jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Feb 22, 2018 17:09:34 GMT
MoneyThing, the updated VR for the 2nd tranche of this development (going live tomorrow) mentions "Works have now commenced on site and a monitoring report has been provided to you in respect of progress with the development and expenditure."Will this monitoring report (& others issued on other loans) be made available to lenders, or will we have access only to the (maybe 2 line) result indicated in the VR updates? Or will your decision be taken case-by-case (in which event may we know what your criteria for deciding this will be)? I would imagine this might be an important point for many lenders.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Feb 16, 2018 18:09:16 GMT
Not personally read them yet SteveT , but I gather profit has gone up £600k in the new accounts. Due to higher reported turnover (+£1.7m on prior) iws.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 29, 2018 19:49:57 GMT
A simple solution (to shimself's understandable request) might be, for loans that are about to release a new tranche, to colour the last updated date say green (" 29th Jan 2018"), or the loan number, or the whole line (when viewing in table view). That way we're alerted there's another chance to invest on that loan (or it's not worth clicking open to read if it's one we don't care for), & helps minimize the plenty of to-ing & fro-ing we already have to do across AC's growing loan book. Brings the punters in, reduces wasted time, addresses clay's good point, win-win-win surely.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 29, 2018 18:29:25 GMT
Parachuting here (not been following these loans or the larger one for the building's freehold) but wonder if this cancellation has anything to do with Room 29 not being listed in the VR as one of the 21 rooms the borrower was looking to buy back?
Have also noted most of the other loans already issued against rooms (79, 32, 71, 72, 22, 55 & 65) don't appear in the list of 21 rooms either.
It seems the borrower is maybe buying back more than 21 rooms (or changing his mind as to which he's buying back)? Or something else?
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 29, 2018 17:55:59 GMT
Perhaps MT have a tighter margin on this loan
Just picking up on this point, there is a comment (& number) in the loan particulars (it was also there in the original Dec loan, when I initially asked MT about it – strangely without reply) that, depending on how you read it, might suggest there is either very little margin or (as I will assume to be the case unless otherwise informed) ample ample headroom for a little CB sweetener. Will leave it to others to hunt it down, not difficult (if you knew the devil had lost one prong to his pitchfork.) Was surprised I didn’t get an answer to a question that, after all, was only raised due to what MT had decided to state (not clearly imv) in the loan’s details, & asked (perhaps with undue discretion) offline as don’t normally draw attention to platforms’ margins in public, unless relevant to assessing risk. In this case I think it might be relevant for this purpose (& also the borrower’s likelihood of getting quick & much cheaper alternative funding). Have tbf not gone back to look at this loan, like mrclondon have lost enthusiasm for what might otherwise be a good borrower (in my case because too many things unclear.)
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 26, 2018 4:29:58 GMT
There are reasons to like this loan, but also reasons to seek a much better understanding of where what seem like very large sums forthcoming (including aiui c.£2m already cashed in from HS2) are being spent. My guess (should we be guessing?) is that the new premises are freehold (to be purchased by the shareholders before being leased to the trading company) in a Propco Opco structure, which could leave ample wriggle room depending on what the Propco actually owns (& who owns the Propco). With so much cash coming in the transfer of premises might presumably release some equity/cash for the shareholders, but without knowing how much needs to be spent (including the site purchase & fitting out of the new premises) a wary lender might be wondering how many people years of good living in the Bahamas he could be helping to finance (large enticing sums from the govt when you’re forced to up sticks after many years of hard work could tempt even hardy souls). On a more mundane note it’s also needed to form a view of what resources the borrower might have to play with should production at the new premises (entry already delayed by 2M we’re told, production who knows by how much) or payments from HS2 be delayed for whatever reason. Some of the questions posed by snowmobile 6W ago still valid imv: p2pindependentforum.com/post/234552/threadMy dumb question number 1 would probably be is there any evidence that the new premises exist & have the shareholders’ money (how much?) already injected/committed? Dumb q #2 - has anyone from MT seen (even just pics) or visited the new site, before they hand over half a mil of our hard-earned cash? It may not be far from their N20 London base..
