How Banks Are Coming Back to SME Lending (Summary)
March 6, 2017
The banks are no longer sitting on the sidelines of small business lending. At LendIt on Monday, a panel featuring representatives from two of the biggest banks in the country, reminded young upstarts that they intended to be the primary capital sources for small businesses.
Unlike JPMorgan Chase, which partnered with OnDeck, Bank of America (BoA) decided to build the technology to deliver loans easily and quickly on their own. BoA SVP Nadeem Tufail said that reputational risk had held them back from partnering with a platform back when they were considering it years ago. “We couldn’t make that leap,” he explained, citing factors like cost, which they saw as simply being too high on some platforms to feel comfortable with.
But that doesn’t mean that the opportunity has passed them by. “A Bank of America customer can get funded in 48 hours,” Tufail proclaimed, while adding that a business that doesn’t bank with them can get a loan from them in about 7 days. The bank is also now doing fully automated approvals on a very small scale with a sliver of their best clientele to test the concept.
Meanwhile, Julie Chen Kimmerling, Senior Manager at Chase, made it a point to say that they were also really worried about things like reputational risk but that they found OnDeck to be a perfect fit. The maturity of their management team and platform really impressed them, she said. Still, Chase governs how the loans are underwritten and keeps the customers on their balance sheet. So they haven’t exactly handed the keys over to OnDeck but obviously trust their brand to be affiliated.
BoA recognized that some of their customers were telling them that they shouldn’t have to submit all these documents when the bank should already have access to their financial histories, particularly their cash flow. Tufail said that this was one of the most important factors in their underwriting. “Does the business have cash flow?” he said. “Does the business have liquidity?” The bank should already be able to evaluate these metrics.
“We certainly have an advantage with transactional level data,” Chase’s Kimmerling said of banks doing loan underwriting. And Chase is no amateur in this market. Kimmerling said that her bank had provided $24 billion of credit to US small businesses last year alone, a figure prominently displayed in their last earnings report.
To boot, both banks retain brick & mortar presences around the country, an advantage for small business customers, who they say are pretty likely to visit a branch.
The banks it seems are coming back. Lendio CEO Brock Blake moderated the panel.
Quotes and paraphrases were derived from the panel. The summary is my own analysis of it.
Upstart Raises $32.5M
March 6, 2017It’s been three years since we launched the Upstart lending platform, and today we’re pleased to announce we’ve raised $32.5M to take our business to the next level. The funding round was lead by Rakuten, a global leader in internet services and global innovation headquartered in Japan, and by a large US based asset manager. Existing investors Third Point Ventures, Khosla Ventures, and First Round Capital also participated. We’re particularly excited to have Oskar Mielczarek de la Miel, Oskar Miel, Managing Partner of the Rakuten FinTech Fund join Upstart’s Board of Directors.
With more than 50,000 loans originated, Upstart has the highest consumer ratings in the industry, has Net Promoter Scores (NPS) in excess of 80, and has delivered industry-leading returns to loan investors.
Leaders in Technology and Data Science for Lending
Upstart was the first platform to leverage modern data science and technology to power credit decisions, automate verification, and deliver a superior borrower experience. In 2014, we were first to launch next-day funding. In the last year, we virtually eliminated loan stacking on the Upstart platform, a central cause of credit issues in online lending. Today, more than 20% of our loans are fully automated, helping us attract the best quality borrowers with a superior experience.
As a result of our efforts, we’ve seen unparalleled credit performance, with 2016 cohorts our strongest yet. Upstart loans are funded in four distinct ways: 1) whole loan sales to institutions, 2) retention by Upstart’s originating bank partner, 3) sales to Upstart itself, and 4) via individuals in our fractional market. Furthermore, we expect our first loan securitization transaction within a few months.
2017 and Beyond!
We’ve focused considerable effort on our credit quality and loan economics, and the results speak for themselves. We aim to originate more than $1B in loans in 2017, and expect to reach cash flow profitability this year.
But that’s not all. We’re also thrilled to announce that Sanjay Datta has joined Upstart as CFO. Sanjay was formerly VP of Global Advertising Finance at Google, having spent a decade to help build and internationally expand Google’s $80B core economic engine.
Those that know my history at Google will understand why I’m excited to tell you about “Powered by Upstart”, a Software-as-a Service offering derived from Upstart’s top-rated consumer lending platform. From rate requests through servicing and collections, this new service brings modern technology and data science to the entire lending lifecycle.
Our beginnings
Anna, Paul, and I founded Upstart to bring the best of Google to consumer lending. Upstart was the first platform to leverage modern data science and technology to power credit decisions, automate verification, and deliver a superior borrower experience. In 2014, we were first to launch next-day funding. As of today, more than 20% of our loans are fully automated and we expect this percentage to increase significantly through 2017. With more than 50,000 Upstart loans originated, we have the highest consumer ratings in the industry and have delivered industry-leading returns to loan investors. With Net Promoter Scores (NPS) in excess of 80, we’re excited about the impact we’re having.
