Becoming a Bank – Varo Articulates the Leap from Fintech to Banking
July 26, 2017
Varo Money wants to become Varo Bank. The completely mobile-app driven fintech startup already lets customers juggle financial tasks with the touch of a button but now they want to make it official.
Varo has applied for a full national bank charter with the bank’s headquarters in Utah in hopes of becoming a national bank. Varo is the second fintech startup to apply for a bank charter in as many months, with the SoFi application still pending, though there are key differences to the design of each application.
Colin Walsh, co-founder and CEO of Varo Money, took some time to discuss the bank charter application with AltFinanceDaily, offering his take on how the future of banking is moving toward mobile and reviving the banker relationship, which has gotten lost along the way.
AltFinanceDaily: Why a bank charter and why now?
Walsh: We founded Varo with a specific vision: to be an indispensable financial guide for customers, with a full suite of banking and financial products. Our founding intention was to create a bank that made it easier and more affordable to manage money. We’ve been in conversations with the regulators for a number of months, and we completed the “pre-application” process. In the past year the regulators’ openness to new de-novo bank charter applications has shifted.
AltFinanceDaily: Was SoFi’s recent move to similarly apply for a bank charter any inspiration for you?
Walsh: SoFi’s filing did not affect our process; we’ve been in conversations with regulators for months (see above answer). In addition, SoFi applied for a different type of charter than we did. They applied for a state-chartered ILC, which tend to be used by subsidiaries of companies whose primary business is not banking. We applied for a national bank charter to become a full-service national bank.
AltFinanceDaily: Have you faced any backlash since applying for the bank charter?
Walsh: Not so far. Varo was founded to make it easier and more affordable for customers to manage their money and improve people’s financial lives. We believe that integrating traditional bank products with modern technology (predictive analytics, contextual alerts/notifications, auto-savings, visualizations) is the best way to achieve this outcome. While it brings a new breed of competition, we believe it is the future of banking and is ultimately in the best interest of consumers.
AltFinanceDaily: Is Varo 100% smartphone banking? For iOS and Android? What type of growth are you experiencing?
Walsh: We also offer service through Interactive Voice Response and phone. We pushed our iOS app into the Apple App store [in] mid-June and are already experiencing very strong demand.
AltFinanceDaily: Does Varo issue loans and are they from your balance sheet?
Walsh: Yes and yes. Varo makes unsecured loans to customers in states where we have lending licenses.
AltFinanceDaily: You come from traditional banking, correct? What do you think of this shift toward online and now mobile banking/lending? Are traditional banks going to be left behind?
Walsh: That is correct, I spent 25 years with traditional banking and financial services companies. 92% of all adults ages 18-36 own a smartphone, and modern technology opens up the possibility of a personal banker in your pocket. The game is changing. Banking used to be a relationship business — but most banks have gotten too big to help the bulk of their customers solve everyday problems and get ahead.
Many incumbent banks aren’t able to make the technological changes that customers of the future will demand. Instead of making step-changes to their technologies, they continue to iterate on the same products and channels that serve the same customers in silos, without imagining what the future of banking could look like.
Varo will be the first entrant to truly challenge the existing banking model. Varo combines proprietary technology and integrated financial solutions to bring relationships back to banking for everyone, all on your phone. Varo is a bank designed around solving financial problems, not pushing products. There’s room for everyone, it’s a very big market, but Varo aims to raise the bar for what consumers should expect from their banks.
AltFinanceDaily: Do you work with any bank partners?
Walsh: Yes, we have great partnerships with The Bancorp Bank, who serves as our sponsor bank for Varo Money’s current business, and Silicon Valley Bank, where we have our main bank account and a venture debt facility.
AltFinanceDaily: Are consumers ready to make the shift to 100% mobile banking?
Walsh: We’ve seen that many customers are willing and ready to make the shift. Varo’s vision is that everyone deserves a personal banker in their pocket. Access to financial guidance should be instant when a customer needs it and not bother them when they don’t. We want to reduce stress through financial empowerment so that our customers can fulfill their ambitions, stop worrying and go live their lives.
