|
|
Post by elephantrosie on Mar 14, 2019 0:22:22 GMT
It is past midnight and I should be finishing off my presentation for tomorrow.
However, I am here procrastinating...
Who here still thinks that investing on collateral platform was a correct move?
Serious answer, please.
PS: I do not.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Mar 14, 2019 2:26:38 GMT
elephantrosie , I'm a big fan of procrastination - why do today what might actually not be needed come tomorrow  Just think of all the wasted time you save by procrastinaing instead of doing unecessary tasks !
However, I'm not a great fan of dwelling on the past too much, beyond reviewing if there is an obvious lesson to be learnt that can inform future behaviour. At the level of the individual p2p loan, I've discovered that the only loans I have buyers remorse with are those I didn't do much if any due dilligence before investing in. In otherwords I can be relaxed about loans that go bad that I've consciously decided should be successful, but get annoyed with myself for investing in loans I've never made the effort to decide whether I view them as good or bad.
Not in recent years so much, but I the early days of the forum (which corresponded to the emergence of the secured asset platforms), I did little DD especially on loans that were being actively talked up on here, but to be fair, in the early days too many loans were listed totally annonymously making DD much harder if not impossible. The phrase "fear of missing out" accurately describes the physcology, and when coupled with my deliberate strategy of wide diversification (0.7% to 1% of p2p pot max per loan) and "fastest finger first" loan allocation led to the inevitable bidding on loans that were never appropriate for my risk appetite.
This may seem off topic, but infact it is the direct reason why I ended up on COL. The Bolton loan. Oh dear ! How I regret being influenced by the posts on the MT board extolling this as the best loan in p2p. I was not an early adopter of COL, unless I can get a substantial 4 figure chunk of a loan I'm not interested, and so its early (bling) loans were not for me. But having been brainwashed as to how fantastic the Bolton loan was, I opened an account with COL when it moved from MT. Oh dear !
With hindsight and extensive due dilligence since I now believe that the Bolton loan and the dozens of other loans (now mostly in default across several platforms) to borrowers with connections to the Bolton loan are the worst p2p loans that have been written (yes, worse than the NG series on TC, or the Paintings or Whitehaven on FS). The degree to which the assets securing these loans have been overvalued if my worst fears are realised is truely frightening, and the potential losses mind-boggling.
Now for the shocking admission ... I did not do due dilligence on COL the platform before opening the account, nor for many months thereafter. Had I done so, I would never have invested ... I already had concerns about one of brothers but didn't join the dots until much later. I simply opened an account with COL based on the positive reputation on here and to follow a loan tagged on here as one of the best in p2p across from MT. If it wasn't for that one loan I would likely never have opened the COL account.
Back to the physcology - with the COL account open, and the 12% rolling in, even when I started to have concerns about COL mid to late 2017 I still continued to invest. I kept the Bolton loan (well the 1st ranking tranche is guaranteed to be safe. Doh ! ) and invested in other loans I felt had cast iron security. Whilst I was conscious of the elephant in the room (my doubts re COL's overall approach) I stupidly ignored the consequences of platform failure.
Apologies for the long winded post, but to answer the question, investing in COL was absolutely the wrong move for me, and I could have avoided it.
|
|
archie
Posts: 1,865 
Likes: 1,860
|
Post by archie on Mar 14, 2019 7:37:37 GMT
No.
When the Bolton loan moved from MT my thinking was if MT don't want it anymore then why should I?
I initially invested in a few of the properties loans but soon decided the way loans were being sold looked a bit desperate so I sold them all.
I wasn't convinced by the tone of the forum posts by Collateral as they always appeared a little evasive.
It also seemed to me they might be listing loans on the platform and then trying to do DD and legals. Too rushed.
I did invest in the bling, that may not have been wise either.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,692
Likes: 3,018
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 14, 2019 7:55:04 GMT
I was out of all property on COL bar a small chunk with too long a queue that I couldn't shift.
I thought the bling was safe.
Even when the receivers went in I thought the bling recovery would be straightforward - a few auctions and most of the money recovered.
How naive I was.