Technology partner
FinTech is disrupting all areas of financial services. As a leading tech platform in marketplace lending, Upstart aims to partner with financial institutions rather than compete with them. Given the pace of change in lending, technology partnerships will be critical in the years to come, and Upstart aims to be a partner the industry can rely on.
But “Powered by Upstart” is not just software – it’s a turnkey solution that provides all necessary document review, verification phone calls, fraud analysis, and (optionally) customer service, loan servicing and collections.
Software-as-a-Service in lending
SaaS has grown exponentially in the last decade because of its obvious virtues: rather than buying, installing, configuring, hosting, and supporting software yourself, the software is delivered over the cloud. It’s more reliable and always up to date. Delivering cloud software can be challenging in any industry. Usability, reliability, and performance are the minimum to play, and effective change management is critical to success. As the team that delivered Google’s SaaS platform before it was called “cloud”, we understand these challenges.
Of course, the regulatory environment in lending raises the bar even higher. We’ve long demonstrated our commitment to trustful and compliant lending, and we’re likewise committed to delivering robust and compliant lending software.
Lendio Announces First-of-Its-Kind Marketplace Lending Franchise Program
March 1, 2017Lendio, the nation’s leading marketplace for small business loans, today announced it is expanding the reach and availability of its small business lending options with the launch of a new franchise program.
The Lendio franchise program complements the company’s core value of helping small business owners fuel the American Dream. Through this program, franchise owners across the country can ease the financial hurdles for small businesses in their local community. Lendio franchisees get access to Lendio’s marketplace and technology, comprehensive training, branded marketing tools and national advertising, partnerships, and access to Lendio’s franchise support team to help coach small business owners through the lending process.
“We are thrilled to extend the availability of our online loan marketplace through our franchisees to an even broader group of small businesses who may not have been aware of the range of loan options available to them,” said Brock Blake, CEO and founder of Lendio. “With 80 percent of small business loan applications being rejected by traditional banks, now more than ever, small business owners need access to various sources of funding. Having a local presence will help bridge the awareness and trust gap for small business owners, helping borrowers position themselves and their companies for a great future.”
Ben Davis, Chief Franchising Officer at Lendio, will lead the franchise program. Together, Lendio and Davis will expand the company’s local presence and offer services to a new segment of small business owners through local franchisees, bringing options, speed and trust to Main Street, the backbone of America’s economy, in a way that has never been done before.
“Lendio’s investment in franchising meets the classic definition of an organization putting its money where its mouth is,” Davis said. “To Lendio’s already powerful online marketplace, Lendio franchisees bring a wealth of knowledge about local businesses and their capital requirements. They are connected to their communities and uniquely driven to build great neighborhoods and strong local economies.”
Lendio helps small business owners find working capital through its online platform. With a network of over 75 lenders offering multiple loan products, Lendio’s marketplace matches small business owners with various loan options. Today’s announcement comes on the heels of Lendio announcing an 87 percent annual increase of loans originated through its platform, which has facilitated more than $240 million in loans to date.
Lendio currently has franchisees in five territories, with significant interest in many others. Partners Kyle Bohrer and Bryan Gealy, in Erie, Pennsylvania, joined Lendio as the first franchise owners. Bohrer has been in the small/mid-sized business marketplace for over 10 years. Located in the Great Lakes region, Bohrer has been working on saving Erie small business owners money on their shipping. By becoming a Lendio franchisee, they are able to support businesses with their financing needs and help their community turn the corner economically.
“We will consult with potential customers looking to create new businesses and ones looking to expand, grow or just stay afloat,” Bohrer said. “Erie is my hometown, so becoming a Lendio franchisee allows local small business owners to work with someone in their community who knows their needs, challenges and potential opportunities.”
For more information about Lendio’s franchise program, visit: https://www.lendio.com/franchise.
About Lendio
Lendio is a free online service that helps business owners find the right small business loans within minutes. The center of small business lending, our passion is fueling the American Dream by uniting the small business loan industry and bringing all options together in one place, from short-term specialty financing to long-term low-interest traditional loans. Our technology makes small business lending simple, decreasing the amount of time and effort it takes to secure funding. More information about Lendio is available at http://www.lendio.com.
# # #
AutoFi Unveils Online Multi-Lender Sales Solution for Used Car Dealers
February 27, 2017SAN FRANCISCO, CA (February 27th, 2017) – Today AutoFi, a financial technology company that is transforming the way cars are bought and sold, announced the launch of the first fully online sales and multi-lender financing solution for used car dealers. Financing on AutoFi’s platform will be provided by its lender network of banks, speciality lenders, and credit unions. Today, the company announced that its credit union financing will be offered in partnership with iLendingDIRECT.
