Sean Murray is the President and Chief Editor of deBanked and the founder of the Broker Fair Conference. Connect with me on LinkedIn or follow me on twitter. You can view all future deBanked events here.
Articles by Sean Murray
Securitization Begins in Alternative Business Lending
May 1, 2014
It’s official, alternative business loans can now be pooled up and sold off to investors. On Wednesday, OnDeck Capital announced a $175 million transaction made possible by issuing fixed rate notes backed by their loans.
Their Class A notes were rated BBB by DBRS while the Class B notes received a BB.
According to DBRS, BBB grade are of “Adequate credit quality. The capacity for the payment of financial obligations is considered acceptable. May be vulnerable to future events.”
BB grade are “Speculative, non-investment grade quality. The capacity for the payment of financial obligations is uncertain. Vulnerable to future events.”
While it’s popular to refer to alternative business lending as highly speculative and fraught with risk, it’s notable that a highly respected ratings agency would not officially bestow OnDeck’s loans with a label to match that. A single B would’ve signified a highly speculative investment and CCC, CC, and C would signal danger. But OnDeck’s Class A notes are up to snuff as investment-grade level material.
OnDeck has been dogged by critics over the last few years, most of whom are their competitors. The argument goes that their practice of undercutting the rest of the industry on rates is doomed to fail. Those theories are bolstered by the very public knowledge that they have yet to turn a profit. Back in March, CEO Noah Breslow was quoted in the Wall Street Journal as saying they were “imminently profitable“, an optimistic yet openly ambiguous indicator of where they stand. Since they are not a publicly traded company, they are not required to disclose their financial statements.
While DBRS serves to validate OnDeck’s policies and approach, word that they had achieved “investment-grade” status did little to pacify their critics. Yet, for a company that places a remarkably heavier focus on credit modeling and technology infrastructure than the majority of their peers, there is always the possibility that OnDeck is actually as smart as they want everyone to believe. Four months ago it was reported that “fifty-six of their 225 employees have backgrounds in math, statistics, computer science, or engineering.” Contrast that with some of the small and mid-sized players that are largely focused on ISO recruitment and sales.
While I haven’t seen a prospectus in its entirely, I’ve learned there are quite a few ground rules in place for these notes. For one, these loan pools have to be diversified. That means no secretly packaging up all the loans in a risky zip code in Nevada and selling them off as a BBB rated note. There are concentration limits in place to reduce risk. Below are the maximum thresholds allowed in a pool based on their location:
Obligor Located in California 20.0%
Obligor Located in Florida 15.0%
Obligor Located in New York 15.0%
Obligor Located in Texas 15.0%
Obligor Located in Any Other State 10.0%
If a concentration limit is exceeded, the issuer is required to maintain additional credit enhancement. I’m not surprised at all that California, Florida, New York, and Texas are singled out. In addition to being among the most populous in the country, they are the heaviest users of alternative business loans and merchant cash advances. There’s also the theory that Floridians are statistically the least likely to repay a loan, as openly discussed in The Joy of Redlining, a controversial assessment borne out of the peer-to-peer lending crowd.
There are other concentration limits to adhere to such as the OnDeck Score range (not FICO score range), size of the outstanding principal, industry type, and repayment time frame.
Notably, recognition and acceptance of the proprietary OnDeck Score in concentration limits is a major achievement for them. Breslow previously referred to the OnDeck Score as “the Main Street equivalent of FICO” in American Banker.
Additionally, OnDeck’s reliance on ISOs/brokers for originations is shrinking. In 2013, their direct marketing channel accounted for 43% of their deal flow, compared to only 12% back in 2010. This is a step in the right direction for them financially as broker commissions are on the rise. Increasing the direct marketing percentage will serve as a hedge against increasing third party origination costs.
So what’s next?
For now, OnDeck Capital can enjoy the liquidity gained through securitization and focus on more important things like growth and profitability. Profits are a must in the current IPO environment. Payment company Square had their IPO hopes dashed when word of their losses were leaked to the Wall Street Journal. That came as a shock to the general public. Meanwhile everybody already has an idea of where OnDeck stands, sort of. They’re either brilliant or doomed to fail. I’d say an independent assessment that they’re capable of issuing investment grade notes, increases their odds of brilliance.
