Archive for 2017
Legal Battles to Keep an Eye On
February 18, 2017CFPB
The CFPB’s organizational structure might not be unconstitutional after all. The D.C. Circuit which originally concluded it was unconstitutional, has decided to rehear the case. Oral arguments on the matter are scheduled to take place on May 24, 2017. A detailed summary of the issues can be found on The National Law Review.
TCPA law
Serial litigant Craig Cunningham is one of two petitioners behind the challenge to an FCC interpretation of what constitutes “prior express consent.” Specifically, the petitioners want to get rid of implied consent resulting from a party’s providing a telephone number to the caller. The FCC has called upon the public to comment. If the FCC indeed decides to narrow the scope of their interpretation, it would become easier for litigants like Cunningham to bring lawsuits. Read a longer brief of the issue here.
New York Lending License
Governor Cuomo’s budget proposal contains changes to Section 340 of New York’s banking law and it has the potential to completely change the alternative landscape in the state. Read a full analysis here.
Platinum Rapid Funding Group Ltd v VIP Limousine Services Inc. and Charles Cotton
After a landmark trial court decision surrounding merchant cash advance last year, plaintiff Platinum Rapid Funding Group went on to obtain a judgment against defendants in an amount exceeding $100,000. However, filed papers on the docket show the case may be heading to the Appellate Division.
Merchant Funding Services, LLC v. Volunteer Pharmacy Inc
Merchant cash advance companies may find themselves having to answer for an unfavorable ruling issued in Westchester County, New York, in which a judge vacated a Confession of Judgment and voided the underlying future receivables transaction. A more in-depth brief can be read here. Notably, the judge in that decision was the same one that decided Pearl Capital Rivis Ventures, LLC v. RDN Construction, Inc.
Layoffs, Big Losses for OnDeck in Q4
February 16, 2017OnDeck weathered a brutal fourth quarter driven largely by an increase in provision for loan losses which increased to $55.7 million, up from $20.0 million in the comparable prior year period. $18.7 million of this can be attributed to loans with original maturities of 15 months or longer whose performance has deviated or is expected to deviate, the company said. “As a result, the Provision Rate in the fourth quarter of 2016 was 10.2% compared to 5.6% in the comparable prior year period,” the company reported. For the full year of 2016, the Provision Rate was 7.4%, compared to 5.8% in 2015. CFO Howard Katzenberg said on the earnings call that it will likely continue to hover at around the 7% level.
The company lost $36.5 million in Q4 and $86.5 million for the year.
To try and turn things around, OnDeck is laying off up to 11% of their staff as part of a “cost rationalization plan.”
James Hobson, their COO, recently announced his resignation and March 15th is his last official day.
On the earnings call, Katzenberg wouldn’t say how many loans in their portfolio were 15 months or longer, but did say that it’s more than a third of their book. This is notable given that this segment is the one in which performance isn’t matching their models and led to the recalibration of loss expectations.
Meanwhile CEO Noah Breslow explained that losses did not stem from their partnership with Chase since Chase held all those loans on their own balance sheet. Breslow said their role in that relationship is servicing.
No origination channel was directly responsible for the loss provision increase. One analyst surmised if perhaps third party brokers or funding advisors, as OnDeck calls them, might be responsible, but the company said that origination channel wasn’t a factor.
Despite the fact that OnDeck is now using the 5th generation of their proprietary OnDeck Score, they were unable to predict performance on loans that now make up more than a third of their portfolio, yet the company said they remain very confident in their scoring model.
“Loans sold or designated as held for sale through OnDeck Marketplace represented 15.8% of term loan originations in the fourth quarter of 2016 compared to 39.8% of term loan originations in the comparable prior year period,” the company reported.
Bond Street Announces Renewal of Loan Purchase Agreement with Jefferies
February 15, 2017NEW YORK (February 15, 2017) — Bond Street, a leading online small business lender, announced the closing of a loan-purchase agreement with Jefferies that renews Jefferies’ prior loan-purchase agreement and expands the size of its loan purchases up to as much as $300 million. This agreement will facilitate Bond Street’s growth and help thousands of small businesses across the country access fair and affordable financing.
