|
|
Post by brightspark on Apr 7, 2018 18:59:11 GMT
I very carefully avoided buying loan 227 along with wind turbines and other undesirables in my MLIA only to find a large chunk was allocated via GBBA which I had decided to give a try on a suck it and see basis. The chunk far outweighed any other loan allocation in my gBBA holding. I did not like that - the computer algorithm had taken advantage as far as I was concerned allocating to me a large chunk of a loan no one else much wanted. It stimulated me close my entire GBBA holding except 227 which is currently unsaleable. I voted no to giving these borrowers a 6 month holiday. These borrowers are not a newly wed couple struggling to pay their first mortgage. They borrowed a large sum of money on the basis that this would make them too big to fail. I note that their number of weddings booked has increased by 11 on the year previous. Wow! Assuming £5K profit per wedding that is £55K extra to go towards repayments. Hardly a deal maker. This loan is going to end in tears - in my view it might as well be sooner rather than later. All the p to p platforms are arch-professionals at kicking cans down the road. I had high hopes that AC were a bit better. Their so-called questionnaire was a bit loaded and their emphasis on the result depending on loan amount held per voter seemed a little well you know what I mean. I am starting to have my doubts.
|
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Apr 7, 2018 19:01:34 GMT
Agreed and I kind of see that , however if an individual votes for an option which A.C. considers that there was a realistic chance of a full recovery but the outcome was a vote for a loss for a quick fix based on the PF backing, it would be withdrawn , not unreasonable in my opinion. That's ok because it protects the pf from silly losses and protects A.C. bottom line , however is it unreasonable that mlia members should be exposed to the same risk , votes which impact their returns distorted by the pf . I can not see an easy fix to this . However what I am totally sure of is giving borrowers interest free loans or haircuts on capital and allowing them to retain their asset is totally stupid ,ok it may work in an isolated loan but the message across the site to borrowers is try it on you will get away with it 6u don't need to pay . Sadly banks have been giving dept forgiveness and that seems for some borrowers what will happen here but that has been based on to tax payers money.
|
|
lucky
Member of DD Central
Posts: 79 
Likes: 46
|
Post by lucky on Apr 7, 2018 19:28:48 GMT
I very carefully avoided buying loan 227 along with wind turbines and other undesirables in my MLIA only to find a large chunk was allocated via GBBA which I had decided to give a try on a suck it and see basis. The chunk far outweighed any other loan allocation in my gBBA holding. I did not like that - the computer algorithm had taken advantage as far as I was concerned allocating to me a large chunk of a loan no one else much wanted. It stimulated me close my entire GBBA holding except 227 which is currently unsaleable. I voted no to giving these borrowers a 6 month holiday. These borrowers are not a newly wed couple struggling to pay their first mortgage. They borrowed a large sum of money on the basis that this would make them too big to fail. I note that their number of weddings booked has increased by 11 on the year previous. Wow! Assuming £5K profit per wedding that is £55K extra to go towards repayments. Hardly a deal maker. This loan is going to end in tears - in my view it might as well be sooner rather than later. All the p to p platforms are arch-professionals at kicking cans down the road. I had high hopes that AC were a bit better. Their so-called questionnaire was a bit loaded and their emphasis on the result depending on loan amount held per voter seemed a little well you know what I mean. I am starting to have my doubts. Totally agree, borrowing 30k short of £6 million, interest payments £59,700.00 per month, gross profit just over £100,000 per annum, just how does that stack up!!
|
|
amphoria
Member of DD Central
Posts: 156
Likes: 124
|
Post by amphoria on Apr 7, 2018 21:53:51 GMT
Possibly. I have a lot of small holdings in all accounts and am unaware of being asked to vote on anything that I do not have an MLIA holding. My QAA holdings are so transitory it would surprise me that I get a vote with them. Note..Even if the loan is suspended you do have the ability to dispose of holdings if they are held in QAA or 30 day AC (under normal conditions). I had assumed this gave no right to vote.... Perhaps we should be asking who was in the vote pool. I am pretty certain that 30DAA and QAA holders do not get a vote. Anyway based on my holding in these accounts, the 30DAA and QAA only hold about £225,000 of the £5.970m. I have a much bigger exposure via the GBBA.
|
|
Mick
Be nice... People respond.
Posts: 138
Likes: 93
|
Post by Mick on Apr 7, 2018 22:00:08 GMT
Just where are the voters that agreed and voted to no interest for six months. You have to be a kind of silly to do this, I could have understood a roll up of the interest for six months, for breathing space to sell then the interest added back to the loan ...but to give away best part of half a million is unprofessional at best. Certainly no one will buy loan parts now ... and in six months getting back to 12.5 percent is a dream.
|
|
teddy
Posts: 214
Likes: 90
|
Post by teddy on Apr 7, 2018 22:29:36 GMT
This is how it works at AC. Con artists get lent millions of our money by bankers who couldn't care less as long as they're getting their wedge, then when the con artists default, the bankers ask them what they want to do about it. The answer is always one of the following:
1. We're going to declare bankruptcy and disappear with all your lenders' money.
2. Give us some more of your lenders' money.
3. Give us a 6 month /12 month interest free loan on the money we're never going to pay back.
Bankers response is always the following:
Yay! We'll have some of that!
