elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Jun 17, 2017 14:11:05 GMT
Now the scales have tipped and I have more invested on this young, well run, default free platform than on the older L one and interest on loan parts for sale is just one of 15 reasons I could give for this. I can see the point about why not list if you still get interest but I wouldn't call MT default free, this has a much younger book than Ly although the administrators have been called in to Birkenhead - you may need to put a bit more up for sale .
|
|
ali
Member of DD Central
Posts: 313
Likes: 311
|
Post by ali on Jun 22, 2017 18:06:16 GMT
An interesting idea on the Lendy board which might be worth considering: A thought - rather than an explicit lender-selected discount (with all the issues that this creates in such a low-volume market), what if the accrued interest that a seller forfeits were instead credited to the buyer(s). Assuming this is visible (or at least fairly well-known), this would presumably create additional demand for loans that have had parts on sale for a long time, thereby reducing the difference between "short" and "long" queues (making "rare" loans easier to buy, as some buyers would avoid them because there's no accrued interest associated with the loan parts for sale, and "common" loans easier to sell within a reasonable amount of time, because some buyers will actively seek them in order to get additional interest "for free").
|
|
archie
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 1,842
|
Post by archie on Jun 22, 2017 18:14:46 GMT
An interesting idea on the Lendy board which might be worth considering: A thought - rather than an explicit lender-selected discount (with all the issues that this creates in such a low-volume market), what if the accrued interest that a seller forfeits were instead credited to the buyer(s). Assuming this is visible (or at least fairly well-known), this would presumably create additional demand for loans that have had parts on sale for a long time, thereby reducing the difference between "short" and "long" queues (making "rare" loans easier to buy, as some buyers would avoid them because there's no accrued interest associated with the loan parts for sale, and "common" loans easier to sell within a reasonable amount of time, because some buyers will actively seek them in order to get additional interest "for free"). Anything that makes loans on the second market more attractive than loans on the primary market is a bad idea. This is particularly true where MT are trying to fill the latest tranche of a multi-tranche loan. If earlier tranches are more attractive it will make it more difficult for them.
|
|
ali
Member of DD Central
Posts: 313
Likes: 311
|
Post by ali on Jun 22, 2017 18:22:11 GMT
Anything that makes loans on the second market more attractive than loans on the primary market is a bad idea. This is particularly true where MT are trying to fill the latest tranche of a multi-tranche loan. If earlier tranches are more attractive it will make it more difficult for them. You might be right, but I'm not convinced. My hunch is that improved liquidity would help to sell the PM loan parts as much as the preference for SM loan parts would hinder their sale. I suspect that quite a few of the loan parts currently on the SM are there because people are hoping to use the proceeds to buy other loan parts. Even if they buy loan parts on the SM the buying chain must eventually end up with either a withdrawal or a PM loan purchase. I think the biggest downside for MT is the added complexity, but I thought it was at least worthy of consideration.
|
|
archie
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 1,842
|
Post by archie on Jun 22, 2017 18:29:10 GMT
Anything that makes loans on the second market more attractive than loans on the primary market is a bad idea. This is particularly true where MT are trying to fill the latest tranche of a multi-tranche loan. If earlier tranches are more attractive it will make it more difficult for them. You might be right, but I'm not convinced. My hunch is that improved liquidity would help to sell the PM loan parts as much as the preference for SM loan parts would hinder their sale. I suspect that quite a few of the loan parts currently on the SM are there because people are hoping to use the proceeds to buy other loan parts. Even if they buy loan parts on the SM the buying chain must eventually end up with either a withdrawal or a PM loan purchase. I think the biggest downside for MT is the added complexity, but I thought it was at least worthy of consideration. You cannot distinguish though, prime example is Wigan. Currently around 63k on pm and 52k on sm.
|
|
ali
Member of DD Central
Posts: 313
Likes: 311
|
Post by ali on Jun 22, 2017 18:39:23 GMT
You might be right, but I'm not convinced. My hunch is that improved liquidity would help to sell the PM loan parts as much as the preference for SM loan parts would hinder their sale. I suspect that quite a few of the loan parts currently on the SM are there because people are hoping to use the proceeds to buy other loan parts. Even if they buy loan parts on the SM the buying chain must eventually end up with either a withdrawal or a PM loan purchase. I think the biggest downside for MT is the added complexity, but I thought it was at least worthy of consideration. You cannot distinguish though, prime example is Wigan. Currently around 63k on pm and 52k on sm. Sorry, Archie. I'm obviously having a senior moment. Can't distinguish what from what? I'd guess your point is that the majority of the sellers of Wigan aren't intending to buy Wigan on the SM (although some people do like to balance their tranches, so some will be). Not sure I understand how that relates, however. My thesis is that a number of the Wigan sellers are intending to buy Bollington (or maybe Lancs or Edinburgh whose sellers then might buy Bollington or Wigan) and so every sale of an SM loan part has the potential to end up facilitating a PM sale. Not all, of course; some will end up as a withdrawal, but enough to make a positive effect on the PM.
|
|
archie
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 1,842
|
Post by archie on Jun 23, 2017 4:28:09 GMT
You cannot distinguish though, prime example is Wigan. Currently around 63k on pm and 52k on sm. Sorry, Archie. I'm obviously having a senior moment. Can't distinguish what from what? I'd guess your point is that the majority of the sellers of Wigan aren't intending to buy Wigan on the SM (although some people do like to balance their tranches, so some will be). Not sure I understand how that relates, however. My thesis is that a number of the Wigan sellers are intending to buy Bollington (or maybe Lancs or Edinburgh whose sellers then might buy Bollington or Wigan) and so every sale of an SM loan part has the potential to end up facilitating a PM sale. Not all, of course; some will end up as a withdrawal, but enough to make a positive effect on the PM. My point was if you allow the sm to become more attractive than the pm it affects all the loans (can't distinguish applied here as it includes loans that might also be on the pm). The Wigan sm is then more attractive than the Wigan pm. Also different loans at the same rate as those on the pm would still be more attractive. It will make it harder for MT to fill loans. The current system is fine but needs a bit of common sense from lenders, no point listing something where there is already a lot for sale. There are plenty of loans with no availability.
|
|