am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Assetz Capital (AC)
#164 vote
Jan 30, 2016 20:16:09 GMT
Post by am on Jan 30, 2016 20:16:09 GMT
First thing to note is that the email from surveymonkey doesn't give the deadline for voting. (It is however on the activity tab at AC when one logs in to see what the proposed options are.)
My understanding is that the intent was to sell into the healthcare market, at a premium to the price achievable in the residential market. Reading between the lines, my interpretation is that the lower number of buyers in the healthcare market means that it takes longer (on average) to sell properties, and the borrower is now redirecting to the residential market to achieve quicker sales. However since the LTV is low the lower price achieved doesn't matter to us, so providing AC unsuspend the loan for anyone who wants their money now, there's nothing objectionable about the borrower's proposal for a short extension at an increased interest rate.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 30, 2016 10:22:09 GMT
If the borrower is borrowing £1m for a year at 8% to build a property he also (under FC's model) borrows £80,000 to pay the interest due (and more the pay the interest due on that, and so - it converges at about £87,000). The borrower also borrows more to pay FC's fees, plus an element for the interest on that.
FC are inconsistent on overrunning property bridging and development loans. These two (and earlier Harrogate) haven't been refinanced, but several others (most recently Tewkesbury) have been refinanced.
End dates aren't a wild guess, but they're not certain either, as you have discovered.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Funding Circle (FC)
SM rates
Jan 29, 2016 17:09:13 GMT
Post by am on Jan 29, 2016 17:09:13 GMT
Yes I saw those, my eyes nearly popped out when I saw a £250 A rated loan part at a 16% discount appear. I managed to get 4 or 5 parts, but that only represents about a 1% success rate I think with the amount I didn't get. I can't really fathom why someone would be selling them one by one at approx 15 second intervals over the space of about an hour and a half with discounts varying from about -2.5% to -16% (that I saw). It must have been at least £30k's worth overall, probably more. If you're just swapping them between your own accounts, wouldn't it be better to sell them at a premium to avoid competition? Several hours later there's a variety of hefty loan parts available at up to 1.5% discount. It could be someone selling out a portfolio of millions of pounds worth of loan parts. I was tempted to buy one to see who was selling, but the only one near my range has a buyer rate of only 7.5% even with the discount.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 28, 2016 20:52:49 GMT
Hmmm. Just for fun, I just put some 19560 up at +0.4%, and they flew out. One buyer bought five. I've made enough to treat blender to some crickets. So I've put some up at various increased premiums to better quantify the daftness. I see there's no cashback on tranche 5. I'm patient.
Thanks for the thought. There is no cash back on tranche 5 yet. But there may be in a few days time. What we know is that it has to be refinanced and it has to go through the partial board. However, tranche 4 disappeared quickly enough. (It's Bristol 1 that's having trouble.)
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 28, 2016 20:12:08 GMT
My apologies rogerbu, I was busy looking at the other thread and have only just noticed your new thread. Let me get back to you on the calcs we use in the system. Regards, Ed. Currently, calculation is based on 1% per month regardless of the number of days in that month (rounded up to the nearest 1p). This is actually quite complicated from a system prospective, e.g. daily interest is calculated for January = 1%/31 & February = 1%/28. We are however about to change it so that the daily calculation will be 12%/365 (rounded up to the nearest 1p). Regards, Ed. Due to shrapnelification, I've got a holding of £3 in one loan (and a second holding of £247 bought when more became available). £3 translates to annual interest of 36p, or approximately 0.1p per day. You seem to be saying that my interest on the £3 will be rounded up to £3.65 over the course of the year, or an effective rate of 120%. I assume that this is not the case, so either I've misunderstood, or you've misspoke. Should it be duration of loan holding multiplied by 12%/365? I would have expected interest to have been calculated to a higher precision* and any rounding applied when a loan is sold/repaid. *A technical distinction is made between accuracy and precision, and it is precision being discussed here. It's another platform which is known to have problems with accuracy.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 28, 2016 12:47:06 GMT
Just how quick will we have to be to land a bid? Are talking seconds, minutes, hours, or should we be okay within the first 24 hr restricted bid period? I had alternative plans to playing on a pc/phone at 9pm on a Friday night...... Bidding starts at 4pm, not 9pm. Recently loans have been available for minutes (for small loans) to hours (for large loans). I recall one of the property loans lasting more than 24 hours, but that may have been a ten-percenter.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 28, 2016 12:23:01 GMT
There's a statement on the in-house forum about Tewkesbury (new) 3, including a paragraph "We have taken immediate steps to address the issue and bought back the tranche of the loan on to our balance sheet through the FC Finance investor account. We will notify investors of plans to liquidate this tranche within the next month." I interpret that as an intention to dispose of it on the secondary market. (How do they sell a single £500,000 bid on the secondary market?) Presumably the 4th loan, the one that disappeared into thin air, was caught before a bid could be made on FCIF's behalf. Let's hope it's £100 parts at 4% discount again! I see that people are trying to sell Tewkesbury 4 at a premium already, even with £1m or more of further tranches imminent, and £500,000 of FC holdings potentially hanging over the secondary market.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 28, 2016 11:59:59 GMT
There is a statement on the in-house forum that 7.6% was an error, and the correct rate is 7.0%.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 28, 2016 11:56:41 GMT
There's a statement on the in-house forum about Tewkesbury (new) 3, including a paragraph "We have taken immediate steps to address the issue and bought back the tranche of the loan on to our balance sheet through the FC Finance investor account. We will notify investors of plans to liquidate this tranche within the next month."
I interpret that as an intention to dispose of it on the secondary market. (How do they sell a single £500,000 bid on the secondary market?)
