Sign up  |  Log in

What a deal!

I just saw a TV commercial for Speedy Cash.  They have loans available for only – only! – 8% per month.

At least they were upfront in the ad: they did say that the APR is only – only! – 96%.

Such a deal!

Simplify the complicated side; don't complify the simplicated side.

Financial Exam Help 123: The place to get help for the CFA® exams
http://financialexamhelp123.com/

The website illustrated a  loan of $2,600 repaid via 42 instalments. APR was 132%!!!!!! 

no

“Mmmmmm, something…” - H. Simpson

Eh, no wonder Obama was so keen to crack down on these businesses.

“The aliens on Mars cloned Hillary Clinton.” - Turd Furgeson

Looks like they operate in Canada and the UK as well.

This space available.

Speedy Cash, Found Wherever Poor People Live!

I have no problem with these places existing.  

1.  They have to charge exorbitant prices (in this case, interest) to cover all of the people who don’t repay.  

2.  The alternative to paying 96% interest would be to go to a loan shark.  And I imagine the loan shark interest is even higher.  And their collection methods are more interesting.  

3.  If you don’t like the terms, then don’t agree to them.  

82 > 87
Simple math.

Greenman72 wrote:

I have no problem with these places existing.  

1.  They have to charge exorbitant prices (in this case, interest) to cover all of the people who don’t repay.  

2.  The alternative to paying 96% interest would be to go to a loan shark.  And I imagine the loan shark interest is even higher.  And their collection methods are more interesting.  

3.  If you don’t like the terms, then don’t agree to them.  

agree 100%

Ok, it’s a valid point that people might need some short term cash under some circumstances. Maybe the 8% interest (probably less if you pay earlier) might not be too large if you are in a state of emergency.

The problem is when people are so financially illiterate and their IQ is so low that they cannot make good decisions. So, the question is, to what extent should the government protect people from their own stupidity?

“The aliens on Mars cloned Hillary Clinton.” - Turd Furgeson

Perfect example of the poor gets screwed even more than everybody else…

This is a well established market in UK. These payday lenders make a fortune!! Imagine at >150% APR, more than half your loans can go pop and your still making money across the whole book. I’ve seen some lenders charge 8% for a week!!.. Over 1000% APR..

I have no issue from a contractual point of view but in practice it is a predatory business targeting people who are already in dire straits.

^First, let’s all agree that a bank won’t loan them any money.  

That being said, is it better for them to have A.) Speedy Cash, B.) a loan shark from the street, or C.) no credit at all?  

82 > 87
Simple math.

In most cases probably C.

one of my councilman millionaire buddies owns multiple car dealerships told me that he doesnt really sell the car at much of a profit. he makes most of his money by charging high APRs on people with no credit. 

I love my cheese. I got to have my cheddar.

Predatory lending might target vulnerable people, but vulnerable people also are in a bad position where they need special services. So, if you are a rational, intelligent person who somehow needs $5k today for an emergency and you have no other alternatives, then someone should be allowed to service you at a market rate. If you make the decision to pursue these services, then that decision is optimal for you, and government restrictions on these services will only worsen your situation.

However, many people in this sort of situation usually are not rational, intelligent or well informed. They are in constant financial distress due to poor planning, lack of knowledge, and inability to make good decisions. So, we need to decide if the government needs to tell these people how to behave through regulations, because the people are self destructive if left to their own devices.

“The aliens on Mars cloned Hillary Clinton.” - Turd Furgeson

What is lost in all this is the high rate of default rate on the loans. 

Would you want to lend your money to people that are seeking these type of loans for anything less than Speedy Cash is charging with essentially no collateral? If so, maybe you can start up a business for yourself. 

I feel like the free market system (such as it is here in the US) has worked this out. If there was an opportunity to lend to higher risk people at lower rates, why hasn’t someone done it? Come in a take over the market by undercutting the average payday loan shop. You could still charge high interest rates, just advertise that they’re lower than Speedy Cash and the like. 

Since it hasn’t been done, I’m assume it’s not profitable. 

ohai wrote:

So, we need to decide if the government needs to tell these people how to behave through regulations, because the people are self destructive if left to their own devices.

Are you suggesting that the government telling them how to live is somehow morally or financially preferable to individual freedom of choice?  

You have a much higher opinion of the government than I have.  

82 > 87
Simple math.

ohai wrote:

Ok, it’s a valid point that people might need some short term cash under some circumstances. Maybe the 8% interest (probably less if you pay earlier) might not be too large if you are in a state of emergency.

The problem is when people are so financially illiterate and their IQ is so low that they cannot make good decisions. So, the question is, to what extent should the government protect people from their own stupidity?

I’m fairly well versed in banking and I agree with Greenman, but I do not agree the market without government intervention would be optimal.

