-intensive, time-consuming, and error-prone process.
Enter the ACH, an electronic network that emerged as a solution to alleviate the paper burden. In 1972, California’s Bank of America and the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco piloted the first ACH program. Their goal was simple: to streamline the check-clearing process and improve efficiency within the financial industry.
In 1974, the National Automated Clearing House Association (NACHA) was formed, providing a much-needed governance structure for the ACH network. Its role was to standardize processes, establish rules and guidelines, and promote the adoption of ACH services across the nation.
As the number of participating financial institutions grew, the ACH network flourished. Electronic transactions gained popularity, and by the end of the decade, paper checks began to lose their dominance.
Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, the ACH network continued to evolve. The advent of the internet and new financial technologies further propelled ACH adoption. Direct deposit, electronic bill payments, and other ACH services became commonplace, reducing the need for paper checks.
In the 2000s, ACH transactions grew exponentially. The Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act (Check 21) in 2003 accelerated the transition to electronic check processing, further cementing the ACH’s role in the financial landscape.
Today, the ACH network processes over 25 billion transactions annually, transferring trillions of dollars. As the world becomes increasingly digital, the ACH network is adapting to meet the needs of businesses and consumers alike.
The introduction of Same Day ACH in 2016 marked a significant step towards real-time payments. This service allows for faster processing of transactions, reducing the waiting time for funds to be available.
As the ACH continues to grow and evolve, it remains a crucial component of the modern financial ecosystem. The once chaotic world of paper-based transactions has transformed into a streamlined, digital landscape, thanks to the innovative spirit that gave birth to the Automated Clearing House. And as technology advances, so too will the ACH, ensuring its place in the annals of financial history.
