kielbasa
Member of DD Central
Posts: 246
Likes: 411
|
Post by kielbasa on Aug 3, 2018 6:37:05 GMT
I came across this article in the FT on P2P lending: www.ft.com/content/12a434ba-7302-11e8-bab2-43bd4ae655ddIn case the link doesn't work, you can probably Google it. It's called "Property peer-to-peer lending — is it ever a good idea?" by David Stevenson (Adventurous Investor). This is an extract: I’d also be very keen to understand how lending platforms will react to any downturn. For instance, how actively will they manage a lossmaking position involving a development? In the past, bank lenders have reacted like lemmings, selling off half-finished developments as quickly as possible and pushing down prices aggressively. Alternative lenders will need to roll up their sleeves and work out any defaults — and avoid a mass rush for the exit.
For some of the platforms featured on this forum, actively managing a lossmaking position and rolling up sleeves to work out any defaults is replaced with closing eyes, crossing fingers and doing very little. |
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368 
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Aug 4, 2018 16:39:04 GMT
Most of the article focuses on residential in London and the south east. Everyone and their dog already knows that there’s no yield there. A lot of p2p lending is in other places. Some of his yield figures are out of whack anyway. This guy hasn’t really done his homework. However, I do feel the “golden days” of p2p are well and truly over. This is also the guy who recommended buying shares in TrustBuddy (several times). Obviously not a well researched tip given how it ended up.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Aug 5, 2018 14:34:55 GMT
David Stevenson has the share picking skills of a blind donkey. Quite how he survives in the FT is beyond me. Another class A clot to avoid on that rag is John Redwood - militant Brexiteer, who has the audacity to say Brexit will be good while at the same time advocating moving assets out of the UK.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Aug 6, 2018 0:45:20 GMT
Most of the article focuses on residential in London and the south east. Everyone and their dog already knows that there’s no yield there. A lot of p2p lending is in other places. Some of his yield figures are out of whack anyway. This guy hasn’t really done his homework. However, I do feel the “golden days” of p2p are well and truly over.Ditto, but I think the industry will be still around in foreseen future. Banks and BS's seem to be reluctant to react proportionally to BOE interest rates rise and I don't envisage this attitude to be changed as they are not obliged to follow. As long as there is a gap, p2p will be there to fill it.
|
|
mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698 
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Aug 6, 2018 10:17:38 GMT
See new FT article today..."UK peer-to-peer lenders fear tighter restrictions"
FCA quoted their own survey that concluded that 40% of P2P lenders had invested > annual income, 20% > 2x annual income, hence greater restrictions are required on retail lenders.
I certainly hope that no one here has that much of their wealth at risk with P2P, diversification across asset classes, not just platforms and loans, is key to wealth preservation.
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Aug 6, 2018 10:31:12 GMT
See new FT article today..."UK peer-to-peer lenders fear tighter restrictions" FCA quoted their own survey that concluded that 40% of P2P lenders had invested > annual income, 20% > 2x annual income, hence greater restrictions are required on retail lenders. I certainly hope that no one here has that much of their wealth at risk with P2P, diversification across asset classes, not just platforms and loans, is key to wealth preservation. I take great issue with statistics measuring percentage invested against annual income. It seems designed to exaggerate the issue in support of a pre-determined tightening of the restrictions on retail lenders. The FCA should be assessing based on networth not annual income. Annual income is distorted by those who manage their affairs to ensure they remain asset rich but income poor to reduce their overall tax rate (tax paid in proportion to their net worth). e.g. think of those with seven figure DC pensions and ISAs, who choose to take the minimum income from their pensions (£11k or whatever it is), is it unreasonable for this individual to invest > £22k in P2P? I'm sorry but it makes me suspicious of FCA motives by their manipulation of statistics.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Aug 6, 2018 10:37:14 GMT
See new FT article today..."UK peer-to-peer lenders fear tighter restrictions" FCA quoted their own survey that concluded that 40% of P2P lenders had invested > annual income, 20% > 2x annual income, hence greater restrictions are required on retail lenders. I certainly hope that no one here has that much of their wealth at risk with P2P, diversification across asset classes, not just platforms and loans, is key to wealth preservation. That is to conflate two orthogonal issues: ratio to annual income, versus Wealth. Why would you be concerned simply on the basis of ratio of p2p investment to income ? With I suspect much of the p2p community being at the more mature end of the spectrum, and probably with proportionally higher levels of investable wealth, but with lower incomes, I don't of itself find it particularly surprising or concerning. Wrong measure
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Aug 6, 2018 11:08:22 GMT
See new FT article today..."UK peer-to-peer lenders fear tighter restrictions" FCA quoted their own survey that concluded that 40% of P2P lenders had invested > annual income, 20% > 2x annual income, hence greater restrictions are required on retail lenders. I certainly hope that no one here has that much of their wealth at risk with P2P, diversification across asset classes, not just platforms and loans, is key to wealth preservation. That is to conflate two orthogonal issues: ratio to annual income, versus Wealth. Why would you be concerned simply on the basis of ratio of p2p investment to income ? With I suspect much of the p2p community being at the more mature end of the spectrum, and probably with proportionally higher levels of investable wealth, but with lower incomes, I don't of itself find it particularly surprising or concerning. Wrong measure Agreed and the only reason I can fathom is that the FCA have an agenda to support. To be honest I take this as support that P2P'ers are not over investing their net worth in this asset class. If they were then sure as I can be the FCA would have used it to further support their direction of travel. In that respect, we're perhaps not such a stupid bunch of folks we sometimes come across as on this forum  The FCA are not covering themselves in glory here. We know they read the forum from the Collateral debacle but realistically the last thing I expect is for them to listen.
|
|
|
|
Post by fatbritabroad on Aug 6, 2018 12:11:49 GMT
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 6, 2018 12:21:36 GMT
Being discussed here ... with sceptism
|
|
|
|
Post by fatbritabroad on Aug 6, 2018 12:23:51 GMT
Apologies thanks. Feel free to remove
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Aug 6, 2018 14:10:08 GMT
... Agreed and the only reason I can fathom is that the FCA have an agenda to support. Another agreement here - my total income is significantly less than 10% of my investable wealth, so what the heck am I supposed to do?
But just to pick up on the FCA's motivation in this regard; an "agenda" is certainly one possibility, but on the whole I tend to the view that cock-up is more likely than conspiracy. In this case, comparisons with income are the easy ones to make because that's what you do when assessing risk ... well, at least, that's what they are accustomed to.
Picking easy but misguided measures of performance/quality is a pretty much universal failing, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by ladywhitenap on Aug 6, 2018 15:29:09 GMT
Note if you're not a subscriber you can view in incognito mode How does one do that please? LW
|
|
|
|
Post by fatbritabroad on Aug 6, 2018 15:54:24 GMT
On your mobileif its android click the three dots tops right hand of screen when you're in chrome and choose incognito mode. Then go into the link above and it let's you through
|
|
|
|
Post by eascogo on Aug 6, 2018 15:56:56 GMT
Note if you're not a subscriber you can view in incognito mode How does one do that please? LW In a separate window google the article title "UK peer-to-peer lenders fear tighter restrictions". This bypasses the subsciption request.
|
|
