Types of Business Revolving and Micro Loan Funds
Revolving and micro Loan funds are emerging as the primary source for entrepreneurs to obtain funding for their business as banks have been tighter with lending. Micro loan programs are provided by various federal, state and not for profit agencies to assist with economic development.
The funding sources shown below are not lent directly by the funding agency, rather these funds are provided to intermediary groups such as economic development agencies, municipal bodies, etc to disperse in their region. These funds are provided at no to little cost for the purpose of increasing economic activity and creating/retaining jobs. Below is an overview of the most common revolving and micro loan funds for businesses.
SBA 7m - The Small Business Administration (SBA) 7(m) Micro loan program gives short term, lesser dollar amount loans to small business entities, and also to organizations such as non-profit childcare and daycare centers. The Small Business Administration makes funds readily accessible to designated lenders, who act in an intermediary capacity. These intermediaries will be locally based non-profit organizations that have expertise, not only in general lending, but in the area of technical assistance and management. The intermediaries then directly supply the loans to qualified borrowers. An average loan amount is from $10,000 to $15,000, with the maximum available loan amount being $35,000. The general outline of fund usage is leasehold or renovation improvement, or as working capital. Job creation or retention requirements will apply.
Loan Amount: up to $35,000
Interest Rate: Typically 5%
USDA IRP - The purpose of the Intermediary Relending Program (IRP) program is to alleviate poverty and increase economic activity and employment in rural communities. Under the IRP program, loans are provided to local organizations (intermediaries) for the establishment of revolving loan funds. These revolving loan funds are used to assist with financing business and economic development activity to create or retain jobs in disadvantaged and remote communities. Intermediaries are encouraged to work in concert with State and regional strategies, and in partnership with other public and private organizations that can provide complimentary resources. Job creation or retention requirements will apply.
Loan Amount: up to $150,000
Interest Rate: Typically 5%
USDA RMAP - The USDA's Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP) is designed to create jobs, and strengthen rural communities by providing specialized technical support and loans for small businesses.
RMAP provides loans and grants to Microenterprise Development Organizations (MDOs), which in turn provide technical services and distribute micro loans to rural microentrepreneurs. The MDOs are not required to be located in a rural area to be eligible to participate but microentrepreneurs must be. Microenterprises may be, but do not have to be, food or agriculture-related.
In addition to loan funds, training, operational support, business planning, market development assistance, and other services to rural microentrepreneurs is available to no charge. Job creation or retention requirements will apply.
Loan Amount: up to $50,000
Interest Rate: Typically 5%
EDA Revolving Loan Program - The Economic Development Administration (EDA) Revolving Loan Fund Program is the Economic Development Administration's economic development financing program that helps America's small businesses grow while benefiting communities through tax base expansion, business growth and job creation. Loans are available for most types of small, for-profit businesses to purchase and/or renovate capital assets including land, buildings and equipment or to finance working capital needs such as inventory and accounts receivable. Job creation or retention requirements will apply.
Loan Amount: up to $150,000
Interest Rate: Typically ranges between 3% & 5%
CDBG Loan Program - Funding for the Community Development Block Grant Program (CSBG) program is provided by Housing and Urban Development (HUD). These grant dollars are available to communities with a population of fewer than 50,000 residents for the purpose of attracting new or expanding existing companies, as long as the projects align with one of three national objectives:
1. Principally benefit low and/or moderate income people.
2. Eliminate or prevent slums and/or blight.
3. Address imminent health and/or safety problems.
Job creation or retention requirements will apply.
Loan Amount: Varies by state
Interest Rate: Typically 5%
CDBG Loan Program - Community Service Block Grant (CSBG) Loan Program provides long-term, fixed-rate financing to new or expanding small businesses in exchange for job creation and employment for low-income individuals. Funding is typically administered jointly between State economic development agencies and Community Action Agencies which are local private and public non-profit organizations. Job creation or retention requirements will apply.
Loan Amount: up to $150,000
Interest Rate: Typically 5% - 7%
Revolving Loan Funds - Many States, Counties, Cities, Towns and Villages offer revolving loans fund to assist with small business development. Funding can come through endowments, consortium of banks or a combination of the funds mentioned above. These funds are typically administered by economic development groups, chambers of commerce, targeted minority association, not for profits or municipal bodies. Job creation or retention requirements typically apply.
Loan Amount: Varies by area up to $750,000
Interest Rate: 0% - 12%
Friday, September 14, 2012
Student Loan for International Students
Student Loan for International Students
Studying in the United States has now become easier for international students. With the current influx of international students attending U.S. colleges and universities, student loans are now made available to these foreign nationals pursuing higher education in the United States.
Specialized College Funding
International student loans are a new form of private education loans that are specifically designed for foreign students who are studying and pursuing an education in the United States. However, in order to qualify for these loans, students must have an eligible US co-signer who is willing to take on the responsibility.
