copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Mar 21, 2020 10:54:23 GMT
A very respected statistician and epidemiologist Ioannidis writes: "Reported case fatality rates, like the official 3.4% rate from the World Health Organization, cause horror — and are meaningless." "The one situation where an entire, closed population was tested was the Diamond Princess cruise ship and its quarantine passengers. The case fatality rate there was 1.0%, but this was a largely elderly population, in which the death rate from Covid-19 is much higher. Projecting the Diamond Princess mortality rate onto the age structure of the U.S. population, the death rate among people infected with Covid-19 would be 0.125%. But since this estimate is based on extremely thin data — there were just seven deaths among the 700 infected passengers and crew — the real death rate could stretch from five times lower (0.025%) to five times higher (0.625%). It is also possible that some of the passengers who were infected might die later, and that tourists may have different frequencies of chronic diseases — a risk factor for worse outcomes with SARS-CoV-2 infection — than the general population. Adding these extra sources of uncertainty, reasonable estimates for the case fatality ratio in the general U.S. population vary from 0.05% to 1%. "If we assume that case fatality rate among individuals infected by SARS-CoV-2 is 0.3% in the general population — a mid-range guess from my Diamond Princess analysis — and that 1% of the U.S. population gets infected (about 3.3 million people), this would translate to about 10,000 deaths. This sounds like a huge number, but it is buried within the noise of the estimate of deaths from “influenza-like illness.” If we had not known about a new virus out there, and had not checked individuals with PCR tests, the number of total deaths due to “influenza-like illness” would not seem unusual this year. At most, we might have casually noted that flu this season seems to be a bit worse than average." The main point of the article is that because we haven't done enough testing, we don't know, and we are making huge decisions on very little data. Of course, where we do have the best data (South Korea), his estimates are not so far off (so far). Read the whole article here: www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/
This article makes some great points but until we have an antibody test and test a random sample of the population including healthy people we can't really accurately say what the death rate is. Many people may have recovered with no/mild symptoms and never knew they had it. If what we're seeing in Italy is the result of 50% of the population already having contracted the disease then the epidemic there has peaked already. We simply don't know yet and we could be doing more damage to our long term healthcare by damaging our economy since we need a strong economy to pay for it in the first place.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Mar 20, 2020 22:24:32 GMT
If the government covers 80% of wages for more than a couple of months our national debt is going to break 100% of GDP. It doubled in 2007/08 financial crisis and has only really levelled out at 85% in the past few years. Italy is at 130%. USA is at 80%. I can't help but think if this is going to be an ongoing crisis we'll see national borrowing increase to the point that gilt buyers lose faith in governments' ability to repay.
I suspect the sovereign debt crisis that has been simmering in the background in Europe and the USA since the financial crisis will come to the boil this year.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Mar 20, 2020 9:30:02 GMT
I don't understand why many countries have had large outbreaks but have seemingly contained them but others have not. Is there something about this virus that doesn't like sticking around in one region for too long?
For South Korea they have the highest testing rate per head of population in the world so far. They have actively traced cases (including using peoples' mobile phone data and credit card usage) and tested where people have been in contact with those that are positive and required them to self quarantine and get tested. Many of their cases (~60%) stemmed from spreading through a cult (Shincheonji) where members gathered in large groups for several hours. These cult members tended to be young so that may also contribute to SK's low death rate. Whether this strategy will remain effective though when other countries are just trying to let it spread slowly so the health services aren't overwhelmed and herd immunity is developed is yet to be seen - they may eventually lose control again unless they keep borders closed.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Mar 15, 2020 22:18:39 GMT
Just bought an nice 1-7litre/min 30-98% oxygen generator . They seem to be selling fast as over 200 sold in a day where that would be a years normal sales. A nice oxygen boost keeps faculties sharp and helps the lungs. Why have money just sitting any returns from investments should be used to enhance your life especially if you had already written it off as loss
Just in case anyone thinks this is good advice, it's not. If you have normal oxygen levels then breathing high oxygen concentrations is detrimental to your health. If a doctor assess and prescribes oxygen because you have low oxygen saturation due to a medical condition by all means use it, otherwise hold off on taking medical advice from a god of the afterlife...
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Mar 12, 2020 11:32:20 GMT
Tom Hanks has got corona as well. Markets are in going to take a tumble in morning!
14 days in isolation ... someone should send him a football to keep him company.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Feb 27, 2020 11:14:22 GMT
If you have the cash on hand you can put in £10k on 5th of April and withdraw it on the 6th then just drip it back in if/when new loans become available.
