Prominent Attorney Criminally Charged In 1 Global Capital Mess

September 17, 2019
Article by:

Department of JusticeAnother individual has been criminally charged in connection with the 1 Global Capital securities case. 74-year-old Jan Douglas Atlas, a securities attorney, was charged with 1 count of securities fraud by the US Attorney in South Florida on Tuesday for authoring opinion letters in 2016 that falsely described that the investments were not securities nor subject to federal securities laws or registration requirements.

The charges allege that Atlas “came to understand” that individuals representing 1 Global were not interested in accurate legal advice based on real facts and that they instead wanted false legal cover that would advance the desired outcome to continue to profit from 1 Global. He allegedly made false and misleading statements despite knowing the true nature of how the investments worked and that they were in fact securities as defined under federal securities laws.

“Atlas’s opinion letters were used and relied upon by 1 Global employees and agents to continue to raise money illegally,” the Department of Justice said in an announcement.

Atlas was also compensated by receiving a percentage of the commissions generated from the fundraising scheme to the tune of $627,000 paid to his personal checking account. These payments were not disclosed to his employer, Kopelowitz Ostrow, as required.

View the US Attorney’s complaint here

Atlas was also separately charged by the SEC.

His employer was not charged with any wrongdoing in either action. Atlas was previously listed as a partner at the firm but is no longer on the firm’s website.

Atlas is the second individual to be criminally charged in connection with 1 Global Capital. The first individual, Alan Heide, who served as 1 Global Capital’s CFO, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit securities fraud. He is scheduled to be sentenced on December 12th.

Stripe Ventures Into Merchant Cash Advance Financing

September 6, 2019
Article by:

stripe conference roomStripe, a payments firm lauded as the world’s most valuable private fintech company (at $22.5B), has officially launched a merchant cash advance product.

Dozens of news outlets have announced that the company is providing loans, but that’s not all, deBanked has learned. Both loans and merchant cash advances are available.

The company’s FAQ page originally explained the “Capital” product as a merchant cash advance but it’s since been updated to reflect that they offer access to both merchant cash advances and loans. An official Stripe spokesperson also clarified that an offer could be an MCA or a loan. The updated FAQ says that funding terms would be available in the customer dashboard, in the funding contract, and that which one a customer qualifies for depends on the specifics of their business.

Stripe merchant account customers can find out if they’re eligible for funding in their dashboard. If they’re not, they can still send Stripe a note through the dashboard to signal that they’re interested, say how much they’re looking for, and select what they plan to do with the funds. Stripe says they will not review your credit report and that all offers are based solely on Stripe transaction history.

The new product will not disrupt the separate integration with Funding Circle, according to a statement provided to Digital Transactions. Stripe customers can still apply to Funding Circle by connecting their Stripe account. Funding Circle offers term loans that range from six months to five years.

Stripe’s MCA product is currently only available in the US, but the company’s founders, Patrick and John Collison, brothers, hail from an unlikely place, rural Ireland. The company handles tens of billions of dollars in payments a year across 34 countries.

Like other recent entrants into the small business funding space, Stripe’s advantage is its ability to tap into its existing customer base. Other payments companies such as PayPal and Square, for example, were among the top four largest originators (for which public data is available) of alternative small business funding in 2018.

Note: This article has been updated to reflect the changes made on Stripe’s website as well as an additional clarification from the company.

A Side-By-Side Look At Small Business Funding Securitization Pools

September 6, 2019
Article by:

Several small business funding companies have closed majored securitization deals since 2018 with Kroll Bond Rating Agency rating the transactions. For the most recent transaction with National Funding, Kroll compared each securitized pool side-by-side in a chart. An abbreviated version of it is below:

NFAS 2019-1 (National Funding) RFS 2018-1 (Rapid Finance) CRDBL 2018-1 (Credibly) SFS 2018-1 (Kapitus)
Weighted Avg Original Expected Time (months) 9.9 11.7 11.5 7.8
Weighted Avg RTR Ratio 1.36x 1.27x 1.32 1.35
Weighted Avg Credit Score 664 665 679 649
Weight Avg Time in Biz (years) 9.6 14.6 12.3 12.5
Percentage of MCA 0.0% 14.1% 45.8% 60%
Percentage of Loan 100% 85.9% 54.2% 40%

Snapshot On Australia: Growth In The Making

August 30, 2019
Article by:

Downtown Sydney skyline

This story appeared in deBanked’s Jul/Aug 2019 magazine issue. To receive copies in print, SUBSCRIBE FREE

The Australian alternative lending market continues to gain momentum, bolstered in part by increased awareness, heightened competition and growing dissatisfaction with the status quo.