- “People want buying a car to be fast, straight forward and more transparent. That’s why AutoFi is working with lenders and dealerships to make the process easier through online sales and financing.” said Kevin Singerman, CEO of AutoFi. “That’s why I’m so excited about our partnership with iLendingDIRECT. Bringing iLendingDIRECT’s network of credit unions onto the AutoFi platform means consumers will have even more competitive financing options to choose from when purchasing a car online.
- “This is the perfect e-commerce solution to get customers the auto financing they need and want in a quick and efficient manner, and enhance their car-buying experience,” said Nancy Fitzgerald, President and CEO of iLendingDIRECT.
The AutoFi platform is the first online point-of-sale solution for auto finance. It allows customers to purchase and finance a car completely online, either through a dealer’s website or an in-store digital experience. The company recently announced the world’s first online car sales and financing solution for new car dealers in partnership with Ford Motor Credit. Today’s announcement further expands AutoFi’s ability to serve the multi-billion-dollar used car sales market through its partnership with iLendingDirect.
AutoFi’s platform will now allow used car buyers to research a vehicle on the dealership’s website; select “Buy Now”; receive an automated credit decision; and get loan offers from banks, specialty lenders and iLendingDIRECT’s credit union network who compete for the car buyer’s business in real time. Consumers can then customize their financing deal by selecting down payment and loan terms; choose vehicle protection products; and e-sign all financing documents online. The new platform gives used car dealers and buyers the ability to transact online with competitive financing options in a fully automated process.
# # #
About AutoFi
AutoFi is a technology company transforming the way cars are bought and sold. The company’s platform allows auto dealers to sell cars completely online by connecting buyers with lenders in a fast, easy and transparent process. AutoFi’s team includes industry leaders from enterprise software, finance, automobile and consumer sectors who previously worked at companies including Lending Club, PayPal, and SunGard. AutoFi’s investors include Ford Motor Credit Company, Crosslink Capital, Lerer Hippeau Ventures, Laconia Capital Group, Basset Investment Group, Eniac Ventures, 500 Startups and Silicon Valley Bank. For more information visit www.autofi.com
About iLendingDIRECT
iLendingDIRECT is a national Finance and Insurance marketing firm that focuses on Auto Refinancing. We offer smart financial solutions with the customers’ well‐being in mind – committed to setting our customers up for success by saving them money and educating them about what is best for their particular financial situation. For more information on iLendingDIRECT services, visit www.ilendingdirect.com.
Equity Crowdfunding to Masses Slow Out of the Gate, But Pickup Expected
February 25, 2017
After a lackluster start, spectators are betting on more promising times ahead for equity crowdfunding to the masses.
Although it’s been talked about for years, it wasn’t until last May that the general public could buy shares of their favorite companies through equity crowdfunding. Before then, only accredited investors could be part of the crowd.
The new crowdfunding regulation, known as Reg CF, has been talked about for several years as a potential game-changer for small businesses seeking growth capital. But so far, it hasn’t gotten the fast-track reception that some industry watchers had hoped for. Between inception and January 16 of this year, 75 companies have run successful equity crowdfunding campaigns, raising $19.2 million, according to statistics compiled by Wefunder, an online funding portal for equity crowdfunding.
Even so, industry watchers aren’t discouraged, saying it takes time for any new product to catch on and to gain traction.
“Equity crowdfunding is in its infancy. It’s got to be a toddler before it can be a teenager, and it’s got to be a teenager before it can be grown up. I think in three to five years, equity crowdfunding will be all grown up,” says Kendall Almerico, a partner with the law firm DiMuroGinsberg in Washington, who represents numerous clients in Jobs Act-related offerings.
A YEAR OF TRIAL AND ERROR
Some industry watchers had hoped equity crowdfunding to the general public would take off immediately, on the heels of successful rewards-based crowdfunding sites like Kickstarter and Indiegogo. Consider that since Kickstarter launched on April 28, 2009, 12 million people have backed a project, $2.8 billion has been pledged, and 118,362 projects have been successfully funded, according to company statistics from Jan. 16.
People looked at Kickstarter’s accomplishments and projected that from day one, equity crowdfunding to the public would be an immediate success, Almerico explains.
Instead, Almerico says 2016 was a year of trial and error, in which companies seeking equity funding tested out the market and learned the process. Initially, there were several funding failures, where companies set fundraising goals that were too lofty and came away with nothing. Other companies have been hesitant to dip their toes into a market that’s still very new and unchartered.
“I’m not surprised that it has taken a little bit of time for companies to raise money this way,” Almerico says.
However, industry participants say that every success story encourages others and the market will continue to build on itself.
