dermot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 862
Likes: 517
|
Post by dermot on May 9, 2017 17:11:25 GMT
The MT limit was said to be 60% LTV (or 62.5) whereas Coll have gone for 69% plus of course, valuation ~0.8 million higher for Coll in the year and a bit since MT last valued... Will the works carried out since then have increased the value a bit?
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on May 10, 2017 4:39:06 GMT
The difference in the valuation is that C have included the capitalised value of future ground rents. Provided the project runs to conclusion on budget everything should be OK but in the event of a default during construction obtaining the loan value in a fire sale could be problematic. Actually the original MT site valuation also included future ground rents, added to the residual value of the site. The main difference in the new valuation is the residual site value, which has more than doubled, based on a GDV up 20% and construction costs up 46% I think. The new loan on C is 102% of the MT valuation from Feb 2016. If they lend the full 69% against GDV as the project progresses it will be 86% of the previous GDV. Different assumptions and probably different comparables.
|
|
dovap
Member of DD Central
Posts: 467
Likes: 410
|
Post by dovap on May 10, 2017 11:41:56 GMT
no bad thing to reduce loans linked to one borrower imho
will take a while to fill on Coll
|
|
archie
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 1,842
|
Post by archie on May 10, 2017 13:48:54 GMT
no bad thing to reduce loans linked to one borrower imho will take a while to fill on Coll Just got cashback.
|
|
paulg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 312
Likes: 189
|
Post by paulg on May 10, 2017 20:21:24 GMT
I find it odd that there has been no comment at all from MoneyThing on this loan, and I'd like to know why it's leaving the MT platform before I reinvest in it on Collateral.
|
|
fogey
Posts: 171
Likes: 104
|
Post by fogey on May 10, 2017 22:57:58 GMT
I find it odd that there has been no comment at all from MoneyThing on this loan, and I'd like to know why it's leaving the MT platform before I reinvest in it on Collateral. Perhaps the answer lies at the bottom of the sinkhole pit that it is being built on ... Don't forget what they found at that pit in Hobb's Lane Knightsbridge in the late 1950s ... It was a lot worse than the large UXB which they first suspected it might be ...
|
|
archie
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 1,842
|
Post by archie on May 11, 2017 6:25:00 GMT
I wonder why it went to Collateral, the platform is too small at the moment to fill this size of loan easily.
|
|
mikeh
Member of DD Central
Posts: 499
Likes: 370
|
Post by mikeh on May 11, 2017 8:00:29 GMT
I wonder why it went to Collateral, the platform is too small at the moment to fill this size of loan easily. Indeed and it has a GDV of £8.5m. Makes no sense at all unless C know something we don't know. I think I'll just watch what happens for a while.
|
|
ben
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 589
|
Post by ben on May 11, 2017 10:44:50 GMT
I wonder why it went to Collateral, the platform is too small at the moment to fill this size of loan easily. Collateral have stated that if the loan does not fill they have other partners that will fill the remaining balance, so they must be satisfied that they have enough interest there to fund it if they are unable to. If they are unable to fund this loan it will upset a lot of people as they have sold there holdings on MT to move accross to Collateral.
|
|
fp
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 853
|
Post by fp on May 11, 2017 12:10:21 GMT
I wonder why it went to Collateral, the platform is too small at the moment to fill this size of loan easily. Collateral have stated that if the loan does not fill they have other partners that will fill the remaining balance, so they must be satisfied that they have enough interest there to fund it if they are unable to. If they are unable to fund this loan it will upset a lot of people as they have sold there holdings on MT to move accross to Collateral. They said the exact same thing about a certain hotel, but it never happened.
|
|
ben
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 589
|
Post by ben on May 11, 2017 15:56:53 GMT
Collateral have stated that if the loan does not fill they have other partners that will fill the remaining balance, so they must be satisfied that they have enough interest there to fund it if they are unable to. If they are unable to fund this loan it will upset a lot of people as they have sold there holdings on MT to move accross to Collateral. They said the exact same thing about a certain hotel, but it never happened. If it does not happen I would think they would lose a fair few investors as people have moved money from the same loan till go there.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on May 11, 2017 18:38:36 GMT
I wonder why it went to Collateral, the platform is too small at the moment to fill this size of loan easily. I wonder if BroadOak could have taken on this loan (passing on say £3m over the course of the development to MT).
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on May 11, 2017 19:30:31 GMT
I find it odd that there has been no comment at all from MoneyThing on this loan, and I'd like to know why it's leaving the MT platform before I reinvest in it on Collateral. MoneyThing - the continued lack of comment compared to you usually excellent dialogue with the forum is starting to feel a little ominous (rightly or wrongly). Perhaps you could appease the disquiet or let us know that it is warrented? For the record I have put in over 1k, and it is about 25% funded at the moment. My view: it's being refinanced by a rival for the development phase, either (more likely I guess) because MT felt the risk level had gone above the LTV they were happy with, or because the borrower found something attractive by jumping ship. Why would MT comment on a loan being financed elsewhere? MT investors will be repaid from a successful refinance. I would have thought MT are not going to influence lenders judgement in favour or against. They would neither like to encourage you to invest money elsewhere, nor to compromise the refinance. They have maintained studious silence since the revaluation was due.
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on May 12, 2017 9:38:38 GMT
Given that Ed is worriting about whether "The bridging opportunity is however £3.3m." is 'too big', I doubt that a development opportunity of the size of this one would have even merited a serious look. I have to wonder whether CO can float it either, without some extraordinary effort.
|
|
averageguy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 841
|
Post by averageguy on May 12, 2017 11:14:37 GMT
They said the exact same thing about a certain hotel, but it never happened. If it does not happen I would think they would lose a fair few investors as people have moved money from the same loan till go there. Didn't that hotel fill in the end ..it ended up being repaid for other reasons if memory serves me correctly
|
|