Sikiritau is from Togo, she took a loan out to purchase supplies for her cosmetics business and plans to use part of her profits to finance the schooling of her three children.

Costs Involved in Microloans

 "There are three kinds of costs the MFI [Microfinance Institute]has to cover when it makes microloans. The first two, the cost of the money that it lends and the cost of loan defaults, are proportional to the amount lent. For instance, if the cost paid by the MFI for the money it lends is 10%, and it experiences defaults of 1% of the amount lent, then these two costs will total $11 for a loan of $100, and $55 for a loan of $500. An interest rate of 11% of the loan amount thus covers both these costs for either loan.

"The third type of cost, transaction costs, is not proportional to the amount lent. The transaction cost of the $500 loan is not much different from the transaction cost of the $100 loan. Both loans require roughly the same amount of staff time for meeting with the borrower to appraise the loan, processing the loan disbursement and repayments, and follow-up monitoring. Suppose that the transaction cost is $25 per loan and that the loans are for one year. To break even on the $500 loan, the MFI would need to collect interest of $50 + 5 + $25 = $80, which represents an annual interest rate of 16%. To break even on the $100 loan, the MFI would need to collect interest of $10 + 1 + $25 = $36, which is an interest rate of 36%. At first glance, a rate this high looks abusive to many people, especially when the clients are poor. But in fact, this interest rate simply reflects the basic reality that when loan sizes get very small, transaction costs loom larger because these costs can't be cut below certain minimums." (http://cgap.org)

 Profitability and Sustainability of MFIs

"Some worry that an excessive concern for profit in microfinance will lead MFIs away from poor clients to serve better-off clients who want larger loans. It is true that programs serving very poor clients are somewhat less profitable than those reaching better-off clients, but this may say more about managers' objectives than an inherent conflict between serving the very poor and profitability. MFIs serving the very poor are showing rapid financial improvement. Microfinance programs like Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee and ASA in Bangladesh have already demonstrated that very poor clients can be reached profitably: both institutions had profits of more than 4% of assets in 2000.

There are cases where microfinance cannot be made profitable, for example, where potential clients are extremely poor and risk-averse or live in remote areas with very low population density. In such settings, microfinance may require continuing subsidies. Whether microfinance is the best use of these subsidies will depend on evidence about its impact on the lives of these clients." (http://cgap.org)