Whatever your feelings, they have set a powerful precedent for secuitization. As these notes were reportedly oversubscribed, investors will be looking to their competitors for a taste. OnDeck just whet the appetite. Additional securitization in this industry could be right around the corner. One might say it’s… imminent.
CAN Capital Still King – $4 Billion Funded
April 29, 2014While college kids across the country are creating alternative lending platforms in their dorm rooms, industry king CAN Capital announced today that they have provided small businesses with more than $4 billion. That puts them on pace to be funding approximately $1 billion a year. ($3 billion milestone back in March 2013).
Word apparently leaked out on DailyFunder ahead of time, drawing several members to tip their hats on the achievement.
As of March 31, Lending Club had also surpassed the $4 billion mark, but with a major distinction, it was almost entirely consumer loans. In the business space, CAN Capital remains on top after 16 years, which sadly makes them older than some of the kids writing code in this industry.
In a lot of ways, code has become the new focal point of alternative lending. There’s sex appeal in having a NASA-worthy underwriting algorithm right now and everybody’s getting caught up in it, some at their own peril.Why stop at a hundred data points when you can have a thousand? Screw it, why not TEN THOUSAND?!
While strong on technology, CAN originates like a boss, having funded over 55,000 small businesses. The tech side is challenging enough for some companies, but it’s the difficulty in marketing that catches many entrepreneurs off guard. In Alex Binkley’s requiem of a defunct startup, Funding Community, he detailed the challenge in generating interest. Who you attract is not always who you’re looking to fund in business lending.
In 2014, there’s no shortage of sexy buzzwords dazzling investors, yet it’s a 1990’s era funding company that continues to dominate. Three out of four eligible customers return to them for additional funds according to their report. Having survived Y2K, the dot com bust, and the financial crisis, they are proof that it takes a lot more than fancy code and a catchy name to master the risky world of business lending. With 16 years worth of data, it may take until 2030 for this year’s new entrants to truly know what they know. $4 billion says a lot but it’s standing tall through both the good times and bad that makes all the difference.
—–
Photos borrowed from HBO’s Silicon Valley series.
What if there were Trigger Leads?
April 27, 2014
Just recently, a user in DailyFunder’s forum complained that a deal of his had been poached by a competitor. There’s nothing new about that story, but it is what followed that drew interest. He was in the process of renewing his client for additional funds, when out of the blue popped up a competitor that called his client to tell them not to sign the contract they had in their hands until they heard his better offer.
As it was suspiciously timed and curiously specific, he decided to reach out to the alternative lending community for their thoughts. One possible conclusion offered was that the competitor was being fed trigger leads.
Trigger leads?????????????????
Forget UCCs folks. UCCs detail transactions that have already happened and we’ve all seen what they’ve done to the merchant cash advance and alternative business lending industry. Companies are scared to file them now. But what if all of your competitors were notified every time one of your deals was submitted to underwriting? You get the app signed, you submit the file, and the next day 10 companies have called your client to offer them a better deal on funding than whatever terms you were about to offer. What gives?
Popular in the mortgage industry, the credit bureaus can actually sell credit inquiry data to lenders. So imagine every time credit gets pulled on a deal, the merchant’s info is sent out to your competitors for a fee.
Dave Sullivan explains Trigger leads below:
There was no way to tell for sure if that was what happened in this situation, and I’ve yet to hear of trigger leads being used in the alternative business lending industry but if someone was getting them, I’m sure they’d want to keep their source top secret.
Can you imagine what kind of chaos would ensue if this became commonplace in our industry?
š
Square Bears Attack
April 21, 2014It was the PR nightmare that wouldn’t end. With Easter Sunday still warm on everyone’s minds, bloggers went for the jugular over Square’s acquisition rumors. Whether based on fact or fiction (nobody seemed to know for sure), Alistair Barr, Douglas Macmillan, and Evelyn Rusli of the Wall Street Journal single-handedly hit Jack Dorsey’s famous payment company with a fresh dose of healthy skepticism. With that came the revelation that Square had lost $100 million in 2013, a dangerously large figure for a company that is apparently plagued with shrinking margins, not growing ones.
What was happening behind the scenes at Square differed in dramatic context depending on which news site you read. Some writers claimed Square executives were considering a well thought-out strategic acquisition in light of a liquidity shortfall, while others insinuated that Jack Dorsey had last been seen raging drunk at a Market Street Starbucks wearing nothing other than flip flops. He reportedly told spectators that a 2% swipe fee was impossible and then he fled out the back door as four Baristas tried to wrestle him down.