“Jefferies has been an outstanding partner and shares our vision for reinventing financial services through technology, data and design,” said David Haber, CEO & Co-Founder of Bond Street. “Jefferies’ continued loan purchases will expand our ability to support entrepreneurs at every stage of their growth cycle.”
Bond Street’s technology and extensive expertise in credit and risk management has enabled the platform to scale, while delivering both a superior customer experience to entrepreneurs and market-leading returns to investors. As a result of this exceptional track record, Bond Street has broadened its term product to include loans ranging from $10,000 to $1 million—a significant expansion from its original $50,000 to $500,000. Bond Street now offers the widest term loan range in the alternative lending industry.
“Supporting entrepreneurs beyond the transaction is the cornerstone upon which we build our technology,” said Peyton Sherwood, CTO & Co-Founder of Bond Street. “We aspire not only to provide seamless access to capital, but also to serve as a proactive financial partner to our customers. Through deep integrations into financial software platforms, we automate financial analysis during underwriting, and programmatically monitor the health of our portfolio over time – surfacing key insights and risks to help our customers succeed.”
Bond Street has raised over $400 million in lending capital since its founding. They are backed by leading investors such as Spark Capital and Homebrew, as well as individual investors including Nathan Blecharczyk (Co-Founder and CTO of Airbnb) and David Chang (Chef/Owner of momofuku).
About Bond Street
Bond Street is revolutionizing small business lending through technology, data, and design. Bond Street provides entrepreneurs access to simple and fair financing to sustain their long-term business growth. Bond Street offers one to three year term loans ranging from $10,000 to $1,000,000 with interest rates starting at 6%. Headquartered in New York, Bond Street was founded, in 2013, by David Haber and Peyton Sherwood. For more information, please visit www.bondstreet.com.
About Jefferies
Jefferies, the world’s only independent full-service global investment banking firm focused on serving clients for over 50 years, is a leader in providing insight, expertise and execution to investors, companies and governments. Our firm provides a full range of investment banking, sales, trading, research and strategy across the spectrum of equities, fixed income and foreign exchange, as well as wealth management, in the Americas, Europe and Asia. Jefferies Group LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Leucadia National Corporation (NYSE: LUK), a diversified holding company.
Lending Club Reveals Q4 Figures, $146 Million Loss for the Year
February 15, 2017
The year that shook the industry ended six weeks ago but the total damage wrought is just now coming out. Lending Club lost $146 million in 2016, $32 million of which can be attributed to Q4. But it didn’t end all that badly according to CEO Scott Sanborn.
On the earnings call he said, “our attention was focused on rebalancing our funding mix, a key step to bolster our resiliency and enable a return to growth. We set a target to help our bank partners close out their rigorous diligence, so that they could return to scale. I’m pleased to say that our efforts have paid off as not only are all of our key bank investors back buying on the platform, but we’ve also welcomed multiple new bank partners over the last few months.”
And so they’re feeling quite optimistic. “It’s an exciting time for Lending Club and I look forward to beginning the next phase of our growth,” Sanborn concluded before turning the call over to new CFO Tom Casey.
Casey went on to predict that the company would lose another $69 million to $84 million in 2017, with nearly half of that expected to be generated in the first quarter of this year.
In brighter news, the company celebrated the 10th year anniversary of their first loan and surpassed more than $25 billion in loans since inception. With close to 2 million customers-to-date, that would mean that nearly 1% of the adult population in the US has had a Lending Club loan.
Less than 10% of their loan volume is comprised of education and patient finance loans, small business loans, and small business lines of credit, according to their report.
