New lenders required to fund larger loans up to £315k

Some previous loans have not got off the ground so would the £50 come on £1000 bid or £1000 bid and £1000 accepted??? If the latter one might need to substantially overshoot to ensure hitting the £1000
thx
Jack P

Got to agree with is above. I would be keen to invest but the fee for selling completely puts me off. For a fledgling site it is too risky to see your capital tied up with no real means to liquidate it.

You are trying to conflate separate issues. Reducing a % seller fee is not going to ensure that there are sufficient willing buyers to scoop up whatever loan parts you wish to dump. 

I'm not at all. I didn't say it would ensure anything but I would say taxing something too highly guarantees people won't use it. Is the same reason I haven't invested in TC.

It's not an exaggeration, it's a fact. I will not be investing in Rebs or TC while the current charges apply. I am happy sticking with AC, SS (which have zero fees) and FC which has 25bp. I'm sure the other points are good issues but it's not something even going to consider while the fees apply. If the fees are removed then I will consider the platform.

Another thing to consider is that the rates available at ReBS are currently several percent higher than FC, so not investing on the grounds that they charge higher exit fees seems to be cutting your nose off to spite your face, unless you believe the risk is considerably higher at ReBS than FC (which would be a different argument). And anyone might as well stick £10k in at the moment, since getting it out again would cost nothing except giving them their cashback back (assuming they address MONEY's point about miscalculation).

MONEY I think there are a couple of aspects of our marketplace where conceptions are misplaced, liquidity being one of them. If someone tries to place a lot of loans on the market at 5%, they are likely to be undercut or left unsold - even at 1% point down on the primary market, you can still command a 3.75% premium on the secondary market because you'll be better value. That's better than anywhere else in the p2p market. I know sales at par or discounts are very rare, so I don't think many people lose money through this process.

If you look at the volumes for sale on the secondary market you can see it is generally fractions of the original loan amount. I personally believe a lot of people invest for the term, rather than for flipping purposes. Which might explain the popularity of loans with smaller terms (24, 36 months etc). 

We would rather see competitive bidding than reduce the % ceilings - as you say some loans are perceived to be better quality than others even within the same risk rating, so it makes sense to let the crowd decide the rate and this way people will lend according to the risk they see, not just at the top rate. We've always wanted to play a minimal role in this aspect, which is why we have never done a fixed rate auction.

Saying all this, when we start to see the vast majority of loans reaching 100% before the end of their initial auction periods, it will be time for the 0.10% increment to be introduced. We want to make it as easy as possible to lend and divest, but it's a tough sell to potential borrowers if we can't demonstrate a level of competition and the possibility of a lower rate for good businesses. We've been encouraged by the recent performance of a couple of loans, so it's likely to be discussed in the next month.