TheDriver
Member of DD Central
Slightly bonkers
Posts: 493
Likes: 190
|
Post by TheDriver on Sept 13, 2018 4:17:08 GMT
Rolling used to repay in full each month, and the Repayment Schedule still reflects that policy; but now instead of it all appearing back in your Holding account the amortised capital remains on the original loan, while the associated capital repayment (and optionally interest) is forcibly queued for reinvestment. I think there are 2 ways of looking at this, either: 1. RS have decided for the sake of "simplicity" to not confuse us simple souls by showing us the split of capital in each category because it is all theoretically going to be relent in one way or other, so is irrelevant to us, or; 2. It highlights another of the ill-considered aspects of the implementation, in a half-baked revision as suggested by GSV3MIaC or possibly 2 justified by 1, allegedly "due to feedback from the majority of investors" !?! As adrian77 would say, "Answers on a digital postcard"!, although a comment by RateSetter would be interesting.
|
|
Stonk
Stonking
Posts: 735
Likes: 658
|
Post by Stonk on Sept 13, 2018 8:18:37 GMT
Rolling used to repay in full each month, and the Repayment Schedule still reflects that policy; but now instead of it all appearing back in your Holding account the amortised capital remains on the original loan, while the associated capital repayment (and optionally interest) is forcibly queued for reinvestment. I think there are 2 ways of looking at this, either: 1. RS have decided for the sake of "simplicity" to not confuse us simple souls by showing us the split of capital in each category because it is all theoretically going to be relent in one way or other, so is irrelevant to us, or; 2. It highlights another of the ill-considered aspects of the implementation, in a half-baked revision as suggested by GSV3MIaC or possibly 2 justified by 1, allegedly "due to feedback from the majority of investors" !?! As adrian77 would say, "Answers on a digital postcard"!, although a comment by RateSetter would be interesting.
The silly thing about the way it is implemented is that the Rolling loan does repay in full each month, and then there's an additional process tacked on afterwards to re-lend the remaining principal back to the original borrower. These processes are inseparable (but not simultaneous), and result in a brand new contract with a different ID, and an unnecessary transaction in your account history. This is different from the way the repayments are handled on the 5 Year market.
(Additionally, of course, there's also the creation of an order from the *repaid* principal, and optionally the interest -- which may or may not match).
It's a complete fudge. They should have spent a bit more time rearranging whatever needed rearranging to get it logically correct internally, and then they would have been able to present a full repayment schedule with the principal/interest split out for each payment, just as they can on 5 Year.
As it stands, the only way you really know precisely what the repaid and remaining principal amounts are is to wait until the repayment has occured and subtract the principal of the newly-created contract from the just-ended one.
|
|
|
Post by oppsididitagain on Sept 13, 2018 9:54:29 GMT
I am going to meet with RS today at the Q&A they invited investors/lenders too.
I will raise some of these points along with my own 'issues 'and let you know . I will suggest to RS that someone from RS take notes and post on the forum to hopefully clear these issues up .
|
|