As NY Lending License Proposal Looms, Industry Trade Groups Mobilize
February 13, 2017The alternative small-business finance community plans to lobby hard against a far-reaching proposed expansion of the New York state lending license. The proposal calls for any person or company that solicits, arranges or facilitates business and consumer loans – or other types of financing – to obtain a license. That could include MCA companies, business loan brokers and ISOs.
Critics claim the expansion, which Governor Andrew M. Cuomo included in his proposed state budget, could trigger a series of ominous and possibly unintended events in the courts and on Wall Street. “It could destroy the industry if the worst comes to fruition,” declared Robert Cook, a partner at Hudson Cook LLP.
Some opponents also contend that the public hasn’t had a reasonable opportunity to respond. “Sneaking a provision with significant impact like this into the budget and not going through regular order is really disturbing,” said Dan Gans, a Washington lobbyist who also serves as executive director of the the Commercial Finance Coalition. “They should allow all the stakeholders to have their voices heard.”
The industry’s trade groups have been quick to react. The Small Business Finance Association has been in contact with New York state legislators to help them understand the ramifications of the proposal, according to Stephen Denis, the trade group’s executive director. Meanwhile, Gans is recommending that the CFC’s board hire an Albany lobbying firm to help advance the industry’s interests.
New York’s current consumer licensing law is written broadly enough to cover any loan to an individual for less than $25,000, even if it’s made for commercial purposes, said Cook. That means the current law could cover loans to sole proprietorships but would not affect loans to corporations, limited liability companies, partnerships or limited liability partnerships, he noted.
Under the proposal in Governor Cuomo’s budget, any type of commercial loan of up to $50,000 would require a license, Cook said. Today, the state requires a license only if a loan carries a simple interest rate of more than 16 percent. Under the budget proposal, all lending would require a license, even if the interest rate is less than 16 percent. Loans made by alternative funders typically carry interest rates of 36 percent to 100 percent, he said.
New York already has a criminal usury rate of 25 percent, but lenders have two methods of avoiding that cap, according to Cook. Under one method, the parties to the loan can use a provision called the “choice of law clause” and thus agree that the contract is subject to the laws of a state that does not limit commercial usury rates, he said. Or, using the second method, the small-business finance company can solicit the loan and refer it to a bank in a state without a cap. The bank makes the loan but then sells the loan back to the small-business finance company or an affiliate, he noted.
But adopting the changes proposed in the New York budget could possibly stymie both methods of circumventing the state’s usury laws. Consider the choice of law clause, Cook suggested. The courts could interpret the proposed expansion as an effort by the state to gain more control of commercial lending. That could prompt the courts to refuse to enforce choice of law clauses involving New York state because doing so would violate a significant policy in New York, he maintained. The proposal could also gut the second way around the usury law – the bank model – by requiring employees of out-of-state banks to have a license in order to originate loans or by prohibiting rates in excess of New York’s cap, he said. Both outcomes are speculative but constitute distinct possibilities, he added.
Expanding the license would also grant additional regulatory authority to the New York State Department of Financial Services, Cook maintained. Besides requiring the license, the DFS would have the ability to regulate, supervise and examine commercial lenders, he said. In the past the department has imposed some significant regulations on licensees, including fair lending requirements and cyber security requirements, he said. “They’re a very active regulator,” he contended. “They could require commercial lenders to jump through a lot of hoops that aren’t there today.”
What’s more, time would pass while a company negotiates the initial hoops simply to obtain a license. Qualifying for the current New York license, for example, can take up to nine months, Cook said. “It’s a fairly intensive licensing process that requires a lot of information about the company, the officers and directors of the company,” he noted. “The licensing process is tough in New York.”
The expansion could also limit the industry’s access to capital, Cook warned. Some alternative funders raise money by selling loans or interests in loans on the secondary market. Requiring a license to buy those products could prompt Wall Street to look elsewhere for less-burdensome investment opportunities, he said.
The laundry list of potential bad effects has many in the industry wondering about the state’s intentions toward the industry. “It’s not clear whether the people up in Albany understand the potential effect this has,” Cook said.
