investibod
Member of DD Central
Posts: 288
Likes: 152
|
Post by investibod on Jan 22, 2016 16:57:22 GMT
There has been basically no movement in the last ½ hour, so there was certainly enough for the initial rush. However, I agree 24 hours seems a bit unlikely 4 investors taking their maximum allowance could clear out the lot.
Only fair way that I can think of is to have a sort of pre-funding. Have a windows, say 24 hours before go live, where you pledge for what you want and pay up front. If it is oversubscribed, you get a portion and the remainder of your money back.
To stop people bidding for more than they want, it could be that the bids are fulfilled starting from the smallest and working up until the loan was full
|
|
Steerpike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,962
Likes: 1,680
|
Post by Steerpike on Jan 22, 2016 17:03:46 GMT
I have my fill of sub-prime car loans from previous tranches and my attempts to capture the gold ring failed due to time outs so I placed my shrapnel in one of the AEs after all.
|
|
investibod
Member of DD Central
Posts: 288
Likes: 152
|
Post by investibod on Jan 22, 2016 17:03:49 GMT
And the last bit of the 4th loan has now gone. I make that 64 minutes.
|
|
sam i am
Member of DD Central
Posts: 697
Likes: 555
|
Post by sam i am on Jan 22, 2016 17:06:39 GMT
Thanks Ed. I hope your prediction is at least partially correct. My selfish employer has decided that they own my time and has dragged me off to a meeting at 4pm tomorrow... Should you wish to receive an 'emergency call' during your meeting at 3.55pm - please email your number to support@...! Managed to log on with my iPad. A few strange looks but got away with it
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Jan 22, 2016 17:28:55 GMT
What a surprise! Those people able to fill their boots say no change needed, those who are unable to log on because they are performing brain surgery or something ask for something fairer.
|
|
derbyfella
Member of DD Central
Posts: 70
Likes: 45
|
Post by derbyfella on Jan 22, 2016 18:04:00 GMT
Got home at 5.45
:-(( Gutted
|
|
madpierre
Member of DD Central
Posts: 303
Likes: 374
|
Post by madpierre on Jan 22, 2016 19:00:31 GMT
Should you wish to receive an 'emergency call' during your meeting at 3.55pm - please email your number to support@...! Managed to log on with my iPad. A few strange looks but got away with it An inspired strategy Sam. Bravo Next time, for a small fee, contact the Shuang and he will arrange a power cut
|
|
david42
Member of DD Central
Posts: 419
Likes: 346
|
Post by david42 on Jan 22, 2016 20:04:25 GMT
Got home at 5.45
:-(( Gutted Moneything is my favourite platform at the moment and I managed to get what I wanted today. If Ed aims to grow the number of loans and broaden the investor base, the 1% restriction and 4 O'clock bunfight will alienate an increasing numbers of investors. Prefunding does not need the complexity we see on other platforms. On any loan, whether pipeline or current, the platform should accept my advance order regardless of what is available. Then, when some is available, it would share it out between outstanding orders up to the limit of the amount I had asked for, or my available cash, whichever is less. If Ed is aiming to increase the flow of loans, the benefit of accepting advance orders is: a) enable a wider range of investors to participate at times convenient to them. b) speed up sales in both primary and secondary markets - helpful at times when supply exceeds demand c) It would also remove any need for people to start writing bots, or the race to spot pictures of cookies and milkshakes that some of us are getting so much practice at on another platform.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Jan 22, 2016 20:52:51 GMT
The 1% restriction is there as this platform's alternative to the pre-allocation approach. I think it's a good way but 1% is now clearly too high to meet even a one day desired duration of loan availability for quite big loans.
What the bid restriction does besides allowing investing at a time convenient to the lender is tend to distribute more of the money to the investors who are investing least money. I think that's a good thing. It also provides certainty that you will get the maximum if that's what you're trying to do, provided the limit is set low enough to allow investing over sufficient time.
Ed's just not quite kept up with the growth of money availability in setting the limit, it used to do the job fine, just not doing so now. Easy enough to tweak it lower and that'll probably be able to do the job throughout 2016 with gradually reducing limits. And no surprise if Ed does have trouble sometimes, predicting the future is inherently quite tough. For this particular issue, better to err on the side of a too low limit than a too high one in my opinion, since no great harm is done if the loan is filled at the start of the second 24 hour period or even the third.