“We are very optimistic that 2017 will be the year it goes more mainstream in the U.S,” says Nick Tommarello, founder and chief executive of Wefunder, who expects crowdfunding levels in 2017 to reach three to four times what they were at the end of 2016.
WADING THROUGH UNCHARTERED TERRITORY
Certainly, Reg CF is still very new in practice. On October 30, 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted final rules to permit companies to offer and sell securities through equity crowdfunding for non-accredited investors. But it wasn’t until May 16, 2016 that this new type of investing actually became permissible.
Companies that want to raise money from the general public have to do it through a funding portal that is registered with the SEC. As of mid-January, there were 21 funding portals, according to a listing on Finra’s website. The bulk of the funding thus far has come through the portals Wefunder, StartEngine and NextSeed, according to statistics compiled by Wefunder. Indiegogo, best known as a leader in perks-based crowdfunding, has also gotten a fair amount of business. Indiegogo launched an equity crowdfunding portal late last year through a joint venture with MicroVentures, an online investment bank.
There are significant rules when it comes to members of the general public investing in equity deals; how much you can invest per year depends on your net worth or income. Everyone can invest at least $2,000, and no one may invest more than $100,000 per year, according to SEC rules.
Meanwhile, companies are limited to raising $1 million in a 12-month period using Reg CF. Also, they must raise enough to hit their funding target or the fundraising round is a bust. They can, however, use other avenues to raise money simultaneously, such as through accredited investors or venture capitalists. This can be an advantage for companies because it allows them to tap their customer base—a great marketing and customer-retention tool—and yet still seek growth financing from investors with deeper pockets.
Over time, as equity crowdfunding gains traction, Almerico predicts the SEC and Congress will revisit some of the regulations and tinker with the laws to make them even more user friendly. And that too, will help crowdfunding gain ground with investors and companies, he says.
For instance, under current rules, a company can’t market its offering until it goes live, at which point additional marketing restrictions set in. Congress and the SEC will likely change some of these restrictions to make the rules more similar to Regulation A, which covers offerings of larger sizes, Almerico says.
A CONSUMER-FACING PROPOSITION
For the most part, companies that are consumer-facing as opposed to B2B will have the most luck with equity crowdfunding. For one thing, consumer-facing companies often have an easier time explaining their story to the public. Also, there’s real benefit for consumer based businesses to get their customers to sink money not only into a company’s product, but behind the scenes as well. Thus far companies that have sought funding under Reg CF run the gamut from breweries to tech startups, Wefunder data shows.
When it comes to equity crowding, investment levels tend to be small. Wefunder stats shows that 31 percent of investments made through its own platform are $100 and 76 percent of investments are under $500. “The whole point is to have lots of investors investing small amounts of money and together they add up,” Tommarello explains.
One of Wefunder’s largest offerings was Hops and Grain Brewing, a microbrewery based in Austin, Texas. The company is one of three businesses to raise $1 million on Wefunder, and more than 70 percent of the money came from its own customers, according to Tommarello. “Equity crowdfunding allows customers an opportunity to back things they really care about and it’s great marketing for the company too,” he says.
Another company, Snapwire Media Inc., a start-up in Santa Barbara, California, also believes in the power of the crowd to raise funds and gain marketing traction. Chad Newell, the company’s chief executive, says Snapwire wasn’t at a point where it felt ready to solicit venture capital money, but felt confident that its users, who were already passionate about its services, would become their biggest advocates.
The company, which connects a new generation of photographers with businesses and brands that need on-demand creative imagery, was launched in 2014. It previously raised $2 million from accredited investors before raising $179,065 from the general public on the funding portal StartEngine. In December 2016, the company launched a campaign to raise additional funds on Wefunder.
“Because we had a strong community and such a large one, we felt it was a good way to raise funds. Why not raise it from the people that care about the product the most?” Newell says.
OVERCOMING THE HURDLES OF NEWNESS
Because equity crowdfunding to the general public is so new, there’s still a lot of uncertainty about how the process works—both among companies looking to raise money and potential investors.
“The biggest hurdle today is that equity crowdfunding is still underground versus rewards-based crowdfunding,” says Howard Marks, co-founder and chief executive of the online portal StartEngine. “It’s tiny. It’s small. It’s nothing. It’s not even a dot in the grand scheme of things,” he says.
At this point, many people still don’t realize they can invest, or how to invest. He likens equity crowdfunding to index funds or junk bonds that were once completely unknown products. Over the years, however, they gained broad acceptance and are now widely used investment vehicles. “Every time there’s a new financial product that comes out, it takes time,” he says.
In December, five new companies used StartEngine for equity crowdfunding. In January, he expects there to be more than 10. By the middle of next year, he predicts there could be 20 a month, and in two years from now he’s hopeful to be doing about 500 equity deals a month.