Point one is not all loans are meant to be recurring, which makes APR calculations sometimes seem very high.

The second point is that the government already closely regulates how the terms and cost of the loan must be disclosed to the customer. I’m not certain there is much more the government can do without being too intrusive. For example, in mortgages they’ve made it where basically the lender can be at fault if the borrower agrees but then screws up. This has never made sense to me.

But the market does not encourage disclosure. I think the government mandating disclosure that’s easy to understand on terms and cost is very important for a functioning loan market.  I believe government should be involved in ensuring decisions are made with all the information disclosed easily. But we should allow any form of lending that is profitable under those disclosures to exist. 

The government as an organization is probably not as intelligent as the median person - or at least it’s inefficiencies produce a result that is worse than what the median person could have produced. However, the bottom barrel of people are probably so prone to bad decisions that the government can protect them from their own ineptitude. You must admit that there are at least some people in the US who are so bad at decision making that it would be in their interests to surrender some or all of their decision making discretion to another party.

rawraw - yes, a regulated system would be a bit less efficient overall. However, the objective of such regulation would be to protect a small number of people from extreme loss, which is assumed to be weighted heavier than a small cost to others. I expect some people here to argue on the merits of this principle. Regarding disclosures - they will protect these bottom level consumers a little bit, but not fully. I mean, you can print a picture of cancerous mouths on cigarette packages, and people still buy them.

“The aliens on Mars cloned Hillary Clinton.” - Turd Furgeson

they target hispanics a lot too. i always see se habla espanol!

I love my cheese. I got to have my cheddar.

If you are in favor of banning these lending practices then you should be in favor of banning student loans to chumps pursuing useless liberal arts degrees (Women’s studies, Chicano literature, underwater basket weaving). Probably better luck getting your money back from a payday loan.

Oh no, you don't want to mess with a guy thats riding on a buffalo.

wow being born poor or stupid should give someone else the right to take advantage of you

"You want a quote? Haven’t I written enough already???"

RIP

^it doesnt give a person the right, but it definitely opens up opportunities.

also to ohai’s point. there are many people who are definitely uninformed idiots that are hustled by these people. my friend almost got hustled to pay 15% interest, i told him das crazy, took him to a regular bank and got it down to 5%, not great but manageable.

hispanics really do get ****ed though by financing even when their credit is nice, they went to a great school, and have a good paying job.

my opinion, dumb people will always become poor cuz they’ll always get played. so as dj khaled would say, dont ever play yourself.

I love my cheese. I got to have my cheddar.

el_macca17 wrote:

I have no issue from a contractual point of view but in practice it is a predatory business targeting people who are already in dire straits.

predatory if they were forcing people to take loans they didnt need maybe. but willing buyer willing seller, high risk loans come with high interest rates, and these are the riskiest of the risky. i dont see why this is so controversial

Does anybody have any idea how much these “predatory lenders who seek to steal from and take advantage of the poor” actually make?  I honestly have no idea.  

82 > 87
Simple math.

Greenman72 wrote:

Does anybody have any idea how much these “predatory lenders who seek to steal from and take advantage of the poor” actually make?  I honestly have no idea.  

There was a guy here in KC that ran a truly predatory lending agency. He got busted last year. Actually met the guy a couple times. Anyway, over the course of about 15 years he personally made about $1.2B. 

Another guy I know much better ran a legit payday loan operation (though he did so out of the Bahamas, so maybe it’s just “semi-legit”) and he was making about $18 million a month. He retired a couple years ago. Decided it was too shady and he made plenty of money so he got out.

^Wow.  Not what I expected to hear.  I expected (based on zero evidence) to hear that these payday loan companies were just barely cutting it.  

Of course, Sweep’s evidence is anecdotal and not statistical.  But still….

edit - Not that profitability of the business should dictate whether it is an ethical way to make money.  But if the guy who owns Speedy Cash makes $50k per year, I immediately think differently than if he makes $20m per year.  

82 > 87
Simple math.

the problem with this form of lending is that many people in somewhat precarious situations put themselves in an outright precarious situation by taking the loan. they go from possibly going bankrupt to guaranteed going bankrupt the minute they sign the docs for the loan. these companies put many people so deep in a hole they otherwise could’ve avoided if they hadn’t been able to access this additional credit. the industry also employs a lot of people in something very unproductive so its an economic drag. my understanding is that these firms all rise at the same time and then most of them go bankrupt in recession.

i have never met a person who uses these cash call cha chingggggg. but i actually live pretty close to 1. maybe i should do some investigative af reporting.

I love my cheese. I got to have my cheddar.

yea go grind on the teller, tell us what u find out

"You want a quote? Haven’t I written enough already???"

RIP