Co-signing for Funding
All applicants must have a co-signer to qualify for funding. A qualified US citizen or permanent resident with outstanding credit, good financial standing, excellent credit score, and having residence in the United States for the past two years is required in most cases.
Private Education Loans for Foreigners are offered to:
Non-U.S. Students
Students attending full-time degree programs
International students attending an eligible U.S. university or college
Students with a creditworthy and eligible U.S. co-signer
Borrowing for College
Students can borrow as much as they need to cover all tuition and other school related expenses after all financial aid, grants, scholarships, personal funds and other free money have been exhausted. These school expenses include things such as boarding expenses and any other expenditure including tuition, books, transportation, fees, insurance and other approved school related-payments.
Benefits of International Student Loans
Easy repayment terms
No collateral required
Quick loan process
Easy online application process
No application deadlines
And much more....
Where to Apply for Funding
A number of US banks and other private lending institutions provide these loans to qualified students giving them an opportunity of a lifetime. However, it is always wise to take out time to research all options available because all lending institutions do not have the same eligibility requirements or offer the same benefits.
Student loans for international students provide the ideal funding solution for college!
Studying in the United States has now become easier for international students. With the current influx of international students attending U.S. colleges and universities, student loans are now made available to these foreign nationals pursuing higher education in the United States.
Specialized College Funding
International student loans are a new form of private education loans that are specifically designed for foreign students who are studying and pursuing an education in the United States. However, in order to qualify for these loans, students must have an eligible US co-signer who is willing to take on the responsibility.
Co-signing for Funding
All applicants must have a co-signer to qualify for funding. A qualified US citizen or permanent resident with outstanding credit, good financial standing, excellent credit score, and having residence in the United States for the past two years is required in most cases.
Private Education Loans for Foreigners are offered to:
Non-U.S. Students
Students attending full-time degree programs
International students attending an eligible U.S. university or college
Students with a creditworthy and eligible U.S. co-signer
Borrowing for College
Students can borrow as much as they need to cover all tuition and other school related expenses after all financial aid, grants, scholarships, personal funds and other free money have been exhausted. These school expenses include things such as boarding expenses and any other expenditure including tuition, books, transportation, fees, insurance and other approved school related-payments.
Benefits of International Student Loans
Easy repayment terms
No collateral required
Quick loan process
Easy online application process
No application deadlines
And much more....
Where to Apply for Funding
A number of US banks and other private lending institutions provide these loans to qualified students giving them an opportunity of a lifetime. However, it is always wise to take out time to research all options available because all lending institutions do not have the same eligibility requirements or offer the same benefits.
Student loans for international students provide the ideal funding solution for college!
Avoiding Online Loan Crooks
Avoiding Online Loan Crooks
The Federal Trade Commission is determined to prevent Americans from being stung by online loan scams. They recently conducted an interesting experiment which involved them setting up a dummy website purporting to be a loan company called 'Esteemed Lending Services'. Those who clicked on the website were redirected to a page which said 'You could have been scammed'. It was an innovative way to drive home the point that thousands of people get scammed when looking for an online loan each year. Below are some 'red flags' that will hopefully set off your alarm bells when looking for a suitable lender.
Not Interested In Your Credit History
If you've ever applied for a bank loan, your credit history is considered to be one of the most important background checks made by any loan company. Those with a low credit score will almost certainly be rejected. Applying for a bad credit loan is one of the easiest ways to be scammed online. Once you have applied, your personal details will be sold to third parties and you may well be tracked by fake debt collectors. Thousands of people are scammed and pay money for debts they don't actually owe. Lenders that claim they are uninterested in your credit history are to be avoided at all costs. It should be noted that payday lenders don't worry about credit scores either but such loans come with incredibly high interest rates.
Unclear Fees
Every legitimate lender clearly displays their fees, terms and conditions. They are legally obliged to be as forthcoming with their conditions as possible. All fees are calculated based on the amount you borrow with these fees paid to the lender after the loan is approved and paid. Never sign any contract you don't understand and carefully read the small print.
Phone Loans
This is another sure-fire way to uncover a scam company. Fake companies will call you and promise loans. Nothing unusual about that you might say. However, these scammers will ask you to pay the fees before giving you loan. What kind of an organization asks you to pay money first in order to receive it? Besides, this practice is totally illegal in the United States.
Copycat Companies
They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Scam companies are taking this to the next level by trading with names that sound remarkably similar to respected companies, right down to the company logo. Fake companies will also have slick websites that are high on presentation but low on information. Don't fall for their style; seek cold hard evidence that they are legitimate. If they are ripping off a well known brand name, you can be sure they are fake.
Not Registered
All lenders must be registered in the state where they do business. Although checking a company's registration will not guarantee a loan you'll be happy with, it should help you uncover most of the criminals.