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Apr 8, 2018 6:50:46 GMT
Just where are the voters that agreed and voted to no interest for six months. You have to be a kind of silly to do this, I could have understood a roll up of the interest for six months, for breathing space to sell then the interest added back to the loan ...but to give away best part of half a million is unprofessional at best. Certainly no one will buy loan parts now ... and in six months getting back to 12.5 percent is a dream. And just possibly this might give the business the chance to stabilise by selling off some assets, refinance the remaining whilst maintaining the operating business to preserve value. Half a million might prove to be money well spent compared to the losses we might all incur with a fire-sale of assets after forcing the borrowers out of business. I honestly do not believe AC would have entertained this option if they did not believe there was a reasonable chance of a successful outcome.
|
|
Mick
Be nice... People respond.
Posts: 138
Likes: 93
|
Post by Mick on Apr 8, 2018 7:30:16 GMT
Just where are the voters that agreed and voted to no interest for six months. You have to be a kind of silly to do this, I could have understood a roll up of the interest for six months, for breathing space to sell then the interest added back to the loan ...but to give away best part of half a million is unprofessional at best. Certainly no one will buy loan parts now ... and in six months getting back to 12.5 percent is a dream. And just possibly this might give the business the chance to stabilise by selling off some assets, refinance the remaining whilst maintaining the operating business to preserve value. Half a million might prove to be money well spent compared to the losses we might all incur with a fire-sale of assets after forcing the borrowers out of business. I honestly do not believe AC would have entertained this option if they did not believe there was a reasonable chance of a successful outcome. I think you will find Assetz have firmly distanced themselves from this proposal... I envy your optimism, but I live in a different world. Unfortunately we will visit this in six months.. I will remember your council.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Apr 8, 2018 7:44:57 GMT
And me. How this underperforming loan is handled may well end up damaging Assetz reputation. This in turn will not be helpful to any lenders and borrowers in this or other loans still over the horizon. Lenders become more wary of lending so borrowers find borrowing just that bit more expensive. This loan will drag on for years but in my view it is better that Assetz rather than the borrower steer the ship into the knacker's yard.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Apr 8, 2018 8:47:19 GMT
I can't see this working out well for AC (as well as for us lenders) - big dent in the PF if they use it - big dent to AC's reputation if they don't (and possibly even if they do)
Always seem to be the same - regardless of how well intentioned firms are at outset - when problems crop up, they always protect themselves at the expense of their customers.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Apr 8, 2018 9:01:49 GMT
Surely whether it is a “big dent” in the PF depends on how much can ultimately (and I agree that may be some way off) be realised from the sale of assets? Is it necessarily, or even likely, to be “big”?
|
|
gibmike
Member of DD Central
What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Posts: 256
Likes: 160
|
Post by gibmike on Apr 8, 2018 10:01:29 GMT
One word. Baffled.
I seriously think we should see the voting on this (names removed of course) and whether they sit in MLIA or not.
We have effectively GIVEN them £300k for FREE!
If they cannot pay then why on earth have we not sent in the receivers?!?!?
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Apr 8, 2018 10:45:58 GMT
Surely whether it is a “big dent” in the PF depends on how much can ultimately (and I agree that may be some way off) be realised from the sale of assets? Is it necessarily, or even likely, to be “big”? Fair point. Given the business appears to be loss making, it remains to be seen if the valuations - which give ample room to repay the loan & interest 100% - are realistic or wishful thinking. How many buyers are there for £multi-million loss making businesses ?
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Apr 8, 2018 10:51:18 GMT
Lots of !!!  and CAPITALS in comments on this situation, reminding me that people generally like to see simple solutions even when a situation is complex. How anyone thought that a loan this size was going to be anything other than complex defeats me. Which may of course be reflected in the low turn out on the vote - I speculate that many potential voters put it on the "too hard" pile and declined to exercise their prerogative. But back to what seems to be the current question - why would AC even put this to a vote and not proceed with legals forthwith? Well, it seems to me to be entirely plausible that such a course of action would be expensive, protracted, and uncertain in its outcome: what might be obtained on a forced sale of the security is anyone's guess, although I'd personally bet a significant amount that it wouldn't be anywhere near it's nominal value. In which case the same indignant lenders would be demanding their pound of flesh for AC's "incompetence" in allowing such a thing to happen. So I think that in such a contentious situation, AC are obliged to put it to a vote, and if voters couldn't be bothered then whose fault is that? If time is not an issue for you, then as a lender I'm pretty sure that your best interest is most likely to be served by being patient. Of course, if time is an issue then you have a real problem, but the sad fact is that you've been outvoted. |
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Apr 8, 2018 10:53:17 GMT
I was not in this loan (unless in 30DAA or QAA) so did not vote but i assume the company gave some sort of business projection that gave confidence to lenders. I am therefore assuming it wasn't simply a "give us another six months please, guv, or my kids starve and the wife is on the streets".
|
|
and CAPITALS in comments on this situation, reminding me that people generally like to see simple solutions even when a situation is complex.