|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 23, 2017 8:07:43 GMT
Now, the PF coverage is down by 50% in the last 3 years, the company's clearly on skid row, and I'm being threatened with haircuts.... If the forumites don't mind, I would like to counter this, which I consider to be slightly scary hyperbole. Agreed I'd like the Provision Fund to be bigger. However the coverage ratio is a forecast, it's worth noting that the Provision Fund has clean assets of over £22m and an income stream from historic bad debt. This is the largest fund globally, by nearly double. And in terms of "skid row", jeez. Platform has been going for 7 years and has still delivered every penny to every lender every day. That's an impressive record and should deserve some trust. To date that's £63m in lender interest. They are now matching record loans of around £60m monthly and growing. They've lend £1.75b and received back over £1b. Lending money is easy, RateSetter have proven they usually make good lending decisions and they can get it back as well. No-one has been "threatened" with a haircut. They are rightly putting the correct governance around the fund to cater for any potential eventuality. That's sensible, and should be expected of a more mature platform. And I suspect there will more news in 2017 that will further strengthen the platform robustness. So please, if you want to leave then make use of the very generous fee-free offer. I appreciate this hasn't gone smoothly for all, but the general feedback I'm reading is that they are doing a good job in the circumstances. Considering this is a one-off and not BAU. Rant over, Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 22, 2017 22:33:44 GMT
it may help in allying some of your personal concerns surrounding the mid to longer term viability of TMP by taking a look see into the important business and personal links of those directly involved with or to those with a watchful vested interest to be found at a distance to the 'core' a goodly number of very wealthy and influential people have a vested interest in the strategic positioning, success, growth and ultimate sector dominance of this venture. These interested parties have identified a niche that will enable them to generate yields for themselves better than or equivalent to some of their affiliate yield driven moneymaking interests. The pursuit of yield forms the bedrock of TMP's ethos, as lenders one could reasonably argue that you are participating in making this well researched business objective viable, by lending one becomes 'a Name' of TMP 'syndicate'. All risk rests with the lender not with TMP as the latter has evidently positioned itself in the role of win, win. Perhaps WestonKevTMP could correct my theorising hypothesis if any part of what I've expressed is incorrect? Link back to my post on Page 2 of this thread: p2pindependentforum.com/post/151998With best regards. I have no idea whatsoever what this post means, or how to answer it. It might just be me, but I think the style very difficult. I apologize if English is your second language. Are you praising the solid professional backgrounds of the co-founders and investors, or something else? I think they have demonstrated strong professional careers to date. And knowing them, they are smart and dynamic. Most forumites know who I am and what I achieved at RateSetter, so I like to think that's earned me some brownie points. Here's my professional profile : (feel free to Link in....) As per the comments on yield. Again your message is very cryptic. Is it a bad thing to form a company that might one day be profitable, as well as providing a fair product for lenders and borrowers? Isn't this a good thing? It's worth noting that unlike I think every other P2P platform, The Money Platform charges zero up front fees on a loan. We only get paid when a loan repays, so we are 100% aligned to the lender in this respect. Arguably the lender is taking a risk with their money and we "only" with reputation, but the estimated returns reflect this. If you like this balance of risk reward then lend, if you don't then fine. Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 22, 2017 22:14:48 GMT
Welcome on board WestonKevTMP . I was thrilled to see you had joined TMP, and that you have already started engaging with us. I am pleased to hear that your first priority is to get the borrowing side into shape. I am concerned that there are only £51,500 of loans in place today. With such small loan volumes the platform must be a long way short of covering its costs. What will you be doing to increase the number of borrowers? And what volume do you expect to achieve over what timescale? How long could this platform survive at current loan volumes? I hope we are looking forward to a long and prosperous engagement. Profitability is not a short-term aim. Seed capital allows the platform to grow numbers safely whilst getting the platform right for borrowers and lenders. Obviously the platform cannot survive on current loan volumes, but having been live for only around 5 months the volumes are as expected. We have sufficient "runway". Phase 1 of building a real platform matching loans with links into the credit reference agencies and payment processors has been a great achievement, alongside full FCA authorisation. This wasn't overnight, it's taken the co-founders 18 months of planning and liaison with the FCA and bureaux to get here. Next stage (phase 2) is getting the product and risk management into a more optimal position. This includes lender protection. Lender volume is not a short term requirement or aim, that's phase 3 for H2 2017 onwards.... Kevin. P.S. I've just made up these "phases", this isn't part of a grand plan....
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 22, 2017 11:56:27 GMT
They might get a few ex lenders popping along for a drink and food ...and ex-employees.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 21, 2017 21:57:31 GMT
Google 'Ratesetter blog' and it takes you to the page. Usually they send an email invite, so they can control entry to lenders (of merit...). This is open to all.... .... so I've registered. It'll be my fifth. Twice as a normal lender and three times as an employee! Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 19, 2017 7:44:37 GMT
My view is that ideally you need some diversification across platforms. However, I would argue that both RateSetter and Zopa+ could be considered core safe holdings. Although a little dull for some of the more adventurous lender types on this platform.
A new lender would then diversity outwards to the likes of Lending Works, Assetz, BondMason, Abundance and Funding Circle before venturing smaller holdings to the higher risk platforms (typically identified by the returns...).
I wouldn't lend on any if the European platforms, nor on the real estate platforms where the security is considered more important than the integrity of the individuals borrowing. But that's my opinion.
Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 17, 2017 21:33:18 GMT
..... The borrower is also racing to refinance to make good his offer to us. Which fits nicely with the previous update " The Borrower is finding refinancing rather challenging ". Alongside the planning permission issues, unfulfilled promises to local planning departments, artists not getting paid, bankrupts owning the company.... and with the loan now over 150 days in arrears and highly unlikely that any overdue interest payments have ever been made (happy to have this confirmed otherwise?) - this meets pretty strongly my definition of default!
