p2pstephan
Member of DD Central
Posts: 91
Likes: 79
|
Post by p2pstephan on Mar 20, 2019 20:03:13 GMT
Legal Charge - 1st - Yay LTV - 60.46% - Not bad  The GDV is impressive but I am more focused on LTV. Had a look on google and 222 C***e Street, Glasgow looks a nice spot. Issues, they will demolish first, which I guess affect the LTV. It is also a big loan (1.2M), and big loans seem to be more of a challenge to control. It seems to have had a complicated history. I’m in, only have a nibble spare to invest on this one. I expect it to take a while to fill 1.2M, or will lots of new money in April change things. Either way, if it all ends well then my nibble started earning 13% from now. If does not end well, FS has earned me more than enough interest to not worry about this one. PS Could not find a thread on this, so started this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Mar 20, 2019 20:19:21 GMT
It is a reasonable location for a hotel, relatively close to the city centre, and I have stayed a similiar (and slightly wider) radius away from Glasgow central station myself on fairly frequent business trips to the city over the years.
The question for me is, why does this project need to resort to FS for funding ? Its perhaps worth pointing out from a DD angle, that the existing lender on this security appears to be the same as the existing lender on the Notting Hill loan, who may have their own reasons for wishing to reduce their exposure to such loans at the current time.
I'm also struggling with this statement on the assets tab "We have had confirmation that whilst the developer has stripped the site ready for demolition they have held the next stage of works as they are currently negotiating with a new operator and wish to ensure that the site is designed in a bespoke nature for the operators' trading brand." Whilst the second bit is obvious, I don't get why that should impact on the demolition of the existing redundant building.
|
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Mar 20, 2019 20:22:36 GMT
Legal Charge - 1st - Yay LTV - 60.46% - Not bad The GDV is impressive but I am more focused on LTV. Had a look on google and 222 C***e Street, Glasgow looks a nice spot. Issues, they will demolish first, which I guess affect the LTV. It is also a big loan (1.2M), and big loans seem to be more of a challenge to control. It seems to have had a complicated history. I’m in, only have a nibble spare to invest on this one. I expect it to take a while to fill 1.2M, or will lots of new money in April change things. Either way, if it all ends well then my nibble started earning 13% from now. If does not end well, FS has earned me more than enough interest to not worry about this one. PS Could not find a thread on this, so started this one. Not one I have any real interest in, just looked out of curiosity Did a virtual walk down the road, shame they don't just regenerate these areas. Could be worth looking at Number 260, I have a feeling it may be connected somewhere along the line.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 20, 2019 20:39:50 GMT
Legal Charge - 1st - Yay LTV - 60.46% - Not bad The GDV is impressive but I am more focused on LTV. Had a look on google and 222 C***e Street, Glasgow looks a nice spot. Issues, they will demolish first, which I guess affect the LTV. It is also a big loan (1.2M), and big loans seem to be more of a challenge to control. It seems to have had a complicated history. I’m in, only have a nibble spare to invest on this one. I expect it to take a while to fill 1.2M, or will lots of new money in April change things. Either way, if it all ends well then my nibble started earning 13% from now. If does not end well, FS has earned me more than enough interest to not worry about this one. PS Could not find a thread on this, so started this one. I have to say that "general information" is now more informative and better structured than in the past. It will very likely take a while to fill (if successful), too large. I've stopped investing in FS property loans a while ago, but decided to give this one a go. I don't trust LTV (never mind GDV), but it sounds like this loan has a good chance to be refinanced.
|
|
p2pstephan
Member of DD Central
Posts: 91
Likes: 79
|
Post by p2pstephan on Mar 20, 2019 20:47:50 GMT
"It will very likely take a while to fill (if successful),"
Several of my loans have been cancelled for various reasons and FS stump up the interest. Makes me happy that FS do this, but it must cost FS a fair bit to pay everyone interest for loans that get cancelled.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 20, 2019 20:50:38 GMT
Development loans. Not touching them on any platform for a good long while - and maybe never on a 'general purpose' P2P platform.
The borrowers are always lauded as the greatest thing since the bread came pre-sliced but so often fail to deliver.
As above I don't understand the demolition delays - but given the borro wer's other development ongoing next door, I'm tempted to feel that it's cashflow which is the issue and this is a fundraising exercise to alleviate that constraint and also pay-off the existing lender, who presumably has as much (if not more) insight into the borrower and their finances but chooses not to remain in the bankers chair.
So No. Not for me. Not at 13% or 23%: return OF capital is more important than return ON capital and there are too many instances of P2P platforms failing in both aspects.