“Within five years, our plan is to have 5,000 companies on the platform,” he says. “The demand for capital is pretty large.”
At this point, Wefunder is the largest platform for Reg CF offerings in terms of dollars funded, successful offerings and number of investors.
According to data through January 16, forty-six of the seventy-one companies that listed on its platform, or 65 percent, had successful offerings, meaning they reached their investment goals.
Some funding portals have felt the pangs of being new to the industry and are trying to get their bearings to compete more effectively.
Vincent Petrescu, chief executive of truCrowd Inc, a funding portal based in Chicago, says his company got registered in May 2016 and spent the rest of the year learning the lay of the land. Ultimately, truCrowd decided it would be better off specializing in a few verticals than going after all types of companies. Its plan now is to focus on the cannabis industry and the HR space.
“I think that the potential is huge. There are lots of good companies out there that need capital,” he says.
THE SNOWBALL EFFECT
Wefunder data shows that investors who buy into one deal tend to do another deal shortly after, so it’s a compounding effect, Tommarello says. “It’s a snowball rolling down a hill. We’re developing a whole new class of mini angel investors,” he says.
In terms of future growth, Petrescu of truCrowd says the biggest hurdle for the industry is exposure. Lots of people still don’t know about it, and they are still in the mindset that it’s illegal because it was for so long.
He says he’s not too concerned, though, because the UK had a similar experience when equity crowdfunding to the general public first started there a few years back. As soon as the success stories start to become more publicized and people see the returns that are possible, he predicts interest will grow. “The potential is there. No doubt about it,” he says.
For companies that are giving more thought to equity crowdfunding, it may help to seek out advice from others that have already traveled this road. Newell of Snapwire says he gets calls every week from company founders to ask about his experience with equity crowdfunding and to discuss in further detail whether it might be the right option for them.
Newell tells companies that ask him about equity crowdfunding that it’s an effective way to raise funds, with certain caveats. For instance, you really have to understand the rules of what you’re allowed to do and what you can’t do because there are many more restrictions when marketing to the general public versus accredited investors. You also have to be good at marketing—or hire a company to do it on your behalf—and have a sizable group of users that you think will want to invest in your future.
“It’s been a great source of capital for Snapwire because of our passionate community. I caution any company that doesn’t have a large community to be careful about spending time and resources and have realistic expectations,” he says.
He also says companies should have realistic fundraising goals since it is unusual—at least at this juncture—to raise a million dollars from small investors through equity crowdfunding. It’s more realistic to expect to raise $200,000 to $500,000, he says.
“I think everyone gets attracted to the top number. But that’s not necessarily what happens. Equity crowdfunding should be complementary to any funding strategy. By itself, it’s not some magic bullet,” he says.
Analysis: New York’s Lender/Broker Licensing Proposal
February 7, 2017
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s proposed budget includes a legislative proposal to “allow the Department of Financial Services (“DFS”) to better regulate the business practices of online lenders.”1 This legislation, which would amend Section 340 of the Banking Law, could have a dramatic impact on lending and brokering loans to New York businesses, as such lenders would have to obtain licenses to engage in business-purpose lending and could only charge rates and fees expressly permitted under New York law.2 It may impact the secondary market for merchant cash advances. If passed, the licensing requirements will take effect January 1, 2018.
The proposed law would amend NY Banking Law § 340 to require anyone “engaging in the business of making loans” of $50,000 or less for business or commercial purposes to obtain a license. The term “engaging in the business of making loans” means a person who solicits loans and, in connection with the solicitation, makes loans; purchases or otherwise acquires from others loans or other forms of financing; or arranges or facilitates the funding of loans to businesses located or doing business in New York.
Although the proposed law would require a license only for a person who “solicits” loans and makes, purchases or arranges loans, the DFS takes the position that the licensing law (as currently enacted) applies broadly and that “out-of-State entities making loans to New York consumers . . . are required to obtain a license from the Banking Department.”3 As a result, there is probably no exemption from licensing for a person who does not “solicit” loans in New York.
The potential impact of the legislation is significant.
Potential Impact on Lenders:
Licensing Required and Most Fees Prohibited. New York law already requires a lender to obtain a license to make a business or commercial loan to individuals (sole proprietors) of $50,000 or less if the interest rate on the loan exceeds 16% per year, inclusive of fees. The proposed law would require any person who makes a loan of $50,000 or less to any type of business entity and at any interest rate to obtain a license. And a licensed lender is governed by New York lending law that regulates refunds of interest upon prepayment;4 and significantly limits most fees that a lender can charge to a borrower, including prohibiting charging a borrower for broker fees or commissions and origination fees.5
Essentially, the DFS will regulate lenders who originate loans to businesses of $50,000 or less in the same manner as consumer loans of less than $25,000. The proposed law would exempt a lender that makes isolated or occasional loans to businesses located or doing business in New York.
