Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on May 10, 2017 11:35:22 GMT
Please forgive what is probably a very easy question, I'm wondering if loans are ever provided without us the "Lenders" knowing the identity of the receiving company. I'm very new to P2P lending, having only got seriously involved around a month ago (heard of SS and similar years ago but it never appealed). I've sunk circa £1500 each into COL and FS so far, as I liked the appeal of being backed by physical assets and evaluating loan by loan on that basis. I don't have much to invest having now sunk the majority of what I consider "riskable savings" into the 2 sites mentioned above, but have at least a spare £400 a month from wages and am now considering other platforms for diversification. My problem is my employer requires me to disclose any and all investments I make (as I work for a financial institution, this is to avoid potential conflict's of interest or me giving favorable treatment to clients or potential clients). For sites where investments are essentially anonymous this isn't too much of a problem, as I can disclose I'm going to invest no more than £5000 through say FS, and no more than $999 (or equivalent Sterling) in a single investment and once approved I'm good to go. However for anything where I know the details of who I am investing in then I have to get pre-approval from both my line manager and a central team who approve all investments for each and every loan, while not overly cumbersome (turn around time can be quick if I chase), for the small amounts I plan to invest in any given loan it is a pain. I can't circumvent this as the potential result is dismissal. From looking through the SM and few available loans it is readily apparent who you are investing in, and this makes sense as company performance and health seem as much a part of the decision as the asset value over these longer term loans. I'm guessing that this is always the case and I'll stick to property, pawn and cars for now! Alternatively are there any other P2P platforms that offer similar to ABL? I've looked at AC and have made an investment in the QAA account, but see their loanbook has similar levels of identification, I'm tempted by the GBBA there, but it's just a few % points shy of what I'm looking for. Appreciate any input. Looks complex. Using Occam's razor as a starting principal, do you have an other/better half who can make these investments on your behalf.
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on May 9, 2017 15:57:43 GMT
I don't know, maybe Mt feel they wont be able to fill the loan when it moves on to development, it will be interesting to see if COL can raise more money for one loan than their current loan book is worth as a whole. Well it has prompted me to register for COL for the first time, and I will be contributing a four figure sum towards this loan. Would not surprise me if many others who hold this loan on MT follow your logic and COL will see quite a strong new customer uptake over the next day or so. Frankly if it was good enough to hold (I have a four figure sum in it) on MT then relative little has changed in the risk following the migration to COL. Still think that as this single loan will form a significant percentage of the total loan book, they may find this one challenging.
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on May 9, 2017 15:37:20 GMT
Only 3.5% funded so far. Those with longer memories will be aware that all platforms have faced this dilemma at some during the evolution of their business. Seems to be a very standard issue when trying to take that leap in bridging loans from the >500k loans to the >1m opportunities. This step seems historically to have been overcome by cashback inducements (MT and SS/L) to assist in bridging the bridging gap. I think from the platforms perspective these inducements work out cost effective in the longer run even if they significantly reduce margins on these earlier loans as a way of increasing their investor head count ready for more future loans as their user base develops. Am sure collateral will reach out to the community if they need any assistance in how this has been achieved historically.