To help bring about that understanding, the CFC intends to call upon its members and merchants who have benefitted from alternative finance to visit officials in the state capital, Gans said.
Gans finds reason for optimism as the associations coalesce around the issue. The state Senate in Albany tends to be pro-business, and I am confident we will find allies that will stand up to this, he said.
Denis also seems upbeat about the industry’s efforts to make itself heard in Albany. In Illinois, some legislators failed to differentiate between consumer loans and commercial loans when considering legislation last year, he noted. That might be the case in New York, too, and the SBFA might help them make the distinction, he said. As an example of the differences, he pointed out that business loans often carry high interest rates because of high risk. “We have talked to some folks in Albany, and everyone is receptive to the industry,” he said. Small business is a powerful constituency, he maintains.
Gans, Denis and Cook all said they’re not opposed to legislation or regulation that addresses problems caused by bad actors in the industry, but all three oppose government action that they believe unnecessarily limits members of the industry who are operating in good faith.
The proposed license in New York differs in at least one significant way from the California lending license that many alternative funders have obtained, Cook noted. The California license doesn’t impose a cap on interest rates, he said. If the New York proposal imposed licensing requirements but did not limit interest rates, the industry probably would reluctantly accept it, he suggested.
—-
Dan Gans at the CFC can be contacted at dgans@polariswdc.com
Stephen Denis at the SBFA can be contacted at sdenis@sbfassociation.org
Robert Cook at Hudson Cook can be contacted at rcook@hudco.com
The LendIt Story
February 12, 2017The LendIt Conference was supposed to be a smallish local meetup for New York-based members of the online lending community. But founders Jason Jones and Bo Brustkern soon discovered they had the makings of a big annual industrywide national convention. And before long, they found themselves replicating their successful American show on other continents.
To understand how the trade show was born and how it’s matured, flash back about seven years. In 2010, Jones and Brustkern were putting together venture capital deals when they happened onto the fledgling peer-to-peer lending movement. “Consumer credit was something we weren’t all that knowledgeable about, but we could see the market was large,” recalls Jones. “There was a clear opportunity that was structural in the market, and there were stable, consistent returns.” So the two of them launched one of the first P2P funds.
Their lending business soon took off, but Jones and Brustkern felt they were working in a void. The industry lacked community, and they decided to do something about it. Jones contacted his friend, Dara Albright, who had been organizing a series of crowdfunding conferences for Wall Street starting in mid 2011.
To heighten the credibility of the new confab, Jones, Brustkern and Albright decided to seek the help of Peter Renton. They didn’t know Renton personally but considered him “the voice of the industry,” Jones says. Renton had nurtured and sold off two printing businesses and used the proceeds to take up online lending as a hobby. He had also launched the Lend Academy in 2010 to teach the world about peer-to-peer lending. Somehow, he had also found the time to develop a following for himself as a blogger.
In early January of 2013, Jones and Albright cold-called Renton to gauge his interest in putting on a show. As fate would have it, Renton had just made a New Year’s resolution to launch a conference for lenders and was receptive to joining up. Together, they put a plan in action.
The originators put up their own money and worked together daily from January to June of 2013, when the first show convened. They secured space that would contain 220 people and calculated their break-even point as 200 attendees. “This was never intended to be a profitable enterprise,” Jones says of those early days. “This was something we all wanted to do for the community. We thought that if we wanted it, others would want it.”
More than 400 people registered for that first conference. “We had a line literally out the door,” Jones notes. “We had to shut off registration. We ended up squeezing about 375 people into that first event. It was completely shocking to us.” From the beginning, attendees came from all over the world. “That’s when I learned China had a P2P industry,” Jones says.
After the initial event, Jones, Brustkern and Renton formed a unified company. Renton brought in Lend Academy, while Jones and Brustkern added their investment fund. The conference also became part of the united company. Ever since, a holding company has owned all three businesses. Dara went on to launch Fintech Revolution TV and continues to support LendIt.