Potential Effect on Choice-of-Law. The proposed law could lead courts to reject contractual choice-of-law provisions that select the law of another state when lending to New York businesses. With new licensing requirements and limits on loans to businesses, a court could reasonably find that New York has a fundamental public policy of protecting businesses from certain loans, and decline to enforce a choice-of-law clause designating the law of the other state as the law that governs a business-purpose loan agreement.
For example, the holding of Klein v. On Deck6 might have come out differently if New York licensed and regulated business loans at the time the court decided it. In the Klein case, a business borrower sued On Deck claiming that its loan was usurious under New York law. The loan contract included the following choice-of-law provision:
“[O]ur relationship including this Agreement and any claim, dispute or controversy (whether in contract, tort, or otherwise) at any time arising from or relating to this Agreement is governed by, and this Agreement will be construed in accordance with, applicable federal law and (to the extent not preempted by federal law) Virginia law without regard to internal principles of conflict of laws. The legality, enforceability and interpretation of this Agreement and the amounts contracted for, charged and reserved under this Agreement will be governed by such laws. Borrower understands and agrees that (i) Lender is located in Virginia, (ii) Lender makes all credit decisions from Lender's office in Virginia, (iii) the Loan is made in Virginia (that is, no binding contract will be formed until Lender receives and accepts Borrower's signed Agreement in Virginia) and (iv) Borrower's payments are not accepted until received by Lender in Virginia.”
The court concluded that this contract language showed that the parties intended Virginia law to apply. However, the court also considered whether the application of Virginia law offended New York public policy. The court compared Virginia law governing business loans against New York law governing business loans, and decided that the two states had relatively similar approaches. As a result, the court found that upholding the Virginia choice-of-law contract provision did not offend New York public policy.
The loan amount in the Klein case was above the $50,000 threshold for regulated loans in the proposed New York law, so this exact case would not have been affected. However, the court’s analysis in the Klein case would have been the same for loans of $50,000 or less. Accordingly, the new law could cause a New York court to reject a contractual choice-of-law provision.
Effect on Bank-Originated Loans. This proposed law apparently would not directly affect loans made by banks that are not subject to licensing under the statute.7 But, the law would require non-banks that offer business-purpose lending platforms that partner with FDIC-insured banks to obtain a license to “solicit” loans. And, it is possible, that the DFS could later, by regulation or examination, prohibit such licensees from soliciting loans at rates higher than permitted under New York law.
Potential Impact on Merchant Cash Advance Companies:
The proposed law imposes a license requirement if a person “purchases or otherwise acquires from others loans or other forms of financing.” New York law does not define the term “other forms of financing.” However, the DFS may consider merchant cash advance transactions to be a regulated transaction for which licensing is required.
As written, only purchasing or acquiring other forms of financing, such as a merchant cash advance, might require a license. As a result, the proposed law only has the potential for affecting the sale and syndication of merchant cash advances. It is unclear whether buying only a portion of a merchant cash advance, or “participation” could require a license, or if only purchasing the entire obligation could require a license.
Potential Impact on Brokers:
Because the new law would require a license to “arrange or facilitate” a business loan of $50,000 or less, ISOs and loan brokers would need a license. As mentioned above, a licensed lender is prohibited from charging broker fees or commissions. It is not clear at the moment whether an ISO or loan broker could contract directly with the borrower for a commission.8
1 See https://www.budget.ny.gov/pubs/executive/eBudget1718/fy18artVIIbills/TEDArticleVII.pdf, page 243. Although not discussed in this article, the proposal would also impose new licensing requirements on certain consumer lenders.
2 A licensed lender may impose a rate in excess of the 16% civil usury limit in New York, but is still subject to the 25% criminal usury limit. See, New York Banking Law § 351(1) and New York Penal Law § 190.40.
3 See http://www.dfs.ny.gov/legal/interpret/lo991206.htm The term “solicitation” of a loan includes any solicitation, request or inducement to enter into a loan made by means of or through a direct mailing, television or radio announcement or advertisement, advertisement in a newspaper, magazine, leaflet or pamphlet distributed within this state, or visual display within New York, whether or not such solicitation, request or inducement constitutes an offer to enter into a contract. NY Banking Law § 355.
4 NY Banking Law § 351(5).
5 NY Banking Law § 351(6).
6 Klein v. On Deck Capital, Inc., 2015 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2231 (June 24, 2015).
7 See NY Banking Law § 14-a; 3 NY ADC 4; NY Gen. Oblig. Law § 5-501.
8 See NY Gen. Oblig. Law § 5-531 that limits fees that brokers can charge on non-mortgage loans to not more than 50 cents per $100 loaned.
