r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 28, 2019 15:41:57 GMT
The most recent updates on 4 of these 5 loans were back in June, 3 full months ago, with the Warrington one last updated 6 weeks ago in early August.
fundingsecure this really isn't compatible in any shape or form with the briefings by email and at your investor evenings that the focus was on improving communication to lenders.
Stretford - if there is still one property to sell, why are you unwilling to supply details of the marketing agent (and ideally online links) ? I've said many times before I don't understand your reluctance to engage your own customer base in such cases, as a significant minority are BTL investors. If there isn't a property to sell, then an explanation as to why not is needed.
Oh god, we're not now going to have "is there one or zero houses" to accompany "one or two boats" are we? You are right though, it should not take months and months for a new team to be able to provide updates in a reasonably timely way. And when the updates do arrive, they still tend to be of 1-2 lines length and in many cases, as before, totally disregard the process apparently ongoing in the previous updates. How fricking hard is it.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 28, 2019 14:35:40 GMT
Coming back to the BBC... The main headline online on BBC news UK right now: PM's referral to watchdog 'politically motivated'Only upon inspection does it transpire that there seem to be some fairly key words missing there. Like "says Government" at the end of it. Oh how careless of them! Anyone not view this as an incredibly biased way of formulating a headline? edit: also, not an isolated incident, as their TV headlines went to a similar theme: I can't put it better than in the tweet on my link: "Objectively, the factual rump of the story is that the PM has been referred for investigation. It is NOT some anonymous unsubstantiated Trumpian response from Downing St. I see this happen far too much now: The No.10 narrative is adopted in the *framing* of the story itself"
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 28, 2019 14:10:11 GMT
According to a recent P2P Finance News article ... Desktops and laptops still most popular way to access P2P investments
It's Europe wide view but one wonders if the recent changes on some Uk sites - notably Zopa and more recently RS - realise this fact or worse even test thoroughly in this market now!. Might come back to bite some of them over the next few years perhaps or worse they'll be backtracking and making changes on changes for years to come. Admittedly I am a luddite where using toys tablets/phones for accessing any financial stuff and in particular P2P but I can use them for simple stuff but any real investing for myself and Mrs Aju requires more reliable and extensive tools and using a PC is for me a necessity. Mind you my spreadsheets analysis and tracking tools are getting a bit over bloated these days. Any thoughts? It's probably an age thing. I believe the average age of a P2P investor is fifty-something, so they're probably less interested in fiddling around with accounts on a phone. This said, I'm in my 30s and I much prefer using a laptop to mess around with P2P and spreadsheets too - too frustrating on a little screen.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 28, 2019 14:00:31 GMT
The only potential problem I see is that if a surge of bad debt erodes the surplus, they'll no longer be able to keep to the commitments made, and increase the risk that the PF may prove to be inadequate at some future date for its primary intended purpose. Seems especially pertinent to the 90D QAA. As of 31st March 2019 there was £229k in the 90d provision fund, protecting approx £27.5m of loans at the time, or about 0.83% coverage. As of now, there is (roughly) £50m in the 90d account once you deduct the amount held in cash, so if there is still just £229k in the kitty, then we would be down to 0.45% coverage - which really is bugger all. I would hope that the 90d PF would regardless to the announcement have more money allocated to it given that it is a relatively new account. We'll have to see. Certainly won't be keeping money there if they don't!
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 28, 2019 9:39:10 GMT
Article on front page Of Times business section today “funding circle investors face long wait for money” quotes 114 days so already out of date. The bit of info in this article that concerns me is this: "Funding Circle has restricted the proportion of old loans that new investors can be allocated to ensure their portfolios are not overburdened with debt"Which yes, we kinda knew. But, given that: a) the usual response to escalating defaults within individual portfolios is "we normally expect some in this phase, and then they level off so your returns will be ok" i.e. there should in normal circs actually be better loans than expected if buying on the SM, as you're 'over the hump'. b) No loans that are already suspended/defaulted would be passed on to new investors anyway. Does that not rather suggest that FC already know there are far more bad loans than have already been seen in this batch? This is as close as you can get to an effective admission that there was an active dash for trash pre-IPO. It really smells. edit: Mind you, much of this article seems to be a straight lift from this forum, so I do wonder whether FC actually have said this explicitly.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 28, 2019 9:05:21 GMT
Sale completed, £20k, email received at 06:30. Combined with loans completed over the 120 days, which I left in situ as I was paranoid that it would cancel the sale, I have just withdrawn 94.3% of my balance. Return is now 2.8%, likely to drop close to zero after the remaining £1.5k of stinky loans fester. The FC delay on 31/05 was 51 days when I started the sale and that seemed bad enough. I can't believe it has actually taken 120 days. This has caused me some major stress and I've been forced to borrow money for the purpose that the FC cash was intended for. I know many would say I should have been aware that selling times could vary but I wasn't. I sold £10k in 2018 and it went through immediately. At that point, my guard came down as I had tested every aspect of FC that I intended to use. I actually became an advocate for FC and recommended them to many people. Needless to say, that advice has now been reversed. I can honestly say I wish I had never heard of FC. Good luck to all and huge thanks to Criston and all contributors to this board, it has been invaluable. Very honest of you, and glad you've escaped relatively unscathed. I hope others who use other even more apparently 'easy access' products on other platforms sit up and take note that the idea of having "tested" platforms in good times is about an effective a plan as doing some dodging and ducking in your living room as prep for stepping in the ring with Mike Tyson and being hit in the mouth.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 27, 2019 17:04:26 GMT
A few questions for Assetz on their email just sent out to investors (w.r.t Turbine loans / Provision funds).