From the initial attendance of 375, the U.S. conference grew to 975 attendees in 2014, 2,500 in 2015, 3,500 in 2016 and a projected 5,000 for this year. About 33 percent of attendees come from the fintech industry, 23 percent are investors, 23 percent are service providers, 14 percent are banks and 2 percent come from government, the media and other backgrounds, Jones says. At first, many of the attendees come from the ranks of CEOs and managing partners, but that’s changing as the industry comes to view the conference as an annual convention where lower-ranking members of an organization can learn about the business, he notes.
Meanwhile, the exhibition floor is becoming an increasingly important component of the show. The gathering attracted 18 exhibitors in 2013, followed by 47 in 2014, 112 in 2015, 177 last year and an expected 210 this year. “We’re transforming from a conference-led event to an expo-led event,” Jones says. This year, exhibitor booths will occupy a 120,000 square-foot hall in New York’s Jacob K. Javits Convention Center.
The U.S. LendIt conferences alternate between San Francisco and New York City, renting larger spaces as the show has grown, Jones explains. Two years ago, the gathering seemed cramped in the gigantic New York Marriott Marquis near Times Square, he says, necessitating this year’s move to the Javits Center. Javits is designed for conventions with at least 10,000 attendees so the show is a little small for that venue, he admits. But the facility could become LendIt’s long-time New York home as growth continues, he predicts.
Jones traces some of the growth in exhibitors to the expansion of the fintech industry. “You have a meeting of the start-ups with the more traditional players who are rethinking their businesses and how to apply the new technology that’s being developed into their businesses,” he says.
Conferences that compete with LendIt in the fintech category are proliferating because of the nature of industry, in Jones’ view. As soon as fintech companies are launched, the internet quickly makes them national or even international in scope, he says. At the same time, the anonymity of cyberspace creates a need for gatherings that provide face-to-face meetings, he maintains. “They live online,” he says. “The spend their year online so there is a need for a convention to meet with their peers, their clients, their service-providers, their customers, their suppliers. There is a need for that physical connection.”
The increase in fintech conferences is also driven by content-related companies that provide articles on fintech innovation. Those sites have regarded conferences as money-makers that complement their journalistic endeavors, Jones says. For example, TechCrunch, an online publisher of technology industry news, puts on the TechCrunch Disrupt conferences in San Francisco, New York City, London and Beijing. In another example, Business Insider conducts the IGNITION conference.
Those forces – the internet, globalization and web-based publishing – are making themselves felt in the convention business in general, not just in fintech, Jones notes. Event-related companies trade at roughly 12 times EBITDA (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization), he says, characterizing the convention business as “a very healthy category of our economy.”
Still, the fintech field’s crowded with more than 30 conferences, but LendIt is succeeding because of its early start and an emphasis on community, according to Jones. “We come from the industry,” he contends. “People are happy with what we can produce. They love our content so they come to learn.” Because the conference has become established, the media outlets focus on covering it, which encourages businesses to use it as a stage for introducing products or announcing mergers and acquisitions, he maintains.
Jones views LendIt and Money20/20 as the largest pure-play fintech conferences. The latter, which attracts 11,000 attendees, focuses on payments and contains a “layer” of fintech, while LendIt specializes in lending and likewise offers a “layer” of fintech, he says. Payments and lending represent the two biggest categories in fintech, so the structure of the shows makes sense, he suggests. By chance, Money20/20 occurs in the fall and LendIt takes place in spring, creating what he considers a “nice balance” that encourages prospective attendees to go to both shows.
Finovate holds a rival fintech conference that focuses more narrowly on innovation than do the LendIt and Money20/20 shows, Jones says. A competing bank securitization conference offers information on lending but doesn’t address fintech in great detail, he says.