Just like Amazon disrupted retail by providing instant shopping in a customer’s hand, banking in the future (and even today) doesn’t have to be about geographic coverage anymore. We believe that the future of banking is about providing an on-demand solution that gets customers from A → B with minimal friction and maximum delight. Once customers experience how easy and affordable Varo is, traditional banks seem outdated. Trust, safety, and security are requirements for our business that we take very seriously.
Revisiting Funding Circle
July 21, 2017Funding Circle’s SME Income Fund delivered profits last year not only in the UK segment, but also in the US segment, according to sources. As the UK is Funding Circle’s home market, it naturally generated more revenue from it, but the margins were actually a lot higher in the US. The Fund’s 12-month calendar year ended on March 31st. The performance doesn’t reflect Funding Circle’s operations as a whole, just the publicly traded fund used to make loans through the company’s platform.
The fund’s Net Asset Value has reached £164.8M, Peer2Peer Finance News reported. Investors received dividends equal to 6.5 pence per share over the last year.
Funding Circle the company, has not filed its year-end 2016 financials yet. As a private limited company in the UK, they’re still a couple months away from the deadline to do so. In 2015, they lost £18M on £23.8M in revenue, which they attributed to their growth strategy.
Unlike with Lending Club and Prosper, anyone investing in a Funding Circle loan in the US must be accredited. Funding Circle Securities is the affiliated broker–dealer of Funding Circle USA. Lending Club and Prosper have a special arrangement with the SEC to work with retail investors. As part of that, every single loan on their platforms must be filed with the SEC as an individual security complete with a full prospectus.
Earlier this month, Funding Circle hired a new Global CFO, Sean Glithero, who was previously the CFO at Auto Trader.
CAN Capital Resumes Funding
July 6, 2017
CAN Capital is back in business, thanks to a capital infusion by Varadero Capital, an alternative asset manager. Terms of the capital arrangement were not disclosed.
CAN Capital stopped funding late last year and removed several top officials after the company discovered problems in how it had reported borrower delinquencies. The discovery also resulted in CAN Capital selling off assets, letting go more than half its employees and suspending funding new deals, among other things.
Now, however, the company has a new management team and its processes have been revamped and staff retrained in anticipation of a relaunch, according to Parris Sanz, who was named chief executive in February. He was the company’s chief legal officer before taking over the helm after then-CEO Dan DeMeo was put on leave of absence.
As of today (7/6), CAN Capital has resumed funding to existing customers who are eligible for renewal. Within a month, the company plans to resume providing loans and merchant cash advance to new customers. It will have two products available in all 50 states—term loans and merchant cash advances with funding amounts from $2,500 to $150,000.
To be sure, getting back into the market after so many months will be a challenge. “I think we’re absolutely going to have to work hard, no doubt about it. In many ways, given our tenure and our experience, the restart may be easier for a company like us versus others. Based on the dynamics in the market today, I see a real opportunity and I’m excited about that,” Sanz said in an interview with DeBanked.
Since its founding in 1998, CAN Capital has issued more than $6.5 billion in loans and merchant cash advances. It’s one of the oldest alternative funding companies in existence today, and, accordingly, it shook the industry’s confidence when the company’s troubles became public late last year.
The new management team includes Sanz, along with Ritesh Gupta, the chief operating officer, who joined CAN Capital in 2015 and was previously the firm’s chief customer operations officer. The management team also includes Tim Wieher as chief compliance officer and general counsel; he initially joined the company in 2015 as CAN Capital’s senior compliance counsel. Ray De Palma has been named chief financial officer; he came to CAN Capital in 2016 and was previously the corporate controller. The management team does not include representatives from Varadero.
Varadero is a New York-based value-driven alternative asset manager founded in 2009 that manages approximately $1.3 billion in capital. In the past five years, Varadero has allocated more than $1 billion in capital toward specialty finance platforms in various sectors including consumer and small business lending, auto loans and commercial real estate. In 2015, for instance, Varadero participated in separate ventures with both Lending Club and LiftForward.
Varadero began working with CAN Capital as part of its efforts to pay down syndicates. Varadero bought certain assets from CAN Capital last year and provided enough funding to allow CAN Capital to recapitalize. “The recapitalization enabled us to pay off the remaining amounts owed to our previous lending syndicate and provided us with access to additional capital to resume funding operations,” Sanz says. He declined to be more specific.