When an IPO was taken off the agenda in February, some analysts wondered if their historic rise had come at a cost. In the Wall Street Journal article, it was alleged that the company was potentially less than a year away from insolvency. The quote was, “During the first quarter of 2014, a Square executive told a potential acquirer that the company had nine months before it would hit a predetermined ‘cushion’ of funds set aside as a last resort.” Thanks to the new credit facility they landed this month of nearly $200 million, they should have no problem with cash flow.
But questions remain. People supposedly close to Square confirm that the company had practically begged Visa and Google to acquire them. Though there were stiff denials from all parties throughout the day, it made for some enticing headlines. Square Bears were out in droves today:
Square Is Losing Millions Of Dollars And Wants To Sell – Huffington Post
Why Square Needs To Sell Itself And Do It Quickly – Forbes
Mobile payment startup Square plans sale as losses widen – Reuters
Did Jack Dorsey Do the Math on Square – UpStart Business Journal
Square denies sell-out plans; all eyes on the dicey-looking financials – ZDNet
Mobile-Payments Startup Square Discusses Possible Sale
Company Faces Wider Loss, Less Cash; Google Considered Potential Acquisition – Wall Street Journal
What should also be of note is Square’s recent venture into the merchant cash advance business, which in practice should be a major liquidity drain. One has to wonder if this is a good time to position themselves as a working capital provider when they’re hemorrhaging cash from their payments operations. Besides, providing funding to micro-merchants in return for a split of their future card sales is an incredibly risky business model. One thing the established players in that market have learned is that it’s really easy to lose money if you don’t know what you’re doing.
I sure hope they know what they’re in for. Otherwise Dorsey might really run off drunk to Starbucks.
Business Lending Ain’t Easy
April 16, 2014
I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a marvelous post by Alex Binkley, one of the co-founders of the now defunct Funding Community. In his Blog, Binkley shares the details of a wild 18 month ride in the world of business lending. P2P lending was going great for consumers, so why not businesses? What followed is a lesson that anyone interested in alternative business lending needs to read.
I’ve copied some of the quotes I think are most relevant below:
On ACH processing:
we were trying to find a way to make our payment processing both inexpensive and simple. Many ACH (bank transfer) companies wanted to charge us high fees because our type of transaction was considered āhigh-riskā for chargebacks, so instead we started working with a relatively new payment processor called Dwolla. Now, Dwolla does ACH transactions cheaper than just about anyone else, but that cheapness comes with a price. For us, it was ease of use.
On the quality of businesses:
So after our first couple weeks we had just about funded all of out first set of loans and we were furiously trying to get new ones signed up. Here was the rub though. We started to get a little bit of inbound interest, but frankly most of those businesses were in rough shape. When we looked at a small business making gross revenue of $1,000 a month looking for a $10,000 loan we just could not see how our lenders were going to be repaid. Of course this was not every business we were looking at, but it was a huge percentage.
On selling the product:
A total of 83% of Lending Clubās loans are for refinancing existing debt. How amazing is that? You donāt have to convince someone to take on new debt, you just have to be able to convince them you can offer a better deal than their current debt. On top of that, you can piggy back on other lending companiesā credit analysis. Our company was built on the idea that the credit markets were too lean for small business, which means that we were built on the idea of originating new debt as opposed to financing old, a much more challenging (and expensive) proposition.
On origination fees as a revenue driver:
Because all of our loans were 9-month loans and we were trying to keep total cost down to borrowers we felt we could not charge origination fees nearly that high.
On ancillary opportunities in business lending:
One aspect of our model we were pitching to investors was that small business lending is very different than consumer lending. When you make a loan to a consumer you really donāt have a lot more to offer that consumer (except maybe more loans). When you make a loan to a business or theory was that you then had the ability to sell a lot of ancillary products to that business.
On not having state of the art technology to track loan repayment and performance:
We started to get questions and concerns about what was happening with peoplesā money. It was all safe and was all being put into the loans intended, but because the transparency was not there some lenders became very concerned.
Business lending ain’t easy…
Read the entire story on Binkley’s blog.
Alternative Lending Took Over Transact 14 (PHOTOS)
April 13, 2014Think the payments industry is just about banks and hardware companies? Think again! The ETA conference continuously hosts the largest gathering of alternative lenders and merchant cash advance companies year after year. Below are some photos from the Transact 14 show:
The Money Team AKA Merchant Cash Group were out in force.