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 25, 2018 15:46:29 GMT
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 18, 2018 12:27:10 GMT
chris a hopefully trivial (but very useful) improvement would be to increase the length of the text we are allowed to put into “Your notes” in the loans. If I’ve done the numbers right there’s room for 247 digits atm. Ideal imv would be to increase this to allow the (currently blank, unused two thirds of the) second line displayed (on my laptop) when you list the loans in table view in “Browse Loans” to be used, thereby extending the digits available to 372 (so 125 more than now). This would be sufficient for my needs & not use more screen-space. I use the notes a lot, & as your loan book increases expect many new MLIA lenders will too. The current space is not enough (for my needs anyway), often end up crunching & abbreviating things to the limits of comprehensibility several months down the line (& still have to miss sometimes important bits out). Any thoughts / likelihood / timelines you can signal? It’s something key for ongoing duedil recording, so if can be bumped up the wish-list as a simple quick fix would be warmly welcomed. Feel free to file under cheap & simple ways to keep MLIA lenders happy Thanks
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 17, 2018 14:31:11 GMT
Going somewhat against consensus (& despite like mrclondon holding a lot of this group’s offers on Assetz already) I am going to go into this loan. Some things that haven’t been understood (imv): The group behind this has a long history & despite being highly geared: 1. has been paying down its debts (from a heady £102m in 2008) to the e/16 ~£23m (excluding the father’s £2m interest free loan) 2. It still seems to have the support of the Bank of Scotland, who appear to provide the majority of the debt funding at (if I have done the numbers correctly adjusting for the Assetz & Route Finance loans - nb there will be other alternative finance sources I have ignored, which would likely push the number even lower) just 3.8% (in 2016). This is an excellent rate for a highly geared group & suggests strong confidence from BoS. 3. The group has repositioned itself with more restaurants / eatery type businesses in premium city centre locations, & so far has been able to service its debts (which is why it hasn’t gone bust despite running into trouble afaics in the post credit-crunch a decade ago). 4. The alternative finance it has taken on can be seen to be a strength rather than a weakness (particularly given it still has mainstream banking support). This is fixed rate short term money (iirc previous mainstream lines were at rates that varied monthly, not great for business planning when you have large debt) that can be raised against specific assets. Not checked widely so please someone correct me but not aware of any defaults to date on these lines. The assets they have used to raise this money appear to be those they are looking to dispose of (these 6 pubs & a long lease on one of Assetz’ loans in return for a shorter lease on one of their leading restaurants) & others where there is a big potential development uplift (the other 2 AC loans). In both cases alternative finance is more suited, & despite the higher headline costs means that the group’s total average borrowing rate (across all mainstream & alt/p2p creditors) ranged in 2014-16 between 5.8 ~ 6.85%, which is perfectly manageable for a viable business (& rather good imv for a highly-geared one). Tagging @bobo who raised this point. 5. There is no evidence to date of “sales by loan” practices & MT have confirmed that these pubs have not been marketed before-hand. Lending against these pubs we’re told has not increased (which aside from being something many p2p borrowers do with or without us being explicitly told when this happens, would be the likely take of someone looking to run off with your money) & the valuers have iirc made a major full revaluation of all the group’s assets recently (possibly made available to BoS too?) rather than some estate agent round the corner (or on the other side of the country) as is the case on other loans we asked to lend on. 6. From what I have read the family behind this group are widely liked & well-regarded. Always hard to judge people you don’t personally know, but there’s plenty of p2p borrowers I rate much less appetising (& this one of the reasons why I invested in their loans on Assetz). Aside from having built & successfully run a large enterprise employing hundreds of staff, donated to charities & sports teams, & generally being fully immersed in the Glasgow-Hamilton scenes (worth googling) these are folk that look likeable, committed to their business (can’t seem them jumping ship), & honour their debts. The mistakes afaics seem to have come from a likely undisciplined asset & land buying spree in the 90’s & noughties that left them exposed in the 08 credit crunch. The problem this loan has (imo) is that it is a hard-sell to p2p lenders who generally don’t take the time (or have the skills) to look properly into a large group’s accounts & trading history, & are instead more easily swayed by a few (not great-looking) pics & the comments of posters here. Summarising just some +ve points on this loan: a. these are income producing assets (a rarity in p2p’s property development sometimes banana case world) with a DSC of 1.24x (ignoring group support) b. it can/should be regarded to be an amortising loan (all proceeds from sales pay down the debt) c. there are no further tranches / possible funding stall-points d. the group’s CG has to be worth something (how