Katherine C. Fisher is a partner in the Hanover, MD office of Hudson Cook, LLP. Kate can be reached at 410-782-2356 or by email at kfisher@hudco.com.
Why Funding Circle Exited Spain
January 24, 2017
Funding Circle operates in the US, UK, Germany, and the Netherlands. Up until recently, they also counted Spain among its active European markets, but no longer. The timing is curious, right after the company raised $100 million through a round led by Accel, but upon a closer look, Spain was never really their thing to begin with.
“We inherited Spain following our acquisition of Zencap in 2015,” Funding Circle Samir Desai said. “We decided to pause new lending in June last year and we have now taken the formal decision to stop all new loans for the foreseeable future. We continue to invest in Europe in Germany and the Netherlands where we are growing fast, and expect to enter more countries in the future.”
Zencap was once said to be the fastest growing online lending marketplace in Continental Europe. In August 2015, Victory Park Capital had agreed to invest up to €230 million in loans originated by Zencap over a three year period. Funding Circle acquired them a mere two months after that, inheriting their operations in Germany, Spain and the Netherlands.
“Funding Circle will continue working on behalf of all investors to service the existing loan book,” the company said. “In total €16 million of loans have been completed in Spain, which is approximately 0.1% of cumulative global originations. Alternative roles in the company have been offered to the team and the company will retain part of the team to service the existing loans.”
Ryan Weeks of AltFi, wrote of the decision to exit Spain, that it was a combination of limited awareness around P2P lending there and low quality loan applicants.
With more resources at their disposal now to focus on Germany and the Netherlands, the company also announced two new senior appointments. Thorsten Seeger has joined as Managing Director for Germany and Belkacem Krimi has joined as Chief Risk Officer for Continental Europe. Thorsten Seeger joins from Lloyds Banking Group, where he was Head of Financial Markets for SMEs and was responsible for driving and delivering access to financial markets for small businesses. Belkacem joins from GE Capital and brings extensive experience in credit risk and operational risk management, developed over 17 years across multiple countries in Europe and Asia. In his last role, he was the CRO for GE Capital France, based out of Paris – managing risk for over $10Bn consumer and commercial assets.
Desai, of Funding Circle, said, “We’re delighted to welcome Thorsten and Belkacem to the team. Both are hugely talented and have extensive experience and understanding of small business lending across Europe.”
But for now, it’s Adios to Spain.
The New Normal
January 24, 2017
In March 2014, I wrote the following for DailyFunder.com: I think we are either currently in, or are fast approaching a “market bubble” in MCA. Bubbles never end well…When I see some of the business practices, offers, terms and other aspects of our business today, I am worried…assets are being overpaid for through higher than economically justified commissions …and [funders are] stretch[ing] the repayment term of the MCA or loan even further. I went on to say that this felt to me an awful lot like the subprime mortgage meltdown of 2008.
Like all good bear market prognosticators, I was a touch early in my forecast. 2014 and 2015 were continued boom years for small business alternative lenders (or “small business Alt Lender.” I don’t agree with applying the moniker “online lender” for our industry. It might be sexy, but it’s not accurate.) Loan and MCA terms got longer, loan pricing to the client dropped further, companies grew 100% year over year. And then 2016 happened.
The most shocking event for me in 2016 was the disruption at CAN Capital. They had the most data, the most experience, market dominance, and the most in-depth institutional knowledge. The granddaddy of all of us. Not far behind is the fiasco that is On Deck, the only publicly traded small business Alt Lender. In the past 12 months alone, the stock price has declined by over 40%. And that is after a roughly 50% drop in stock price in 2015. The first 9 months of 2016, driven in part because of market required changes to their business model when they could no longer profitably sell a sufficient volume of loan originations, they have a GAAP net loss of almost $50 million. There have also been a number of other lesser but still high profile failures, shutdowns, and exits from the industry in the past several months alone.
So what is driving this abnormally high rate of failure in the Alt Lending industry? Is it the “New Normal?” And what do I think lies ahead in 2017 and beyond? Before revealing my personal crystal ball again, I will share an anecdote from earlier in my business career.
I was the CFO (and eventually CEO) of a profitable, long-tenured family owned construction company. We had a working capital credit line from a major bank secured by a first position lien on our accounts receivable. The credit line was also personally guaranteed. We borrowed from the credit line for three reasons. For cash flow, when our receivables paid more slowly than expected; we had tax payments due; or we purchased a large piece of equipment. We always paid back the draw on the credit line as quickly as we could, to keep interests costs low, to impose cash management discipline, and to create future availability on the line once repaid.
The credit line was for one year. It was always renewed. But I was frustrated to have to go through an annual underwrite process with our bank, despite the personal guarantee, consistent profitability, and that we always paid back our draw on the credit line. Our banker (patiently) explained to me that economic cycles changed, and medium sized businesses – we had about 200 employees – suffered ups and downs and sometimes became financially distressed and even went out of business. The bank wanted to protect their position and not overextend the term of the credit line.