In a nutshell, online loan companies that look for fee payment up front are not legitimate. Don't give your bank account information to lenders and avoid giving any kind of personal information on the phone. Online cash loans may help you through a financial crisis but there are a lot of crooks out there waiting for you to make a mistake.
The Federal Trade Commission is determined to prevent Americans from being stung by online loan scams. They recently conducted an interesting experiment which involved them setting up a dummy website purporting to be a loan company called 'Esteemed Lending Services'. Those who clicked on the website were redirected to a page which said 'You could have been scammed'. It was an innovative way to drive home the point that thousands of people get scammed when looking for an online loan each year. Below are some 'red flags' that will hopefully set off your alarm bells when looking for a suitable lender.
Not Interested In Your Credit History
If you've ever applied for a bank loan, your credit history is considered to be one of the most important background checks made by any loan company. Those with a low credit score will almost certainly be rejected. Applying for a bad credit loan is one of the easiest ways to be scammed online. Once you have applied, your personal details will be sold to third parties and you may well be tracked by fake debt collectors. Thousands of people are scammed and pay money for debts they don't actually owe. Lenders that claim they are uninterested in your credit history are to be avoided at all costs. It should be noted that payday lenders don't worry about credit scores either but such loans come with incredibly high interest rates.
Unclear Fees
Every legitimate lender clearly displays their fees, terms and conditions. They are legally obliged to be as forthcoming with their conditions as possible. All fees are calculated based on the amount you borrow with these fees paid to the lender after the loan is approved and paid. Never sign any contract you don't understand and carefully read the small print.
Phone Loans
This is another sure-fire way to uncover a scam company. Fake companies will call you and promise loans. Nothing unusual about that you might say. However, these scammers will ask you to pay the fees before giving you loan. What kind of an organization asks you to pay money first in order to receive it? Besides, this practice is totally illegal in the United States.
Copycat Companies
They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Scam companies are taking this to the next level by trading with names that sound remarkably similar to respected companies, right down to the company logo. Fake companies will also have slick websites that are high on presentation but low on information. Don't fall for their style; seek cold hard evidence that they are legitimate. If they are ripping off a well known brand name, you can be sure they are fake.
Not Registered
All lenders must be registered in the state where they do business. Although checking a company's registration will not guarantee a loan you'll be happy with, it should help you uncover most of the criminals.
In a nutshell, online loan companies that look for fee payment up front are not legitimate. Don't give your bank account information to lenders and avoid giving any kind of personal information on the phone. Online cash loans may help you through a financial crisis but there are a lot of crooks out there waiting for you to make a mistake.
Are Lawsuit Loans And Settlement Loans Legal?
Are Lawsuit Loans And Settlement Loans Legal?
Since I'm in the industry, obviously I have a lot of interest in articles being published about theis particular facet of litigation funding. I find it particularly interesting to read the numerous articles that are misleading. One can only surmise that many of these articles are published by those who would want to preclude having individuals obtain adequate lawsuit loans and settlement loans to assist them with the litigation process. A common reason that this would occur would be because the individuals do want do not want the injured plaintiff to have his/her "day-in-court."
As we begin this article, let me say that some jurisdictions make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to obtain lawsuit funding (e.g., North Carolina). However, most states do permit such transactions to occur. It is understood that, as a public-policy, this form of funding can be very helpful to those who do not have the financial resources to fend for themselves if tthey sustain injuries as a result of another's negligence.
Please take note of the fact that attorneys are barred, at least in most jurisdictions, from assisting their clients financially, irrespective of the financial hardship the client may face. Additionally, most jurisdictions make it illegal for anyone other than a disinterested third party to provide either lawsuit loans were settlement loans to plaintiffs. Attorneys who violate this stricture often place their professional lives in jeopardy.
The American Bar Association has made it very clear that its position is that attorneys are not to advance financing to their clients to enable them to proceed with litigation. Furthermore, virtually all jurisdictions bar attorneys from engaging in this activity. Many attorneys general offices have actually issued legal opinions with respect to this issue.
An individual may certainly incredibly asked why he such funding would be necessary to pursue litigation if one is injured as a result of another's negligence. Unfortunately, many people find themselves confronting substantial delays in settlements. These delays can create crashing hardships on those individuals who have sustained the injuries. In fact, insurance carriers often focus on the strategy of "delay, delay, delay." These delays often result in coercing the plaintiffs to settle their claims at a substantially-reduced amount.
There are some instances in which attorneys object to their clients obtaining either lawsuit loans are settlement loans. Although this is relatively rare, this is seen most commonly in attorneys who work with so-called Personally Injury Mills. The attorneys do not wish to have the client possess the means by which he/she is able to continue the litigation because the attorney wants to quickly churn-out a particular number of cases each month to meet the firm's quota. Individuals would be wise to avoid utilizing such attorneys' services.
