Whatever philosophical complaints you have about the check cashing business, CashNetUSA was a well run, professional business with great technology.<p>I interviewed at CashNetUSA last year. It was the second most-appealing job I've ever been offered (I interviewed for my current job, the most appealing, at the same time so I didn't end up working there). They had a great tech team, extremely smart and experienced guys. They employed 400 people (mostly call-center reps) and paid well (not sure how they're doing post-bust). They sponsored and hosted meetings for the Chicago Lisp User Group when we were active.<p>Site in RoR, they programmed their own call center using Asterisk, self-managed Linux infrastructure, quants generating real-time risk assessments for customers to determine individualized rates, etc.
I wished the article explained a little better why his business was not shady. From the article, it doesn't sound much different from the paycheck cashing places...<p>Maybe his new real estate business is more respectable but it was made possible by his previous business.<p>Can anyone explain why we should look up to him? I understand that there might be a need for "payday loans" but it still looks like exploitation.
He was an angel investor for a start-up founded by two friends of mine. A very decent guy, with high moral and ethical standards. There can always be an exception to the rule - even in the cash loan business.
I'm watching The Merchant of Venice right now, then I pop over here and read an article about a 28 year old Jew from Chicago who made millions of dollars lending people money at an extortionate rate. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that; I'd do it myself had I but the wherewithal. I just found it funny. Like, you know his friends have to mention it to him occasionally, rib-jab style. Heh.
Seeing Woods's law play out is always amusing.<p>"Whenever the private sector introduces an innovation that makes the poor better off than they would have been without it, or that offers benefits or terms that no one else is prepared to offer them, someone—in the name of helping the poor—will call for curbing or abolishing it."<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Woods#Woods.27s_Law" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Woods#Woods.27s_Law</a>
Let's do a little research. The trader in the article, David Shorr, lists himself as a CashNetUSA founder on linkedin.<p><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/ppl/webprofile?action=vmi&id=6599295&pvs=pp&authToken=AWoO&authType=name&trk=ppro_viewmore&lnk=vw_pprofile" rel="nofollow">http://www.linkedin.com/ppl/webprofile?action=vmi&id=659...</a><p>He also appears as a manager in some of the SEC documentation.<p><a href="http://searchwww.sec.gov/EDGARFSClient/jsp/EDGAR_Query_Result.jsp?queryString=%22david%20shorr%22&queryForm=1&isAdv=1&numResults=10#topAnchor" rel="nofollow">http://searchwww.sec.gov/EDGARFSClient/jsp/EDGAR_Query_Resul...</a><p>David Shorr is 45 according to pipl.com<p>While Mr. Goldstein was a founder, he wasn't the only founder, and he had some more senior, connected talent to help him.
Fail. We don't need another subprime lender. This country has seen enough shenanigans from IndyMac, Countrywide, and the other clowns on Wall St. Entrepreneurs, find something else to create because this is a lousy way to make money and taxpayers are done with bailouts.<p>If you still want to do finance, see this link from HBS for ideas on how to build a nontoxic, sustainable form of it:<p><a href="http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/haque/2009/04/manifesto.html" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/haque/2009/04/manifesto.htm...</a>
This guy might be the best guy in the world but payday loans are predatory lending and regardless of the situation, puts people in a worse spot than they were before.<p>Depending on the situation, they can charge over 1,000% interest. If payday loans were to charge 30% interest they'd still be able to cover the people that wouldn't pay.<p>It's a dumb saying but "don't be evil" springs to mind. Taking money off of the backs of the people that can least afford it isn't capitalism, it's greed.
Rob the poor when they need loans, then snap up all the properties in distress and rent them out with high technical proficiency. Hmmm, if you don't see the <i>serious</i> problems here you should be asking yourself some really tough questions about where the state of your personal ethics is.