“We were impressed with the overall value proposition of CAN’s offerings as evidenced by the strength of its long standing relationships, the company’s core team, sound underwriting practices, technology and the strong performance of their credit extension throughout the cycle,” said Fernando Guerrero, managing partner and chief investment officer of Varadero Capital, in a prepared statement. “We’re confident the company’s focused funding practices will allow it to serve small business customers for many years to come.”
Guerrero was not immediately available for additional comment.
DLA Piper served as legal counsel for, and Jefferies was the financial advisor to, CAN Capital, while Mayer Brown was legal counsel to Varadero Capital, L.P.
Since its troubles last year, CAN Capital had been working with restructuring firm Realization Services Inc. for assistance negotiating with creditors. It also worked with investment bank Jefferies Group LLC for advice on strategic alternatives.
Sanz declined to discuss other options CAN Capital considered, noting that the Varadero deal provides the firm the opportunity it needs to jump back into the market—this time with “tip top” operations in place.
He declined to say how many employees the firm still has, other than to say it is now “appropriately staffed.” In addition to getting rid of the prior management team, CAN Capital reduced staffing in numerous parts of its business. That includes nearly 200 positions at its office in Kennesaw, Ga, according to published reports.
The company will still be called CAN Capital. “We feel that that brand has a recognition in the market, in particular with our sales partners,” Sanz says.
What Happened to Bizfi?
July 1, 2017
Update 9/22: Select assets of Bizfi including the brand and marketplace were acquired by rival World Business Lenders
Update 8/30: Credibly was selected to service Bizfi’s $250 million portfolio
This past week, Bizfi gave their remaining employees a 90-day warning notice, according to sources familiar with the matter. It was the latest wave of layoffs to hit the company over the last few months. At its peak, Bizfi, which provided capital to small businesses, employed more than 200 people. Some of those riding out their potentially last 90 days are anxiously awaiting the outcome of nonpublic negotiations to salvage parts of the company’s legacy, if it can be done at all.
It’s a bittersweet moment, according to newly former employees I spoke with, some of whom are so young they vaguely recall Bizfi’s past as both Merchant Cash and Capital (MCC) and Next Level Funding (NLF). They characterized their experience as having worked in fintech.
MCC was founded in 2005 as a buyer of future credit card sales, way before the rise of modern fintech. They later spawned affiliate company NLF, which was eventually consolidated into the newly minted Bizfi brand in 2015. In 2016, they were one of the top three largest originators of merchant cash advances. Today, they are no longer funding new business.
Overall, the company grew too fast and missed the window of opportunity to sell, observers maintain. In a CNBC interview in 2015, a Bizfi representative said that they believed securing a major equity investment would allow them to go public by 2017. Such an investment never came. And with the market cooling last year, institutional interest in the space waned and several of the industry’s better-known players were forced into a precarious position.
Bizfi held on, until recently.
I myself was the third employee of MCC, or fourth depending on who actually walked through the door first on my first day that I shared with another new hire back in 2006 (who by the way was Jared Feldman, the eventual co-founder and CEO of Fora Financial, which sold for millions to Palladium Equity Partners LLC). I was at MCC until 2008 and then worked at NLF until 2010. That means I had been gone for five years before the companies ever merged to become Bizfi and seven years before the current dilemma. Therefore I’m not able to personally comment on what exactly went wrong because the company was nowhere near the same as when I left it.
I will report new developments as they become public.
From the Board of Credit Suisse to the FinTech World – Gaël de Boissard joins the winner of last year’s Money20/20 Europe Startup Competition
June 27, 2017
New York, NY – 26 Jun, 2017 – Exactly one year after winning Money20/20 Europe Startup Competition, James (a FinTech in Credit Risk, formerly known as CrowdProcess) returns to Copenhagen after closing an oversubscribed investment round led by Ex-Credit Suisse Board Member Gaël de Boissard. This round also included ex-Deutsche Bank COO, Henry Ritchotte, and BiG Start Ventures, a VC focused on FinTech and InsurTech. As a result of this deal, Mr. de Boissard has now joined James’s Board of Directors, after having previously been at the board of Credit Suisse.
The company that successfully pivoted into the FinTech industry in late 2015 sees its ambition of building the first Credit Risk AI, together with the superb results achieved with banks’ risk departments as the major factors behind this successful investment round. According to Mr. de Boissard, “Having worked in banking and credit for more than two decades, I was always surprised to see how little progress was being made in advancing the science, data analysis, and process automation around credit risk. When I met James I knew that was the future I’d been looking for, and I’m incredibly excited to be part of implementing the first credit risk AI.”
Providing financial institutions with solid, scientifically-backed risk management tools can help prepare them against cyclical crisis and help protect their reputation, making the global financial system safer in the long-run. Additionally, the fact that the company has a track record of helping banks achieve results such as 30% default rate reduction and 10% acceptance rate increase has been the cornerstone of its growing reputation both in the US and in Europe.
After going through a product/market fit process that involved testing the solution with over 25 financial institutions in three different continents, the company is now focused on execution and growth. In order to fulfill this, company co-founder and lead researcher Pedro Fonseca recently handed over the role of CEO to his co-founder João Menano, who built the company’s strong international commercial reach. This marks the beginning of a new stage for the company, where the focus has shifted from finding product/market fit to reaching global scale.
This investment round will allow James’s team to grow accordingly to the market needs felt mainly in the US and in Europe.
About
James is a data science company focused on the credit industry. Founded with the goal of bringing the best of data science to every risk department, James is on its way to build the first Credit Risk AI. Currently operating in three continents, the solution was tested by over 25 financial institutions, from Tier 1 banks to alternative lenders.
Winner of last year’s Money20/20 Europe Startup Competition, the 20 person startup aims to one day place the best of data science in every risk department.
Contact
Name: Francisca Beija
Email: francisca@crowdprocess.com
Phone Number: +351 968 183 576
Amazon vs. Banks
June 23, 2017Amazon made headlines most recently for its blockbuster acquisition of Whole Foods, but the online behemoth already disrupted another sector – fintech — including banks and online lenders when in 2011 it started lending to small businesses. So far Amazon Lending has extended $3 billion-plus in capital to the small business community, a cool billion of which was lent in the past year alone.
Amazon has dealt a one-two punch to the lending market, filling a gap that was left by banks following the financial crisis and leveraging the massive data that the online retailer has access to through its Amazon Marketplace platform.

Matt O’Malley, co-founder and president of Looking Glass Investments, a fixed-income alternative investment firm focused on marketplace lending, said small business lending was a very natural evolution of Amazon’s business.
“Large levels of data give you the ability to increase your predictive power. Amazon has a great deal of information on how a company is doing and an ability to assess credit risk that is very likely unmatched as it relates to businesses selling on their platform,” O’Malley said.
This is not to suggest that Amazon’s future market share in the small business lending segment is a lock.
“In the long run, this entire fintech revolution is about the movement of capital and having to do it faster. So even Amazon is going to have competition. And the reason is there are fewer barriers to entry than before. From Milwaukee to Wisconsin, there is competition for building bank products. I’d put our math up against anybody in New York City thanks to technology,” said O’Malley of Looking Glass Investments’ own lending platform.
Nonetheless a lack of transparency surrounding interest rates for Amazon loans could interfere with repeat business. “Amazon should be careful about being respectful to business owners. Assuming the business does succeed, imagine that the borrower is either going to have a positive reaction or a negative reaction to the initial loan with Amazon. It won’t be good for long-term business if they have a negative reaction. If I were Amazon, I would be cautious on rates,” O’Malley said.

Something else that could throw a wrench into Amazon’s plans as a small business lender is banks, if and when they open the spigots to loan to this segment. While small businesses businesses have already proven a willingness and even a preference for turning to alternative lenders, the tables could turn at some point.
“That’s an unsettled question we think about every day. When do banks make the decision to get in the game? And we would like that to happen sooner rather than later because it would be good for our company LendSight, Inc. But at the same time, we don’t see that tipping point in the near term,” said O’Malley.
AltFinanceDaily spoke with a pair of business owners that sell on the Amazon Marketplace platform, both of which Amazon has lent to.
LonoLife Living the Life
San Diego-based food and beverage maker LonoLife, the Hawaiian translation for which is peace and prosperity, was offered a line of credit with Amazon without having to ask for it. Jesse Koltes, one of LonoLife’s co-founders, spent some time with AltFinanceDaily to talk about the offer, which came over the phone.