Fortunately I wasn't too heavily exposed (under 2% of my total P2P) and learnt a good lesson on platform risk and need to diversify across as well as within platform.
|
|
Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Mar 14, 2019 9:19:47 GMT
Absolutely not.
|
|
sjg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 67
Likes: 61
|
Post by sjg on Mar 14, 2019 10:16:42 GMT
Mmm hindsight I would have to say no. Though had never actually really thought of platform collapse or closure as a possibility before this. I know better now! |
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Mar 14, 2019 10:28:58 GMT
Who here still thinks that investing on collateral platform was a correct move? Well, with the benefit of hindsight, obviously not. But assuming that you mean us to try to re-engineer our thinking without that benefit ... ... still definitely not. The irritating thing for me is that in the weeks ahead of the crash I had already decided that I didn't like the platform and that I would exit. But (here was the mistake) I decided that there was no rush and I would just withdraw as loan terms ended. It's a lesson which after many years I still have to keep reminding myself of - trust my instincts, they are usually right. For me it's not a disaster - even a 100% wipeout would be less than I might "lose" on a single bad day in the stock market - but avoidable losses somehow feel so much worse.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Mar 14, 2019 10:30:04 GMT
At that time I knew that I should diversify from FC and was procrastinating. Procrastination may well have saved me from Coll, because I still do not see that anyone who lent though Coll made an error at the time. If they had, there would also be people who saw what was coming and got out and said 'told you so' - they do not exist. This came out of the blue, created by Coll and the FCA, to the detriment of both lenders and borrowers, and to the future of p2p in general. It was an unknown unknown, imo.
|
|
sarahcount
Member of DD Central
Posts: 359
Likes: 815
|
Post by sarahcount on Mar 14, 2019 11:18:58 GMT
I think I was drawn in by the clean looking website and the photos of sparkly bling.
Towards the end I could see that the large development loans were struggling but kept buying more of the Bolton first charge thinking that the low LTV would be sound even if the loan defaulted.
My intention was to cash out the Bolton money once that loan repaid just leaving a smaller balance of bling and residential bridging loans.
Of course I wouldn't have invested at all if I had known that the platform wasn't regulated by the FCA despite the reassurances on the FCA website.
I would urge anyone in my position to file a complaint against the FCA if they haven't already done so.
The time limit to complain is fast approaching and the online complaint form is available on the FCA website and elsewhere on this forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Mar 14, 2019 11:39:52 GMT
Mmm hindsight I would have to say no. Though had never actually really thought of platform collapse or closure as a possibility before this. I know better now! I think the manner in which all previous UK owned platform closures had ocurred will have sub-consiously "de-risked" the concept to the extent the mess we find ourselves in was pretty much impossible to envisage.
Yes Secure/Encash and Squirrl repaid all loans in full before closing, Gradurates was taken over by RS, and FK + FE continue to this day to efficeintly manage the run down of their loanbooks. Investors in Quakle did lose money, but was not UK owned, and the lack of credit scoring of borrowers an obvious risk.
|
|
11025
Member of DD Central
Posts: 737
Likes: 858
|
Post by 11025 on Mar 14, 2019 12:01:17 GMT
I was trying to diversify to complement my MT and SS exposure. I only lent on the bling too thinking that since the security was in CO’s hands and would be easy to sell and reliably valued would save me. I didn’t trust the 15% property stuff, seemed too good to be true. I remember having worries about CO’s slightly strange web site and I heard implied criticism of CO in terms of them not being set up as true P2P from some one at a London P2P meet-up. I wish I’d taken more notice. What like Lendy you mean ? 
|
|
pom
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,922 
Likes: 1,244
|
Post by pom on Mar 14, 2019 14:13:01 GMT
Hell no.
Didn't like them right from the start (and said so on some of the earliest threads here) so it was quite a while until I invested more than a toe dip, and only because they were proving so popular I figured I could use the liquidity, but I never invested as much as on other platforms...then they suddenly jumped from reasonable sized bridges to huge development loans which made me uneasy, but like someone else said, felt no need to rush. Stopped investing in any new loans, started pruning my property loans but figured bling would be fine...oops.
I always considered platform failure as a possible, that's why I'm invested in so many of them to limit my max exposure. The lack of permissions in itself wouldn't have been a red flag IF they'd been honest about it and why they thought they didn't need them. But...!!!