Indeed, there’s been significant growth in the few years since deBanked first wrote about the nascent alternative lending business down under. Notably, Australia’s alternative funding volume surpassed $1.14 billion in 2017, up 88 percent from $609.59 million in 2016, according to the latest data available from KPMG research. It’s the largest country in terms of total alternative finance market volume in the Asia Pacific region, excluding China, according to KPMG.

To be sure, the Australian market is still relatively small—at least compared with the U.S. Digging deeper, the largest share of market volume in 2017—the latest data available—came from balance sheet business lending, accounting for more than $574 million, according to KPMG. P2P marketplace consumer lending had the second largest market volume at $256 million. Invoice trading was the next largest segment of the Australian alternative finance market, accounting for $142.65 million, according to the KPMG report.

Its small size notwithstanding, what makes the Australian market particularly interesting is the potential promise it holds for the companies already established there and the opportunities it may offer to new entrants that find ways to successfully compete in the market.

Certainly alternative lending opportunities in Australia are growing, as awareness increases and the desire by consumers and businesses for favorable rates and faster service intensifies. The Australian alternative lending market is similar to Canada in that a small number of large banks dominate the market both in terms of consumer lending and small business lending. But, like in Canada, alternative lenders are gaining ground amid a changing customer mindset that values speed, favorable rates and a digital experience.

Reserve Bank of Australia

Equifax estimates that alternative finance volume in Australia is now growing at about 10 percent to 15 percent per year; that compares to a decline of approximately 20 percent for some major traditional lenders in terms of credit growth, says Moses Samaha, executive general manager for Equifax in Sydney. This presents an opportunity for alternative lenders to serve parts of the market the banks don’t want and those that are more attuned to a digital experience.

“IT DOESN’T FEEL LIKE THEY ARE AS ACTIVE AS THEY WERE ANNOUNCED TO BE”

Even so, challenges persist. For instance, digital disruptors are still working on gaining brand awareness, and the market is only so big to be able to accommodate a certain number of alternative players. Time will time whether there will be consolidation among alternative lenders and more bank partnerships, which haven’t been so successful to date. “It doesn’t feel like they are as active as they were announced to be,” Samaha says.

At present, the Australian market consists of a few dozen alternative lenders pitted against four major banks. RateSetter, SocietyOne and Wisr are among the largest alternative players in the consumer lending space. On the small business side, Capify, GetCapital, Moula, OnDeck, Prospa and Spotcap are some of the leading companies. PayPal Working Capital also has a growing presence in the Australian small business lending market.

New lenders continue to eye the Australian market for entry, but it’s not an easy market to crack, according to industry participants. The market consists of mostly home-grown players and that’s not expected to change drastically. (Capify, OnDeck and Berlin-based Spotcap are notable exceptions. Another U.S. major player, Kabbage, previously provided its technology to Australia’s Kikka Capital, but that agreement is no longer in force.)

Australia Lending

There can be a steep learning curve when it comes to outsiders doing business in Australia. What’s more, there’s no longer the first-to-market advantage that existed a decade or so ago. It’s also a relatively limited market in terms of size, which can be off-putting. Australia has a population of around 25 million, making it less populated than the state of California, with an estimated 39.9 million residents.

Still, for alternative players that are able to successfully navigate the challenges the Australian market presents, there’s ample opportunity to grab market share away from traditional players—similar to the pattern that’s emerged elsewhere around the globe.

Take consumer lending, for example. The unsecured consumer lending market in Australia sits at about $70 billion, with the large banks occupying maybe a 90 percent share of that, says Mathew Lu, chief operating officer of Wisr (previously known as DirectMoney Limited). Compared with other markets such as U.K. and the U.S., who went through a similar journey around a decade ago, “Australia is probably three or four years into that same journey of growth. It’s shifting and changing,” he says.

“A PERFECT STORM”

Alternative lenders have made strides in undercutting the large banks by offering generally lower rates and typically faster loan times. Unfavorable press related to bank lending practices has also benefited alternative lenders. Lu refers to these conditions as “a perfect storm” for growth.