“It was super quick, super easy, as opposed to what you get with a banking relationship even if you get a better rate,” said Koltes. “Bank loans take more time and paper work, and with Amazon there was none of that.”
LonoLife never approached a bank for a loan. And given an exclusive agreement with Amazon for its top selling bone broth, they didn’t have to. “I 100 percent agree that access to capital for businesses without a lot of revenue is problematic. We’re not a capital intensive business so there are not a lot of assets to put behind as collateral for a loan with a bank,” Koltes said.
And while he declined to disclose the size of the credit line, Koltes characterized the amount as “meaningful” adding that Amazon adjusts it higher and lower, mostly to the upside.
“They have 100 percent transparency to one of the biggest parts of our business. That is something other lenders don’t have,” he said, referring to the sale of the bone broth product. “One reason they are able to move first and with more confidence is they have confidence you can pay something off. They are literally seeing how much money you make every month.”
LonoLife’s Koltes compared the rate at which Amazon lent to them as comparable to other non-bank lenders but probably not best in class and not equivalent to an asset-backed small business loan. “But it’s not as high as you get from venture debt,” he quipped.
LonoLife has been selling on Amazon since 2016 and was offered the line of credit about a year later. “It’s a virtuous cycle. We’re growing on Amazon and they’re funding the growth,” Koltes said.
Mini Bezos
Stephan Aarstol, founder of direct-to-consumer brand Tower, is best known for pitching his Stand Up Paddle Boards, in response to which he received a $150,000 backing from billionaire investor Mark Cuban. Little did Aarstol know that this would be the excuse banks would use not to lend.
“After Shark Tank banks no longer looked at us as a startup. They told us we don’t technically qualify for an SBA loan because they’re not in the business of giving billionaire loans,” said Aarstol referring to the company’s silent partner Cuban. Before the show banks pointed to the company’s lack of a two-year financial history. Meanwhile Tower’s revenue has climbed higher every single year since the company was founded, reaching $7.5 million last year.
Amazon, which offered its first loan to Aarstol in the amount of about $35,000 at about the same time PayPal offered him a $25,000 loan for working capital. He took them both. “We needed the capital for inventory,” he said of the Paddle Boards, which can take up to three months to produce. A couple of months later in 2013 Amazon followed up with another offer for a $145,000 loan. Tower accepted that loan too.
The first time Tower got a loan of any kind from a traditional bank was September 2014, more than four years from inception for a company that was profitable from day one. That fall the banks started lining up after Tower was named the fastest growing company in San Diego by the San Diego Business Journal.
Since then Aarstol has been straddling the fence of alternative lenders and traditional banks, having borrowed more than $1 million from Amazon alone. He feels loyalty to Amazon because they were one of the first lenders to offer him a loan. That plus the ease and speed at which he can access capital.
Meanwhile Aarstol has since widened the beach lifestyle brand, almost like a mini-Bezos would, to include sunglasses, surf boards, snorkeling, bikes, skateboards and even a magazine through which Tower can do its own advertising.
“We’ve expanded the brand and every new product class we open up requires additional inventory and additional capital,” he noted.

The Future Amazon
Perhaps the greatest sign for just how massive Amazon can become as a small business lender is in their ability to capture repeat business. If it’s any indication, both Koltes and Aarstol would return.
“We’ve been really pleasantly surprised with access to capital Amazon has given us,” said Koltes. “It has helped us grow our business. We’re growing at a fast rate. Without Amazon we would have had to pick and choose what we did.”
For Aarstol, it’s a combination of both allegiance and fear that fuels his relationship with Amazon as a borrower.
“What if banks all of a sudden are no longer willing to lend to small businesses again? What’s my fallback? This is a hedge for me to keep establishing credit. I’ll keep borrowing from and paying back Amazon loans,” he said, despite the interest rates of 11 percent to 13 percent.
Alternative Lenders Spread Their Wings Internationally
June 20, 2017
As alternative lending gains global traction, a growing number of U.S-based alternative lenders are exploring international growth, with large companies like OnDeck, Kabbage and SoFi leading the way.
Some alternative lenders have begun their expedition closer to home by extending their reach into Canada. Others are traveling farther beyond to parts of Europe and Australia, for example, while others are eying eventual growth in Asia.