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 10, 2017 17:03:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 10, 2017 12:18:01 GMT
Sometime local news outlets are providing more timely news...
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 8, 2017 9:30:02 GMT
RateSetter quite rightly gets a lot of scrutiny over its bad debt performance, and comparison to Provision Fund contributions. After all this is it's primary USP. As forumites know this was my role from 2014 to mid 2016, and I'm proud of the retail book performance. However Zopa don't seem to get the same level of scrutiny. For example these statistics imply they are heavily relying on the loan bad debt curves significantly tailing off over time, as they are currently on course since 2014 of spending more than the contributions (or collections performs well on defaulted loans). And the Zopa safeguard fund is far smaller than the RateSetter Provision Fund. So lets see how things pan out. Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 8, 2017 9:20:51 GMT
....indeed RS is meant to be emailing me some data on the 2016 default levels v their projections as detailed on their Market Data page, to aid my decision) and no mention of being Blacklisted was indicated if I left. I personally, if I worked there, wouldn't send you any information above and beyond what is reported on the web site, or can be deduced from analysing the downloadable loan book. Not just because they have 40,000+ lenders and so can't be expected to perform bespoke analysis for a single lender, but also because it isn't fair. The site is egalitarian and all have access to equal information whether you have £10 or a few million... And although I don't know, I'd be really surprised if anyone was "banned". Not only because it would be petty and regulatory risky, but very difficult to implement and control. Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 7, 2017 8:30:27 GMT
Fantastic news. I registered in the hope he may persuade a transition to fractional lending ie diversified loan parts. Here's hoping, all the best WestonKevTMP ! Thank you, it's good to be back. And the small team at The Money Platform are dynamic, innovative and keen to do the right think by lenders and provide a fairer more transparent offering to this much maligned sector of borrowers. It's short term borrowing, that doesn't have to mean pay-day or sub-prime. It's different and there is clearly demand. I'll shortly be writing a blog on why this lending sector needs a successful platform that can lend with honesty and integrity. A business needs to make money, but it doesn't have to treat people unfairly. And with full platform FCA authorisation already in place, the regulator understands this as well, and is supportive. But there is a lot of work to do, the platform is far from a finished article. One issue is that of lender protection, and most forumites will know my background of building the RateSetter fund from sub £1m to over £20m. However this model of protection isn't right for every lender, platform, risk profile or type of borrowing proposition. TMP has been initially designed to not provide protection through fractional loans (i.e. diverisifed loans), nor a Provision Fund (although the software design has this functionality). A third option is that of a colllatorised pool for managed collective lending, not disimilar to the rolling/monthly options sprouting across many P2P platforms - although this usually means reduced returns. Currently TMP is a higher risk higher return proposition, and there are enough lenders in place whilst borrowing volumes are purposefully low. Lenders ideally need to obtain their own diversification across loans, which does mean higher lending amounts. So at the moment the focus is on getting the borrowing half of the platform in shape. Then in the medium-long term future of the platform when borrowing volumes can be allowed to grow safely and sustainability, alternative methods of lender protection (than self diversification) will be firmly on the agenda. That time isn't here get.... Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 7, 2017 8:13:26 GMT
Tried to sign up but did't have any luck. Postcode finder doesn't seem to find the village that I live in so I had to choose the next nearest village... Finally got stuck on the box where you put a house number.... which I don't have.. Although the platform is young, the address look-up software is pretty industry standard. If TMP can't find your address then other more established platforms may also be struggling. It should have found your village/postcode, but there could be an issue with house names instead of numbers. Any chance you could DM me the details? So despite the standard software and look- up functionality, I'd really appreciate it if people could DM me their glitches and I'll investigate. Or email me directly.... It's kevin@themoneyplatform.com Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 5, 2017 22:07:05 GMT
As I see it (please correct if wrong) on outstanding loans of £623 million and a PF of £22.2 million (being 3% or so) it would only take a default change from 3% to 3.5% to trigger the haircut. Odds are that this will certainly happen as soon as the economy takes a dip. I'll be happy to correct you... The current Provision Fund has been amassed from the existing portfolio. Which has already suffered its defaults and is a cleaned book. The current 3% ProvisirFund is net of these historical Decatur. Yes there will be more defaults, but your talking about the default rising from the already book rate, say 3%, to 6%, before a haircut is triggered. All new loans will bring with them new Provision Fund contributions. And if management think the new lifetime default rate is 6%, these new loans will have higher contribution accordingly. I'm not saying their aren't risks involved lending with RateSetter. But they are far from as delicately balanced as a small 0.5%.increase being disastrous. Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by WestonKevTMP on Feb 4, 2017 22:20:56 GMT
One of the questions is why is RS doing this now, from the released figures on the PF it looks to be under more pressure, if not why is RS lacking the confidence in the PF to cope now when it was confident in the past, especially as this is occurring during good times or do they know something we don’t. They are doing it now because the Resolution Event was never fit for purpose. Just read some of the older threads to see how much confusion and uncertainty surrounded when it would be called and what would happen in run-down. As I said on another thread, I think this T&C update is a very good change. It provides more certainty on what would happen if the PF wasn't thought sufficient, and gives management more room to make changes to address any potential shortfall rather than be forced into run-down. And very fair in terms of the fee-free get out. I mean even people that wanted out for whatever other unrelated reason can use this opportunity. The Resolution Event made sense at launch, but now 6 years later it needed a change to be more practical of potential reality. Kevin.
|
|