p40l0m4r
Member of DD Central
Posts: 63
Likes: 16
|
Post by p40l0m4r on May 10, 2017 9:26:12 GMT
Mintos Financial statement has been published on their website: www.mintos.com/en/about-us/investor-relations/As I see, the amount of net loss compared with revenues and capital was huge last year. Ok, I think 2016 was still an year of startupping and we can see in statistics of 2017 that the business is growing in volumes, so is predictable that the real operating result in running activity will be better, but for now Mintos is lossing money. What could that mean for us? Mintos is not the guaranted for our bb loans, but it could apply more commissions for us in the future, if the growing of activities is not enough to bring the situation back to profit for them.
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on May 10, 2017 15:25:15 GMT
I think they've posted pretty good numbers by growth company standards. Turnover grew tenfold but salary + admin expenses "only" quintupled. (The comparison period is not a full year so turnover really grew 5-fold and expenses 2.4-fold.) They might be on track to make a profit in the final quarter of this year.
As a user of the platform I'm not worried at the moment. However, the one thing that could really spoil the party would be an adverse change in the legislation in Latvia.
|
|
fric
Member of DD Central
Posts: 199
Likes: 79
|
Post by fric on May 11, 2017 7:55:33 GMT
Developing IT systems surely isn't cheap - thus the increase in costs. It requires quite a bit of investments upfront before you can actually start profiting.
|
|
|
Post by rahafoorum on May 13, 2017 9:59:11 GMT
The site seems to be under maintenance.
Anyway, note that there are several Mintos related companies, which provide a considerable proportion of the loan volumes originated on the platform. In other words, even if "Mintos" provides a loss, the owners can still be making a decent profit through this enterprise. You're not getting the whole picture if you only look at Mintos reports here.
|
|
|
Post by darksiege on May 13, 2017 23:32:20 GMT
I think they've posted pretty good numbers by growth company standards. Turnover grew tenfold but salary + admin expenses "only" quintupled. (The comparison period is not a full year so turnover really grew 5-fold and expenses 2.4-fold.) They might be on track to make a profit in the final quarter of this year. As a user of the platform I'm not worried at the moment. However, the one thing that could really spoil the party would be an adverse change in the legislation in Latvia. Hello southseacompany, What do you mean by "However, the one thing that could really spoil the party would be an adverse change in the legislation in Latvia"? I would like to know what this could mean for us (investors) in P2P latvian plataforms. Thanks in advance!
|
|
p40l0m4r
Member of DD Central
Posts: 63
Likes: 16
|
Post by p40l0m4r on May 13, 2017 23:59:58 GMT
I think they've posted pretty good numbers by growth company standards. Turnover grew tenfold but salary + admin expenses "only" quintupled. (The comparison period is not a full year so turnover really grew 5-fold and expenses 2.4-fold.) They might be on track to make a profit in the final quarter of this year. As a user of the platform I'm not worried at the moment. However, the one thing that could really spoil the party would be an adverse change in the legislation in Latvia. Hello southseacompany, What do you mean by "However, the one thing that could really spoil the party would be an adverse change in the legislation in Latvia"? I would like to know what this could mean for us (investors) in P2P latvian plataforms. Thanks in advance! There're rumors that latvian government is in contact with biggest latvian p2p service offers to make a more defined legislation for p2p lending. This could mean, for example, more strict and standard requirements in terms of financial coverage and in financial disclosure for everyone that want to exercise this activity in Latvia. For us, this could be bad for the possibility of an increase of commissions, but theorically we can receive a smaller platform risk.
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on May 14, 2017 1:18:41 GMT
What do you mean by "However, the one thing that could really spoil the party would be an adverse change in the legislation in Latvia"? I would like to know what this could mean for us (investors) in P2P latvian plataforms. Read the posts by lawyer on this forum. He has (allegedly) read the draft law. From his description, it seems platforms (not just originators) have to hold part of the investment as "skin in the game". If that is the case, self-originator platforms like Twino will not break a sweat, but pure platforms like Mintos will face huge financial strain. Of course, anything can change before the draft becomes law.
|
|
|
Post by darksiege on May 14, 2017 13:47:16 GMT
What do you mean by "However, the one thing that could really spoil the party would be an adverse change in the legislation in Latvia"? I would like to know what this could mean for us (investors) in P2P latvian plataforms. Read the posts by lawyer on this forum. He has (allegedly) read the draft law. From his description, it seems platforms (not just originators) have to hold part of the investment as "skin in the game". If that is the case, self-originator platforms like Twino will not break a sweat, but pure platforms like Mintos will face huge financial strain. Of course, anything can change before the draft becomes law. Thanks for the information! (Very useful) As an investor in many of latvian platforms (Mintos, Twino, Grupeer and ViaInvest) its so important and urgent that legislation can protect us in some manner. However it won´t be easy for platforms to hold part of investment like originators do. I hope this can bring some stabilization in P2P (mainly latvian platforms because there is many out there!). However i hope they do not charge us (using fees) because 10-12% for loans, has an high risk!
