coop
Member of DD Central
Posts: 714 
Likes: 571
|
Post by coop on Nov 6, 2018 13:03:07 GMT
Question: Why does MT seem to struggle filling these loans at the moment when any old dogsh1t eventually gets funded on FS?
It can't just be due to the userbase as it would be easy for FS lenders to register with MT too. MT have proven themselves far more diligent and competent than FS (in my oh so humble opinion of course!) so I'm struggling to see why the discrepancy in benig able to get loans to fill?
Is there something I'm missing?
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,873
Likes: 7,918
|
Post by SteveT on Nov 6, 2018 13:07:00 GMT
A lot of FS lenders work on the assumption they’ll be able to sell their loan parts on the SM before term, or else they will be bought out when (if) the loan renews.
|
|
cwah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 949
Likes: 468
|
Post by cwah on Nov 6, 2018 13:13:38 GMT
Also FS valuation have been more reliable so far.. and do not base valuation from GDV or residual values!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Nov 6, 2018 13:15:50 GMT
Question: Why does MT seem to struggle filling these loans at the moment when any old dogsh1t eventually gets funded on FS? It can't just be due to the userbase as it would be easy for FS lenders to register with MT too. MT have proven themselves far more diligent and competent than FS (in my oh so humble opinion of course!) so I'm struggling to see why the discrepancy in benig able to get loans to fill? Is there something I'm missing? A combination of reasons I guess... - bonus rates up to 4% for BHs (plus additional incentives not explicitly listed, MT may offer these too) - low risk of default for 6 months - (small) premiums/discounts on SM - recent defaults on MT - FS invest more heavily in marketing (banner add on my screen at the moment, refer a friend, affiliate income, attendance at trade shows) - greater loan flow makes investing in an ISA easier on FS Some of the above are contentious, I agree.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Nov 6, 2018 13:23:11 GMT
Also FS valuation have been more reliable so far.. and do not base valuation from GDV or residual values!!! I think the lenders in FS Wimbledon would disagree ever so slightly there !
It more a case that FS offer bonuses for large investments of upto 4% so taking the yield to 17% for a typical 60-70% LTV loan (but bonus lost if sold on SM), and a number of underwriters who will take up the slack whilst the loan fills on the PM.
If MT offered similiar bonuses (in effect giving up part of their margin) I think most loans would fill eventually. Arguably though, it is prefereable that the weaker loans don't fill if that prevents smaller investors from suffering large capital losses at a future point.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,873
Likes: 7,918
|
Post by SteveT on Nov 6, 2018 13:24:44 GMT
Also FS valuation have been more reliable so far.. and do not base valuation from GDV or residual values!!! I can’t tell whether you’re being sarcastic. If you’re serious, then you’re badly deluding yourself. Huge swathes of the FS loan book is based on projected residual valuations of development schemes and land with consent for development.
|
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Nov 6, 2018 13:41:25 GMT
Also FS valuation have been more reliable so far.. and do not base valuation from GDV or residual values!!! I think the lenders in FS Wimbledon would disagree ever so slightly there !
It more a case that FS offer bonuses for large investments of upto 4% so taking the yield to 17% for a typical 60-70% LTV loan (but bonus lost if sold on SM), and a number of underwriters who will take up the slack whilst the loan fills on the PM.
If MT offered similiar bonuses (in effect giving up part of their margin) I think most loans would fill eventually. Arguably though, it is preferable that the weaker loans don't fill if that prevents smaller investors from suffering large capital losses at a future point.
I have held the view for some time that a good number of loans not filling would be a very good thing, the loan that filled on MT yesterday being an example. Admittedly I am using the readily available gift of hindsight, but Lendy would not be in its current position if more of us had looked beyond the rate and at the viability. It surely has to be time for a more sustainable approach from all concerned, and yes possibly a more realistic view on levels of return.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2018 13:43:40 GMT
I'm not sure if the ability to get people to invest your offerings is that critical to me. For instance I've not invested anything in FS property loans over the past year and feel very comfortable with the result. On the other hand I've invested a fair bit with MT's property and feel equally happy.
