|
Post by chris on Nov 5, 2016 9:17:07 GMT
valueinvestor123 - no one has said there shouldn't be criticism, indeed one of the main reasons I listed for supporting this forum was to directly receive that criticism from the coalface. Many of the posts go beyond what is fair and reasonable though and that directly leads to it being counter productive to be actively involved in this community any longer, some outright accusing the platforms of lying, manipulation, deviousness, etc. We've had instances of lenders getting very vocal on here before reporting us to the ombudsman or FCA, with the authorities finding in our favour in each instance. Take a specific example with censorship of our on site Q&A. There have been numerous examples of lenders complaining vocally on this forum about "censorship" yet I have an open offer to investigate any concrete cases where their questions were illegitimately removed. I've had several people take me up on that and in each case the customer services team had clearly acted appropriately. There is a hard and fast rule that the Q&A is for asking questions specifically about a given loan and not for broadcasting personal opinion to other investors, yet each case I've looked at was a block of opinion dressed with a question at the end. Yet that will never satisfy everyone and we continue to be accused of censorship. We also have official channels for lenders to provide feedback, with a well staffed customer services team who will listen to any lender's concerns. They can provide official responses and interrogate other parts of the business in order to get answers for lenders. We do not shy away from scrutiny. Returning to the QAA you must surely be able to see why your posts have been rubbing people up the wrong way, including other forum members not just AC staff. Let me address several specific points your raise: It took 69 pages to discuss - I certainly haven't posted 69 pages of explanation. Like with most things that are simple to use there can be a lot of hidden complexity if you want to pull back the curtain. You don't complain that a car is too complex to drive because the manufacturer doesn't discuss the atomic interactions within the fuel air mixture in the cylinder in their sales brochure. Likewise we provide an account designed around liquidity and easy operation that has to do some complex things behind the scenes to provide that and remain article 36H compliant. We have been open in discussing how the account works but putting that all up front in the sales message doesn't help the vast majority of lenders. If that's your opinion then don't use the account. However I don't think you've come close to demonstrating that. The suitability of the account is split into liquidity and risk, and each have potential issues that are heavily mitigated. With liquidity you can be locked into longer term lending in specific market conditions - precisely the same as platforms like RS or even FC / SS etc. should their secondary markets dry up. This is heavily mitigated by the priority on the aftermarket of loan units held by the QAA and the cash component of the account. There is a price to pay for those mitigants and that is reflected in the rate offered. Likewise with the risk of lending you can invest in some higher rate loans, reflecting their higher risk, alongside some of our lower rate loans. However these are still secured loans and the difference between the rates ends up in the provision fund providing a mitigant for that risk. If those mitigants don't work for you then don't invest. Others are happy with that trade off and with the historical performance of the account. Andy has already told you that we have bought in large volumes of 3rd party data including 50+ year data from companies like Moody's and Experian. Our data modelling is a continuous project that is improving all the time based upon our own data as well as an increasing set of 3rd party data. We have published as much about our methodology as any other peer to peer platform, and if anything have given away more than the others via Andy's replies to you. I'm all for scrutiny but this feels more like singling us out at this stage.
|
|
|
Post by chris on Nov 5, 2016 9:23:31 GMT
From Andrew's responses about the bits and pieces about the workings of the model used, it became fairly clear to me that it was more likely than not to be faulty and assumption used, detached from real world, long term scenarios, potentially locking unsuspecting investors into an account, wrongly labelled "quick access". This name should not be synonymous with anything to do with peer2peer! I don't follow that line of thought at all and that's where suspicions of an agenda will stem from. How has our modelling been faulty? Why is it detached from the real world? How is using 50+ years of data not looking at long term scenarios? How do we potentially lock unsuspecting investors into an account? How is it wrongly labelled "quick access"? Your final sentence is bordering on the ridiculous to be honest. What would you name the account?
|
|
wapping35
Member of DD Central
Posts: 385
Likes: 210
|
Post by wapping35 on Nov 5, 2016 9:37:32 GMT
Wow I thought this was the RS thread not AC.