|
|
|
Post by darksiege on May 14, 2017 13:51:32 GMT
Hello southseacompany, What do you mean by "However, the one thing that could really spoil the party would be an adverse change in the legislation in Latvia"? I would like to know what this could mean for us (investors) in P2P latvian plataforms. Thanks in advance! There're rumors that latvian government is in contact with biggest latvian p2p service offers to make a more defined legislation for p2p lending. -> This is a good point for us (investors) because the rates at 10-12% doesnt paid the risk we take!This could mean, for example, more strict and standard requirements in terms of financial coverage and in financial disclosure for everyone that want to exercise this activity in Latvia. -> This is also great! Honestly i dont want more P2P platforms. More platforms means low interest rates for us and we can´t forget the risk this has. 10-12% its the minimum.For us, this could be bad for the possibility of an increase of commissions, but theorically we can receive a smaller platform risk. -> Fees or commissions it would be bad unless they raises interests rates.
|
|
p40l0m4r
Member of DD Central
Posts: 63
Likes: 16
|
Post by p40l0m4r on May 14, 2017 17:16:09 GMT
This could mean, for example, more strict and standard requirements in terms of financial coverage and in financial disclosure for everyone that want to exercise this activity in Latvia. -> This is also great! Honestly i dont want more P2P platforms. More platforms means low interest rates for us and we can´t forget the risk this has. 10-12% its the minimum.I don't understand this point. More platforms for me means more competition in the offer, that it could result in higher interest rates in average. On the other hand I presume it will mean also a greater risk in the loans offered (there'll be more loans in offer if more platforms have to build an offer). If they remain few platforms, a trust may be done between them and the consequence could be to mantain low the rates.
|
|
|
Post by tomas on May 14, 2017 18:32:33 GMT
I would say that the income does not seem clear. The loan originators are paying some fees to platform for service. Secondary market fee brings only 20' Eur. So for platform to become profitable additional fees should be introduced whether for originators or investors.
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on May 15, 2017 3:28:27 GMT
So for platform to become profitable additional fees should be introduced whether for originators or investors. I disagree. You cannot analyse a company that is growing at a triple digit percentage in the same way as you would an established company like a utility. Mintos collected half a million euros in fees from originators last year. Monthly loan volumes have grown about 250% since last year, so assuming no change in fee percentage, they will bring in around 1.8m euros in originator fee income this year. Profitability depends on how fast costs are ramping up. If personnel and admin costs were to double from last year, they'd end up with an annual profit larger than the combined losses in 2015-2016.
|
|
|
Post by darksiege on May 15, 2017 23:49:03 GMT
I don't understand this point. More platforms for me means more competition in the offer, that it could result in higher interest rates in average. On the other hand I presume it will mean also a greater risk in the loans offered (there'll be more loans in offer if more platforms have to build an offer). If they remain few platforms, a trust may be done between them and the consequence could be to mantain low the rates. Thats your point of view. If that was the truth answer me about this. Why can't we see anymore 13-14% at Twino or Mintos as happened one year ago? Competion in loans means people or companies can chose what platform they want.
|
|
kulerucket
Member of DD Central
Posts: 336
Likes: 93
|
Post by kulerucket on May 16, 2017 6:40:33 GMT
I am looking forward to more legislation in place even if it does shake things up. It is very difficult to know whether to trust platforms at the moment and I would be happier increasing my platform maximum if I had more confidence in the way these companies operate. If platforms such as Mintos need to raise capital for skin in the game, then we could see a dip in interest rates but I think that it is likely that Mintos will want to stay competitive and would prefer the extra fees go to the originators or raise capital via other means. Let's not forget, that this skin in the game will also act as a source of income for Mintos so they should be able to use the interest earned from their existing skins to pay for new skins. Skin in the game has to make Mintos take extra care when selecting originators as the are staking their own business on whether the originator survives.
I wonder if Mintos would be able to take out loans from their own marketplace to raise the capital needed? There would probably be rules against this, but it can't be that different from raising capital from bonds/equity etc.
|
|
p40l0m4r
Member of DD Central
Posts: 63
Likes: 16
|
Post by p40l0m4r on May 16, 2017 6:47:56 GMT
I don't understand this point. More platforms for me means more competition in the offer, that it could result in higher interest rates in average. On the other hand I presume it will mean also a greater risk in the loans offered (there'll be more loans in offer if more platforms have to build an offer). If they remain few platforms, a trust may be done between them and the consequence could be to mantain low the rates. Thats your point of view. If that was the truth answer me about this. Why can't we see anymore 13-14% at Twino or Mintos as happened one year ago? Competion in loans means people or companies can chose what platform they want. I think because investors in p2p have grown a lot in the last 12 months, so they can find much more people who decide to accept loans at interests slighty lower. For the most general law of offer and demand: if offer is higher, they have to rise interests to distribuite it all, if demand is higher, they can drop a bit and take a bit more profit. Of course also loans offered have grown in this period, but I think less than demand (but I'm writing with not enough data's in my hand). Yes, that's my actually point of view, but if you can explain yours, I'm more than happy to compare another opinion and other infos that I'm not considering now.
|
|