It is the non-recourse nature of litigation funding that often confuses individuals. However, this simply means that if the individual does not win the underlying lawsuit, they do not have to repay the money advanced. Actually, it's inappropriate to refer to these arrangements as "loans." If they were loans, it would be necessary for them to be repaid, irrespective of the outcome of the case. Therefore, it is more appropriate to refer to this form of funding as, just that, funding.
In spite of all of the fear-mongering, lawsuit loans and settlement loans are perfectly legal, if not performed in a usurious manner. If a funding entity were to engage in such activities, the transaction could be barred as a matter of law. Therefore, individuals would be wise to work closely with lawsuit funding brokers to assist them in finding the most ethical and economical avenues to obtain the funding they seek.
Since I'm in the industry, obviously I have a lot of interest in articles being published about theis particular facet of litigation funding. I find it particularly interesting to read the numerous articles that are misleading. One can only surmise that many of these articles are published by those who would want to preclude having individuals obtain adequate lawsuit loans and settlement loans to assist them with the litigation process. A common reason that this would occur would be because the individuals do want do not want the injured plaintiff to have his/her "day-in-court."
As we begin this article, let me say that some jurisdictions make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to obtain lawsuit funding (e.g., North Carolina). However, most states do permit such transactions to occur. It is understood that, as a public-policy, this form of funding can be very helpful to those who do not have the financial resources to fend for themselves if tthey sustain injuries as a result of another's negligence.
Please take note of the fact that attorneys are barred, at least in most jurisdictions, from assisting their clients financially, irrespective of the financial hardship the client may face. Additionally, most jurisdictions make it illegal for anyone other than a disinterested third party to provide either lawsuit loans were settlement loans to plaintiffs. Attorneys who violate this stricture often place their professional lives in jeopardy.
The American Bar Association has made it very clear that its position is that attorneys are not to advance financing to their clients to enable them to proceed with litigation. Furthermore, virtually all jurisdictions bar attorneys from engaging in this activity. Many attorneys general offices have actually issued legal opinions with respect to this issue.
An individual may certainly incredibly asked why he such funding would be necessary to pursue litigation if one is injured as a result of another's negligence. Unfortunately, many people find themselves confronting substantial delays in settlements. These delays can create crashing hardships on those individuals who have sustained the injuries. In fact, insurance carriers often focus on the strategy of "delay, delay, delay." These delays often result in coercing the plaintiffs to settle their claims at a substantially-reduced amount.
There are some instances in which attorneys object to their clients obtaining either lawsuit loans are settlement loans. Although this is relatively rare, this is seen most commonly in attorneys who work with so-called Personally Injury Mills. The attorneys do not wish to have the client possess the means by which he/she is able to continue the litigation because the attorney wants to quickly churn-out a particular number of cases each month to meet the firm's quota. Individuals would be wise to avoid utilizing such attorneys' services.
It is the non-recourse nature of litigation funding that often confuses individuals. However, this simply means that if the individual does not win the underlying lawsuit, they do not have to repay the money advanced. Actually, it's inappropriate to refer to these arrangements as "loans." If they were loans, it would be necessary for them to be repaid, irrespective of the outcome of the case. Therefore, it is more appropriate to refer to this form of funding as, just that, funding.
In spite of all of the fear-mongering, lawsuit loans and settlement loans are perfectly legal, if not performed in a usurious manner. If a funding entity were to engage in such activities, the transaction could be barred as a matter of law. Therefore, individuals would be wise to work closely with lawsuit funding brokers to assist them in finding the most ethical and economical avenues to obtain the funding they seek.
Benchmark Lending Rate Versus the Prime Interest Rate
Benchmark Lending Rate Versus the Prime Interest Rate
In essence, the benchmark lending rate can be described as the interest rate that the bank has to pay when the institution borrows money from another bank or large corporation. The benchmark rate is to be distinguished from the prime rate of the banks, as the latter expresses the minimum and individual interest rate settled by the bank and on top of which the institution places additional charges based on the level of risk of the borrower. The benchmark rate is typically used by banks to determine the realistic prime lending rate (PLR) that they should charge and it helps calculate other rates of interest.
In order to understand the meaning of the benchmark lending rate, let's imagine a bank in the U.S. The PLR and American bank sets is usually in accordance with the federal funds rate, established by the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is an institution with the power to influence the money supply via open market transactions. Consequentially, the banks that calculate their PLR using the federal funds rate will have to charge major borrowers an interest rate that was calculated in accordance to the Federal Reserve's set rate. In a nutshell, the importance of the prime rate is that it is the decisive factor regarding the interest rates borrowers can receive money.
