Find us elsewhere
Join Now Member Login

Alimony /Child Support Resellers $1.6Billion Served

 
New Topic
Post Reply
Follow Topic
Page of 1
  • Author
  • Message
 
Virtecom

posts: 18

Apr 20, 2007 1:13 PM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote

I had a discussion with a buddy of mine regarding CSE in Florida. The Dept. of Revenue charges the payee $4-11 fee for the privilege of dispersing a check. Now in my state “Florida Department of Revenue - Child Support Enforcement; Enforces child support law on behalf of about 975000 children, collecting $1.16 billion in FY06”

So let’s break this down:

·         975,000 orders

·         Avg. $7.50/check=$7,312,500 per month

·         $87,750,000 to put a check in the mail

·         Assume 20% admin cost and it’s a nice racket

  A part of my business is electronic payments i.e. debit/credit cards. In my industry the debit card has evolved into a payment card with the selling point being that it lowers the admin cost to employers. As I see it there are a couple of opportunities here:

·         Privatizing the payment system

·         Structured Settlements

The first item is purely a logistics issue and let’s says the vendor charges a lesser fee based on volume. I know that a private corp. can get the job done at 50% the cost now.

The second is the real cherry here: If you don’t know what structured settlements are -This is a settlement where the injured party may receive some of the money owed up front and the remaining is paid in installments, (i.e. annually, semiannually, quarterly).

The avg. child support judgment is roughly $600/month. Multiply this by 15 years ($108,000 over 15 years) The settlement company offers the recipient an $86,400 (80%) cash out. That’s a $21,600 profit for the company. Now if this company takes those proceeds and invest them they can potentially net a tidy sum after all is said and done.

The USP (Unique Selling Proposition) could be:

·         Guaranteed income

·         LTV

·         Lump sum payments etc.

·         Mediations

·         Bonding Services (never be arrested for arrearage)

The Biz op could be:

Agent structure with commissions based on building a network of independent Agents.

·         Commission Structure:

·         $25 fee/applicant

·         1 full month of CS Payment and 20% of 1 month for term

I see a huge opportunity here or am I Q-razy?Wacko

 

 

 

 

 

-------------------------

Leonard Campbell
Dir. Business Development
leonard.campbell@gmail.com

InactiveMember

posts: 705

Apr 22, 2007 2:40 PM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote

Hmm. This sounds like a great idea but it also sounds a bit dirty. Of course not paying child support is *really* dirty. I`m surprised the hedge funds aren`t in this business already. Basically this is the same as buying/selling derivatives. The downside risk in this case is non-payment ... which is a huge risk with respect to child support. You`d need a seriously qualified risk management professional to advise you on managing downside.

That’s a $21,600 profit...

Let`s not forget that this profit is over 15 years or $1440/annum. Not as attractive unless the skew was very shallow indeed. The risk each year is $5700. The question here is cashflow, and it seems like a very risky proposition indeed. Securitizing child support cashflow is really dicey in my opinion. The business takes 100% of the risk for 20% reward. More commonly, especially in financial services, the business takes 20% and the client takes 100% of the risk.

Model-wise, child support is structured to provide monthly cashflow to the parent of the child. Lump sum payouts could be misspent. This already happens to monthly payments and it`s the child who suffers as a result.

It might be better to snip the lump sum apart into monthly payments. This also reduces your downside because you`re only liable for cash on a monthly basis. Instead of taking an $86,000 risk you spread your risk out over 15 years, into 180 risk units. Higher risk granularity means that a great many things have to go wrong before you`re in financial trouble. The statistical chances of something going wrong are much more manageable if you have 180 risk units x 10,000 clients [1.8 million risk units] than if you have 10,000 risk units [one for each client].

[ Also. Who would supply the initial liquidity for the buyouts? This idea is very easy to duplicate. A bank or fund could decide to get into this business very quickly and then you`d have a price war. ]

InactiveMember

posts: 705

Apr 22, 2007 2:46 PM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote

p.s. Novel idea. A rare thing these days.

Virtecom

posts: 18

Apr 30, 2007 10:20 PM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote
Yes I agree the risk factor is high but statistically speaking more people pay than don`t pay. You only hear about the ones that don`t. The key would be to get a majority into this type of program and the funding risk minimized. Also I would only pay 10 out of 12 months and put those funds into a bond of some sort as a hedge fund. I would only garantee the payout to recipient but her payment will still be monthly. I don`t have all the bugs worked out but my instincts tell me there`s something there.

-------------------------

Leonard Campbell
Dir. Business Development
leonard.campbell@gmail.com

InactiveMember

posts: 705

May 02, 2007 4:41 AM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote
I am going to correct some of your financial misconceptions ... just as a favor.

1. Putting the funds into bonds is not a hedge. Classically, hedging is the adoption of long and short positions designed to produce a return regardless of the direction of the market. Investing these funds in a single class of securities is not a hedge. Using the funds to take a long position in one security and short position in another security is a hedge. The risk in your model can be hedged but that is a long explanation that I don`t have time to write.

2. If you think that your funding risk is minimized ... converted from an unknown amount of risk to the minimal amount of risk ... I think you should read a few books on finance. I can recommend several if you like. If you`re making monthly payments to a recipient then you`ll have to have a lot of cash on hand every month, right? The structure you propose has a lot of underlying risks that you have obviously not considered and your current model does not have the financial strength to mitigate these risks. Here`s a simple diagram:

[Capital] [Unkown Risk] [Profit]

Do you know where you sit with respect to risk? On the right or left? Again, from my previous post: successful financial services models tend to take a percentage of the profit while placing 100% of the risk onto the consumer. In this case you`re taking 100% of the risk for a long period and in order to do something like this you need a lot of liquidity and excellent risk management. Usually this would take the form of an asset into which the risk is transferred. A mortgage is a risky proposition but the risk in that equation is transferred into the house. The market value of the house literally gobbles up risk. [Ask the greedy vultures who handed out those subprime mortgages about the importance of good risk management. That is, if their phones haven`t been turned off yet.]

3. Overall this idea is a great example of financial engineering but ... this idea is tremendously easy for bigger, better funded competitors to copy. Tip of the day: they`ll try to eat your lunch!
Page of 1
Post Reply
 
.
Advertisement

Keep the Community Clean!

  • StartupNation forums should be used as a platform to learn, educate others, share stories, tips & tricks and to provide constructive feedback.
  • Please do not use the Forums for advertising & blatant self-promotion.
  • Please be respectful to other members and refrain from personal attacks and vulgar language.
  • StartupNation reserves the right to delete any message, reply, and/or member who violates our terms of use.
Read full terms of use
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement