tonyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 477 
Likes: 258
|
Post by tonyr on Oct 12, 2014 16:02:03 GMT
Can I ask if the bug you encountered was the one where you looked a loan A exited the page then went to Loan B entered the amount you want only to find that you bought some of A plus B? As the Buy page on the AM in fact had a mixed of two Loans on it as below, On this page there are two different Wind Farms. Nope, it wasn't that bug. At one stage I listed everything I had bought for sale, then wanted to reverse that (I told you I messed up). However, there was no way to cancel the sell request. I believe that the way this mostly works for people is that if you set a higher AI limit than before it buys the ones you've set up for sale, so effectively cancelling the selling of them. However, in this case the higher AI limit didn't buy anything, so I ended up in the silly position of manually buying in large chunks of which 90% would be my own, I'd get 10% of what I wanted and I just had to keep doing that until I'd bought back all of my own that were for sale. I have (what I think) is a really good idea for AC, I've conveyed these to Stuart but I think it'll be a while before AC can cope with the algorithmic complexity.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 12, 2014 16:25:32 GMT
It's not a bug, it's a feature! But it has caught a few people out and has been changed for the new system.
With the current AI when you give it permission to buy and / or sell loan units you're giving it a point in time permission. It also uses the same listing mechanism as the manual site, so if you tell AI to sell your loan units and then change your mind and untick it's permission to sell it won't change anything. Those loan units are already listed for sale and AI won't unlist them for you if you remove its permission to sell as they've already been listed. What it wouldn't do is list more loan units for sale as it no longer has permission to do so.
To delist loan units simple set the target to the amount you wish to retain. I.e. if you have £1,000 of loan units and £500 for sale, but you want to delist £250 of them then you'd set your target to £750. However in order to be allowed to do this AI needs the "buy" option to be enabled (or advanced settings to be unselected). It doesn't actually buy them, it has the ability to delist, but it's driven off that same permission.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Oct 12, 2014 17:19:05 GMT
I got two tranches of units at different times on 9 October via AI and manual. (Post deleted. Confused because of reading the Carmarthenshire thread. (Potassium withdrawal symptoms  )
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 12, 2014 17:23:48 GMT
Sorry everyone, I guess I was largely responsible for this. I saw it was coming up in a few days, freed a lot of funds by selling other stuff and then was allocated a large proportion of this via AI ... : If I understand what you're saying correctly, you ended up buying most of what the underwriters had to sell. I think the critical question, then, is... Do you intend to keep those long-term? Or are you likely to be selling a big chunk of your holding any time soon. It's clearly your decision what you want to do, and you're under no obligation to tell us anything, but it might be helpful to those here who would like to pick up some of that loan to know whether they should keep some funds available for when you will be selling or just accept that they've missed the boat and decide what they'd like to do instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 12, 2014 20:36:08 GMT
It's not a bug, it's a feature! But it has caught a few people out and has been changed for the new system. With the current AI when you give it permission to buy and / or sell loan units you're giving it a point in time permission. It also uses the same listing mechanism as the manual site, so if you tell AI to sell your loan units and then change your mind and untick it's permission to sell it won't change anything. Those loan units are already listed for sale and AI won't unlist them for you if you remove its permission to sell as they've already been listed. What it wouldn't do is list more loan units for sale as it no longer has permission to do so. To delist loan units simple set the target to the amount you wish to retain. I.e. if you have £1,000 of loan units and £500 for sale, but you want to delist £250 of them then you'd set your target to £750. However in order to be allowed to do this AI needs the "buy" option to be enabled (or advanced settings to be unselected). It doesn't actually buy them, it has the ability to delist, but it's driven off that same permission. Yes, what I'm saying is that what you think should happen in your second paragraph doesn't happen. All my AI mandates had buy and sell permissions ticked (nothing else, I didn't trust those). I understand how it was supposed to work, I realise that it wasn't great but it should have been "good enough for now", but it doesn't work as you think it should, which is a major problem. As per PM and other thread it is working as expected and instructed, but the settings are wrong.
