webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Nov 14, 2015 16:58:13 GMT
It may help MT and also hesitating lenders to have some idea of how much is likely to be pledged by the cut-off.
|
|
paulg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 312 
Likes: 189
|
Post by paulg on Nov 14, 2015 18:03:59 GMT
Shouldn't there be an option for 2k-5k ?
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Nov 14, 2015 18:38:09 GMT
Shouldn't there be an option for 2k-5k ? Yes but I don't think I can modify the poll? Anyone in this bracket please toss a coin and go for the one above or below. Sorry.
|
|
madpierre
Member of DD Central
Posts: 303
Likes: 374
|
Post by madpierre on Nov 14, 2015 19:46:11 GMT
What might help more is two polls - the second being if there was an SM in place by the cut off 
Personally the SM might encourage me to put slightly more in but only if the SM was as assured as with SS. So in that case maybe a third poll might be required 
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Nov 14, 2015 21:14:02 GMT
What might help more is two polls - the second being if there was an SM in place by the cut off
Personally the SM might encourage me to put slightly more in but only if the SM was as assured as with SS. So in that case maybe a third poll might be required forgive me, but the question of whether there the SM will be in place prior to, coincident to, or shortly afterwards strikes me as an enormous red herring. So I must be missing something. We know there is an SM coming up, and probably within a few weeks. An SM is only as useful as its liquidity. And that is dependent on the number of active investors X the size of their wallets/appetite. I think it is reasonable to assume that the vast majority of the current MT lender base will invest up to their max desired on the original loan listing (excepting those that for some reason are unattached to the connected world for the listing duration). So why is it rational to 'invest more than I would otherwise do' conditional on there being an SM in place prior to, but not 'soon afterwards/relatively near term' ? The punt one would be taking is on the combinaton an SM AND a significant increase in MT lenders to provide the liquidity to make the SM meaningful. The latter is unlikely to occur at the same speed as the arrival of an SM. If one was serious about taking an outsize position, I would be far more interested in MTs statements on marketing plan to acquire new lenders than I would be as to whether the promised SM is going to appear at -1, 0, +1, +2 weeks relative to loan completion.
|
|
trevor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 556
Likes: 379
|
Post by trevor on Nov 14, 2015 21:25:04 GMT
3 investors saying 75-100k! It'll be interesting to see if this really happens.
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Nov 14, 2015 21:30:39 GMT
3 investors saying 75-100k! It'll be interesting to see if this really happens. Only one when I looked
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,886
Likes: 11,109
|
Post by ilmoro on Nov 14, 2015 21:32:19 GMT
What might help more is two polls - the second being if there was an SM in place by the cut off
Personally the SM might encourage me to put slightly more in but only if the SM was as assured as with SS. So in that case maybe a third poll might be required forgive me, but the question of whether there the SM will be in place prior to, coincident to, or shortly afterwards strikes me as an enormous red herring. So I must be missing something. We know there is an SM coming up, and probably within a few weeks. An SM is only as useful as its liquidity. And that is dependent on the number of active investors X the size of their wallets/appetite. I think it is reasonable to assume that the vast majority of the current MT lender base will invest up to their max desired on the original loan listing (excepting those that for some reason are unattached to the connected world for the listing duration). So why is it rational to 'invest more than I would otherwise do' conditional on there being an SM in place prior to, but not 'soon afterwards/relatively near term' ? The punt one would be taking is on the combinaton an SM AND a significant increase in MT lenders to provide the liquidity to make the SM meaningful. The latter is unlikely to occur at the same speed as the arrival of an SM. If one was serious about taking an outsize position, I would be far more interested in MTs statements on marketing plan to acquire new lenders than I would be as to whether the promised SM is going to appear at -1, 0, +1, +2 weeks relative to loan completion. Excellent points. Im pretty sure the early PBLs didnt fill instantly on SS despite the avaliability of a SM and cashback as the lender base wasnt broad enough. The advantage MT has over early SS is that people generally have confidence in the platform and model which they didnt initially when SS moved from boats to property as noone knew SS competence in this area.