Wisr, for instance, saw loan origination volume spike 409 percent in fiscal year 2018. The company secured $75 million in loan funding agreements last year and boasts more than 80,000 customers, according to a company presentation.

Marketplace lender, SocietyOne, which in March reached $600 million in loan originations, is another example of an alternative lender that has benefited from the momentum. The company— celebrating its 7th anniversary this summer—is hoping to reach $1 billion in loans by 2020, according to its website.

RateSetter—another major player in this space—has also experienced significant growth since launching in Australia in 2014, and is now funding over $20 million in loans each month, according to its website. In April, the company soared past $500 million in loans funded and in May it saw a record number of new investors register. The company has more than 15,000 registered investors by its own account.

deBanked AustraliaOne question for the future is whether the consumer alternative lending space in Australia will ultimately be too crowded amid a spate of new entrants. Wisr’s Lu says “there’s a big question mark” regarding how many alternative lenders the market can sustain. “Will there be a level of consolidation or amalgamation? These are questions ahead of us,” he says.

For its part, alternative lending to small businesses is also a growing force within Australia. As a testament to the development of this market, in June 2018, a group of Australia’s leading online small business lenders released a Code of Lending Practice, a voluntary code designed to promote fair terms and customer protections. Currently, the Code only covers unsecured loans to small businesses. Signatories include Capify, GetCapital, Moula, OnDeck, Prospa and Spotcap.

Capify—an early entrant to Australia—has been pursuing businesses there since 2008. The company, which integrated its U.S. business in 2017 to Strategic Funding Source (now called Kapitus) is now operating only in Australia and the U.K. In Australia, it has executed more than 7,500 business financing transactions for Australian businesses and has more than 50 staff members in its Australian offices.

The company recently closed a deal with Goldman Sachs for a $95 million line of credit for growth in Australia and the U.K., which includes building out its broker program to increase distribution and technology investment.

David Goldin, the company’s chief executive, says Capify is hoping to grow its Australian business between 25 percent and 30 percent in 2019. The company is looking at M&A activity as well as organic growth.

“YOU CAN’T GO OUT 24 MONTHS ON A 1.25 FACTOR RATE – THAT’S CRAZY”

Since Capify has been in the market, he has seen a number of new entrants—some more successful than others. One concern Goldin has is the lack of experience by some of these competitors. Many aren’t pricing the risk properly and not underwriting prudently to be able to weather a downturn, he says. They are so new, he questions whether they have the expertise to be able to survive a downturn given what he characterizes as pricing and underwriting missteps.

“You can’t go out 24 months on a 1.25 factor rate – that’s crazy,” he says, referring to some contracts he’s seen. “I’ve seen this movie in the U.S. before and it doesn’t end well.”

Australian Piggy BankMeanwhile, competition has driven down prices and made moving quickly on potential leads more of a necessity. When leads come in today, if you’re not on the phone in 30 minutes, you could lose it to a competitor, he says.

While the small business market is an enticing one for alternative lenders, raising awareness of their offerings continues to be a challenge.

“The small business market is fragmented and raising awareness is expensive,” says Beau Bertoli, co-founder and co-chief executive of Prospa, another prominent small business lender in Australia. “There hasn’t been much innovation in small business banking, but many Australians still don’t think of switching from banks and traditional lenders,” he says.

“THE SMALL BUSINESS MARKET IS FRAGMENTED AND RAISING AWARENESS IS EXPENSIVE”

That said, more small businesses are turning to alternative lenders and these companies say they expect growth to increase over time. Recent research commissioned by OnDeck found that 22 percent of small and medium-sized businesses would consider an online lender, up from 11 percent in the past. This could be buoyed further by the introduction of Open Banking in Australia, which was set to be introduced in Australia in 2019, but this was pushed back to early 2020.

“We look forward to the introduction of Open Banking in Australia as it should allow lenders to use incremental data points to improve risk modeling, and increase competition in the SME lending space, ultimately providing SMEs with improved access to cashflow solutions to grow and run their businesses,” says Cameron Poolman, chief executive of OnDeck in Australia.

Bertoli of Prospa, which recently listed on the Australian Stock Exchange, says the Australian alternative lending market will also benefit from strong support from industry and government to increase competition and improve consumer and small business outcomes. The government recently established a $2 billion Australian Business Securitisation Fund, which is a huge win for small business, he says, that will ultimately make the finance available to small business owners more affordable by lowering the wholesale cost of funds for alternative lenders. “We expect this will boost credibility and consideration of alternative lenders among small business owners,” he says.