you value will depend but maybe the fact the group is still in business after many decades & the sum we’re lending is a trivial part of their asset portfolio suggests they’re likely to be able to honour it before going bust in the next 18M, & would be plain daft to look for a loan by sale for relative peanuts) For further reassurance AC seem to have faith in these folk. The loans there are still being bought by the GBBA (don’t recall this happening on other overdue loans) & they’ve always been sought after (despite their relatively large size). As with all p2p / 12% lending there will be risks, but for a stake in income-producing assets backed by a group with a long proven trading history there are many worse offers there. Don’t like making predictions but here I’ll punt that in a few months time these will be sought-after (maybe never available) loans from folk fleeing the property development frenzy. tagging @magenta14 who provided useful info, & might be interested in a different view
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 15, 2018 12:31:54 GMT
The core assets include 3 with loans on Assetz, & a bit more kerb appeal SteveT
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 4, 2018 21:25:06 GMT
Returning to the subject of the UNs MoneyThing, what isn't clear to me (even after reading your FAQs) is whether these have effectively jumped ahead of us on the transfer of the loan from FS to MT (& if so whether there is some way this leap-frogging could have been avoided before/during the transfer.) Here some long bumpf on UNs & related, which I haven't read or have any insights on (but presumably MT & their advisors are well-versed on, & amongst other things addresses the ways various applications should be made): www.gov.uk/government/publications/notices-restrictions-and-the-protection-of-third-party-interests-in-the-register/practice-guide-19-notices-restrictions-and-the-protection-of-third-party-interests-in-the-registerRelated question - from a quick glance it would seem something in the order of £1.65m has already been taken in deposits by the borrower. What will/can/can't these sums be used for (I imagine some may be destined to funding the assured 8% 5Y yield offered to investors, but not sure whether that kicks in from completion or before? but maybe also the build or just cost-over-runs/contingencies etc? anything stopping it being used on other sites?). Where is that money being held & how much of it is still available for whatever uses it is intended for? Can the future loan updates include a brief running picture of these sums? It's a sizeable sum that might have important repercussions on this loan & on which we have very little visibility or understanding. Even before getting into the questions raised above it might pitch the borrower's skin in the game (point 5 of your FAQ) in a different light? I haven't formed a proper view yet on this loan & see some promising aspects, so look forward to your further thoughts MoneyThing. Thanks
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Dec 20, 2017 16:33:00 GMT
Good news about the diversification algorithm. Can you clarify whether this will apply ONLY to new investments from Feb onwards or whether existing investments in GBBA2 will also be diversified into smaller chunks? Also, will the same process be applied to investments in the Property account? Existing investments will be included and rebalanced. Late to this good news & possibly missed some beats chris but what about the GBBA1, PSIA (& GEIA?) existing holdings - will these be rebalanced too?
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Dec 13, 2017 20:46:01 GMT
The letter makes reference to a valuation dated 2nd Nov, which I don't recall us seeing. SophieThing ? I hope I am right in presuming that the "receipt of evidence" promised in the 11th Dec update has been duly kept to, as fine gentleman (or true ladies) would have mentioned otherwise were that not to be the case. Wrt the site visit whilst the more visits the better (ofcourse) it’s not an aspect that hugely concerns me tbh. I’d rather the site is PROPERLY visited (by MT & qualified surveyor) at the end of Jan when works are meant to be complete. At that time Ed can have a good long chat with the borrower, whilst going thru the tenancy schedule & rent receipts in all their minutiae, & perhaps take a visit to another nearby emporium to see how things work there?
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Dec 13, 2017 20:39:21 GMT
Thanks SophieThing, but wouldn't elliotn's suggestion 2 up be even better (& is it on Shuang's list)?
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Dec 5, 2017 10:34:43 GMT
Not been following closely but that (apparently) expensive funding offer could be read in a (even very) positive light. The £22k costs amount to just 0.15% of the o/s LY loan of £14.3m, & might well be worth the trouble if the borrower thinks the funder’s offer might have legs to it (they already have a term sheet iws). From a look at the new funding candidate’s (well-connected – G Sachs, DB, Citi, UBS etc – these sorta guys don’t get out of bed for a few shillings) directors’ profiles it seems they might have access to good pots of international money (perhaps beyond the provision of bridging facilities that seem to be their main line of business), & who knows could represent not only a temporary refi opp but the route to the ultimate exit funding / ownership partner, should that be required.
In which case the borrower (who I don’t know well but have heard is savvy) could be hitching himself onto a winning proposition, that helps us all exit the loan in due course.
|
|