So, how are the benchmark rates actually used in the lending process? For starters, any changes in the federal funds rate will directly affect the abilities of the banks to make cash transfers, as they need to watch out on ensuring they have the right amounts in their reserves. Therefore, when the federal funds rate increases, then all interest rates on loans provided to consumers and the return rate on the bank's deposit certificates, such as money market accounts, certificates of deposit and savings accounts will stagnate or decrease slightly.
In general, there are two methods used to calculate the prime lending rates. The first method, which is rather rarely used, implies that the prime rates and the benchmark lending rates are established by the authorities that manage the rates. The second one is commonly used in most countries of the world and it is based on the market forces. In short, the market forces imply the growth or contraction of the economy, trade balances, money supplies of the national banks, macroeconomic factors and so on.
It is important to note that there is some controversy regarding the way the Federal Reserve sets its prime rate and hence, influences the PLR of the other banks in the U.S. Basically, the federal funds rate is an exception and rarely set of rules used by the Federal Reserve to intentionally affect the economy.
By manipulating the cash flow, usually by increasing the supply in the open trade markets, they are assuming some huge risks, according to some economists. This main disadvantage of the expansionary monetary policy is that it is prone to add deficits and increase the inflation in the economy. According to the critics of the policy, the economy will stabilize and the benchmarks will emerge naturally, despite the financial crises U.S. and other countries are facing today.
In essence, the benchmark lending rate can be described as the interest rate that the bank has to pay when the institution borrows money from another bank or large corporation. The benchmark rate is to be distinguished from the prime rate of the banks, as the latter expresses the minimum and individual interest rate settled by the bank and on top of which the institution places additional charges based on the level of risk of the borrower. The benchmark rate is typically used by banks to determine the realistic prime lending rate (PLR) that they should charge and it helps calculate other rates of interest.
In order to understand the meaning of the benchmark lending rate, let's imagine a bank in the U.S. The PLR and American bank sets is usually in accordance with the federal funds rate, established by the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is an institution with the power to influence the money supply via open market transactions. Consequentially, the banks that calculate their PLR using the federal funds rate will have to charge major borrowers an interest rate that was calculated in accordance to the Federal Reserve's set rate. In a nutshell, the importance of the prime rate is that it is the decisive factor regarding the interest rates borrowers can receive money.
So, how are the benchmark rates actually used in the lending process? For starters, any changes in the federal funds rate will directly affect the abilities of the banks to make cash transfers, as they need to watch out on ensuring they have the right amounts in their reserves. Therefore, when the federal funds rate increases, then all interest rates on loans provided to consumers and the return rate on the bank's deposit certificates, such as money market accounts, certificates of deposit and savings accounts will stagnate or decrease slightly.
In general, there are two methods used to calculate the prime lending rates. The first method, which is rather rarely used, implies that the prime rates and the benchmark lending rates are established by the authorities that manage the rates. The second one is commonly used in most countries of the world and it is based on the market forces. In short, the market forces imply the growth or contraction of the economy, trade balances, money supplies of the national banks, macroeconomic factors and so on.
It is important to note that there is some controversy regarding the way the Federal Reserve sets its prime rate and hence, influences the PLR of the other banks in the U.S. Basically, the federal funds rate is an exception and rarely set of rules used by the Federal Reserve to intentionally affect the economy.
By manipulating the cash flow, usually by increasing the supply in the open trade markets, they are assuming some huge risks, according to some economists. This main disadvantage of the expansionary monetary policy is that it is prone to add deficits and increase the inflation in the economy. According to the critics of the policy, the economy will stabilize and the benchmarks will emerge naturally, despite the financial crises U.S. and other countries are facing today.
TACT Program - Bank of America Says No
TACT Program - Bank of America Says No
The Toxic Asset Conversion and Transfer (TACT) Program is a simple and effective solution to the banking and real estate crisis, that does not require government funding. It builds on the progress made by banks and real estate investors to bring us back from the brink of a liquidity disaster. The dilemma is that most senior bank executives are not aware of the TACT Program yet, and because it is not a government program they are not being encouraged or forced to implement it. Since the housing bubble burst, bank executives have been reacting to mandates from the government, the Federal Reserve, and FDIC. Banks have not been proactive, and it appears the major banks are not likely to change in the very near future. I would have thought the Great Recession was long enough, deep enough, and that 140 bank closures in 2009, and 157 in 2010 would get bankers interested in finding alternatives.
Our real estate fund, and many other home providers (aka investors), have been acquiring distressed properties since we resolved the defaults in our own portfolios. Yes, we were faced with foreclosures and defaults just like the banks. We solved our own problems, and then developed the TACT Program based on our experience. We are now willing to share our experience with banks and acquire more properties if financing is available. This is the key advantage of the TACT Program. When buying a distressed property the bank that owns the property, or holds the non-performing loan, actually has the money available to finance it. That money happens to be locked up in the toxic asset itself. The proceeds from the sale can be used to finance the buyer! If we went to a different bank to finance that same property, they have to use their scarce funds to provide a loan. Those other banks also have a problem with toxic assets on their balance sheet and are not anxious to make new real estate loans.