Eventually we might get to a situation where the average amount per lender in a new loan drops to some fairly low value, say £1, and sometime before that some thought about alternatives like a limit combined with a queue will be needed. There are quite a lot of potential complexities with queues relating to the ability of investors to use them to cherry-pick the most desirable loans so very careful attention to use of multiple queues for loans of different properties and other features is needed to have a good queue system - a lot of this was tried in various ways at Bondora though they never did get the queue granularity sufficiently fine to prevent cherry-picking. If it's much too coarse what happens instead is that lenders with the most liberal lending policies find their queue positions preferentially used for the least desirable loans and not the most desirable ones because those who want only shorter terms end up at the front of the queue for the shorter term loans, while those lending at 60 month have that resetting their position each time one comes in. Over at Bondora what used to happen in one iteration where terms were not in different queues was those who offered on 60 month loans as well as shorter ones tended to get almost all 60 month. I doubt that it's intuitively obvious to most people that this is what would happen. Some different potential issues at MoneyThing, this is just to illustrate some of the complexities of queues that might at first thought seem to be a simple solution. The queue as filter effect will probably be lower at MoneyThing because it's partly dependent on a fairly large flow of new loans. Still, a set of queues is likely to be a good solution once it's been tweaked sufficiently.
|
|
ben
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 589
|
Post by ben on Jan 22, 2016 21:01:02 GMT
I think the problem is that some loans are have gone far quicker then others one or two of the bigger loans have not gone for upwards of a week where as most of the portfolios go quick, they could maybe look at keeping the 1% for 24 hours for the larger loans but decreasing that for the portfolios
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jan 22, 2016 21:31:27 GMT
Seems pretty simple to me. The 1% max is now too high for loans below some level of loan value assuming that the objective is to at least stretch out availability to 24hrs + some small delta. MT have the data to work out approximately where that is. Loans below that leve but above some level which would otherwise leave everyone dealing in shrapnel should have the max bid restriction reduced to some new percentage. Again, MT have the data to make a good guess at what that should be. I'd suggest though that the floor should be no lower than £50. Occassionaly the max will be 'wrong' fior that loan and the hangover after 24 hours will be more than a small delta simply because of the loan characteristics. However history suggests that won't be a problem for MT has the excess will get mopped up PDQ.
This is a simple model and requires no pre-funding shenanigans or sw development to support. It just needs monitoring and tuning.
One can argue whether it should be 24 hours or 48 hours or even 12 hours, but the principle is pretty reasonable.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Jan 22, 2016 22:17:21 GMT
I think the problem is that some loans are have gone far quicker then others one or two of the bigger loans have not gone for upwards of a week where as most of the portfolios go quick, they could maybe look at keeping the 1% for 24 hours for the larger loans but decreasing that for the portfolios Yes that's part of it. Based on these loans it appears that a good next try might be 0.25% for loans of total value £300,000 for one place. For say £50,000 it might well take 0.05% as the next try, depending to some extent on estimated demand for the particular category of loan involved. The limit could be increased after a couple of days if desired. That'd hurt the convenience for some of the lenders and cause a fast finger situation at the time of the increase if it was an increase to unlimited, while say doubling each day after the first two might not have that effect.
|
|
dovap
Member of DD Central
Posts: 467
Likes: 410
|
Post by dovap on Jan 22, 2016 23:41:15 GMT
over a grand sat on the sm on these AEs at the mo
for the disgruntled unhappy with their lot
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 5,793
|
Post by duck on Jan 23, 2016 7:26:16 GMT
Just throwing a bit of a curved ball into the discussion of %'s timescales etc I wonder how much money is being 'discouraged' by the system at present?
Until mid last year my work involved no internet, no phones .... basically no contact with the outside world when in 'the office'. That didn't stop me investing in P2P/P2B (6 figure sum) but I had to choose platforms carefully. MT along with SS and FS were 3 I had to rule out. So rather than being one of the 'disgruntled' I just accepted the situation and stayed away.
Whilst I accept that my working arrangements were at the extreme end of the spectrum I suspect calculations based on (for example) current cash coming in and speed of loans filling doesn't give the full picture.
Don't get me wrong, I like the current system (now I can use it!) and I am building a decent portfolio so no change would suit me just fine
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jan 23, 2016 10:31:30 GMT
Just throwing a bit of a curved ball into the discussion of %'s timescales etc I wonder how much money is being 'discouraged' by the system at present?
Some money my be discouraged at the moment. Some money will always be discouraged by whatever system as you can't please all of the people all of the time. However MT is not suffering from a demand supply exceeding supply demand problem - if it were then this particular discussion would not be happening and the money that might currently be discouraged due to lack of timely access would be far less discouraged as loans would be available for longer......QED the current system should be relatively self balancing in that regard provided the %age max is monitored/tuned.
|
|