|
|
madpierre
Member of DD Central
Posts: 303
Likes: 374
|
Post by madpierre on Nov 15, 2015 9:55:50 GMT
forgive me, but the question of whether there the SM will be in place prior to, coincident to, or shortly afterwards strikes me as an enormous red herring. So I must be missing something. We know there is an SM coming up, and probably within a few weeks. An SM is only as useful as its liquidity. And that is dependent on the number of active investors X the size of their wallets/appetite. I think it is reasonable to assume that the vast majority of the current MT lender base will invest up to their max desired on the original loan listing (excepting those that for some reason are unattached to the connected world for the listing duration). So why is it rational to 'invest more than I would otherwise do' conditional on there being an SM in place prior to, but not 'soon afterwards/relatively near term' ? The punt one would be taking is on the combinaton an SM AND a significant increase in MT lenders to provide the liquidity to make the SM meaningful. The latter is unlikely to occur at the same speed as the arrival of an SM. If one was serious about taking an outsize position, I would be far more interested in MTs statements on marketing plan to acquire new lenders than I would be as to whether the promised SM is going to appear at -1, 0, +1, +2 weeks relative to loan completion. Excellent points. Im pretty sure the early PBLs didnt fill instantly on SS despite the avaliability of a SM and cashback as the lender base wasnt broad enough. The advantage MT has over early SS is that people generally have confidence in the platform and model which they didnt initially when SS moved from boats to property as noone knew SS competence in this area. The above is precisely what I was implying though the concise but abstruse deployment of this useful little emoticon -
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 5,791
|
Post by duck on Nov 16, 2015 4:46:18 GMT
It may help MT and also hesitating lenders to have some idea of how much is likely to be pledged by the cut-off. Whilst a fair indicator to compare the lender base numbers with pledges, there will be circumstances where one lender will have several accounts and therefore appear to be more than one lender. For instance I have personal, business and my partners accounts (she of course has total control of the money/investments as per HMRC requirements) on several platforms. So whilst I personally might not make an investment into a particular loan (usually for tax reasons) one or both of the other accounts might invest. My business cash flow requirements are different to my personal requirements so sometimes the business will pass over a good loan simply for that reason.
Probably not a very common situation but even so it will skew estimates.
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,561
Likes: 1,170
|
Post by shimself on Nov 16, 2015 8:12:00 GMT
You could fix the vote to allow <<<<2K or zero to be precise.
It's just too big a leap for the platform for me, and the borrower seems to have been a bit tricksy (not majorly) with their first SS loan.
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Nov 17, 2015 9:43:12 GMT
... the borrower seems to have been a bit tricksy (not majorly) with their first SS loan. Yes, but this seems to be to the advantage of the MT loan and leaves the SS loan a bit more vulnerable. If it draws down and if the SS SM remains liquid it might pay investors in the SS loan to switch to the MT one, if they agree with my analysis (do your own DD etc blah blah)
|
|
merlin
Minor shareholder in Assetz and many other companies.
Posts: 902
Likes: 302
|
Post by merlin on Nov 17, 2015 10:11:27 GMT
I was taught to be cautious. So as this is the first "big property loan" loan from this provider I have put £1k in. Could have put a lot more in had I built up sufficient confidence. Took the same route with other providers SS, AC, FS, etc.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Nov 17, 2015 14:16:41 GMT
... the borrower seems to have been a bit tricksy (not majorly) with their first SS loan. Yes, but this seems to be to the advantage of the MT loan and leaves the SS loan a bit more vulnerable. If it draws down and if the SS SM remains liquid it might pay investors in the SS loan to switch to the MT one, if they agree with my analysis (do your own DD etc blah blah) Maybe but the SS loan is under the old security, so you aren't really lending directly to this borrower, and with SS you have the provision fund as protection to factor in. Secondly I have thought about lending on this loan, but to do so I need to sell an existing loan lose interest and the loan might not even go ahead, leaving me with cash with no home, so more dead time. Agreed the security looks slightly better here, but could be repaid quickly from sales. I also worry about platform risk, being such a small platform.
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Nov 17, 2015 18:15:00 GMT
Yes, but this seems to be to the advantage of the MT loan and leaves the SS loan a bit more vulnerable. If it draws down and if the SS SM remains liquid it might pay investors in the SS loan to switch to the MT one, if they agree with my analysis (do your own DD etc blah blah) , so you aren't really lending directly to this borrower, and with SS you have the provision fund as protection to factor in. Secondly I have thought about lending on this loan, but to do so I need to sell an existing loan lose interest and the loan might not even go ahead, leaving me with cash with no home, so more dead time. Agreed the security looks slightly better here, but could be repaid quickly from sales. I also worry about platform risk, being such a small platform. At the moment, but SS say they will move all loans on to the new terms.
|
|