Declining property values is another factor helping alternative lending. “In November 2018 we saw the largest annual fall in property prices in Australia since the global financial crisis in 2009,” says Simon Keast, managing director of Spotcap Australia and New Zealand.

Australian Dollar“As property prices decline, business owners find it more difficult to use their home as loan security and as such, turn to alternative lenders such as Spotcap that can provide them with unsecured loans for their business,” he says. What’s more, the SME Growth Index in March showed for the first time that business owners are almost as likely to turn to an alternative lender as they are to their main bank to fund growth, says.

Overall, the market opportunity for alternative lending to small businesses is compelling, says Bertoli of Prospa. “We estimate the potential market for small business lending in Australia is more than $20 billion per annum and we’ve penetrated only about 2 percent of the market so far. There are 2.3 million small businesses in Australia, and they’re crying out for capital,” he says.

Keast of Spotcap says he expects to see more banks and non-financial enterprises looking to leverage the technology fintech lenders have built to provide swift and digital lending products to small businesses. He offers the example of a partnership Spotcap, a German-based company, has with an Austrian Bank to provide same-day finance to SMEs in Austria as an example of the types of partnerships the company could also seek in Australia. “We have already partnered with an Austrian Bank that is leveraging our lending platform to provide same-day finance to SMEs in Austria, and there is plenty of interest for similar partnerships on the ground here,” he says.

OnDeck, meanwhile, expects to see a shake-out within the alternative finance sector, which will result in a smaller number of bigger players, with the ability to scale and serve multiple customers with a variety of products, according to Poolman, the company’s chief executive.

For his part, Goldin of Capify is bullish on the Australian small business market, but he cautions others that it’s not a gold rush type of place where everyone who comes in can make money.

“The state of California has more opportunity than the entire continent of Australia,” he says.

New York’s COJ Bill Has Been Delivered To The Governor

August 28, 2019
Article by:

COJ TombstoneNew York’s infamous Confession of Judgment bill has finally been delivered to the governor for his signature. Although the legislative process offers flexibility to depart from the statutory timelines (as we have witnessed), the governor now presumably has 10 days or less to sign it. Stay tuned.

The Confession of Judgment ban is very specific, it prohibits the entering of a COJ in New York against a non-New York resident. It does not prevent parties from filing lawsuits in New York. It does not prohibit COJs from being filed in other states. This law is significant because approximately 99% of COJs being utilized in the small business finance industry were being filed in New York regardless of where the debtor resided. That is because the New York Court system is the fastest and most efficient when it comes to entering COJs and securing a judgment.

Gold Rush: Merchant Cash Advances Are Still Hot

August 18, 2019
Article by:

gold rush

This story appeared in deBanked’s Jul/Aug 2019 magazine issue. To receive copies in print, SUBSCRIBE FREE

Last year, when Kevin Frederick struck out on his own to form his own catering company in Annapolis, the veteran caterer knew that he’d need a food trailer for his business to succeed.

He reckoned that he had a good case for a $50,000 small-business loan. The Annapolis-based entrepreneur boasted stellar personal credit, $30,000 in the bank, and a track record that included 35 years of experience in his chosen profession. More impressively, his newly minted company—Chesapeake Celebrations Catering—was on a trajectory to haul in $350,000 in revenues over just eight months of operations in 2018. And, after paying himself a salary, he cleared $60,000 in pre-tax profit.

But Frederick’s business-credit profile was so thin that no bank or business funder would talk to him. So woeful was his lack of business credit, Frederick reports, that his only financing option was paying a broker a $2,000 finder’s fee for a high-interest loan.

Luckily, he says, everything changed when he discovered Nav, an online, credit-data aggregator and financial matchmaker.

Based in Utah, Nav had him spiff up his business credit with Dun & Bradstreet, a top rating agency and a Nav business partner. This was accomplished with a bankcard issued to Frederick’s business by megabank J.P. Morgan Chase. Soon afterward, he says, Nav steered him to Kapitus (formerly Strategic Funding Source), a New York-based lender and merchant cash advance firm that provided some $23,000 in funding.