Presumably the 4th loan, the one that disappeared into thin air, was caught before a bid could be made on FCIF's behalf.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 27, 2016 18:35:48 GMT
If FC were acting as agent for FCIF, and acted in contravention to FCIF's instructions, then I'd guess that the whole loan bid would have been unenforceable.
I don't see why it is (now) described as repaid - cancelled and the bid returned might be a more accurate description. The alternative would have been for FC Property Solutions or whatever they call the underwriting arm to have taken over the loan, but I don't suppose that would have been viewed with approval here.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 27, 2016 15:38:22 GMT
The 3rd tranche of the Tewkesbury refinance appears not to be drawndown, even though FCIF bid for it on the 22nd. Was it rushed through prematurely? (There's over 1 month remaining on most if not all of the remaining tranches of the original loan.) Has someone noticed it would break the investment rules in the FCIF prospectus? I was wondering about that. £1.5M with one borrower. Maybe we should prepare for a 10% A. I would hold some for 6 months if they added 1% cash back. There's about £1,000,000 to come, plus £380,000 to £500,000 if they retrospectively enforce the 0.75% rule, so we should be expected some to appear within the next month of so, unless sales are completed faster than expected. Some of the proceeds from the sale of phases 1 and 2 will get diverted into phase 3, but I expect that the earlier tranches of the new loan will repay in about 6 months. But if they get it way during the late winter doldrums they won't need cashback.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 27, 2016 15:00:44 GMT
The 3rd tranche of the Tewkesbury refinance appears not to be drawndown, even though FCIF bid for it on the 22nd. Was it rushed through prematurely? (There's over 1 month remaining on most if not all of the remaining tranches of the original loan.) Has someone noticed it would break the investment rules in the FCIF prospectus?
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 27, 2016 10:05:12 GMT
Just curious, tonyr , why you ask? So people only see this post after they've answered the poll, right? (sorry, first time I've done this). I asked because: more diversity: The whole ethos of AC is that it's asset backed loans, these come with security so you just don't need the diversity that is necessary on other platforms. There are enough loans on AC already for good diversity. So more diversity really means more access to loans (if the £6m bridging loan comes off then we'll all get more access to the existing loans). simpler ways to invest: I don't think that existing AC customers are asking for simpler ways to invest. The MLIA, GEIA, GBBA, QAA already give a wide spectrum of ways to invest. I don't regard the MLIA as complex and indeed, it's the adding of other 'black box' algorithms like the QAA that makes the MLIA complex (as we don't know what other funds are going to make parts available or take priority with parts come onto the market). consistent rates: I see nothing inconsistent about any of the rates on offer (either in the fixed rate accounts or the MLIA). We've had a loan drought (hopefully coming to an end soon) that's not been good for AC or us lenders. There was an internal AC decision to change their 'origination' and that led to the scraping of an existing way of working with its associated pipeline and the start of a new one with associated delays. There may be many good reasons why this happened but to say that it was because "Lenders asked for more diversity, simpler ways to invest and consistent rates." doesn't seem right. Unless of course the drought was not caused by a pipeline change but the QAA eating everything it could find but from what Chris has said there were only two loans that went exclusively to the QAA. I'm just trying to understand what's happening. I would have interpreted more diversity as meaning more asset classes (I'm still waiting for invoice finance to appear), supporting diversification across asset classes as well as across borrowers. But AC was always reasonably diverse (bridging loans, development loans, SME loans, infrastructure loans, commercial mortgages ...) so I'm not sure what the additional diversity would be - AC's problem over the last year (which is as long as I've been using the site) has been lack of deal flow, not lack of diversity.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
General P2x Discussion
Tax Return
Jan 26, 2016 19:01:08 GMT
Post by am on Jan 26, 2016 19:01:08 GMT
Shortly after I started I was in this position (2013) so I merely sent a nice letter to the tax office after 5th April telling them how much interest I had and offering to send 20% (my rate) to cover the tax. They phoned me a few days later and arranged to collect the tax by adjusting my PAYE. I can't do that now, so they told me to register and I have filled in an online tax return. Just sent a payment and the rest will come out of that Tewkesbury repayment on Fancy Cracks! 2016-2017 will be different when we get £1000 interest allowance tax free. I don't know how that will be managed considering all the banks/building societies will have to stop witholding tax from interest due. Will we all have to declare every bit from every source so HMRC can apply it to our tax codes? My understanding is that the banks and building societies are going to tell the government how much they've paid you. (Hence news reports on the "end of the tax return".) But I expect that HMRC will send me a letter clarifying things sometime between April 2016 and May2017.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 26, 2016 18:31:36 GMT
To make it on topic, it's being propped up by a bridging loan at 10%. £1,500,000 has been snaffled by FC IT. Has the FC IT (FC SME Income Fund) raised extra funds then? Is there an easy way to find out? The Prospectus says "the total exposure to a single borrower (legal entity) shall not exceed 0.75 per cent. of NAV at the time such investment is made." B*****hall (which borrows on behalf of the Fund) took 3 tranches from this borrower totalling £1.5m. On 31 Dec 2015, the declared NAV was £147.0m. £1.5m/£150m would be 1%. No new anouncements have been made on the fcsmeif.com site. Shouldn't such a capital raising be declared? Can B*****hall lend in any other capacity than on behalf of the Fund? Details are in the Prospectus and this does not appear to be the case. Ouch. If FC IT has raised new money there should be an RNS announcement. There doesn't seem to be one (http://www.investegate.co.uk/Index.aspx?searchtype=2&words=Funding+Circle)
|
|