Noah Breslow and Paul Rosen of OnDeck Capital
American Finance Solutions having fun at their booth:
Booth 339 at ETA still rocking the show at 100% pic.twitter.com/V8SMqhhpOZ
— AFS (@AFSBusinessLoan) April 10, 2014
Seth Broman of Merchant Cash and Capital showing off CAMS
Renier showing off Swift Capital’s 1 hour funding program
Seth Broman (MCC), myself (deBanked), Matthew Washington (Fora), Michael Hollander (NLF), and Andrew Mallinger (Fora) roughing the frozen tundra of Minus5 Ice Bar
Mitch Levy (AmeriMerchant) and myself.
Strategic Funding Source is all business…
We had such a great time meeting you all at #ETATRANSACT by @ElecTranAssoc! Can't wait until next year! pic.twitter.com/V3b6ybtTBw
— Strategic Funding (@SFSCapital) April 11, 2014
I spy RetailCapital
Working the ETA show #transact14 pic.twitter.com/FQzaDfA0j9
— RetailCapital (@RetailCap) April 9, 2014
Everyone’s shoes were shiny thanks to IOU Central
CAN Capital went big as usual
We're sponsoring the today's CEO roundtable at #ETATRANSACT – come check us out after at booth #825! pic.twitter.com/Xz3l38CVlp
— CAN Capital (@CANCapital) April 10, 2014
Attendees were all like
There were sweet views from the parties hosted by North American Bancard and Priority Payments, but what happened at them stayed in Vegas. š
Want to be included? Send me your photos or links to your photos! e-mail me at sean@merchantprocessingresource.com.
Would You Fund This Business?
April 12, 2014
Is the site inspection dead?
One of the strangest byproducts of the automation age is that underwriting tools once deemed absolutely essential are being replaced with APIs, digital verifications, and algorithmic scoring. Speed is everything, but why?
Faster speed through automation allows for scaleability. The promise of speed to a potential customer also encourages them to apply. Working capital can be an impulse decision now. You don’t even need to leave your chair to get $80,000 for your small business. But who’s making sure these businesses are sound… or more importantly, that they even exist?
I learned through conversations at Transact 14 that there is a growing dependency on Google Earth for site verification, more specifically Street View. Really??? Street View?!
While tech heavy funding companies laud real-time data through hundreds of APIs, it’s amusing to think that something like Street View, which might not be updated for months or years at a time, suffices as a site verification. Indeed, Street View still shows Christmas decorations in my home town.
Google Earth can pinpoint the obvious things like showing you something is located in the middle of nowhere:
But can it show you this sign located inside?
And how would you know if the writing was literally on the wall if it just went up yesterday?
Or that everything is completely on the up and up except that the business will be:
If you had the chance to speak with Jason Fullen or Joe Volk at NVMS during Transact 14, you’d know that site inspections performed by real live humans can be done in the same day they’re ordered. Or if you were getting wild at the Quiktrak party, you’d know that many of the older merchant cash advance companies still rely on site inspections, particularly on large deals.
How dumb would you feel if the $150,000 deal you funded looked like this on the inside?
Investigate a little
Who better to know the scoop on the business than the locals? I am reminded of the time a $100,000 deal I worked on where the site inspector commented that a restaurant was actually a front for a brothel that was likely going to get shut down.
I also recall almost funding a $100,000+ supermarket until the site inspection revealed that all of the shelves in the store were empty. I guess that merchant wasn’t lying when they said they needed the money to buy inventory!
And there was my own personal trip to a Brazilian Steakhouse for the final approval on an MCA deal based on credit card transactions. The server politely informed me at the end of my meal that the establishment no longer accepted credit cards as of a few days ago. How convenient…
Can social media be our eyes?
In the social media era, it’s almost as if a million site inspections are being conducted every minute. Can reviewer data be our eyes?
If there are too few reviews or they’re aged, can you rely on all your other data points? Can you trust that the available reviews are from real customers?
Speed is king these days, but ignorance is never in style. One has to consider if they can trust external data versus what they see with their own two eyes. We’ve all seen deals that looked great on paper, but turned out to be complete
After further review of the deal:
Should we fund businesses we never see? It’s your call.
