|
Post by jevans4949 on Jan 2, 2014 10:09:00 GMT
jevans4949 - I'll have to check but I think they're currently listed in the order in which they were listed for sale. I agree it makes sense to show them in order of highest annualised rate then largest discount first. Should be a quick change that I can sneak through in the next day or two. I'll also add making the list sortable by any of the column headings to our to do list. That would be helpful, although the rate would be presumed to represent the perceived risk, whereas a discount represents an actual "bargain" for the buyer - so I would put the discount first.
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Jan 2, 2014 9:42:51 GMT
chris: Good News - not that I'm planning to sell at present. As a supplementary, when units are on offer in the aftermarket, do they appear in any particular order? It would probably be helpful to sellers and buyers if units offered at a discount appeared first, to help expedite a quick sale.
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 26, 2013 12:37:28 GMT
I'm not a participant in FC, but I wrote a program to calculate APR and repayments when I worked for a major UK bank when the legislation requiring APR calculation was first introduced in the 1970's. (Prior to that, the bank used printed mathematical tables to calculate repayments).
There is a formula (fairly complex, and I can't remember it now) for calculating what repayments should be, but I validated this and found you needed to make fine adjustments to get the optimal repayment; I did this using a Newton-Raphson type procedure. (At one point, when testing the limits of parameter values, I managed to lock up an IBM 360/65 computer for more than half a minute.)
If the loan is based on compound interest, and the lender applies the interest to the account on fixed calendar dates (rather than dates based on the drawdown date, then the calculation (and the APR calculation that then arises) cannot be wholly accurate unless the drawdown date is known; you would also need to forecast how the fixed dates were affected by weekends and bank holidays. The bank in question actually calculated interest and charges on one fixed day each month or each quarter and applied them a few days later.
In the end we didn't worry too much, as most compound-interest loans were charged on a variable rate above Bank of England base rate, which in those days was likely to change several times during a year.
EDIT: If you have the dates and values of all repayments, and interest and charges, you can calculate the APR, as defined in the EU including the UK, using the spreadsheet irr function
EDIT 2: If you have what used to be called a Personal Loan, where flat rate interest based on the initial principal over the term of the loan is applied, the calculation of repayments is far simpler. The APR is then around double the quoted flat rate.
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 26, 2013 12:01:35 GMT
Most of the documentation for potential loans (from any p2p lender) tends to focus on the primary business proposition. One wonders whether the same attention is given to the viability of the guarantees. Many of these seem to be based on the value of the guarantor's main residence. Naturally anybody forced to cough up is going to try to wriggle out of paying the full amount; maybe lending companies ought to look to whether the guarantor has other, more liquid, assets, and whether the guarantor has really understood the risk of the business failing - especially if the guarantor is a close relation or close friend, who may have been to embarrassed, or blinded by love, to refuse.
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 24, 2013 16:46:24 GMT
Given the time of year, should we be calling this the Westward Ho-Ho-Ho loan?
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 24, 2013 11:03:35 GMT
On the suggestion that FC have no interest in understating the default rate, I have two thoughts as well: - FC may not know any more than us when it comes to estimating the default rate. - Right now FC's Directors best strategy is to grow the platform then sell out. So they may not be around when the chickens come home to roost. So resisting my natural cynicism, I think FC have put together an estimate that they can justify and they may even believe it. But I doubt they lose any sleep over it. In the buyout scenario, it depends on whether the buyer is just desperate to jump on the P2P bandwagon (à la dotcom boom), or whether he does due diligence on FC's loan book. That said, so much depends on factors outside P2P companies' control; I understand that Zopa lenders took a hit from the 2008 economic collapse, which at that point was beyond anybody to control. You can either be to optimistic and lose money on bad risks, or too pessimistic and fail to make money on things that might have worked. In the end, you can only make decisions based on the information you have at the time.
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 24, 2013 10:40:12 GMT
Thanks, Andrew, for the explanations. I guess in many cases it could be counter-productive to release such information prior to the launch. Best wishes to all those heavy-hitters who have helped Assetz get under way, and are still helping with the larger loans.
Here's hoping by this time next year there's so much business that everybody can be satisfied.
|
|
|
Assetz Capital (AC)
Statement
Dec 23, 2013 10:17:21 GMT
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 23, 2013 10:17:21 GMT
In connection with the previous few comments, it could be useful to have a couple of balancing entries to indicate when a bid becomes a loan part. A punter could then run 2 accounts - bids and loans.
|
|
|
Assetz Capital (AC)
Statement
Dec 22, 2013 19:16:10 GMT
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 22, 2013 19:16:10 GMT
Couple of thoughts on improving the statement - Separate columns for nature of transaction and loan to which it relates
- Shorter title for loan, e.g., "Birmingham Bridging Loan" followed by announcement date.
- Does the lender's account detail need to be on every line of the CSV?
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 17, 2013 23:57:24 GMT
... it might not be as well illustrated at the Karma Suitra ... Now there's an interesting concept for manual design ...
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 17, 2013 23:44:03 GMT
... by stating "Saving Stream t/a Lendy Ltd makes it's profit ... 1) Should be "Lendy Ltd t/a Saving Stream" 2) Should be "... makes its profit ....". "it's" is only ever short for "it is" Get your English right, chaps!
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 16, 2013 13:03:06 GMT
Years ago in my youth I dreamed of such a card; with the increasing risks of theft and fraud, and the increasing indispensibilty of cards, I think it may be an unnecessary risk.
And if it's going to cost me just to own one ...
Is this thing really just a solution looking for a problem?
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 16, 2013 12:34:39 GMT
So does this mean that any Barclays / Nat West / Nationwide gizmo works on any account? And this is what they call security? The device creates a one time code based on your card, your pin and a seed from the requesting website using a standard algorithm. The key to the security is your card which you must have (and has to be a chip and pin card not a cloned magnetic stripe one) and your pin which you must know for the device to work and produce the correct one time code, and this is on top of having to know all the login information to get to the point where you need the device, your card and your pin. OK, so that's pretty good, then. Although if you were to extend it generally, you will need a chip and pin card for all your accounts, even those which don't currently need them for shopping and ATMs - like online P2P.
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 16, 2013 12:15:06 GMT
So does this mean that any Barclays / Nat West / Nationwide gizmo works on any account? And this is what they call security?
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Dec 14, 2013 15:12:13 GMT
Not that I'm going to involve myself with them, but to be fair to Lendy / SavingStream, with any online P2P lender, you have to trust them that the borrower exists. And if the loan is secured, you have to trust them that the security exists, and is (reasonably) accurately valued, and that the P2P company has the legal rights to it which they say they have.
I think you will find that typical APRs for high street pawnbrokers are around 130% - 140% - even for stuff as easily stored and disposed of as gold (which as security they value only as scrap), and I think you will find that Funding Secure (the other online pawnbroker) is only paying lenders the same sort of percentage as Lendy. The admin fee will probably cover valuation fees and legal expenses. If Lendy are paying for the storage space for the boat, and insurance, that presumably comes out of their percentage. There are undoubtedly further costs if the security has to be liquidated; is there any explanation about how that will be dealt with?
|
|