|
|
|
Post by valueinvestor123 on Nov 5, 2016 9:54:18 GMT
Chris, "Andy has already told you that we have bought in large volumes of 3rd party data including 50+ year data from companies like Moody's and Experian. Our data modelling is a continuous project that is improving all the time based upon our own data as well as an increasing set of 3rd party data. We have published as much about our methodology as any other peer to peer platform, and if anything have given away more than the others via Andy's replies to you. I'm all for scrutiny but this feels more like singling us out at this stage." So just to clarify: SME loans performance during recessions cannot be disclosed by AC? Do you not see how this may come across as somewhat less than transparent? Especially if it is followed up by "the reason is because we paid for the data". I am sorry if you feel singled out but that's only because the QAA is unique (as you or Andrew stated) and in order to fully appreciate its risks, you actually have to be more knowledgeable, not less, because the success of it depends on how successful the modelling (which is provided by the company). At least investing directly into loans, you know exactly what you are investing in and what the asset class does. QAA blurs those lines. In good times, it will be a blessing, in bad times, it harbours more risk than many people may anticipate. "If that's your opinion then don't use the account."
It's not so simple Chris and not really a valid argument. If you go to Tesco's to buy baby food but then discover it may contain plutonium, you don't just say "oh ok, I am just not going to buy it then. There are other babies who must have had it and it's been 12 months and they are still ok, despite the baby food being from Tesco's..." (sorry for the morbid example: I am still hung over from yesterday. All that baby food...). "However I don't think you've come close to demonstrating that."Because AC is withholding an essential piece of the puzzle.
|
|
DeafEater
Member of DD Central
Extremely Moderate
Posts: 218
Likes: 292
|
Post by DeafEater on Nov 5, 2016 9:54:25 GMT
Wow I thought this was the RS thread not AC. Me too and I was getting sick of the tirade from vi123 when it was on the AC forum. For the record (and on the wrong forum) I also have reservations about AC using short money to cover long loans more cheaply to limit how much of the loans are covered by people in MLIA/GBBA/GEIA accounts but I do appreciate the relative liquidity of their QAA account so it's very much a case of swings and roundabouts. Oh and chris , welcome back to the forums (even the RS forum). I've always found your posts measured and helpful.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,196
Likes: 6,006
|
Post by registerme on Nov 5, 2016 9:56:07 GMT
Yes, the general commentary around rep presence on the forum (leading from the RS rep presence or lack thereof) was appropriate, but please can we take any AC specific discussions to their forum?
|
|
|
Post by valueinvestor123 on Nov 5, 2016 10:57:12 GMT
From Andrew's responses about the bits and pieces about the workings of the model used, it became fairly clear to me that it was more likely than not to be faulty and assumption used, detached from real world, long term scenarios, potentially locking unsuspecting investors into an account, wrongly labelled "quick access". This name should not be synonymous with anything to do with peer2peer! I don't follow that line of thought at all and that's where suspicions of an agenda will stem from. How has our modelling been faulty? Why is it detached from the real world? How is using 50+ years of data not looking at long term scenarios? How do we potentially lock unsuspecting investors into an account? How is it wrongly labelled "quick access"? Your final sentence is bordering on the ridiculous to be honest. What would you name the account? This will apply to the RS Provision Fund as well since its their board and since I am now only talking about the use of the PF and the involvement of company reps on the forums. "How is using 50+ years of data not looking at long term scenarios?"Because you never confirmed how you actually incorporate this data into your 0.32% loss projection calculation. Should the model be out even by a tiny fraction, investors will be locked in with illiquid loans just as they would with the main account. There are safeguards in place but since you refuse to give any guidance on an average case scenario during an economic downturn for which you apparently have data but poised to keep it from public eye at all cost, the average investor who you aim this account for is not in the position to make an informed decision. "Me too and I was getting sick of the tirade from vi123 when it was on the AC forum."Then don't read it, very simple. I now have a lot of money at stake with each of the major platforms and I have a vested interest in making sure they 1. Do as they advertise and are transparent. 2. They comply with the FCA guidelines (who seem to not have decided what their rules are 100% yet otherwise the platforms would have full licenses by now). There have been many incorrect statements made on these boards by Reps that directly contradict these guidelines, not to mention careless wording on their websites. edit: Will reply on the other board then. Just saw the reply.