“They led me in the right direction,” Frederick says of Nav. “A lady there (at Nav) helped me with my credit, warning me that the credit card I’d been using had an effect on my personal credit. Then she led me to Kapitus, all probably within a week.”

chesapeake celebrations trailerNow, Frederick has his food trailer. He reports that its total cost—$14,000 for the trailer, which came “with a concession window, mill-finished walls, and flooring” plus $43,000 in renovations—amounted to $57,000. Equipped with a full kitchen—including refrigeration, sinks, ovens, and a stove—the food trailer can be towed to weddings, reunions, and the myriad parties he caters in the Delmarva Peninsula. In addition, Frederick can also park the trailer at fairgrounds and serve seafood, barbeque, and other viands to the lucrative festival market.

Meanwhile, the caterer’s funders are happy to have him as their new customer. The people at Kapitus, to whom he is making daily payments (not counting weekends and holidays), are especially grateful. “Nav provides a valuable service,” says Seth Broman, vice-president of business development at Kapitus. “They know how to turn coal into diamonds,”

Nav does not charge small businesses for its services. As it gathers data from credit reporting services with which it has partnerships—Experian, TransUnion, Dun and Bradstreet, Equifax—and employs additional metrics, such as cashflow gleaned from an entrepreneur’s bank accounts, Nav earns fees from credit card issuers, lenders and MCA firms.

“THEY DON’T HAVE TO SPEND AS MUCH MONEY ON LEADS”

The company has close ties to financial technology companies that include Kabbage and OnDeck, and also collaborates with MCA funders such as National Funding, Rapid Finance, FundBox, and Kapitus. “We give lenders and funders better-qualified merchants at a lower cost of client acquisition,” says Caton Hanson, Nav’s general counsel and co-founder, adding: “They don’t have to spend as much money on leads.”

As banks have increasingly shunned small-business lending in the decade since the financial crisis, and as the economy has snapped back with a prolonged recovery, alternative funders—particularly unlicensed companies offering lightly regulated, high-cost merchant cash advances (MCAs)—have been piling into the business.

And service companies like Nav—which is funded by nearly $100 million in venture capital and which reports aiding more than 500,000 small businesses since it was founded in 2012—are thriving alongside the booming alternative-funding industry.

Over the past five years, the MCA industry’s financings have been growing by 20% annually, according to 2016 projections by Bryant Park Capital, a Manhattan-based, boutique investment bank. BPC’s specialty finance division handles mergers and acquisitions as well as debt-and-equity capital raising across multiple industries and is one of the few Wall Street firms with an MCA-industry practice. By BPC’s estimates, the MCA industry will have more than doubled its small business funding to $19.2 billion by year- end 2019, up from $8.6 billion in 2014.

Bankrolled by a broad assortment of hedge funds, private equity firms, family offices, and assorted multimillionaire and billionaire investors on the qui vive for outsized returns on their liquid assets, the MCA industry promises a 20%-80% profit rate, reports David Roitblat, president of Better Accounting Solutions, a New York accountancy specializing in the MCA industry. Based on doing the books for some 30 MCA firms, Roitblat reports that the range in profit margins depends on the terms of contracts and a funder’s underwriting skills.

The numerical size and growth of the MCA industry is hard to ascertain, reports Sean Murray, editor of deBanked (this publication), which tracks trends in the industry and sponsors several major conferences. “So much is anecdotal,” Murray says.

Even so, the evidence that MCA companies are proliferating—and prospering—is undeniable. Over the past two years, deBanked’s events, which experience substantial attendance from the MCA industry, have consistently sold out, requiring the events to be moved to larger venues. In Miami, attendance in January this year topped 400-plus attendees, Murray reports, roughly double the crowd that packed the Gale Hotel in 2018.

Similarly, the May, 2019, Broker Fair in New York at the Roosevelt Hotel drew more than 700 participants compared with the sellout crowd of roughly 400 last year in Brooklyn. (Despite ample notice that this year’s Broker Fair at the Roosevelt was sold out and advance tickets were required, as many as 40-50 latecomers sought entry and, unfortunately, had to be turned away.)

“EVERYBODY AND HIS BROTHER IS TRYING TO GET A PIECE OF THE ACTION”

The upsurge of capital and the swelling number of entrants into the MCA business has all the earmarks of a gold rush. “Everybody and his brother is trying to get a piece of the action,” asserts Roitblat, the New York accountant.

gold rushAnd there are two ways to hit paydirt in a gold rush. One way is to prospect for gold. But another way is to sell picks and shovels, tents, food, and supplies to the prospectors. “If you can find a way to service the gold rush, you can make a lot of money,” says Kathryn Rudie Harrigan, a management professor and business-strategy expert at the Columbia University Graduate School of Business. “It’s like profiteering in wartime.”

