|
|
Post by skint4achange on Nov 24, 2017 11:34:16 GMT
When I rebuilt my last portfolio it took 4 days (100 parts) None of the parts were SM. All were fresh loans.
I would say that you can probably reduce the cash drag/get around FC autobodge restrictions (If the program does restrict you after flipping) by simply having a second dormant account. Once you have liquidated your portfolio, transfer all funds into the dormant account. If the dormant account has been sitting there and the autobodge has penalised it for selling out previously, that penalty time should have now passed an the funds will reinvest straight away. Leave the account that the funds have just come from dormant for use in 29/30 days time.
Sounds simple but there is probably a catch somewhere (Or soon will be if FC see this!  ) Although, FC would not really care. Once the loan part is sold, it will only be purchased by another investor. They still have no exposure.
|
|
|
|
Post by skint4achange on Nov 24, 2017 11:38:59 GMT
That is not what VI said by the way. He said flip before the FIRST payment. This is to get rid of the loan part before there has even been a chance for the loan to have an event and thus make it unsalable.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Nov 24, 2017 11:45:12 GMT
That is not what VI said by the way. He said flip before the FIRST payment. This is to get rid of the loan part before there has even been a chance for the loan to have an event and thus make it unsalable. I was meaning this part - which is why we are not active (with no repayments to spend, just safe interest to extract):
"I am merely running down my FC account so won't be active until I sell my property loans with 2 payments left"
What comes next, in 2018 for me, is to be decided. Maybe an ISA and a classic account managed in an optimal way. We shall see what is available and legal, and whether mass-flipping bots have caused a problem.
Interesting that you do not get much from the SM, because the best platform response to mass flipping on the SM would be to make the flipper buy from the SM. I conclude that the difference in buying and selling time must be a market imbalance - though the whole/partial loan split is relevant.
|
|
|
|
Post by grahamreeds on Nov 24, 2017 11:45:29 GMT
In the nearly 24hrs since burning my account I have bought 4 items off the PM for £130, and a further £1628 from the SM.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Nov 24, 2017 11:53:02 GMT
In the nearly 24hrs since burning my account I have bought 4 items off the PM for £130, and a further £1628 from the SM. Aha! Your fins are showing!
|
|
|
|
Post by skint4achange on Nov 24, 2017 11:53:03 GMT
In the nearly 24hrs since burning my account I have bought 4 items off the PM for £130, and a further £1628 from the SM. Ouch. But, provided the payments are not due straight away there should be no problem. You can still flip them at the end of the month just before the payment date if that is what you are doing.
Alternatively, get a 2nd account
|
|
markr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 766 
Likes: 426
|
Post by markr on Nov 24, 2017 23:31:52 GMT
Very interesting. It does seem, from various posts, that a complete balanced portfolio will sell in an hour or so, while such a portfolio takes a goodly number of days to be created. Either there is a structural and serious imbalance between supply and demand, or just possibly FC have anticipated the flipping strategy you mention and have engendered some delay. It arises because of the removal of the selling fee, and the mass flipping issue would have come up in the analysis of the proposed change. Hmm, I'm not sure "anticipated" and "analysis" have any place in a discussion about FC! I think the apparent imbalance between supply and demand is just the effect of one-to-many versus many-to-one when viewed through just one account. When you put your portfolio up for sale, there are thousands of accounts ready to snap up your parts; when you want to buy, you are competing with thousands of accounts and you only buy something when it's your turn. For example, lets say Autobid takes an hour to pass through everyone's account, and when it reaches yours, it'll buy something (if you have enough funds), then move on. If you have 200 loans to sell, they'll probably sell in one pass so they'll be gone within the hour. But to replace those 200 loans will take, at best, 200 hours.
|
|
|
|
Post by skint4achange on Nov 24, 2017 23:35:22 GMT
Very interesting. It does seem, from various posts, that a complete balanced portfolio will sell in an hour or so, while such a portfolio takes a goodly number of days to be created. Either there is a structural and serious imbalance between supply and demand, or just possibly FC have anticipated the flipping strategy you mention and have engendered some delay. It arises because of the removal of the selling fee, and the mass flipping issue would have come up in the analysis of the proposed change. Hmm, I'm not sure "anticipated" and "analysis" have any place in a discussion about FC! I think the apparent imbalance between supply and demand is just the effect of one-to-many versus many-to-one when viewed through just one account. When you put your portfolio up for sale, there are thousands of accounts ready to snap up your parts; when you want to buy, you are competing with thousands of accounts and you only buy something when it's your turn. For example, lets say Autobid takes an hour to pass through everyone's account, and when it reaches yours, it'll buy something (if you have enough funds), then move on. If you have 200 loans to sell, they'll probably sell in one pass so they'll be gone within the hour. But to replace those 200 loans will take, at best, 200 hours. Interesting view. And, makes sense.
I think that the whole system of Autobid is still very new but we can make it a bit more understood by sharing our experiences here.
I am glad I started this thread now because some valid comments are now surfacing.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Nov 25, 2017 17:02:27 GMT
Very interesting. It does seem, from various posts, that a complete balanced portfolio will sell in an hour or so, while such a portfolio takes a goodly number of days to be created. Either there is a structural and serious imbalance between supply and demand, or just possibly FC have anticipated the flipping strategy you mention and have engendered some delay. It arises because of the removal of the selling fee, and the mass flipping issue would have come up in the analysis of the proposed change. Hmm, I'm not sure "anticipated" and "analysis" have any place in a discussion about FC! I think the apparent imbalance between supply and demand is just the effect of one-to-many versus many-to-one when viewed through just one account. When you put your portfolio up for sale, there are thousands of accounts ready to snap up your parts; when you want to buy, you are competing with thousands of accounts and you only buy something when it's your turn. For example, lets say Autobid takes an hour to pass through everyone's account, and when it reaches yours, it'll buy something (if you have enough funds), then move on. If you have 200 loans to sell, they'll probably sell in one pass so they'll be gone within the hour. But to replace those 200 loans will take, at best, 200 hours. I would not underestimate FC in this area. True they are not good at customer service or anything that involves overheads which increase with business volume, but they have always been good on strategic thinking and system design (excepting the errors in implementation). The main control seems to be split between partial and whole loans, and I believe that they let enough loans through to the partial board to keep the cash drag within limits they choose. They are in control here. Also, there is the practice, as you say, of waiting to be in the buying chair, but in the past there was not a limit of one part each time you are in that chair - I used to sell more than one part to one autobid buyer at a time. Also the frequency of buying events used to vary and still seems to. I reckon they may have some controls here and perhaps some new ones, see df's post. The thing to do is to collect observations of its behaviour and to see if we can work out what goes on inside that black box.
|
|
) Although, FC would not really care. Once the loan part is sold, it will only be purchased by another investor. They still have no exposure.