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on May 9, 2017 14:48:24 GMT
It ist in de hands of der SS! MoneyThing Ed, Has 'imminent' firmed up at all yet ? Yes. It has just been repaid. What is often now referred to as post-imminent
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on May 9, 2017 14:04:19 GMT
Afternoon, We have one new loan going live now with no pre-funding and no bid limits. Development Property Loan Interest P/A - 12% Loan value of £1,683,000 (value £2,440,000) LTV 69% Loan Term - 9 months Pre Fund - None Bid Limit - None You can see this loan in Available Loans now - the loan is offering interest at a rate of 12% per annum. Many thanks, Gordon Collateral Rep collateral Does this follow your standard procedures for other loans. Is the loan already fully underwritten by collateral/other and we would just be buying that out. Also is interest paid from the point of investment as per other loans
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on May 5, 2017 16:14:52 GMT
1. I would consider your definition to be 'popular' loans and not a definition of 'high class' loans, as such I cannot agree that 'activity on the SM seems to support (your) definition'. I think there is a very critical difference between those two but as always am happy to agree to disagree on that point. I would point out that I believe using your definition you have just informed the community that 2 of the 3 loans that this thread refers to are in fact 'high class' loans. 2. You are missing the key point in that you do not appear to have any consistency in 'your way'. In no way was I implying that your way was wrong as I am not sure which of your multiple 'ways' you are referring to. Merely pointing out, along with others and also with a that you are either hypocritical or just so inconsistent that it becomes difficult to follow your train of thought. I get you. In a way I am saying that the terms 'bad loan' and 'high class loan' are not mutually exclusive. I can see it sounds muddled but I am using bad loan to define the borrower/security etc. and I am using high class loan to define the liquidity, remaining term and interest rate. An example I would give would be the Alpine themed house by the famous waterway. A 'bad loan' but also a 'high class loan' - (by my definitions). I get you too. These definitions certainly make sense of some previous posts, and certainly clear up my understanding of bad vs high class in this context. Back to the original point... With reference to these 3 loans you posted 'Without scrutiny, it would be like a government without any opposition. If we can force U-turns on bad loans etc. then we have done our job.
Opinions, concerns and issues raised by investors helps to keep the management in check and, ultimately, helps everybody - the platform included.'By this I read that as a community, we could 'force U-turns on bad loans' and thus have 'done our job' and 'help(ed) everybody' by ensuring these types of 'bad' loans were not accepted onto the platform. Then I haven't done any DD ...... I agree these loans sound bad......However I will be investing modest sums in both the 12% loans.......liquidity will be great for the first month or so. It is 12% in the bag.......sell like hot cakes on the SM. I am happy to invest in new, rare beast 12% loans and I am glad a few others will not, as that increases my allocation.
I think the original query showed some confusion over whether these two statements seem incongruous. I took this as meaning that forcing a U-Turn, which helps everyone including the platform would be best achieved by the community not engaging with these loans if that were the weight of opinion. If in this community based scenario you are then 'happy to invest' then are you also not 'doing your job'. Just for clarity I fully agree with your original statement, in fact some time ago the platform pulled the so-called 'toxic wasteland' loan from the pipeline which I believe was in part due to the views of members of this community. I am finding it difficult to then understand your second post which seems to suggest that as it is a 'bad' loan the best way to handle it is to buy it and pass on that responsibility at an early opportunity. Not trying to be difficult but I just find the two strategies/concepts to be diametrically opposed. Apologies in advance for the selective quoting which I hope you can see has been done purely to coalesce the post not to attempt to misquote you. My forum skills are insufficient to have fully linked to both the original posts. I am of course happy to amend to re-quote in full.
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on May 5, 2017 13:44:32 GMT
You're alive!!! Had us all worried there for a month or nine. Alive and well thanks. Retired last year at the grand old age of 48 so have had other things to occupy me, but getting back up to speed now. (Early retirement thread was fascinating, everyone should have a read).
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on May 5, 2017 13:36:02 GMT
1. I define high class select loans as those paying 12% with very long unexpired terms. Investor appetite as evidenced by activity on the SM seems to support my definition. Therefore there is no inconsistency in my comments. 2. my way is right and your way is wrong. 1. I would consider your definition to be 'popular' loans and not a definition of 'high class' loans, as such I cannot agree that 'activity on the SM seems to support (your) definition'. I think there is a very critical difference between those two but as always am happy to agree to disagree on that point. I would point out that I believe using your definition you have just informed the community that 2 of the 3 loans that this thread refers to are in fact 'high class' loans. 2. You are missing the key point in that you do not appear to have any consistency in 'your way'. In no way was I implying that your way was wrong as I am not sure which of your multiple 'ways' you are referring to. Merely pointing out, along with others and also with a that you are either hypocritical or just so inconsistent that it becomes difficult to follow your train of thought.