We recently submitted a number of offers on Bank of America's short sales and bank owned properties (aka REO) contingent on obtaining financing under the TACT Program. Many of our purchase contracts were approved by the REO and short sale departments. When I contacted Bank of America's mortgage lending department to obtain their approval, the response was what I expected, "our system does not have TACT Program listed as a loan type."
I therefore contacted BofA's EVP/Chief Financial Officer to ask him to consider the benefits of testing the TACT Program to fix the bank's balance sheet. It does not take an in-depth knowledge of finance to appreciate the impact a significant decrease in REO and non-performing loans would have on BofA's profitability and financial condition. The CFO would certainly realize that a 50% decrease in toxic assets could increase their ability to borrow and lend, and thus increase their performing asset base by over $200 billion.
After many detailed discussions regarding the TACT Program, which took place over several months, with various people on the CEO's executive staff, we received their decision - NO. The executive staff said they would not finance the properties they are selling under the TACT Program. Unfortunately they would not provide that decision in writing so we had to contact each Realtor to cancel our purchase contracts.
The decision was disappointing, although their rationale for not participating in the TACT Program was very encouraging. They agreed that this program would have significant benefits to Bank of America, and that the $60 Billion of toxic assets on their balance sheet is indeed hindering their ability to borrow and lend. They also agreed that further deterioration in the housing market was a significant risk to their future financial condition. They would gladly sell us those properties even at lower prices than we offered, if we would buy them using cash.
This has been a major issue with all banks. They will accept low cash offers and thus are willing to continue the downward spiral of market values by selling below market value. The bankers may not realize that this further decreases the value of their existing loan and property portfolio. This practice of discounting the price to get it sold has been the perfect formula for ensuring further deterioration in the housing market.
So what was the reason for saying NO, at least for now? Bank of America is too big to make a major a strategic decision in such a short time-frame. They saw the advantages, but would not go ahead with financing those properties for us, at this time. They suggested we continue to work with smaller banks to acquire their properties.
As most sales seminars emphasize, a sale is rarely made on the first sales call. The typical number of sales calls required is seven. Those sales seminars also teach us that objections are merely questions that they need our help to answer. My resolution to Bank of America - I will be back. I will provide more evidence that the TACT Program works, and that we are ready, willing, and able to help them sell off their toxic assets at market prices.
Bank of America is the first bank to decide not to implement the TACT Program. Several Arizona banks we contacted about buying their toxic assets did not decide soon enough, and have been closed by the FDIC. I cannot be sure we could have saved those banks from closure, although the FDIC would certainly have given them more time if they had a clear strategy, and could show steady progress toward improving their financial condition ratios. I am not worried about Bank of America being closed by the FDIC anytime soon, so I will be back!
The TACT Program continues to move forward, despite Bank of America's decision. TACT is a very simple and practical solution to the housing and banking crisis that takes banks' Toxic Assets and Converts them to performing loans by Transferring those assets to a qualified buyer. Those buyers convert foreclosures to family homes!
The Toxic Asset Conversion and Transfer (TACT) Program is a simple and effective solution to the banking and real estate crisis, that does not require government funding. It builds on the progress made by banks and real estate investors to bring us back from the brink of a liquidity disaster. The dilemma is that most senior bank executives are not aware of the TACT Program yet, and because it is not a government program they are not being encouraged or forced to implement it. Since the housing bubble burst, bank executives have been reacting to mandates from the government, the Federal Reserve, and FDIC. Banks have not been proactive, and it appears the major banks are not likely to change in the very near future. I would have thought the Great Recession was long enough, deep enough, and that 140 bank closures in 2009, and 157 in 2010 would get bankers interested in finding alternatives.
Our real estate fund, and many other home providers (aka investors), have been acquiring distressed properties since we resolved the defaults in our own portfolios. Yes, we were faced with foreclosures and defaults just like the banks. We solved our own problems, and then developed the TACT Program based on our experience. We are now willing to share our experience with banks and acquire more properties if financing is available. This is the key advantage of the TACT Program. When buying a distressed property the bank that owns the property, or holds the non-performing loan, actually has the money available to finance it. That money happens to be locked up in the toxic asset itself. The proceeds from the sale can be used to finance the buyer! If we went to a different bank to finance that same property, they have to use their scarce funds to provide a loan. Those other banks also have a problem with toxic assets on their balance sheet and are not anxious to make new real estate loans.