|
|
|
Post by chris on Nov 5, 2016 11:23:04 GMT
Should the model be out even by a tiny fraction, investors will be locked in with illiquid loans just as they would with the main account. I'm not going to keep covering the same ground with you, and my other post within the AC board covers much of what you raise in this latest post, so let me just pick up on this one claim and the one below. Even if the model is out by enough for the PF to become overwhelmed the account remains liquid unless there is a simultaneous run on the account, removing the cash component of the account, and the platform itself runs out of funds it is willing to put into the PF, and the account cannot sell enough of its holdings in non-defaulted loans to meet liquidity demands. That is a possible scenario which is why there are the disclaimers in place around "normal market conditions", but it shouldn't be a probable scenario. We are transparent about the operation of the QAA and marketplace. We are satisfied the account operates precisely as advertised. We are satisfied that the platform as a whole and the QAA specifically comply with FCA guidelines. All content on our website is subject to review and sign off by our compliance officer, a full time member of staff and board director with decades of banking industry experience in this role. If you are aware of any incorrect statements that have been made by AC staff either here or on the website then please highlight them to me and I shall raise the matter with our compliance officer.
|
|
|
Post by westonkev on Nov 5, 2016 11:29:18 GMT
.... p.s. Kev - thanks for all your input and best wishes for the future. M Firstly, thank you to everyone that has inquired into my well-being, it's most appreciated alongside the kind words of the forumites.. It was always a bit of a quirk that I was here as a "representative". I was really here as a sharing economy fan and multi-platform P2P lender. But as an employee of RateSetter in the interests of transparency I needed to be branded, and the Executive didn't mind me in an informal partial-personal capacity to continue as generally I know what I was talking about. Although at times my tone was a little more flippant than an official source.... It was never the intention of RateSetter to have a forum representative, and in truth I doubt if they'll assign one. And certainly not one with a free reign as I did. RateSetter is I think fine, quite simply the love affair I had with this small sharing economy P2P platform has fizzled. As we've matured, the company is taking different path to what would be my choice. Rather than feel frustrated and not a wholesome believer in the next stage of their journey, it has been mutually agreed that we part. It's a little sad, but hey ho, that's life. I'm sure RateSetter will continue to grow and become a household brand and leading P2P platform, with rates that continue to be set by the peoplr and not committee. That was always my love, and I'll miss the markets. Myself, I suspect I'll pop up again at some point in this sharing economy that I love. Certainly I'll continue to be a lender on my preferred platforms and commenting here. Kevin.
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Nov 5, 2016 11:38:07 GMT
Firstly, thank you to everyone that has inquired into my well-being, it's most appreciated alongside the kind words of the forumites.. It was always a bit of a quirk that I was here as a "representative". I was really here as a sharing economy fan and multi-platform P2P lender. But as an employee of RateSetter in the interests of transparency I needed to be branded, and the Executive didn't mind me in an informal partial-personal capacity to continue as generally I know what I was talking about. Although at times my tone was a little more flippant than an official source.... It was never the intention of RateSetter to have a forum representative, and in truth I doubt if they'll assign one. And certainly not one with a free reign as I did. RateSetter is I think fine, quite simply the love affair I had with this small sharing economy P2P platform has fizzled. As we've matured, the company is taking different path to what would be my choice. Rather than feel frustrated and not a wholesome believer in the next stage of their journey, it has been mutually agreed that we part. It's a little sad, but hey ho, that's life. I'm sure RateSetter will continue to grow and become a household brand and leading P2P platform, with rates that continue to be set by the peoplr and not committee. That was always my love, and I'll miss the markets. Myself, I suspect I'll pop up again at some point in this sharing economy that I love. Certainly I'll continue to be a lender on my preferred platforms and commenting here. Kevin. Thanks for all the input you made as the quasi Ratesetter representative, you served them and us well and so I hope they appreciated your input as much as I and I'm sure many fellow forumites did. All best wishes for the future, and welcome to the 'other side' I'm sure your input as a 'mere' member will be just as valuable.
