In Stickel v. Harris (1987) 196 Cal. App. 3d 575, after a licensed broker approached Stickel about investing in a real estate development by a yet-to-be-formed joint venture, she loaned funds at 30 percent. When the borrowers defaulted, Stickel successfully sued to recover the principal and interest at the agreed-upon rate. The appellate court upheld the lender's recovery, finding the broker did not solicit the loan on his own behalf but arranged the loan as a representative of the joint venture. He did not forfeit his exempt status just because he joined the joint venture. ( Stickel v. Harris, supra, 196 Cal. App. 3d at p. 585.) By obtaining the necessary capital for the joint venture, he provided "a vital service from which all involved, including himself, would benefit." (Ibid.) The broker expected to be paid from the profits of the venture, and "anticipated profits qualify as compensation. " (Ibid.)