So on the one hand I've only myself to blame as I shouldn't have overruled my misgivings, but at the same time because I'd always believed it could happen somewhere in some unpredictable manner, at least my exposure is less than I earn from P2P overall in a year
|
|
neal
Member of DD Central
Posts: 87
Likes: 55
|
Post by neal on Mar 14, 2019 14:13:58 GMT
I moved money out of FC into SS as I was thinking defaults at 7% were getting a bit high, I then moved money out of Lendy into Col as I thought Col was offering more opportunities to diversify. I currently have investments in these and three other platforms. Right now I'd be happy with only 7% of loans in default, yes it was a bad move but not as bad as showing my dear brother how good Col was. My brother also invested or as we call it now lost money to the Col fiasco.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Mar 14, 2019 14:50:37 GMT
Hell no. Didn't like them right from the start (and said so on some of the earliest threads here) so it was quite a while until I invested more than a toe dip, and only because they were proving so popular I figured I could use the liquidity, but I never invested as much as on other platforms...then they suddenly jumped from reasonable sized bridges to huge development loans which made me uneasy, but like someone else said, felt no need to rush. Stopped investing in any new loans, started pruning my property loans but figured bling would be fine...oops. I always considered platform failure as a possible, that's why I'm invested in so many of them to limit my max exposure. The lack of permissions in itself wouldn't have been a red flag IF they'd been honest about it and why they thought they didn't need them. But...!!! So on the one hand I've only myself to blame as I shouldn't have overruled my misgivings, but at the same time because I'd always believed it could happen somewhere in some unpredictable manner, at least my exposure is less than I earn from P2P overall in a year No platform is perfect and risk-free, pom. Your misgivings were about general lending policy - common to many platforms - and not an expectation that it would fail in the way it did. You seem to be saying that if you had reduced lending because of your concerns about lending policy, you would not have been caught. That's co-incidence, not a clue. I think you should blame Coll and FCA, and that you could have done no more than spread your risk - which you did. I don't think you have any responsibility for the losses, other than choosing p2p. Just bad luck - no self-blame involved, imo. There were plenty of lenders talking up Coll and voting on polls - they could not be expected to see the meteorite coming, especially when the regulator first said that there was no meteorite coming, and then deliberately moved the Earth into its path, seeking to protect the inhabitants.
|
|
pom
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,922
Likes: 1,244
|
Post by pom on Mar 14, 2019 17:57:04 GMT
Hell no. Didn't like them right from the start (and said so on some of the earliest threads here) so it was quite a while until I invested more than a toe dip, and only because they were proving so popular I figured I could use the liquidity, but I never invested as much as on other platforms...then they suddenly jumped from reasonable sized bridges to huge development loans which made me uneasy, but like someone else said, felt no need to rush. Stopped investing in any new loans, started pruning my property loans but figured bling would be fine...oops. I always considered platform failure as a possible, that's why I'm invested in so many of them to limit my max exposure. The lack of permissions in itself wouldn't have been a red flag IF they'd been honest about it and why they thought they didn't need them. But...!!! So on the one hand I've only myself to blame as I shouldn't have overruled my misgivings, but at the same time because I'd always believed it could happen somewhere in some unpredictable manner, at least my exposure is less than I earn from P2P overall in a year No platform is perfect and risk-free, pom. Your misgivings were about general lending policy - common to many platforms - and not an expectation that it would fail in the way it did. You seem to be saying that if you had reduced lending because of your concerns about lending policy, you would not have been caught. That's co-incidence, not a clue. I think you should blame Coll and FCA, and that you could have done no more than spread your risk - which you did. I don't think you have any responsibility for the losses, other than choosing p2p. Just bad luck - no self-blame involved, imo. There were plenty of lenders talking up Coll and voting on polls - they could not be expected to see the meteorite coming, especially when the regulator first said that there was no meteorite coming, and then deliberately moved the Earth into its path, seeking to protect the inhabitants.
No, if I'd listened to my misgivings I wouldn't have invested with them at all. My gut is generally right but in this and a couple of other cases I decided to ignore it, or at least to a limited degree tho I was luckier elsewhere. Won't be doing that again - sure loans will go wrong and platforms will fail, but if I can see stuff that worries me and still go ahead...well..older and wiser
|
|
Just think of all the wasted time you save by procrastinaing instead of doing unecessary tasks ! 
