|
Post by ruralres66 on Feb 4, 2017 11:40:52 GMT
Welcome back Westonkev..... No worries getting matters off your chest. Your loss is our gain....!
|
|
|
Post by nutfield on Feb 4, 2017 12:01:37 GMT
Since Kevin has been absent, the fears of some investors have taken on an almost paranoid tone at times. These negative thoughts are valuable, but it does need a more positive view to give the the non expert investor a more rounded picture. Welcome back Kevin!
|
|
rick24
Member of DD Central
Posts: 244
Likes: 138
|
Post by rick24 on Feb 4, 2017 13:47:21 GMT
Anthony Hilton: "Let’s be positive as peer-to-peer pain looms" in the Evening Standard 31st Jan 2017. Extract from larger article: Now, after a rule change, all lenders will be pooled if the fund is exhausted and the losses shared equally across the board, meaning in effect that the business will go into run-off. The final conclusion that "the business will go into run-off" seems to be precisely the opposite of what will happen, at least if the strategy works: the business will carry on trading and paying interest to lenders, albeit at a reduced rate for a certain time.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 955
Likes: 645
|
Post by alender on Feb 4, 2017 15:15:11 GMT
One of the questions is why is RS doing this now, from the released figures on the PF it looks to be under more pressure, if not why is RS lacking the confidence in the PF to cope now when it was confident in the past, especially as this is occurring during good times or do they know something we don’t.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 4, 2017 22:20:56 GMT
One of the questions is why is RS doing this now, from the released figures on the PF it looks to be under more pressure, if not why is RS lacking the confidence in the PF to cope now when it was confident in the past, especially as this is occurring during good times or do they know something we don’t. They are doing it now because the Resolution Event was never fit for purpose. Just read some of the older threads to see how much confusion and uncertainty surrounded when it would be called and what would happen in run-down. As I said on another thread, I think this T&C update is a very good change. It provides more certainty on what would happen if the PF wasn't thought sufficient, and gives management more room to make changes to address any potential shortfall rather than be forced into run-down. And very fair in terms of the fee-free get out. I mean even people that wanted out for whatever other unrelated reason can use this opportunity. The Resolution Event made sense at launch, but now 6 years later it needed a change to be more practical of potential reality. Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by bricktop on Feb 5, 2017 11:40:28 GMT
I have to agree with Kevin. It all makes sense to me and is quite logical. Timing is ok - yes coverage has been slipping but not off a cliff so formalising something that was announced 2 months ago now is fine.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Feb 5, 2017 14:04:10 GMT
Have to agree Kev, binary resolution provided confidence that RS was serious about safeguarding investments to win over early adopters but, as p2p and RS loan book has matured, the time has come to provide a flexible approach that will help ensure the longevity of RS (and subsequently lenders' funds - witness Z's weathering of the Great Recession with the capability to temporarily reduce returns). It's just great that this has afforded more experienced hands a free bail out to pursue a higher risk investment srategy if they so choose...TMP anyone?
|
|
toffeeboy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 505
Likes: 362
|
Post by toffeeboy on Feb 9, 2017 16:38:57 GMT
Have to agree Kev, binary resolution provided confidence that RS was serious about safeguarding investments to win over early adopters but, as p2p and RS loan book has matured, the time has come to provide a flexible approach that will help ensure the longevity of RS (and subsequently lenders' funds - witness Z's weathering of the Great Recession with the capability to temporarily reduce returns). It's just great that this has afforded more experienced hands a free bail out to pursue a higher risk investment srategy if they so choose...TMP anyone? Thankfully I came slightly late to the party and missed the struggle of 2008, I started at the end of 2008, but I don't think quoting Zopa here is relevant and the I might be wrong but the way you word it is incorrect. Firstly I don't think it is relevant because in 2008 Zopa didn't have their provision fund (safeguard) so the model was completely different which leads me to my second point.
As I said I joined later but I don't believe that Zopa reduced rates or anything to make it through 2008 without anyone losing capital as that wasn't the way their model worked back in them good old days. You set your rates to allow for receiving some bad debts so when a loan defaulted you didn't shout and scream, it was already allowed for in your higher lending rates. In 2008 when the s**t hit the fan, bad debt increased so anyone involved lost some money but everyone was covered by the interest they received nothing to do with Zopa moving money around. Some got lucky and had lower bad debts, some unlucky and got more but everyone made money because it had been allowed for in the interest rates.
Just reminiscing now about Zopa when you actually had control over what rate you wanted to receive and even the bidding wars that used to happen, ah the good old days. Speaking of bad debts that is the only reason still have any involvement in Zopa as I £40 in there that pays about 8p a month that I can't get out.
|
|
|
Post by tonybbpp on Feb 10, 2017 7:31:53 GMT
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,848
Likes: 11,077
|
Post by ilmoro on Feb 23, 2017 10:38:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Feb 23, 2017 13:11:32 GMT
This is idiotic. I have a large chunk of my funds with RS, but twice that sum earns < 1% in a protected account. If people really need an app to get them saving then P2P is not the first place to consider since emergency funds really need to be in a protected account. Furthermore the app developers must be taking a cut somewhere. Are Smartphone users really this stupid? Disclaimer: My wire attached phone functions as invented by A G Bell and meets all my phone needs!
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Feb 23, 2017 14:16:41 GMT
I don't get how it's 'smart algorithm' would detect that in a given month you've decided to set aside a few hundred pounds to make a manual one-off overpayment on your mortgage or reduce credit card debt, say. Presumably, it would whir into action and deposit said hundreds pounds into Ratesetter (at the prevailing 'Market Rate' of course) unless you catch it in time or take the time to tell it otherwise?
I'm all for smart tech, but this sounds like way too much hassle even for hands off people.
Edit: It reminds me a little of the 'Balance Extra' functionality in my Halifax bank account, which has the aspiration of telling me how much cash I have left until payday, despite me having no regular paydays at all and making scores of completely fluctuating larger and smaller deposits and withdrawals for P2P. Needless to say, that was turned off rather quickly. I think I'd much rather they'd have continued to pay me £5 a month reward as opposed to £3 as opposed to invest in that nonsense.
|
|
Neil_P2PBlog
P2P Blogger
Use @p2pblog to tag me :-)
Posts: 355
Likes: 209
|
Post by Neil_P2PBlog on Feb 23, 2017 14:38:57 GMT
Plum seems to be targeted at 'millenials' - so perhaps just tracks their bank account, works out which is the monthly salary, rental payment and a few bills, transport, creates a monthly average of food/ entertainment spend and then messages them on facebook to save the rest with their partners?
Would just need to work for a percentage of people who had standard spending patterns.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 1,444
|
Post by jlend on Apr 10, 2017 12:08:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2017 9:29:56 GMT
Can someone help clarify this news story and the details? Ratesetter's cofounder and COO has joined the board of a company (George Banco) which lends to "borrowers with poor or no credit history". Had Ratesetter been lending funds out to this George Banco company in order for it to then lend out? If so, that seems seriously unlike what I expected Ratesetter to be doing with investors' money. Edit: According to the article, yes, Ratesetter was lending George Banco money until this issue with the FCA came up. And apparently "The platform has lent a total of £310m to other lenders, of which £102m are currently outstanding." Do they mean outstanding as in, "yet to be paid back but all fine", or "could be in trouble"?!
|
|