Will you be investing in AE325 and AE326?

Perhaps it is best (to avoid ostracising the non-Excel experts), that we look at implementing a 'Borrower ID' identifier & perhaps an Excel/CSV export feature. Will revert back. Ed.

With the extra identifying letter in lower case.

solicitorious - Point taken and I agree.

My "basic" Excel skills are fine and I have various spreadsheets to manage and project household budget, SIPP / ISA, overall pension planning and the like as well as a "simple" list of P2P investments by platform.

I create these manually and if I am honest probably do may of the calculations in a roundabout, long-winded manner (but at least I understand them when I refer back to them and my OH can see my logic - even if she fails to agree with it).

I know I really should get into it more but there are so many other more interesting things to do  .

It's a sort of informal feedback for MoneyThing, the collective opinion of investors about the bid limit prospective effectiveness: the higher the peak load, the less they trust that it will be sufficient. Though in this case the renewals complicated things because those were sure to go quickly and fast fingers was clearly going to be the only way in.

Loan 235, the watches renewal, lasted 33 seconds.
Loan 234, the electronics renewal, had a surprisingly large amount available and lasted for 78 seconds.
At ten minutes in there's still £16,076 from £150,000 of loan 326 available. At 16 minutes £6,782. At 22 minutes £6,382. All sold at 62:45.
At ten minutes in there's still £14,117 from £150,000 or loan 325 available. At 16 minutes £5,962. At 22 minutes £5,762. All sold at 62:35.

Not sure that introducer is really the best term. The general structure is:

1. All loans by lenders are to MoneyThing directly. Every time we're discussing a loan here we're identifying the borrower, because it's always MoneyThing.
2. Moneything has already lent the money to their customer. The CS, AE and BP prefixes on a loan identify MoneyThing's customer in some cases, in others they use the generic MT prefix (supercars, for example).
3. In some cases their customer has or will also lend the money to someone else. Pawn and car HP/lease, for example, or the new loan to top up mortgage case.

I don't think there are any cases where there is just an introducer relationship, with our money directly lent to the party that MoneyThing has lent to. In all three cases there is some security and an interest in that security is assigned to us as lenders to MoneyThing.

So there are two groupings that need identifying for risk management: the MoneyThing borrower and where one exists, the borrower's borrower. In the case of many loans where there are lots of low value items or where it is in practice only going to be one loan per ultimate customer there's no issue with the borrower's borrower. The cases where identification of the borrower's borrower is needed are where it's viable for significant amounts to be borrowed across multiple loans, typically in the case of commercial property development, where there is both multiple borrowing from MoneyThing and potential borrowing buy the same borrower from or via a different platform (from in the MoneyThing case, via in the SavingStream case assuming they are now 36H compliant and the introducer, not the lender).

However, I'm not sure that at present there are any cases where borrower's borrower information is needed. Do you have a specific example that's of interest, without naming MoneyThing's borrower?