When I started RapidAdvance in 2005, I drew on my personal knowledge and previous experience as a borrower. The products we offered made sense based on our customer profile which was main street small business. We needed to protect against economic cycles and the high rate of small business failure. The maximum term offered by any company in 2005 was 8 months, at that time only for an advance product (future purchase and sale of credit card receivables), not a loan. Payment was received daily through a credit card split, thus allowing for a future capital advance (renewal) within about five or six months as the open advance was paid down. Cash advances could be used for taxes, equipment purchases, or business expansion. The price of the product reflected the risk of the credit offered.
What many in the small business Alt Lending industry seem to have forgotten, or never learned, is that our business is fundamentally a subprime credit industry. We are either lending to subprime borrowers, because of either the personal credit of the owner or the balance sheet of the borrower, or if the credit is strong and the business is more substantial, the loan itself is a subprime risk because we are at the bottom of the capital stack – behind the bank loan, the business property mortgage loan, the other personal guarantees of the owner, the factoring company, etc. We are taking the most risk. To offer two and three year terms and to try to pretend to get to “bank like” rates is, in my opinion, committing lending suicide.
At Rapid, we were dragged kicking and screaming into slightly longer term and lower cost products in order to stay competitive with certain customers. But we have kept that pool of customers as a very small percentage of our overall receivables.
Going into 2017 and beyond, I see five major trends. First, terms will get shorter, prices will increase, and offers will become more rational. That is already happening. Second, capital to this industry will become less available. The best companies with proven data driven models, consistent underwriting, a strong balance sheet and predictable loss rates will get financed. The days of easy money chasing this space are over. Equity will be particularly hard to come by.
Third, there will be continued disruption of funding companies. Companies will consolidate and some will disappear. On Deck may be in for a big challenge. They had a tremendous cash burn converting their business model to more balance sheet financed instead of originating and selling loans. Their market cap today is approximately book value, i.e. if you could buy up all the shares of the company at today’s trading price that would be roughly equal to their cash on the balance sheet and the value of their net receivables. The next two quarters are crucial for them to show the market they have turned the corner to become a self-sustaining lender. I am not optimistic, but I am rooting for them to succeed as it is in the best interests of the industry.
Fourth, stacking will continue to be an issue. I believe that the legal system over the next few years will bring some semblance of order to this industry scourge. At Rapid we have taken an aggressive legal stance against stacking, with some success in the courts. The challenge is that each situation is fact specific, and to prevail in a claim of tortious interference, the first position lender has to prove damages. I think that an unrelated decision at the end of 2016, Merchant Funding Services, LLC vs. Volunteer Pharmacy in New York State, could be a game changer. Because of the form of contract and the business practices in Volunteer, the judge ruled that the transaction constituted criminal usury. Knowing the business practices of the stackers, specifically the practice of writing an agreement that pretends to be a sale and purchase of future receivables but is in fact a loan, which is the basis for the judge’s ruling in Volunteer, I can see lawyers seizing on this precedent to help overstressed small business owners attempt to void their stacked loan agreements. The small business would first block the stacker’s ACH, claim the contract is void because of criminal usury, and then sue the stacking company. There could also be class action lawsuits like we saw a few years ago in California – bundle together a number of these claimants and go after the deep pocketed investors and banks that finance the stacking companies. The State’s Attorney General in New York may take a public policy interest in these types of loans. Once the dominoes start to fall, the costs of stacking – litigation and unpaid loans, in addition to proactive claims for damages – could be enormous for both the stacking companies and their owners and investors.
Lastly, and to my great pleasure, I think we will stop hearing small business Alt Lenders calling themselves “Fintech.” I think we will see the beginning of the demise of fully automated, no manual touch funding. At Rapid we have data and risk and pricing algorithms but we have always had an underwriter at a minimum review every file. At conferences when I have presented or participated in Fintech panels I always referred to Rapid as a technology enabled, non-bank small business lender. Now even On Deck describes themselves in similar terms.
I titled this post “The New Normal.” In the classic Mel Brooks movie Young Frankenstein, Dr. Frankenstein sends his assistant Igor to steal a brain from a cadaver to implant into his monster. But Igor accidentally drops the genius brain he was supposed to steal, and brings the doctor a different brain without telling him. When the monster awakes and has the personality of a psychotic five year old, Igor tells him he brought him a brain that was labeled “normal” instead of the one he was supposed to steal. It was, as Igor read it, “Abby Normal.” Abnormal, I believe, is the “New Normal” we will be dealing with in 2017.





