Propelling the opportunity is the fact that a number of international banks are still unprepared to offer online lending on their own and thus are more amenable to partnerships with U.S.-based alternative lenders, according to Rashmi Singh, senior manager in the wealth management practice at EY.
It also helps that the options for local partners are somewhat limited. “There are not a lot of digital lenders [outside the U.S.] at the same level as some of the folks here,” Singh says.
To be sure, international expansion requires extensive time, money and regulatory know-how, and some U.S. alternative lenders may never reach the critical scale to be able to compete effectively. Nonetheless, as globalization proliferates, industry observers expect that additional forward-thinking companies will push beyond the limits of their current geographical borders.
“The question is not if, but when (and where) U.S. fintech companies will expand internationally,” contends Ryan Metcalf, chief of staff and director of international markets at Affirm, a San Francisco-based fintech that has partnered with Cross River Bank of Fort Lee, New Jersey, to allow shoppers pay for purchases over time with simple-interest loans.
Affirm—which works with more than 900 retailers and recently announced that it had processed its 1 millionth consumer installment loan—has focused on domestic growth so far, but the company is now considering a number of options for international expansion, Metcalf says.
SIZING UP THE MARKET
Certainly, there are numerous opportunities for homegrown lenders to expand internationally given the healthy growth alternative lending is experiencing in other parts of the world. Each market, of course, has its nuances and individual growth patterns.
Europe, for instance, has seen substantial growth over the past few years, with the U.K. leading the way in alternative finance. It has four times higher volumes in aggregate than the rest of Continental Europe, according to a 2016 report from KPMG and TWINO, one of the largest marketplace lending platforms in Europe. (P2P consumer lending is the largest component of alternative online lending in Europe, capturing 72 percent of the total in the first through third quarters of 2016, according to the report.)
After the U.K., France, Germany and the Netherlands are the top three countries for online alternative finance by market volume in Europe, according to a September 2016 report by the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance.
Asian markets, meanwhile, show significant promise for alternative finance players to make their mark due to the sizeable population of digitally savvy consumers who are still largely underbanked. China is by far the largest market for alternative lending in Asia. It’s also the world’s largest online alternative finance market by transaction volume, registering $101.7 billion in 2015, according to the March 2016 Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance report. This constitutes almost 99 percent of the total volume in the Asia-Pacific region, the research shows. To date, most of the growth in China specifically has been from local firms, but that could change as the market there continues to develop.
Although there are many possible international markets to explore, U.S. lenders have to tread carefully before planting roots elsewhere, observers say. Some smaller U.S. lenders may find domestic expansion easier and more cost-effective because of the time, regulatory and financial commitment that goes along with exploring international markets. It’s a lot easier, for instance, to expand from New York to California, than it is to build out internationally.
“Why take on all the added costs and regulatory pressures, when you haven’t fully explored your home market, unless the business that you’re in deems it necessary,” says Mark Abrams, partner with Trade Finance Global, a London-based international corporate finance house, specializing in crossborder trade.
“It doesn’t make sense to start as a U.S. lender, do a few loans and then jump over to the U.K,” he contends.
What’s more, foreign banks looking for alternative lending partners typically prefer to work with larger, more established players. Even though new players’ technology may be ahead of the curve, the banks still want a longer track record. “It’s reputational for these banks,” says Singh of EY.
MANY CHALLENGES TO INTERNATIONAL EXPANSION
Several alternative lenders say they see significant growth opportunities by expanding internationally. At the same time, however, they are mindful of the substantial headwinds they face.
Regulation is among the biggest, if not the biggest, challenge. A lot of firms in the U.S. have invested a lot of time and money to get up to speed on U.S. regulations. When they look to Europe or to Canada or Mexico or elsewhere, there are different regulations. “If you’re speaking to folks in three continents, now you are looking at regulations times three,” says Singh of EY.
Certainly there’s a time commitment involved; it can take six to eight months for a U.S. lender to get their U.S.–based platforms compliant with regulations in another country, she says.
What’s more, regulatory barriers can vary greatly country to country, notes Metcalf of Affirm. Take Canada for example where very low barriers to entry exist with some provincial exceptions. In the U.K., on the other hand, it can take eight months or more to receive a lending license, he says.