(PS: appreciate this is on paper a bridging loan for 6 months, but that's just window dressing IMO as the platform recognises the antipathy towards that type of loan.)
|
|
sarahcount
Member of DD Central
Posts: 359
Likes: 815
|
Post by sarahcount on Mar 20, 2019 20:52:45 GMT
"Given that the borrower is working to a tight deadline to secure this refinance, they have agreed to pay a higher interest rate which secures 13% p/a for our investors. This rate does not necessarily reflect an increased credit risk."
So maybe extra interest for no extra risk. Maybe.
Personally I've stopped investing in development loans having had my fingers burned elsewhere - but it might be that New FS have looked at this one more carefully.
For sure I'm pleased to see new loans on the platform and I wish it well.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Mar 20, 2019 21:02:02 GMT
"Given that the borrower is working to a tight deadline to secure this refinance, they have agreed to pay a higher interest rate which secures 13% p/a for our investors. This rate does not necessarily reflect an increased credit risk." So maybe extra interest for no extra risk. Maybe.Personally I've stopped investing in development loans having had my fingers burned elsewhere - but it might be that New FS have looked at this one more carefully. For sure I'm pleased to see new loans on the platform and I wish it well.
Maybe indeed ... hmmm. The email announcing the loan at 17:20 this afternoon contained the same sentence but a 15% rate. (although the summary info did contradict that with the 13%).
The size of loan, the fact that initiating recovery seems to be a slower legal process in Scotland, a residual value valuation, an abandoned (for now) demolition are all suggesting to me that 13% is an appropriate risk related rate in the context of FS rate ranges. 14% or indeed 15% would indeed to me represent a higher interest rate.
|
|
p2pstephan
Member of DD Central
Posts: 91
Likes: 79
|
Post by p2pstephan on Mar 20, 2019 21:48:18 GMT
So I did not imagine the 15% “higher interest rate which secures 15% p/a for our investors.”
I agree 13% is fair for the risk, using the FS standard. 15% would worry me. Not too many loans at 15% end well.
No bonuses offered, which is fine by me as I have just a nibble in this one. Maybe they will promote it further with a 1% cash back. (Oops I am getting greedy and that can be dangerous in P2P)
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 20, 2019 22:10:36 GMT
"It will very likely take a while to fill (if successful)," Several of my loans have been cancelled for various reasons and FS stump up the interest. Makes me happy that FS do this, but it must cost FS a fair bit to pay everyone interest for loans that get cancelled. Yes, this is one of the reasons that leaned me towards making an exception to my "no FS property ordinance".
|
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Mar 20, 2019 22:31:21 GMT
"It will very likely take a while to fill (if successful)," Several of my loans have been cancelled for various reasons and FS stump up the interest. Makes me happy that FS do this, but it must cost FS a fair bit to pay everyone interest for loans that get cancelled. Yes, this is one of the reasons that leaned me towards making an exception to my "no FS property ordinance". Putting my conspiracy hat on. Given the Notting hill one was underwritten and this one is from the same former lenders 'stable'. I wonder what the chances are of this being treated to the same good fortune.
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Mar 20, 2019 22:32:28 GMT
"It will very likely take a while to fill (if successful)," Several of my loans have been cancelled for various reasons and FS stump up the interest. Makes me happy that FS do this, but it must cost FS a fair bit to pay everyone interest for loans that get cancelled. Yes, this is one of the reasons that leaned me towards making an exception to my "no FS property ordinance". There appears to be increasing use of underwriters to secure completion of the loan. That is a good thing in that it demonstrates confidence in the loa, but it's bad for us hoping to get risk free interest...
|
|
p2pstephan
Member of DD Central
Posts: 91
Likes: 79
|
Post by p2pstephan on Mar 20, 2019 23:09:22 GMT
I do wish they would only use the term “underwrite” to cover guaranteeing that lenders cannot lose capital. If only they could use a different term to cover another lender funding the FS funding shortfall.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Mar 21, 2019 0:02:11 GMT
One of the two directors of the company which is assumed to be the borrower of this loan is the director of a London based firm of architects (which seems to be his main role) with an extensive portfolio of high profile projects and clients, albeit mainly in and around London. Links are on DD Central for those with access.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 21, 2019 8:43:41 GMT
Yes, this is one of the reasons that leaned me towards making an exception to my "no FS property ordinance". Putting my conspiracy hat on. Given the Notting hill one was underwritten and this one is from the same former lenders 'stable'. I wonder what the chances are of this being treated to the same good fortune. I found Notting Hill very unattractive - 12 months (too long without monthly repayments), 8.7m (allergy to extra large loans triggered by another platform), underwritten (no chance to sell).
|
|