As Professor Harrigan suggests, cashing in on the gold rush by servicing it has parallels across multiple industries. Consider the case of Charles River Laboratories, which has capitalized on the rapid development of the biotechnology industry over the past few decades.

As scientists searched for biologics to battle diseases like cancer and AIDS, the Boston-area company began producing experimental animals known as “transgenic mice.” Informally known as “smart mice,” Charles River’s test animals are specially designed to carry human genes, aiding investigators in their understanding of gene function and genetic responses to diseases and therapeutic interventions. (The smart mouse’s antibodies can also be harvested. “Seven out of the eleven monoclonal antibody drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration between 2006 and 2011,” according to biotechnology.com, “were derived from transgenic mice.”)

In the MCA version of the gold rush, a bevy of law and accounting firms, debt-collection agencies and credit-approval firms, among other service providers, have either sprung to life to undergird the new breed of alternative funder or added expertise to suit the industry’s wants and needs. (This cohort has been joined, moreover, by a superstructure of Washington, D.C.-based trade associations and lobbyists that have been growing like expansion teams in a professional sports league. But their story will have to wait for another day.)

Rather than being exploitative, supporting companies serve as a vital mainstay in an industry’s ecosystem, notes Alfred Watkins, a former World Bank economist and Washington, D.C.-based consultant: “A gold miner can’t mine,” he says, “unless he has a tent and a pickaxe.”

And in the high-risk, high-reward MCA industry, which can have significant default rates depending on the risk model, many funders can’t fund if they don’t have reliable debt collection. Many of the bigger companies, says Paul Boxer, who works on the funding side of the industry, have the capability of collecting on their own. But for many others—particularly the smaller players in the industry—it’s necessary to hire an outside firm.

“THIS INDUSTRY IS ONE OF THE TOP-GROWTH INDUSTRIES I’VE SEEN IN THE 36 YEARS THAT I’VE BEEN IN BUSINESS”

One of the more widely known collectors for the MCA industry is Kearns, Brinen & Monaghan where Mark LeFevre is president and chief executive. The Dover (Del.)- based firm, LeFevre says, first added MCA funders to its client roster in 2012; but it has only been since 2014 that “business really took off.”

LeFevre won’t say just how many MCA firms have contracted with him, but he estimates that his firm has scaled up its staff 35%-40% over the past five years to meet the additional MCA workload. The industry, LeFevre adds, “is one of the top-growth industries I’ve seen in the 36 years that I’ve been in business.”

He also says, “People in the MCA industry know a lot about where to put money, but collections are not one of their strong points. They need to get a professional. It gives them the free time to make more money while we go in behind them and collect.”

If repeated dunning fails to elicit a satisfactory response, KBM has several collection strategies that strengthen its hand. The big three, LeFevre says, are “negotiation, identifying assets, and litigation.” He adds: “We have a huge database of attorneys who do nothing but file suit on commercial debt internationally. Then we can enforce a judgment. You don’t want someone who just makes a few phone calls.”

Because business has become so competitive, LeFevre says, he won’t discuss his fee schedule. As to KBM’s success rate, he says no tidy figure is available either, but asserts: “Our checks sent to our clients are more than most agencies because of our proprietary collection process.”

Jordan Fein, chief executive at Greenbox Capital in Miami and a KBM client told deBanked: “We work with them. They’re organized and communicate well and they know to collect. They’re on the expensive side, though. I’ve got other agencies that I use that are cheaper.”

Debt-collection firm Merel Corp, a spinoff from the Tamir Law Group in New York, might be a lower-cost alternative. Formed in just the past 18 months to service the growing MCA industry, Merel typically takes 15%-25% of whatever “obligation” it can collect, says Levi Ainsworth, co-chief operating officer.

A successful collection, Ainsworth asserts, really begins with the underwriting process and attention to detail by the funders. “Instead of coming in at the end,” he says, “we try to prevent problems at the start of the process.”