|
|
tonyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 477
Likes: 258
|
Post by tonyr on Oct 12, 2014 20:51:03 GMT
Sorry everyone, I guess I was largely responsible for this. I saw it was coming up in a few days, freed a lot of funds by selling other stuff and then was allocated a large proportion of this via AI ... : If I understand what you're saying correctly, you ended up buying most of what the underwriters had to sell. I think the critical question, then, is... Do you intend to keep those long-term? Or are you likely to be selling a big chunk of your holding any time soon. It's clearly your decision what you want to do, and you're under no obligation to tell us anything, but it might be helpful to those here who would like to pick up some of that loan to know whether they should keep some funds available for when you will be selling or just accept that they've missed the boat and decide what they'd like to do instead. I'm an underwriter, liquidity is more important to me than return. I'll put them on the market as other loans need funding. I don't know that time scale, there are always planned drawdown timesales and delays and it's very difficult to model but certainly I've got more than I'd be comfortable holding long term. I suspect you are attracted to CWT 121 compared to C**, Montrose, Swansea, Aberdeenshire or North Lothian because there are no parts for sale on the aftermarket. I'm hoping that the new site and associated marketing will help with this, it's no good for anyone to see an underwritten loan so big that they won't buy because they won't be able to sell. I also see many potential problems in the new site. Personally I'm holding off putting my SIPP into AC until I can see that the new site really does work.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 12, 2014 23:08:44 GMT
... it's no good for anyone to see an underwritten loan so big that they won't buy because they won't be able to sell. : Thanks for your input. As for the issue highlighted by the above quote, Saving Stream have the solution -- loan parts offered for sale in the SS Aftermarket by retail investors are put ahead of underwriters' parts in the selling queue. As a result, they are sold first even when there are many underwriters' parts for sale, and this gives retail lenders good liquidity. It has been pointed out that this SS policy discriminates against underwriters, and I can't argue that it doesn't. But I don't think it's really significant for the underwriters because the number of retail users' parts available on the SS Aftermarket is tiny relative to the number of underwriters' parts. Furthermore, I'm convinced that the knowledge that the policy exists and would help them sell their parts reasonably quickly means retail investors are a lot more willing to invest in loans that still have a significant underwriters' presence. The net result of this behavioural change is that it probably allows underwriters to exit their large positions more quickly than they could without this policy. In short, the policy may discriminate against underwriters on the surface, but the change in the way retail lenders act as a result means the underwriters are better off having been discriminated against!
|
|
|
|
Post by pepperpot on Oct 12, 2014 23:56:34 GMT
... it's no good for anyone to see an underwritten loan so big that they won't buy because they won't be able to sell. : Thanks for your input. As for the issue highlighted by the above quote, Saving Stream have the solution -- loan parts offered for sale in the SS Aftermarket by retail investors are put ahead of underwriters' parts in the selling queue. As a result, they are sold first even when there are many underwriters' parts for sale, and this gives retail lenders good liquidity. It has been pointed out that this SS policy discriminates against underwriters, and I can't argue that it doesn't. But I don't think it's really significant for the underwriters because the number of retail users' parts available on the SS Aftermarket is tiny relative to the number of underwriters' parts. Furthermore, I'm convinced that the knowledge that the policy exists and would help them sell their parts reasonably quickly means retail investors are a lot more willing to invest in loans that still have a significant underwriters' presence. The net result of this behavioural change is that it probably allows underwriters to exit their large positions more quickly than they could without this policy. In short, the policy may discriminate against underwriters on the surface, but the change in the way retail lenders act as a result means the underwriters are better off having been discriminated against! Well put! If you don't mind I'm going to draw andrewholgate' attention to that post as it's well worth consideration. The difference in models (SS/AC) complicates it slightly, being overweighted in a recently drawn SS loan has a different risk profile to most AC loans (unless it's an 'interest retained at drawdown' one - in which case it's similar). And those interest retained ones tend to do quite well on the AM for some reason!
|
|
|
|
Post by phoenix on Oct 13, 2014 9:19:18 GMT
Personally I'm holding off putting my SIPP into AC until I can see that the new site really does work. We can put our SIPPs into AC now???
|
|
tonyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 477
Likes: 258
|
Post by tonyr on Oct 13, 2014 10:52:15 GMT
Personally I'm holding off putting my SIPP into AC until I can see that the new site really does work. We can put our SIPPs into AC now??? I'm informed that one person has done it already, I haven't done yet. I'm sure AC will release details when the process works smoothly and if you want to be another guinea pig like me then they'll put you in touch with the right people.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewholgate on Oct 13, 2014 13:42:24 GMT
SIPPs - We have the first live and are just testing how it works. Once we are happy, we will release more details of how you can also put SIPPs to work.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 13, 2014 21:13:45 GMT
SIPPs - We have the first live and are just testing how it works. Once we are happy, we will release more details of how you can also put SIPPs to work. : Are you working on NISAs as well?
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewholgate on Oct 16, 2014 10:07:03 GMT
NISA's are being worked on alongside the consultation that HM Treasury are running. I predict H2 2015 before any NISA wrapper is available for any platform.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Oct 16, 2014 11:24:57 GMT
NISA's are being worked on alongside the consultation that HM Treasury are running. I predict H2 2015 before any NISA wrapper is available for any platform. 
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Oct 16, 2014 11:31:40 GMT
"NISA's are being worked on alongside the consultation that HM Treasury are running. I predict H2 2015 before any NISA wrapper is available for any platform."
....and that doesn't allow for the "unfortunately" and "there will be a delay" and "we will provide a further update on (Monday/next month/at the end of the year/when we have more info)" etc.
Grumpy is pencilling in 2016/2017 for this and there will be severe restrictions.
|
|
) 