That’s why it’s so important for online lenders to make strategic decisions about where they want to invest their time and resources—even if they have sound technology that’s easily adaptable outside the U.S. “The minute you throw in cross-border regulations, it gets very complicated,” Singh says.
Understanding the local culture of the market you’re trying to tap is also crucial, according to Rob Young, senior vice president of international at OnDeck, where he oversees all aspects of the company’s non-U.S. expansion efforts.

Within the past several years, OnDeck has begun offering small business loans to customers in Canada and Australia. Frequently Canada is a first step for U.S. companies that want to expand internationally because of the shared language and similarities between the economies, Young explains.
After the Canadian operation was successfully underway, the opportunity arose for the online lender to expand to Australia—which shares several similarities with the Canadian market. OnDeck doesn’t break out how much of its overall loan portfolio comes from these two markets, but it has announced publicly that it’s delivered more than CAD$50 million in financing to Canadian small businesses since 2014.
“So far we’re very satisfied with the performance,” Young says, referring to its expansion into both Canada and Australia.
Young notes that while a U.S.-based alternative lender can leverage certain things like technology from a central location within its home country, having dedicated teams on the ground in local markets is also critical. Marketing and pricing all have to be competitive with the needs of the local market, he says.
In Canada and Australia, for example, OnDeck has found that the “personal element” is really important. Young says customers there expect to interact with sales representatives who have ties to the community, understand the local market and can relate to the issues small businesses there are facing.
“I don’t think you can establish that rapport if you are trying to serve them with a sales team overseas,” he says.
U.S.-based alternative lenders also need to be careful to create products that fit the culture and needs of a particular market. For instance, alternative players that focus on luxury asset-based lending would want to look at countries with high concentrations of wealth. “It doesn’t make sense to grow to a country where there’s very little wealth because you’re not going to have much success,” says Abrams, of Trade Finance Global.
Even knowing the market well doesn’t guarantee results, which Lending Technologies, a white label technology provider for the MCA space, has discovered first hand.
Markus Schneider, the company’s chief executive, is originally from Switzerland and he knows the market there well, so he set out to fill a void he saw for an MCA-like product. However, Lending Technologies, which has offices in New York and Zurich, has hit some roadblocks along the way.
“It’s a very different mind-set there. People are more risk-adverse,” Schneider says.
The company already has a Swiss distribution partner in place, but has had trouble finding a lender willing to underwrite the funds. Schneider would also be willing to work with a U.S. lender that wants to partner with Lending Technologies to provide MCA services to merchants in his home country.
“We’re going to do this. It’s just a matter of time,” he says. “There’s a tremendously underserved segment of the market there.”
FINDING THE RIGHT FIT
To be successful internationally, U.S. companies also have to be willing to shift gears as needed when things aren’t working out as expected.
Take Kabbage, for example. The small business lender expanded into the U.K. in 2013, two years after its U.S. debut. But the company found that having its own small business lending business in the U.K. was too challenging for regulatory and capital reasons. It no longer offers new loans from this platform.
Instead, the funding company decided that a better global strategy was to license its technology to financial institutions in international markets a less capital-intensive, yet economically sound way of doing business.
Kabbage—which recently announced the establishment of its European headquarters in Ireland—has licensing arrangements with Santander in the U.K., Kikka Capital in Australia, Scotiabank in Canada and Mexico and ING in Spain. The company plans to launch operations in several additional countries this year where banks use Kabbage’s technology to offer online loans to their clients, says Pete Steger, head of business development at Kabbage.
“We are partnering with local experts. That’s our strategy,” Steger says.
Funding Circle has also made changes to its international strategy. Earlier this year, the company—which got its start in the U.K.—announced that it would stop issuing new loans in Spain. The Spanish version of the company’s website says that it continues to monitor ongoing loans so investors receive monthly payments for the projects they have invested in.
A spokeswoman for Funding Circle said the company continues “to look at new geographies, but we have no immediate plans for expansion and are focused on building a successful business here in the U.S., U.K., Germany and the Netherlands.” She declined to comment further.
Without divulging too many details, a handful of U.S.-based alternative financiers say they continue to look at additional markets outside their home turf.
