TRMA’s recent Summer 2011 Conference in San Francisco was another great, insightful event. Experian’s own Greg Carmean gave a presentation regarding the issues involved in providing credit to small-business owners. I recently interviewed Greg to get his impressions about last month’s conference. KM: I’m speaking with Experian Program Manager, Greg Carmean, who spoke at TRMA’s Summer Conference. Hi, Greg. GC: Hi, Kathy. KM: Greg, I know I’ve interviewed you before, but can you please remind everyone what your role is here at Experian? GC: Sure, I’m a Program Manager on the Small Business Credit Share side. I work with small- and medium-size companies, including telecom and cable companies, to reduce credit risk and get more value from their data. KM: Thanks, Greg. So last month, you spoke at TRMA’s Summer Conference. What did you discuss? GC: My presentation was entitled, “Beyond Consumer Credit – Providing a More Comprehensive Assessment of Small-Business Owners.” I talked about how traditional risk management tools can provide a point-in-time look at a business owner, but often fail to show the broader picture of the risk associated with all of their current and previous businesses. There is 3-4 times more fraud in small business than in consumer. Business identity theft has become a bigger issue, Tax ID verification is a common problem, and there’s a lot of concern about agents bringing in fraudulent accounts. KM: Why did you choose this particular topic?   GC: Well, Kathy, small business is seen as a large area of opportunity, but there can be a lot of difficulty involved in validation, especially when it comes to remote authentication and new businesses. KM: Would you say there’s more fraud in small business than on the consumer side? GC: Believe it or not, there is 3-4 times more fraud in small business than in consumer. Business identity theft has become a bigger issue, Tax ID verification is a common problem, and there’s a lot of concern about agents bringing in fraudulent accounts. Many telecom and cable companies are beginning to adopt more aggressive, manual processes to lower the risk of fraud. Unfortunately, that usually results in lower activation. KM: What can be done about it?   GC: Many telecom and cable companies are beginning to adopt more aggressive, manual processes to lower the risk of fraud. Unfortunately, that usually results in lower activation. KM: Sounds like it can be frustrating! GC: It can be, especially for the salespeople who bring in an account, and then find it’s not approved for service. Sometimes clients will pass a fraud check, but not a credit check. One of the topics I touched on is better tools that more accurately identify a small business owner's risk across all of their current and previous businesses to alleviate some of these problems. KM: Is there anything else telecom and cable companies should be doing? GC: I think the best risk-mitigation tool when it comes to account acquisition is leveraging information about both the small business and its owner. As they say, knowledge is power. KM: Definitely! Thanks again for your time today, Greg. Share your thoughts! If you attended TRMA’s Summer Conference, and especially if you attended Greg Carmean’s session, we’d love to hear from you. Please share your thoughts by commenting on this blog post. All of us at Experian look forward to seeing you at TRMA’s Fall Conference in Dallas, Texas, on September 20 – 21, 2011.

By: Staci Baker The Durbin Amendment, according to Wikipedia, gave the Federal Reserve the power to regulate debit card interchange fees. The amendment, which will have a profound impact on banks, merchants and anyone who holds a debit card will take effect on October 1, 2011 rather than the originally announced July 21, 2011, which will allow banks additional time to implement the new regulations. The Durbin Amendment states that card networks, such as Visa and Mastercard, will include an interchange fee of 21 cents per transaction, and must allow debit cards to be processed on at least two independent networks. This will cost banks roughly $9.4 billion annually according to CardHub.com. As stipulated in the Amendment, institutions with less than $10 billion in assets are exempt from the cap. In preparation for the Durbin Amendment, several banks have begun to impose new fees on checking accounts, end reward programs, raise minimum balance requirements and have threatened to cap transaction amounts for debit card transactions at $50 to $100 in order to recoup some of the earnings they are expected to lose. These new regulations will be a blow to already hurting consumers as their out of wallet expenses keep increasing. As you can see, The Durbin Amendment, which is meant to help consumers, will instead have the cost from the loss of interchange fees passed along in other forms. And, the loss of revenue will greatly impact the bottom line of banking institutions. Who will be the bigger winner with this new amendment – the consumer, merchants or the banks? Will banks be able to lower the cost of credit to an amount that will entice consumers away from their debit cards and to use their credit cards again? I think it is still far too soon to tell. But, I think over the next few months, we will see consumers use payment methods in a new way as both consumers and banks come to a middle ground that will minimize risk levels for all parties. Consumers will still need to shop and bankers will still need their tools utilized. What are you doing to prepare for The Durbin Amendment?

Every communication company wants to inoculate its portfolio against bad debt, late payments and painful collections. But many still use traditional generic risk models to uncover potential problems, either because they’ve always used generics or because they see their limited predictive abilities as adequate enough. Generalization dilutes results The main problem with generics, however, is how they generalize consumers’ payment behavior and delinquencies across credit cards, mortgages, auto loans and other products. They do not include payment and behavioral data focused on actual communications customers only. Moreover, their scoring methodologies can be too broad to provide the performance, lift or behavioral insights today’s providers strive to attain. Advantages of industry-specific models Communications-specific modeling can be more predictive, if you want to know who’s more likely to prioritize their phone bill and remit promptly, and who’s not. In multiple market validations, pitting an optimized industry-specific model against traditional generic products, Experian’s Tele-Risk ModelSM and Telecommunications, Energy and Cable (TEC) Risk ModelSM more accurately predicted the likelihood of future serious delinquent or derogatory payment behavior. Compared with generics, they also: Provided a stronger separation of good and bad accounts More precisely classified good vs. bad risk through improved rank ordering Accurately scored more consumers than a generic score that might have otherwise been considered unscorable Anatomy of a risk score These industry risk models are built and optimized using TEC-specific data elements and sample populations, which makes them measurably more predictive for evaluating new or existing communications customers. Optimization also helps identify other potentially troublesome segments, including those that might require special handling during on boarding, “turn ons,” or managing delinquency. Check the vital signs To assess the health of your portfolio, ask a few simple questions: Does your risk model reflect unique behaviors of actual communications customers? Is overly generic data suppressing lift and masking hidden risk? Could you score more files that are currently deemed unscorable? Unless the answer is ‘yes’ to all, your model probably needs a check-up—stat.