|
|
Post by stevepn on Jul 12, 2017 9:10:39 GMT
I have been with Rate setter for about 3 years and was happy with them till recently.First the 3 year deals are no longer available and now we have the situation where the rolling rate is higher than the 1 year rate. I believe this is part of the manipulation being used by Ratesetter for their own advertising ends.
On their website is states that £1,973,130,654 has been invested and not a penny lost. In my theory for example if I invest £10,000 in the 1 year deal that is £10,000 at the end of the year but if I put it in the Rolling account that then becomes £10,000 x 12= £120,000 and multiply that by hundreds of other investors who do the same and Ratesetter in theory have suddenly invested billions of £'s of money where in effect it is a lot less because it is the same money being reinvested every month, and by these means Ratesetter could now claim to be the biggest P2P lender going because of the way they manipulate things.
Would I be correct in saying this, or is my minds running riot?
|
|
c88dnf
Member of DD Central
Posts: 364 
Likes: 266
|
Post by c88dnf on Jul 12, 2017 10:10:51 GMT
I have been with Rate setter for about 3 years and was happy with them till recently.First the 3 year deals are no longer available and now we have the situation where the rolling rate is higher than the 1 year rate. I believe this is part of the manipulation being used by Ratesetter for their own advertising ends. On their website is states that £1,973,130,654 has been invested and not a penny lost. In my theory for example if I invest £10,000 in the 1 year deal that is £10,000 at the end of the year but if I put it in the Rolling account that then becomes £10,000 x 12= £120,000 and multiply that by hundreds of other investors who do the same and Ratesetter in theory have suddenly invested billions of £'s of money where in effect it is a lot less because it is the same money being reinvested every month, and by these means Ratesetter could now claim to be the biggest P2P lender going because of the way they manipulate things. Would I be correct in saying this, or is my minds running riot? Your logic on the calculations is correct. Ratesetter (and others) tend to highlight the value of loans originated. It's what used to be known as "the mug's eyefull". Casual investors see a big number and are reassured by it. More sophisticated investors like you will - of course - be looking at every platforms' returns from Companies House (profit/ loss account) and the trend in weekly sales figures from Ratesetter's "rate trends" page under "key information". The latter appearing to show that quantity of loans originated is stagnant in 2017 and arguably on a slight downward trend.
|
|
stub8535
Member of DD Central
personal opinions only. Not qualified to advise on investment products.
Posts: 1,442
Likes: 945
|
Post by stub8535 on Jul 12, 2017 12:15:53 GMT
I have been with Rate setter for about 3 years and was happy with them till recently.First the 3 year deals are no longer available and now we have the situation where the rolling rate is higher than the 1 year rate. I believe this is part of the manipulation being used by Ratesetter for their own advertising ends. On their website is states that £1,973,130,654 has been invested and not a penny lost. In my theory for example if I invest £10,000 in the 1 year deal that is £10,000 at the end of the year but if I put it in the Rolling account that then becomes £10,000 x 12= £120,000 and multiply that by hundreds of other investors who do the same and Ratesetter in theory have suddenly invested billions of £'s of money where in effect it is a lot less because it is the same money being reinvested every month, and by these means Ratesetter could now claim to be the biggest P2P lender going because of the way they manipulate things. Would I be correct in saying this, or is my minds running riot? Why should ratesetter not use the same false reporting as other platforms to overinflate their lending figures with renewals FS :rolleyes:
|
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Jul 12, 2017 12:39:35 GMT
RS do not make monthly loans. The rolling money is used to finance longer term loans, although the shortest seems to be a GiffGaff 6 month option. The statistics cover the value of loans, not the recycling of rolling funds.
The continued absence of FCA authorization does suggest that the opacity of RS, and the increased reliance on rolling, is a cause for concern.
|
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Jul 13, 2017 5:40:36 GMT
RS do not make monthly loans. The rolling money is used to finance longer term loans, although the shortest seems to be a GiffGaff 6 month option. The statistics cover the value of loans, not the recycling of rolling funds. This is correct. Loan volumes are based on loans, not the amount of monthly loan volume rolling over. If it was, I'd guess the money "lent" would be nearer £10billion....
|
|