For an MCA firm dealing with an excessive number of defaults, Merel sometimes places one of its employees with the funder to handle “pre-defaults,” for which it charges a lower fee. The collections firm has also built a reputation for not relying on a “confession of judgment.” Now that COJs have been outlawed for out-of-state collections in New York State, Merel’s skills could be more in demand.

Better Accounting Solutions, which has its offices on Wall Street, is another service-provider promising to lighten the workload of MCA firms by providing back-office support. The company is headed by Roitblat, a 36-year- old former rabbinical student turned tax-and-accounting entrepreneur. Since he founded the company with two part-time employees in 2011, it’s ballooned to some 70 employees.

“GROWTH IN THE MCA INDUSTRY HAS BEEN EXPLOSIVE”

Roitblat does not have all of his firm’s eggs in one MCA basket. His firm handles tax, accounting and bookkeeping work for law firms, the fashion industry, restaurants and architectural firms. Even so, he says, thirty MCA clients— or more than half his clientele—rely on the firm’s expertise, three of whom were just added in June. His best month was January, 2018, when six funders contracted for his services. “Growth in the MCA industry has been explosive,” he says.

MCA accounting work has its own vagaries and oddities. For example, because of the industry’s high default rate, Roitblat notes, a 10%-slice of every merchant’s payment is funneled into a “default reserve account.” And when an actual default occurs, credits are moved from the receivables account to the default reserve account.

Roitblat takes pride that his firm’s MCA work has passed audits from respected accounting firms like Friedman, Cohen, Taubman and Marcum LLP. Moreover, he has helped clients uncover internal fraud and, in one instance, spotted costly flaws in a business model. An early MCA client, Roitblat says, had no idea that “he was losing close to $100,000 a month by spending on Google ads.”

Better Accounting also keeps its rates low. The firm typically assigns a junior accountant to handle clients’ accounts while a senior manager oversees his or her work. “He (Roitblat) does a fantastic job,” says David Lax, managing partner of Orange Advance, a Lakewood (N.J.)-based MCA firm. “They understand the MCA business. And even if your business is small, they can set up the infrastructure and do the work more economically and efficiently than you can. You’d have to create the position of comptroller or senior-level accountant,” Lax adds, “to equal their work.”

Top-notch competence and low rates, Lax says, are not the only reasons he often refers Roitblat’s firm to fellow MCA companies. “The only thing better than their work,” he says, “is the people themselves.”

Whether it’s oil and gas, banking and real estate, construction, health care or high-technology—you name it—lawyers have an important role across nearly every industry. So too with the MCA industry where, as has been shown, there is an especially high demand for attorneys skilled at winning debt-collection cases.

To hear Greenbox’s Fein tell it, a skilled lawyer handling debt collection can write his or her own ticket. A talented attorney, he says, not only retrieves lost money and prevents losses, but enables the funder to “offer the product cheaper than the competition.

“We use a ton of attorneys in 35 states in the U.S. and in Canada,” Fein adds, “and you have no idea how many attorneys we go through until we find a good one.”

Until recently, much of the MCA industry’s success has resulted from a hands-off, laissez faire legal and regulatory environment—particularly the legal interpretation that a merchant cash advance is not a loan. The industry has also benefited from the fact that most credit regulation focused on consumer credit and not on business and commercial financings.

But now, as the MCA industry is maturing and showing up on the radar screens of state legislatures, Congress, regulatory agencies, and the courts, there is heightening demand for legal counsel. In just the past 12 months, California passed a truth-in-lending statute requiring MCA firms not only to clearly state their terms, but to translate the short-term funding costs of MCAs into an annual percentage rate. The state of New York, as has been noted, passed legislation restricting the use of COJs.

Moreover, notes Mark Dabertin, special counsel at Pepper Hamilton, a top national law firm based in Philadelphia, the state of New Jersey is contemplating licensing MCA practitioners. The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently determined in Anderson v. Koch that, because of a “call provision” in a funding contract, a merchant cash advance was actually a loan.

“YOU CAN’T JUST DO IT BY THE SEAT OF YOUR PANTS”

And, Dabertin warns, the Federal Trade Commission, which has the authority to treat a merchant cash advance as a consumer transaction—replete with the full panoply of consumer disclosures and protections—is training its gunsights on the industry. “On May 23,” Dabertin reports in a memo to clients, “the FTC launched an investigation into potentially unfair or deceptive practices in the small business financing industry, including by merchant cash advance providers.”