You say:
"We are, however, pleased to confirm that the total provision fund balances will remain at least at the level of funding published currently on our web site as at the end of March 2019, other than some of that balance being used for provision fund payments to lenders for any normal loan loss coverage"
If I've understood correctly, what you are saying is that despite the QAA's now being circa 25% larger than in March 2019, that they will now be less protected in £ terms than they were before.
This means that in effect, the % coverage of the provision funds for the various QAA flavours is now being chopped significantly.
So, firstly have I understood this correctly?
Secondly, why are you pleased to have reduced your coverage ratio? It sounds good for Turbine investors, but QAA investors seem to be worse off.
Third, can you advise how much further of the balance is also being taken away for "normal loan loss coverage"?
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 27, 2019 14:41:33 GMT
Thanks for saving me the effort in digging this out. Further, what business (and all of us) really hate is the uncertainty of not knowing what's going to happen. The problem with that is that in achieving a Brexit deal or <let's go for it> a clean break Brexit, both will then trigger years and years of trade deal negotiations and, of course, ongoing uncertainty about what's going to happen with tariffs/rules/regs - that stuff that business cares about. Saw today that the EU reckon on a transition period of 10-15 years. 10-15 years of bickering with the EU. "Clean Break".
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 27, 2019 14:33:23 GMT
And I despair when remainers make posts suggesting that they are some how more inteligent and better understand the facts that leavers. There are plently of very intelligent and sucessful business men out there who are quite happy with the prospect of Brexit.
The fact that somebody dissagrees with you doesn't make them wrong, it just makes them different. Spot ON agent69 . For every "Captain of Industry" that says Leaving will be a disaster, there's an equal & opposite stating Leaving will be great for business. Come now, you know that's not really true. There are so few pro-Leave business leaders that nearly all interviews with such people are either that bloke with the vacuum cleaners who is so pro-Brexit that he decided to move his business from the UK to Singapore, and the bloke that runs a pub chain who looks like a Thundercat that's really let himself go.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 27, 2019 14:08:59 GMT
I cant post the entire article but one key paragraph struck me, "It (the FCA) said it would be “reviewing the adequacy of a number of firms’ financial resources” amid concerns that some platforms will fail if equity investment backers withdraw." I wonder if FC falls in this category. There are a number of platforms who would otherwise be insolvent without the financial support of their backers, trading merrily on regardless for now. I'm not quite sure what the FCA might be proposing to do in such cases?
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 27, 2019 11:36:04 GMT
Updates on site. In short, looks like full repayment of capital and interest for 1st facility, part repayment of capital (unspecified) of 2nd facility (development tranches), and nowt for the supplementals after that*. Assuming, I should say, that it does complete as forecast in 4-6 weeks.
This is a loan btw where the very top ranking facility and the dregs paid the same interest rate - ridiculous.