For its part, SoFi has announced plans to expand to Australia and Canada this year. The company’s chief executive has also talked about European and Asian expansion in the future.
On the international front, Affirm is currently evaluating markets that make the most sense for its business model, Metcalf says. Affirm is also looking at possible acquisitions in developed markets such as the U.K. and Sweden as well as considering “serious investment” in new distribution models in southeast Asia, Mexico and Brazil, he says.
LendingClub, meanwhile, last November announced a significant partnership with National Bank of Canada and its U.S. subsidiary Credigy. The agreement provides for Credigy to invest up to $1.3 billion over the subsequent twelve months. A spokeswoman for LendingClub said the company has nothing to share about plans for international expansion.
As for OnDeck, Young says the company is exploring a number of options; it’s a matter of finding markets where gaps exist in small business lending and where potential customers have a willingness to borrow online.
“We want to be the preferred choice for small businesses. It’s not necessarily defined geographically,” Young says. “We review markets all the time. There are a number of markets that are interesting to us.”
Déjà Vu: Some Small Business Funders are Fading Away
June 20, 2017
Apparently I’m old enough to see this happening all over again. A handful of big names in the alternative small business space are faltering and many of you have asked what this means for the industry. It really doesn’t mean anything other than those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.
We already went through this in 2008-2009 when at least half of the funders in the merchant cash advance industry were wiped out over the course of several months. Merit Capital Advance, Fast Capital, First Funds, Summit, and Global Swift Funding were the Goliaths of their time. Those companies going out of business seemed unthinkable in principle and for what that would mean for the industry as a whole. Smaller players disappeared too, names like iFunds, Infinicap, and others for those of you who might remember.
Those companies failed. The industry continued.
While it’s easy to finger the financial crisis as the culprit for their demise, the truth, or at least the truth through the fog of war and days gone by, is a lot more relatable. Funders were undone by their dependence on a single source of capital, sloppy underwriting, defaults, rogue ISOs, a race to hit origination targets, overpaying commissions, misplaced predictions, and even stacking. If any of those things remind you of what’s happening today, well then of course there are companies failing.
One lesson from the past is that you won’t necessarily get a year or two to adjust and figure things out. It will seem like everything is great and then suddenly it’s not. No company is going to sit you down and tell you their 1-2 year going-out-of-business plan to prepare you for change. They probably don’t have any such plan, will fight to avoid it and their end may be just as much a shock to themselves as it is to everyone else.
What we’re learning again this time is that some business models just won’t pan out long term. And some business models that used to work no longer work so much today. Things like stacking are not going away. It’s not illegal and no legal precedent has been established against it. If you’re an ISO though, you may be risking a relationship or breaching your own ISO contract by helping a merchant engage in it. So it’s a slippery slope but one that has permanently disrupted the landscape.
I have heard a lot of complaints from ISOs about the supposed decay of funder loyalty, as in they feel their deals are getting swiped. Another lesson from 2008 is that in times of strain, parties are more likely to look to their contracts for guidance and if the contract says they can take your deal after a certain amount of time and they very much financially need to, they probably will do it. The whole hey, we’re friends, we wouldn’t do that kind of thing goes out the window if survival is at stake and the contract allows for certain actions. That also means that if you’re an ISO who has violated an ISO agreement before and got nothing but a shrug in the past, don’t be surprised if suddenly one day you’re put on notice of a breach and are forced to reckon with the consequences of it.
What failures in the industry may also mean is a return to a semblance of order, a return to a code. 2010-2011 was a refreshing time to be in the business with so much unhealthy competition out of the way even though approval terms were less flexible and there were fewer options to shop around for. By 2013 however, a flood of participants discovering the industry for the first time, believed that they had stumbled upon something brand new and lost were the lessons of yore. Some of them introduced lasting change, like ACH debits over merchant accounts splits. Others just replicated the cavalier tactics that had proved fatal in the previous generation, distorting a happy market equilibrium in the process.
Ultimately, the market will prevail, albeit with some new names and new faces at the top. This is the way of things. It has happened before. It will happen again. Look at the companies rising rather than those that are falling. Whatever they are doing may be the future, whether you agree with how they do business or not.





