We recently submitted a number of offers on Bank of America's short sales and bank owned properties (aka REO) contingent on obtaining financing under the TACT Program. Many of our purchase contracts were approved by the REO and short sale departments. When I contacted Bank of America's mortgage lending department to obtain their approval, the response was what I expected, "our system does not have TACT Program listed as a loan type."
I therefore contacted BofA's EVP/Chief Financial Officer to ask him to consider the benefits of testing the TACT Program to fix the bank's balance sheet. It does not take an in-depth knowledge of finance to appreciate the impact a significant decrease in REO and non-performing loans would have on BofA's profitability and financial condition. The CFO would certainly realize that a 50% decrease in toxic assets could increase their ability to borrow and lend, and thus increase their performing asset base by over $200 billion.
After many detailed discussions regarding the TACT Program, which took place over several months, with various people on the CEO's executive staff, we received their decision - NO. The executive staff said they would not finance the properties they are selling under the TACT Program. Unfortunately they would not provide that decision in writing so we had to contact each Realtor to cancel our purchase contracts.
The decision was disappointing, although their rationale for not participating in the TACT Program was very encouraging. They agreed that this program would have significant benefits to Bank of America, and that the $60 Billion of toxic assets on their balance sheet is indeed hindering their ability to borrow and lend. They also agreed that further deterioration in the housing market was a significant risk to their future financial condition. They would gladly sell us those properties even at lower prices than we offered, if we would buy them using cash.
This has been a major issue with all banks. They will accept low cash offers and thus are willing to continue the downward spiral of market values by selling below market value. The bankers may not realize that this further decreases the value of their existing loan and property portfolio. This practice of discounting the price to get it sold has been the perfect formula for ensuring further deterioration in the housing market.
So what was the reason for saying NO, at least for now? Bank of America is too big to make a major a strategic decision in such a short time-frame. They saw the advantages, but would not go ahead with financing those properties for us, at this time. They suggested we continue to work with smaller banks to acquire their properties.
As most sales seminars emphasize, a sale is rarely made on the first sales call. The typical number of sales calls required is seven. Those sales seminars also teach us that objections are merely questions that they need our help to answer. My resolution to Bank of America - I will be back. I will provide more evidence that the TACT Program works, and that we are ready, willing, and able to help them sell off their toxic assets at market prices.
Bank of America is the first bank to decide not to implement the TACT Program. Several Arizona banks we contacted about buying their toxic assets did not decide soon enough, and have been closed by the FDIC. I cannot be sure we could have saved those banks from closure, although the FDIC would certainly have given them more time if they had a clear strategy, and could show steady progress toward improving their financial condition ratios. I am not worried about Bank of America being closed by the FDIC anytime soon, so I will be back!
The TACT Program continues to move forward, despite Bank of America's decision. TACT is a very simple and practical solution to the housing and banking crisis that takes banks' Toxic Assets and Converts them to performing loans by Transferring those assets to a qualified buyer. Those buyers convert foreclosures to family homes!
SBA Clean Tech Loans Really Concern Me - Let's Talk
SBA Clean Tech Loans Really Concern Me - Let's Talk
As the coordinator for a think tank, we spend a lot of time looking over entrepreneurial business plans for new startups. I am always amazed at the number of business plans that I've been reading, especially in the last five years that have to do with clean technologies, green companies, and alternative energy. Still, I am quite concerned because many of these business plans simply do not have a compelling reason to risk the capital. Okay so, let's talk about this for second shall we?
If I as a retired entrepreneur, and founder of a think tank do not feel comfortable recommending these startups to angel investors and venture capitalists, for fear that it might tarnish my reputation, and realize it's not even my money involved, then why is it okay to use taxpayer guaranteed money to fund some of these same projects? If they aren't viable, they shouldn't be done. If their only chance for success has to do with tax rebates, temporary waivers from regulatory agencies, and low-cost funding from the government - then actually they are not viable at all, certainly not in the free marketplace.
In that case, may I ask why we are bothering with this? I know the answer, but I pose the question because I am a little bit tired of the political agendas, the anti-fossil fuel motive, and this new religion of global warming. This country needs reliable and low-cost energy. By having that we are giving a boost to all of our industries, meaning they can compete better globally. If we overtax our infrastructure, and take that money and funnel it to projects which are not viable, all we are doing is manipulating the free-market system in a pathetic and disgusting way (my opinion, because I'm not allowed to say that, as it isn't politically correct, which is in itself pathetic).
At some point we need a Frank discussion, and we need to talk about the truth, fairness, and reality of the free-market. We aren't doing that in our country, and I fear we are throwing more good money after bad, to what avail I ask?