*pending further recovery, naturally.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 26, 2019 21:27:53 GMT
One of my early forays went along this line of thinking. I invested in the Vanguard High dividend yield fund, which in the last 5 years has been roundly trounced by all of its non-income focused equivalents. OK, not a disaster, but nowhere near as good as VWRL for example either. In my limited understanding, because: 1) Dividends can be cut. 2) Your high yield dividends may not compensate for the loss of capital growth you experience relative to other firms which pay lower dividends and are growing more quickly. Of course there's nothing to say you won't do well buying such firms/funds, but equally nothing to say conclusively that they'll do any better.. I.e. guess what, yet again, no free lunch in investing so high dividends yield funds are designed for relatively immediate income like the vanguard one you mention, but capital growth doesn't occur with p2p either... Has it been trounced by non-income focussed equivalents in dividends or growth (had you decided to sell at that point)? So "other firms which are growing more quickly" (and deliver growth which out performs dividends) would be packed into a passive product, do you mean? (I'm not under the impression that I can beat the market at all, except temporarily and I haven't got the time for that). My thinking is around risk, as you say, there's no guarantee that funds will grow, but if p2p platform fails, there's no recovery potential. Whereas if a broad and well managed passive fund struggles, there's the option for it to be recalibrated and pick up again eventually?? P2p platform will not eventually recover.... I wouldn't compare equities and P2P, they're not really alike at all. With shares there's capital growth and income, with some funds specialising in one or the other and some just disregarding the distinction entirely. I was generally talking about passive products, but the same applies for active investing too. The extremes are a very young company re-investing any and all profit in their own growth with zero dividends, or an aged old behemoth paying big dividends but which has maxed out all of its growth potential. Both can be good or bad investments. IMV, the lesson I learned is that it's the total return that's more important, not the focus on capital growth or income. Risk-wise, then IMV yes, providing you stick to broad-based index funds, then its my view they're much less risky than P2P as you say. Individual stocks a whole different kettle of fish, see recent Thomas cook thread for an example The only reason I'm anywhere near P2P now personally is that equities are currently so expensive.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 26, 2019 20:25:06 GMT
(they bottled it in the end, but...) But don't worry (as I'm sure you know) the right-wing talkshow host Julia Hateful-Blower then decided to tweet his address to her legions of angry Brexiteer followers anyway. Just for bantz. Edit: and all of this sort of thing then leads to Jess Phillips today: "The Labour MP Jess Phillips, who represents Birmingham Yardley, has revealed that a man has been arrested after trying to “kick the door” of her constituency office while reportedly shouting that she was a fascist. She told LBC Radio: I’ve only just heard about it myself but my staff had to be locked into my office while the man tried to smash the windows and kick the door, I believe. I don’t know what I can say because the man has been arrested".. It's all too clear where this can lead next, which is why last night/today's Bojo/cummings performances have been so sickening.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 26, 2019 18:57:20 GMT
I'm generally getting the impression, on reading, that there are funds which offer dividends which appear to match the income offered by e.g. Zopa. Why do people not just invest in a fund designed for income, instead of say, growth street? If it's a managed fund, can it's price deteriorate that badly? One of my early forays went along this line of thinking. I invested in the Vanguard High dividend yield fund, which in the last 5 years has been roundly trounced by all of its non-income focused equivalents. OK, not a disaster, but nowhere near as good as VWRL for example either. In my limited understanding, because: 1) Dividends can be cut. 2) Your high yield dividends may not compensate for the loss of capital growth you experience relative to other firms which pay lower dividends and are growing more quickly. Of course there's nothing to say you won't do well buying such firms/funds, but equally nothing to say conclusively that they'll do any better.. I.e. guess what, yet again, no free lunch in investing
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 26, 2019 17:28:45 GMT
.... get it over with, and get on with it..... This is never going to be "over with". They are our nearest neighbours and most important trading partners. We have, and will continue to have, close diplomatic, cultural, economic and security interests and ties. You think that, on the conclusion of any kind of deal (or crashing out without a deal), that that's simply going to "be it"? Not a chance. Any and all of our relationship with the EU will be up for renegotiation for.... ever. And we will have, by far, the weaker hand. Despite being as obsessed as everyone else with the whole thing, I go for long periods without recalling that this unbelievably painful and difficult stage that we're trying to be overcome now is but only the first step. What a godawful thought. Just imagine the ongoing bitterness as the EU/US/Japan proceed to walk all over us in future trade deal negotiations, with Tory politicians every step of the way blaming both those large trade blocs for their intransigence/unfairness in not giving us everything we want and, of course, continuing to blame anyone in the UK too who still somehow doesn't believe in their efforts. JamesFrance @vero or other forum Leave enthusiasts - do you really disagree that even with and especially without a withdrawal deal being agreed, that this whole shebang is bound to continue in the same horribly divisive and ultimately unfruitful manner if we somehow overcome this stage? For years and years Or do you honestly feel the likes of Liz Truss and Dom Raab are going to somehow win concessions equal or greater than we already have with the US, Japan etc, and in super rapid fashion? I'd really like to believe that, but on the evidence of their abilities so far it seems somewhat far-fetched. Frankly, even with the best negotiators in the world, we are now a medium-size economy country in a weakened position looking for trade deals in a rush. It is not going to happen to our advantage. The more I write, the more totally insane this whole thing sounds. Time for dinner!
|
|