If the business is precisely the allocation of idle, unused capital to potentially profitable businesses who happens to need it to be developed to their maximum capacity, it does indeed make sense to get indebted. The profitability of the allocator comes from taking a cut from the maximized profitability of the capitalized business, and so he can share that cut with his lender, the capitalist.
I know, your concern is that this scheme has risks attached and you can't understand how they claim that the lender isn't at a risk. Yes, this is the weak point of their business as I can understand it (if his business really is what they say it is, because I don't have that as a fact, but I tend to believe that at least Patrick and Kluge are doing what they say they're doing). The lender is effectively taking a big risk, and all that jazz about some "guarantee" or "insurance" comes down as soon as anything goes wrong, and a lot of things can go wrong...
Maybe his profits aren't that great. Nor are those of his lenders, if you take into account all the risks attached... Maybe that's precisely the point that they are realizing now...
Edit: s/lendee/lender/ I confused the terms...