|
|
|
Post by unknown on Nov 5, 2016 12:15:22 GMT
Kevin's so called 'flippancy' & and good nature has been a major reason for my enthusiasm for peer2peer, and in particular Ratesetter, these last years. I will welcome his wise comments on this forum in the future. Thanks Kevin.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 955
Likes: 645
|
Post by alender on Nov 5, 2016 12:23:15 GMT
Firstly, thank you to everyone that has inquired into my well-being, it's most appreciated alongside the kind words of the forumites.. It was always a bit of a quirk that I was here as a "representative". I was really here as a sharing economy fan and multi-platform P2P lender. But as an employee of RateSetter in the interests of transparency I needed to be branded, and the Executive didn't mind me in an informal partial-personal capacity to continue as generally I know what I was talking about. Although at times my tone was a little more flippant than an official source.... It was never the intention of RateSetter to have a forum representative, and in truth I doubt if they'll assign one. And certainly not one with a free reign as I did. RateSetter is I think fine, quite simply the love affair I had with this small sharing economy P2P platform has fizzled. As we've matured, the company is taking different path to what would be my choice. Rather than feel frustrated and not a wholesome believer in the next stage of their journey, it has been mutually agreed that we part. It's a little sad, but hey ho, that's life. I'm sure RateSetter will continue to grow and become a household brand and leading P2P platform, with rates that continue to be set by the peoplr and not committee. That was always my love, and I'll miss the markets. Myself, I suspect I'll pop up again at some point in this sharing economy that I love. Certainly I'll continue to be a lender on my preferred platforms and commenting here. Kevin. Good luck for the future Kevin. We may not have agreed a lot of the time but you input was invaluable. You through a lot of light on how RS operates which helped my confidence in the platform and therefore the amount of money I invest. As to your flippant remarks, they can be amusing and sometimes stir people up into making contributions to the discussion. As is said in other areas I did not make an offensive remark but I cannot stop you being offended. As a general point as an investor if there are areas where there is no or little information we should tend to worst case scenario in making investment decisions as there are potentially unknown risks. You have to ask yourself why is this so, it can only be the platform does not want you to know about this area or did not realise it was difficult for investors to understand but cannot be bother engage as they have enough investors already. In most cases when a company engages with it’s customers; it’s customers may not be 100% satisfied but the confidence in company improves. I can go to RS or the RS blog but I am not confidence I will get all view points for obvious reasons.
|
|
investibod
Member of DD Central
Posts: 288
Likes: 152
|
Post by investibod on Nov 5, 2016 12:55:06 GMT
Firstly, thank you to everyone that has inquired into my well-being, it's most appreciated alongside the kind words of the forumites.. It was always a bit of a quirk that I was here as a "representative". I was really here as a sharing economy fan and multi-platform P2P lender. But as an employee of RateSetter in the interests of transparency I needed to be branded, and the Executive didn't mind me in an informal partial-personal capacity to continue as generally I know what I was talking about. Although at times my tone was a little more flippant than an official source.... It was never the intention of RateSetter to have a forum representative, and in truth I doubt if they'll assign one. And certainly not one with a free reign as I did. RateSetter is I think fine, quite simply the love affair I had with this small sharing economy P2P platform has fizzled. As we've matured, the company is taking different path to what would be my choice. Rather than feel frustrated and not a wholesome believer in the next stage of their journey, it has been mutually agreed that we part. It's a little sad, but hey ho, that's life. I'm sure RateSetter will continue to grow and become a household brand and leading P2P platform, with rates that continue to be set by the peoplr and not committee. That was always my love, and I'll miss the markets. Myself, I suspect I'll pop up again at some point in this sharing economy that I love. Certainly I'll continue to be a lender on my preferred platforms and commenting here. Kevin. I am sure that your termination agreement will limit to a certain extent what you can say about RS and its workings, but I look forward to reading your future postings, now that you do not have to consider any implications of having the "representative" tag. We have not always agreed, but I have enjoyed the argument. Good luck with your future endeavours.
|
|
wapping35
Member of DD Central
Posts: 385
Likes: 210
|
Post by wapping35 on Nov 5, 2016 14:38:55 GMT
Kevin thanks for all your prior input and comments. Even the "pithier" ones. .. I know they must have taken up a lot of your personal time. I do wish you the best of luck where ever you next land, but I am sure you will do well. On the general topic of this thread I do feel RS could navigate a middle path of having a CS representative occasionally contributing on this forum (hey even Zopa manage that) but hey ho. Cheers W35
|
|
markr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 766
Likes: 426
|
Post by markr on Nov 5, 2016 23:32:23 GMT
Good luck in whatever future venture ignites the love affair again, Kev, Jean and I raise our RateSetter mugs to you.
|
|