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on May 5, 2017 11:48:12 GMT
I haven't done any DD , although of course I have read the comments of others who have. I agree these loans sound bad and I wouldn't want to be anywhere near them within 6 months of their term end dates. However I will be investing modest sums in both the 12% loans - should they not be withdrawn. The loan totals are relatively small, and liquidity will be great for the first month or so. It is 12% in the bag, albeit for a limited period. My guess is that as the majority of investors act like me (and in addition don't read this forum) that these loans will be over-subscribed and sell like hot cakes on the SM for a while to come. Of course I could be wrong - but given my stake will be trivial compared with the total Lendy interest I have bagged to date, I am happy to invest in new, rare beast 12% loans andI am glad a few others will not, as that increases my allocation. I would not touch the 10% loan with a bargepole. I also see the merit in your strategy (having used it myself up until last year), however, showing support for loans that "sound bad" in the form of setting pre-funding can only be read by Lendy as a stamp of approval that they are providing what people want, paving the way for more of the same. The more 'bad sounding' loans that come onto the platform, the more likely the platform will fail and the bigger they are... Your recent comment -here- seems to be at odds with how your strategy might be perceived by Lendy and it seems you are relying on others to engage in the scrutiny you speak of, as any scrutiny from someone "glad" to be increasing their allocation could be seen as hypocritical. My pre-funding on these loans is 0, as it was for the Thames duo. Also hard to envisage how this aligns with the quote last week from GeorgeT "Yes it is true I have decided to reduce my exposure on this platform and I am in the process of doing that and I will be only holding very high class, select loans from now on". One may erroneously get the impression that he holds onto his loans for a significantly longer period than he holds onto his strategies. 0 for me too on these 3, and hope just maybe one day us ol' timers can enjoy a pint over reading the 'why have I been burnt' posts from some people using the 'I'll just flog it on the SM' strategy
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on Aug 11, 2016 11:26:58 GMT
What to do if you are evil (/perhaps criminal?) and you are desperate to sell your loan part: 0) You already have the most discounted sale price (you are desperate to sell) - e.g. £1000 @ 99.51) You put a buy order for a similar amount but slightly higher - e.g. £1000 @ 99.62) You choose a popular time and sit there refreshing the page 3) Someone comes along, spots the arb and buys your £1000 @ 99.5 - they hope to make a quick £10 profit. 4) You see you've sold your loan part so you quickly cancel your buy at 99.6 Note that in practice the person in (3) may complain and request your account blocked! Often find that the problem with these devious, cunning criminal types is that they always get let down by planning their schemes during their maths lessons and not paying attention to learning the basics.
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on Jul 4, 2016 11:58:54 GMT
Well 9ct gold is 38% gold. It is 755 grams so contains 290 grams of gold. This amount of gold melted down on the open market on today's spot price would be about £8940, Collateral have valued this at £8950 with would give you a shortfall of about £10. You would also have an issue if you needed to sell it internationally as it would be unlikely to be able to be delivered via air freight services. Hi investor .What spot price are you using? Ok I give up. Amendment Current spot price is £32.70 * 290 = £9483. This is an excellent opportunity to invest in another high quality loan from Collateral
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on Jul 4, 2016 11:42:41 GMT
Pity the fool who has invested in 0114 why? not looked yet what is bad about it Well 9ct gold is 38% gold. It is 755 grams so contains 290 grams of gold. This amount of gold melted down on the open market on today's spot price would be about £8940, Collateral have valued this at £8950 with would give you a shortfall of about £10. You would also have an issue if you needed to sell it internationally as it would be unlikely to be able to be delivered via air freight services. Edit. Accurate gold price would make this worth around £9,400
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on Jul 4, 2016 11:24:13 GMT
Pity the fool who has invested in 0114
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on Jun 30, 2016 11:48:45 GMT
I don't do jokes about Johnsons
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on Jun 30, 2016 11:40:02 GMT
Breaking News --- Boris has pulled out
|
|