Now when I test how much of my money I've got back, the FS property, from before I stopped investing is still invested (and in various levels of default) with only "hope" supporting the idea of cash coming back, while with MT I have received back a fair proportion of my investments or am aware of the the situation and confident that Ed will get me back most of my money.
Getting the deal away is not the key, earning the interest and getting the capital back is.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Nov 6, 2018 15:05:01 GMT
Also FS valuation have been more reliable so far.. and do not base valuation from GDV or residual values!!! Either your tongue is in your cheek cwah, or you've forgotten to take your medication. 
|
|
cwah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 949
Likes: 468
|
Post by cwah on Nov 7, 2018 0:14:05 GMT
I'm actually "semi" serious as I know all platforms have their issues. However, Fundingsecure is now the platform where I have the majority of my investment (Lendy was top before but not anymore) and I've invested some more on a London loan and some other low LTV on it. Maybe I was lucky, but so far: - It is the platform with the least amount of money in default. - I haven't had experience yet where when the loan goes into default, the sales LTV is completely out of whack - Properties in default are automatically indicated in the tax statement report. Which save of hassle as well for taxes. I may just have been lucky, and I've waiting very much on S* W* property recovery (1442701959) soon and invested a lot on G* G* (4906730174) which hopefully will be renewed soon. Maybe I'm unlucky with Moneything, but I only invested on few loans and got the majority of my investment in default already!  |
|
archie
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 1,842
|
Post by archie on Nov 7, 2018 6:46:08 GMT
Maybe I was lucky, but so far: - Properties in default are automatically indicated in the tax statement report. Which save of hassle as well for taxes. Caution - Details on the tax statement shouldn't change after that tax year ends. My FS tax statement taken just after year end :- Losses 141.49, Recovered 50. Taken now:- Losses 275.00 Recovered 183.51. The losses minus recovered total is the same but these figures shouldn't change. The figures were different again in August but I spotted those changes and they corrected them eventually. For MT we need a second page on the tax return with a breakdown of defaults and recoveries.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2018 11:22:27 GMT
I'm actually "semi" serious as I know all platforms have their issues. However, Fundingsecure is now the platform where I have the majority of my investment (Lendy was top before but not anymore) and I've invested some more on a London loan and some other low LTV on it. Maybe I was lucky, but so far: - It is the platform with the least amount of money in default. - I haven't had experience yet where when the loan goes into default, the sales LTV is completely out of whack - Properties in default are automatically indicated in the tax statement report. Which save of hassle as well for taxes. I may just have been lucky, and I've waiting very much on S* W* property recovery (1442701959) soon and invested a lot on G* G* (4906730174) which hopefully will be renewed soon. Maybe I'm unlucky with Moneything, but I only invested on few loans and got the majority of my investment in default already! I'm guessing you know that the definition of "default" is different between these two portals? :-)
|
|
cwah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 949
Likes: 468
|
Post by cwah on Nov 7, 2018 13:31:43 GMT
I'm actually "semi" serious as I know all platforms have their issues. However, Fundingsecure is now the platform where I have the majority of my investment (Lendy was top before but not anymore) and I've invested some more on a London loan and some other low LTV on it. Maybe I was lucky, but so far: - It is the platform with the least amount of money in default. - I haven't had experience yet where when the loan goes into default, the sales LTV is completely out of whack - Properties in default are automatically indicated in the tax statement report. Which save of hassle as well for taxes. I may just have been lucky, and I've waiting very much on S* W* property recovery (1442701959) soon and invested a lot on G* G* (4906730174) which hopefully will be renewed soon. Maybe I'm unlucky with Moneything, but I only invested on few loans and got the majority of my investment in default already! I'm guessing you know that the definition of "default" is different between these two portals? :-) Yes I know there are difference. And also know that MT are much more reactive which ia definitely a good thing. I have few loans on FS over 400 days late and not in default which is indeed problematic.
|
|