While LendIt has been coming of age in the U.S., it’s also gained siblings in Shanghai and London. The Chinese edition of the show, which made its debut in 2014, ranks as the largest fintech show in Asia. The Chinese fintech market has grown to at least five times the size of any other market in the world, and it’s home to four of the world’s five largest fintech companies, Jones says. “We were completely blown away,” he says of learning about the industry during a visit to China.
Despite the language barrier and the challenges of dealing with an unfamiliar culture, LendIt has managed to prosper in China. Through a joint venture with a local financial think tank, LendIt helped produce annual Chinese events known as the Bund Summit for two years with attendance capped at 500. For the third year, LendIt parted ways with its partner and recast the show as a larger event. After the change, the confab, now called the Lang Di Fintech Conference, attracted 1,200 attendees, making it China’s largest. “There’s a ton of future opportunity,” Jones predicts of the China endeavor. “We want to be the annual convention for the Chinese fintech industry.”
Although it’s difficult to set up operations in China, cooperation has prevailed there in at least some areas. “The government has been quite supportive,” Jones says of of Chinese officials. “They appreciate what we’re trying to do there.” In January, LendIt launched its Chinese language daily news feed.
Thousands of miles away, the European-based LendIt confab ranks second in size on that continent only to the European version of Money20/20, Jones says. Attendance at the London-based LendIt show numbered 450 in 2014, which was its initial year. It climbed to 800 in 2015 and reached 925 last year.
Putting on the European event requires much less effort than the Asian version because it’s almost an extension of the U.S. original, he says. It’s dominated by firms from the United Kingdom but draws a smattering of companies from other European nations. Crossing borders presents challenges for European fintech companies, which keeps the industry’s companies smaller there than in the U.S. and China, but that may change, he believes. “There’s a lot of innovation there, but they still have a ways to go,” he says.
To handle its far-flung operations, LendIt relies on 20 full-time employees, 11 contractors and 10 people working in a joint venture in China for a total of 41 staff members. “These events are incredibly large shows, and we constantly feel understaffed,” Jones says. That feeling prevails despite recent additions to the staff, he notes.
And additional opportunity beckons in myriad locations. “The challenge is, do you have a bunch of conferences all over the world, or do you do a beachhead and pull people to those three events?” Jones wonders aloud when asked about the future. “For the moment, we have made the strategic decision to stick with these three events and go deeper with them. But there are so many opportunities all around the world. We’re constantly being asked to come to different countries.” Then, too, LendIt could convene smaller, one-day events around the glove as feeders to the three main conventions, he allows. “That’s something we’re batting around now.”
The established two-day conferences could also grow into three-day affairs – but not right away, Jones suggests. “We’re totally running out of time,” he says of trying to cram in all the speakers and exhibitors that LendIt would like to present. Stretching the format could create conflicts because some participants attend other events immediately before or after LendIt.
Notable LendIt speakers have included Larry Summers, who’s served as Harvard president and U.S. Treasury Secretary; Karen Mills, former administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration; John Williams, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco; and Peter Thiel, venture capitalist and member of the Trump transition team. This year, attendees can look forward to meeting the robot that represents Watson, the IBM computer. Watson will take the stage to field questions about fintech. For Jones, however, creating a conference isn’t just about the big-name speakers be they human or mechanical. “People who are lesser-known can be really fascinating,” he says.
Whoever handles the speaking duties, the LendIt Conference executives vow that they’re in it for the long run as the fintech industry’s annual convention during both boom times and economic slumps. As Jones puts it: “We want to be a reflection of our industry.”
‘Debt Collection Terrorist’ Wants FCC to Get Rid of Implied Consent in TCPA
February 9, 2017Craig Cunningham, the serial TCPA plaintiff who once aspired to author a book titled, Tales Of A Debt Collection Terrorist: How I Beat the Credit Industry At Its Own Game and Made Big Money From the Beat Down, now wants to make it easier to sue for TCPA violations.