These pressures from government and the courts will only make doing business more costly and drive up the industry’s barriers to entry. Failing to stay legal, moreover, could not only result in punitive court judgments, but render an MCA firm vulnerable to legal action by their investors.

“It’s inevitable that the industry will evolve,” Dabertin says, and firms in the industry will have to self-police. “They will need to hire counsel and a compliance staff,” he adds. “You can’t just do it by the seat of your pants.”

Enova’s Small Business Division Garner’s Limelight in Q2

August 16, 2019
Article by:

enovaLate last month, Enova released its second quarter report for 2019. Generally bearing positive news, the report asserts that the company is in a good position due to increasing demand, growth in various areas, and reductions in financing costs.

Total revenue is up from Q2 2018, rising 13% from $253 million to $286 million, just as net income has risen from $18 million to $25 million.

“We are pleased to report another quarter of solid financial results that exceeded our expectations on both the top and bottom line,” said Enova CEO David Fisher in the earnings call. “Our strong financial performance was driven by solid demand, stable credit, and efficient marketing spend. We continue to demonstrate our ability to produce sustainable and profitable growth and our second quarter results further validate this balanced approach.”

Speaking more specifically about which divisions of Enova have excelled, Fisher highlighted the small business sector, which is composed of Headway Capital and The Business Backer. “NetCredit and our small business financing products were the primary growth drivers during Q2, with domestic revenue up 19% year over year … Our products are clearly gaining traction with customers, resulting in originations increasing 140% year over year, and small business now represents 12% of our book at the end of Q2.”

Jim Granat, Enova’s Head of Small Business Financing, chalked such gains up to “having a great team, a good strategy, and a great company behind us that has the ability to invest in the analytics, tech, and people.” The strategy he speaks of is titled ‘Faster and Easier,’ a modus operandi began by him after his arrival to the company in 2018. It is data-driven and involves incorporating certain individual operations of Headway and Business Backer, and streamlining these processes so that the brands overlap for particular actions. Implemented with the belief that “doing it internally would lead to speed and ease externally,” ‘Faster and Easier’ appears to be working, if one takes Fisher’s comments and the report as affirmation.

“We’ve been working really hard and hopefully the results of that show in the fruits of these efforts,” said Granat. “We are just in the beginning of what we can accomplish, these projects take a while and we are incredibly excited about the second half of 2019, let alone 2020 and beyond.”

Alan Heide, CFO Of 1 Global Capital, Hit With Criminal Charge & SEC Violations

August 15, 2019
Article by:

handcuffs

Update: Alan Heide has pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud.

The former CFO of 1 Global Capital, Alan Heide, was stacked with bad news on Thursday. The US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida lodged criminal charges against him at the same time the Securities & Exchange Commission announced a civil suit for defrauding retail investors.

Heide was criminally charged with conspiracy to commit securities fraud.

According to the criminal complaint:

It was a purpose of the conspiracy for the defendant and his conspirators to use false and fraudulent statements to investors concerning the operation and profitability of 1 Global, so that investors would provide funds to 1 Global, and continue to make false statements to investors thereafter so that investors would not seek to withdraw funds from 1 Global, all so that the conspirators could misappropriate investors’ funds for their personal use and enjoyment.

He is facing a maximum of 5 years in prison.

alan heide criminal charges

1 Global Capital CEO Carl Ruderman, who recently consented to judgment with the SEC, has not been charged criminally to-date. However, he is mentioned throughout the pleading against Heide as “Individual #1 who acted as the CEO of 1 Global.”

Civil charges were simultaneously lodged by the SEC.

According to the SEC’s complaint:

Although 1 Global promised investors profits from its short-term merchant cash advances to businesses, the company used substantial investor funds for other purposes, including paying operating expenses and funding Ruderman’s lavish lifestyle. The SEC alleges that Heide, a certified public accountant, for nine months regularly signed investors’ monthly account statements that he knew overstated the value of their accounts and falsely represented that 1 Global had an independent auditor that had endorsed the company’s method of calculating investor returns.

According to an SEC statement, Heide agreed to settle the SEC’s charges as to liability, without admitting or denying the allegations, and agreed to be subject to an injunction, with the court to determine the penalty amount at a later date.

1 Global Capital filed for bankruptcy last year after investigations by the SEC and US Attorney’s Office hampered their ability to raise capital. Ruderman’s recent settlement with the SEC put him on the hook for $50 million to repay investors.