|
Post by df on Oct 10, 2018 18:47:40 GMT
Loan amount: £1,600,000 Asset Value: £2,700,000 LTV: 59% Interest rate: 12% Max. Bid per 24 hours: £8000 Bid Restriction Duration: 24 hrs
6-months interest on this loan will be paid to lenders on drawdown and the secondary market will not be enabled for 6 months.
|
|
ptr120
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 1,346
|
Post by ptr120 on Oct 10, 2018 19:30:45 GMT
A new approach and clearly designed to manage the SM
|
|
|
Post by df on Oct 10, 2018 19:48:27 GMT
A new approach and clearly designed to manage the SM My first thought was - it is better for lenders because upfront 6 month interest can be reinvested straight away instead of waiting for monthly portions.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,843
Likes: 11,069
|
Post by ilmoro on Oct 10, 2018 19:54:23 GMT
The accounts being filed as a condition subsequent is a concern.
|
|
KoR_Wraith
Member of DD Central
Posts: 293
Likes: 297
|
Post by KoR_Wraith on Oct 10, 2018 21:52:50 GMT
Still to look into the valuation details but credit to MoneyThing for trying a new (and improved?) loan format.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Oct 11, 2018 3:54:56 GMT
The accounts being filed as a condition subsequent is a concern. As are all his other accounts.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Oct 11, 2018 3:56:36 GMT
Still to look into the valuation details but credit to MoneyThing for trying a new (and improved?) loan format. I’d imagine everyone dumping at 6m so we only have half the time available to sell, still will do wonders for the SM total in the interim
|
|
|
Post by funkymonkey on Oct 11, 2018 6:36:43 GMT
The borrower could be forgiven for his reason given for the accounts of this one company being overdue, but I wonder what the reason is for the other 3 of the borrowers companies also having overdue accounts? Looking at the Gazette notice, admin doesn't seem to be a strong point.......
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Oct 11, 2018 8:49:26 GMT
The borrower could be forgiven for his reason given for the accounts of this one company being overdue, but I wonder what the reason is for the other 3 of the borrowers companies also having overdue accounts? Looking at the Gazette notice, admin doesn't seem to be a strong point....... More than 3 (certainly previously anyway). Have a look at some of his other ventures with the prospective borrower too.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Oct 11, 2018 8:53:16 GMT
Still to look into the valuation details but credit to MoneyThing for trying a new (and improved?) loan format. I’d imagine everyone dumping at 6m so we only have half the time available to sell, still will do wonders for the SM total in the interim Other possible outcomes: - new lenders get excluded from existing loans and the opportunity for quicker diversification. - existing lenders are prevented from exit should the development not complete in the stipulated amount of weeks (think back to some other developments). Such niceties may not bother investors blinded by only having 94% of capital will be at risk. Of course, unless there were any future problems and we’re still stuck in the mother of all flips after six months.
|
|
|
Post by funkymonkey on Oct 11, 2018 9:22:38 GMT
Given the interest rate that the borrower is currently paying is not far off what he'll be paying MT when/if the debt is refinanced, what's the incentive for refinancing. Presumably the current financer isn't prepared to extend the extra £150k required to complete the project? I wonder why? If the accounts will be filed prior to the loan being drawn down, can they not be provided prior to the loan going live?
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 11, 2018 9:32:53 GMT
I've not had time as yet to study this in any detail, but some initial thoughts. 6-months interest on this loan will be paid to lenders on drawdown and the secondary market will not be enabled for 6 months. The accounts being filed as a condition subsequent is a concern. And if the accounts when filed raise concerns, lenders are then trapped in until a scramble to exit at the 6 month mark. This structure is possibly more attractive to smaller retail lenders for the increased AER and less so to larger professional investors who may wish to exit the loan via the SM before the implications of any issues in the accounts are more widely understood. The borrower could be forgiven for his reason given for the accounts of this one company being overdue, but I wonder what the reason is for the other 3 of the borrowers companies also having overdue accounts? Looking at the Gazette notice, admin doesn't seem to be a strong point....... My understanding is the borrower (person) is not the current owner of the company nor a current director, and therefore can't be held to be responsible for the failing of the previous director (and owner) to fulfil their statuory duties as a director at any of their companies.
|
|
liso
Member of DD Central
Posts: 389
Likes: 394
|
Post by liso on Oct 11, 2018 9:38:47 GMT
Given the interest rate that the borrower is currently paying is not far off what he'll be paying MT when/if the debt is refinanced, what's the incentive for refinancing. Presumably the current financer isn't prepared to extend the extra £150k required to complete the project? I wonder why? If MT's prospective borrower is not the owner of the company or a current director, that may explain the current financier being unwilling to extend the loan, but clarity would be appreciated if possible. MoneyThing
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 11, 2018 9:40:22 GMT
If the accounts will be filed prior to the loan being drawn down, can they not be provided prior to the loan going live?
Although the policy may have since changed, MT have previously stated that they do not provide management accounts of borrowing companies whose loans are secured by property asssets.
Whilst I view that policy as short-sighted, many borrowing companies are simply property holding SPVs and the action is often elsewhere rendering the accounts of the borrowing company itself of limited value.
|
|
|
Post by MoneyThing on Oct 11, 2018 9:42:12 GMT
Morning. Thanks all - please keep the posts/queries coming and we will look to capture them in a FAQs before the loan goes live. Regards, Ed.
|
|