There was an interesting piece recently in the Austin Business Journal titled; "SBA launches nationwide fund to invest $1.5B in small biz - -The SBA U.S. Small Business Administration Latest from The Business Journals Follow this company is launching a new national fund to make equity investments in technology companies, particularly "cleantech" firms." by Megan Kamerick, reprinted from the New Mexico Business Weekly. Anyway the article stated;
"Through the new initiative, the SBA will commit $1 billion to funds focused on investing in underserved markets or in sectors that have been defined as national priorities. These can be businesses located in, or employing residents of, low or moderate-income areas or economically distressed areas. They can also be industry sectors the Obama Administration has identified as national priorities. Right now, that includes clean energy and education."
Indeed, if the government would just get out of the way, we would solve all of our problems, the same challenges wouldn't have had in the first place. To claim that right now we have a politician who has identified our national priorities as his own pet projects, and political agenda is ridiculous. If that's his agenda, why doesn't he quit being president and go out in the real world and compete in the free markets make $1 billion, and then use his own money?
Well, the reason is he doesn't, is simple, he does not have the ability to do that, he only has the ability to read a teleprompter and tell us what to do, and then bribe us with our own money. What I don't understand is how Americans can be so smart and still not see this? And if we are giving loans to people that don't understand the concept I just explained, then they aren't smart enough to run a business anyway, and they're just going to lose money, and default on those loans, and it's going to be the taxpayer who foots the bill over and over again - can't you see this pattern? Please consider all this and think on it.
As the coordinator for a think tank, we spend a lot of time looking over entrepreneurial business plans for new startups. I am always amazed at the number of business plans that I've been reading, especially in the last five years that have to do with clean technologies, green companies, and alternative energy. Still, I am quite concerned because many of these business plans simply do not have a compelling reason to risk the capital. Okay so, let's talk about this for second shall we?
If I as a retired entrepreneur, and founder of a think tank do not feel comfortable recommending these startups to angel investors and venture capitalists, for fear that it might tarnish my reputation, and realize it's not even my money involved, then why is it okay to use taxpayer guaranteed money to fund some of these same projects? If they aren't viable, they shouldn't be done. If their only chance for success has to do with tax rebates, temporary waivers from regulatory agencies, and low-cost funding from the government - then actually they are not viable at all, certainly not in the free marketplace.
In that case, may I ask why we are bothering with this? I know the answer, but I pose the question because I am a little bit tired of the political agendas, the anti-fossil fuel motive, and this new religion of global warming. This country needs reliable and low-cost energy. By having that we are giving a boost to all of our industries, meaning they can compete better globally. If we overtax our infrastructure, and take that money and funnel it to projects which are not viable, all we are doing is manipulating the free-market system in a pathetic and disgusting way (my opinion, because I'm not allowed to say that, as it isn't politically correct, which is in itself pathetic).
At some point we need a Frank discussion, and we need to talk about the truth, fairness, and reality of the free-market. We aren't doing that in our country, and I fear we are throwing more good money after bad, to what avail I ask?
There was an interesting piece recently in the Austin Business Journal titled; "SBA launches nationwide fund to invest $1.5B in small biz - -The SBA U.S. Small Business Administration Latest from The Business Journals Follow this company is launching a new national fund to make equity investments in technology companies, particularly "cleantech" firms." by Megan Kamerick, reprinted from the New Mexico Business Weekly. Anyway the article stated;
"Through the new initiative, the SBA will commit $1 billion to funds focused on investing in underserved markets or in sectors that have been defined as national priorities. These can be businesses located in, or employing residents of, low or moderate-income areas or economically distressed areas. They can also be industry sectors the Obama Administration has identified as national priorities. Right now, that includes clean energy and education."
Indeed, if the government would just get out of the way, we would solve all of our problems, the same challenges wouldn't have had in the first place. To claim that right now we have a politician who has identified our national priorities as his own pet projects, and political agenda is ridiculous. If that's his agenda, why doesn't he quit being president and go out in the real world and compete in the free markets make $1 billion, and then use his own money?
Well, the reason is he doesn't, is simple, he does not have the ability to do that, he only has the ability to read a teleprompter and tell us what to do, and then bribe us with our own money. What I don't understand is how Americans can be so smart and still not see this? And if we are giving loans to people that don't understand the concept I just explained, then they aren't smart enough to run a business anyway, and they're just going to lose money, and default on those loans, and it's going to be the taxpayer who foots the bill over and over again - can't you see this pattern? Please consider all this and think on it.
Saturday, September 1, 2012
Adult's Long Gangster Suit Costume (X-Small 34-36) On Sale
Under for Adult's Long Gangster Suit Costume (X-Small 34-36)
on Sale
Adult's Long Gangster Suit Costume (X-Small 34-36) Feature
Adult's Long Gangster Suit Costume (X-Small 34-36) Overview
Disclaimer : This
site/page does not included in any the parts with amazon.com but it is
participant in the amazon services LLC associates program by
advertising and linking to amazon.com , Certain content that appears on
this site comes from amazon services LLC. This content is provided "as
is" and is subject to change or removal at any time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)