It's probably for the best that Ablrate don't go down the route of relaxing their standards on loan acceptance like Lendy/FS. That said it's not in their interests to go MT's way either.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Feb 20, 2020 17:02:21 GMT
From what I can see RICS valuations aren't worth the paper they're written on in P2P for a number of reasons. 1. Most valuations include so many disclaimers that it would be impossible to hold them liable if you don't recover anywhere near the value in a default situation (e.g. we didn't conduct a structural survey gets them out of what should be obvious structural defects, Brexit around the corner so anything could happen to the market, residual valuations on developments where small changes in assumptions drastically affects value, etc) 2. The P2P platforms interests aren't aligned with yours. They want to lend as much money as possible to get their % fees so surprisingly the valuation comes out to be just enough to lend the borrower as much as they want. If the valuation is inflated a bit so it looks like an amazing LTV at first glance the lenders will lap it up. Reading some of the very helpful DD people do on here and comparing properties for sale nearby can curb this somewhat but I guess the majority of lenders naively trust the platform unfortunately. 3. Potential nefarious dealings between valuers and borrowers. I don't know how often this happens but I've suspected it in one case on FS specifically. What's to stop the borrower slipping the valuer a few quid to get a favourable valuation to defraud the lender? Only reason a platform would care is if they plan to be in business long term where in reality it seems that several platforms are just in it to make money while the going's good then walk away and let admins mop up whatever value is left over.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Feb 15, 2020 11:51:49 GMT
We all think MT are 'nice' people because of they way they ran their platform in the good days. However while that probably remains true, they are certainly not capable of making good decisions when it comes to defaults, preferring to put the problem off until a later date. When they had a viable platform, they all too often made the easiest decision for their platform, and hoped this coincided with what was best for their lenders. I hope now they are closing down they will act to conclude things are quickly as possible. Anyone who thinks waiting will bring a better return is deluded. Anything that takes time involves administrators, their fees and expenses which rode any capital return. The sentiment of the previous last post is spot on in my opinion.
Easy to say with the benefit of hindsight. If MT had sold the property at a fire sale price when admins had recommended build out being the more profitable option then they would have been lambasted on here too. Running a recovery on defaulted P2P is a case of d***ed if you do d***ed if you don't if you can't recover all the capital and interest a day after it's due. I would also argue the headache of a build out is far from the easiest decision for the platform.
I agree with you on anything involving administrators however. Platforms and P2P lenders would do well to be aware that they are for the most part vultures who will underestimate costs initially to get the business then screw you later. I for one am glad MT are winding down the platform themselves when it might be easier to walk away and leave it in the hands of administrators like Lendy or FS.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Feb 4, 2020 16:37:42 GMT
From an email today from the administrators regarding a request to the court for directions on Lendys distribution waterfall:
Basically if we don't challenge the distribution waterfall then p2p lenders get screwed in favour of creditors, if we do challenge it we get screwed in favour of the administrators and legal firms with a possible bonus screwing in favour of creditors. Gotta love the legal robbery that is administration.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Dec 20, 2019 12:57:48 GMT
Don't forget that it's now in the interests of administrators to have the fee waterfall favouring Lendy. If they have £20m in the unsecured pot to take their fees from they'll certainly drag out and inflate their costs to absorb as much of it as possible. Page 4 of the admin report: The way this will most likely go will be:- they rack up a few hundred hours at £500 an hour of administrator charges, then they decide in their favour, investors challenge it, it goes to court and then we get another few hundred thousand in legal costs (which the administrators themselves will get a kickback from).
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Dec 9, 2019 15:47:39 GMT
Yeah, it's almost like a vote on the specific issue (BJ's Brexit deal) might have been a better way of deciding the Brexit issue- you know, like a confirmatory referendum. It would be a reasonable way to deal with the issue provided the logic was "we have already decided to leave the EU in the last referendum, this referendum will be about how we leave ... leave with this deal or leave without a deal." Most people saying they want a second referendum say they want remain on the ballot which is code for they want to overturn the result of the last one.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Dec 9, 2019 15:29:00 GMT
And Brexiteers as soon as they won swiftly moved the goalposts declaring that obviously if people voted to Leave the EU they also wanted out of the single market, custom union, and anything else they don't like even if it wasn't on the ballot paper. To be fair there wasn't a consistent message from leave campaigners on whether we would leave the single market or not which given the broad variety of backgrounds of leave campaigners is understandable.
I think as long as the EU believes there is a possibility of overturning the referendum result then any deal we get will be rubbish to give remainers leverage to stay or force no deal (which they don't think will happen, and given parliament's remain bias they're likely right).
It's unfortunate that yet another election is almost entirely about Brexit. If I want to vote based on the Brexit issue I'm railroaded into voting for a party whose other policies I'm mostly against.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Dec 6, 2019 18:48:02 GMT
Sophie & Ed,
I'm saddened to hear you're winding down the business but appreciate the commercial reasons for doing so. Of the 9 platforms I invested in over the years in my opinion MoneyThing has definitely come out on top for integrity and clear communications with lenders. Where the situations arose when there was a choice about doing what was best for MT and what was best for lenders, MT always dealt fairly and often more than fairly with us. I'm sure your employees also appreciate this sense of fairness in keeping them on board until after the holidays.
I hope you have happy and relaxing Christmas (with plenty of chocolate!) and good luck with whatever you decide to do next in the new year!
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Nov 29, 2019 20:59:07 GMT
From the Lendy's terms and conditions I downloaded on 08/11/17 in regards to the order of defaulted recovery payments:
The new terms and conditions on the website which say 11/07/18:
The new T&Cs seriously benefit Lendy at the expense of lenders. In the example from todays email from administrators the recovery to lenders was £1,078,000. Under the old T&Cs it would have been £1,425,000.
Does anyone remember if we were forced to accept the new terms explicitly when we logged in? The last time I invested new money onto the platform was Dec 2017. Is there anyone else in this position that thinks it might be possible to argue to the administrator that we implicitly refused the new T&Cs since we stopped investing after they were implemented?
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Nov 18, 2019 17:22:18 GMT
I won't be investing at 4% for 5 year, especially with AC offering 5.75% for 90 day notice money.
Fortunately we still have the ability to set our own rate so it's only the passive investors that will get screwed by this. The 'smart' money will either set a fair rate or look elsewhere.
Hopefully enough people notice that little discreet edit button to change the rate in the new website design so RS don't become unstable from a mass exodus of funds.
|
|