Cunningham appeared in a deBanked story about telemarketing last year after it was discovered that he had sued alternative business finance companies for alleged violations. Declining to speak with me at the time, there was plenty to glean from his trail of forum posts where he uses the alias Codename47. One post stands out. “TCPA enforcement for fun and for profit up to 3k per call,” is the title of one thread he started in 2014 on the FatWallet forum.
And if his motives are fun and profit, then a petition filed by Cunningham with the FCC to limit the scope of “prior express consent” might concern you because it would create more opportunities for him and others to initiate lawsuits. This week, the FCC actually asked the public to comment on his petition.
With this Public Notice, we seek comment on a petition for rulemaking and declaratory ruling filed by Craig Moskowitz and Craig Cunningham (Petitioners).1 Petitioners request that the Commission initiate a rulemaking “to overturn the Commission’s improper interpretation that ‘prior express consent’ includes implied consent resulting from a party’s providing a telephone number to the caller.”2 Specifically, Petitioners request that the Commission issue a rule requiring that for all calls made to wireless and residential lines subject to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) restrictions in 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) and 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(B),3 “prior express consent” must be express consent specifically to receive autodialed and/or artificial voice/prerecorded telephone calls at a specified number, and such consent must be in writing.4 In addition, Petitioners seek a declaratory ruling to remove uncertainty regarding the meaning of “prior express consent” resulting from previous Commission orders.5
In the original description of Cunningham’s never-written book, his co-author Brian O’Connell, a famous writer, wrote this of Cunningham’s baiting strategy:
“The key was baiting the collections agent on the other end of the line and waiting for the agent to say something incriminating that crossed the line into what the law considered abuse. He began taping calls and soon had his first lawsuit against a security alarm company looking for $450 from an early termination fee.”
He has long since moved on from just debt collectors and files a lot of suits over allegedly unwanted calls.
Comments on Cunningham’s FCC proposal to make suing even easier, can be submitted online or by mail.
Lendio Announces Record Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year in 2016, Executive Promotions
February 8, 2017Lendio, the nation’s leading marketplace for small business loans, today announced that it helped facilitate more than $70 million in financing through its marketplace of more than 75 small business lenders during Q4 2016. The figure represents a 68 percent increase in loans originated through the Lendio platform over Q4 2015. In the last fiscal year, Lendio facilitated more than $240 million in funding, a 87 percent increase over 2015.
The company also announced the promotions of Jim Granat to president and chief revenue officer and Trent Miskin to chief growth officer. Granat formerly served as chief operating officer and Miskin as chief technology officer.
Q4 Highlights:
- Lendio raised $20 million in funding led by Comcast Ventures and Stereo Capital
- More than 3,300 small businesses funded in Q4, including in all 50 states
- Record number of repeat customers – 111 percent year-over-year deal growth from Q4 2015
- Added six new lenders to its marketplace, including: FundingCircle, Able Lending, and Internex
“We are extremely pleased to report a strong year-end performance and look forward to continued success in the months and years to come,” said Brock Blake, founder and CEO of Lendio. “These robust numbers put us in an even better position to help small business owners acquire funding. Looking ahead, we will continue to focus on investing in a superior customer experience, loan application automation, efficient processes and talented personnel that will help simplify small business lending.”
Lendio’s financial performance is the result of helping small business owners across the U.S. gain access to capital. Becca Grider and Lindie Royall of Little Poppy Co., a bow subscription for little girls, needed funding to manage the rapid growth of their company (20 percent month over month). “We started looking online at different options for funding and quickly realized that Lendio was our best choice,” Royall said. “We submitted our information online, they contacted us and showed us our different loan options. We got $75,000 through alternative lending, and because we now have the money on hand, it will help us keep our growth going.”
About Lendio
Lendio is a free online service that helps business owners find the right small business loans within minutes. The center of small business lending, our passion is fueling the American Dream by uniting the small business loan industry and bringing all options together in one place, from short-term specialty financing to long-term low-interest traditional loans. Our technology makes small business lending simple, decreasing the amount of time and effort it takes to secure funding. More information about Lendio is available at http://www.lendio.com.