amwinv
Member of DD Central
Posts: 198
Likes: 282
|
Post by amwinv on Aug 5, 2020 22:58:29 GMT
Share price has slowly crept back up to almost £1 over the last few weeks. Anyone know what's changed?!?!
The Metro-Ratesetter buyout?
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Aug 5, 2020 23:12:02 GMT
Share price has slowly crept back up to almost £1 over the last few weeks. Anyone know what's changed?!?! The Metro-Ratesetter buyout? Could be the fact that they are channeling CBILS cash, and the expectation that many of their borrowers will be propped up by government handouts?
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 945
Likes: 1,632
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Aug 5, 2020 23:37:55 GMT
Share price has slowly crept back up to almost £1 over the last few weeks. Anyone know what's changed?!?! The Metro-Ratesetter buyout? Merian Global Investors (UK) Limited bought a few more shares last month + previously mentioned facts from Ace above posting.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Aug 6, 2020 6:50:55 GMT
Also, the rumours that MetroBank are considering more purchases might have had an effect.
|
|
dorset
Member of DD Central
Posts: 281
Likes: 187
|
Post by dorset on Aug 6, 2020 10:52:03 GMT
Agree it's a very good strategic fit. A bank that is loss making and struggling aligned to a busted p2p platform.
|
|
coogaruk
Hello everyone! Anyone remember me?
Posts: 703
Likes: 463
|
Post by coogaruk on Aug 6, 2020 13:35:32 GMT
Share price has slowly crept back up to almost £1 over the last few weeks. Anyone know what's changed?!?! The Metro-Ratesetter buyout? I would have expected that to have had the opposite effect!
|
|
c88dnf
Member of DD Central
Posts: 364
Likes: 266
|
Post by c88dnf on Aug 20, 2020 22:50:20 GMT
84p closing price on August 19th. Up 0.2p over the past month, up 3.35p over 6 months, down 28p over 1 year, down 356p since launch.
EDIT - down to 73.35p at 16.00 Aug 25th.
|
|
|
Post by camraid on Sept 9, 2020 19:55:16 GMT
It was valued as a tech company. Arguably it is a finance company.
It has very little recurring income. It needs to generate loans to generate platform fees. This requires huge marketing spend.
CBILS may have provided a temporary reprieve. They have refinanced some of their existing loans.
The success of this business will depend on growth in the US.
The initial list price was madness.
|
|
puddleduck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 537
Likes: 489
|
Post by puddleduck on Sept 10, 2020 13:14:46 GMT
It was valued as a tech company. Arguably it is a finance company. It's definitely a finance company - I don't really understand why traditional businesses of which lending surely is, can be shoehorned into 'tech' Same thing happened with WeWork - the business model was renting, sub-dividing and re-letting property. That had a stupidly high 'tech' valuation for a traditional bricks and mortar business model. If you can attach buzzwords i.e tech, blockchain etc you can fool a lot of people who should know better.
|
|
|
Post by camraid on Sept 10, 2020 14:50:29 GMT
It was valued as a tech company. Arguably it is a finance company. It's definitely a finance company - I don't really understand why traditional businesses of which lending surely is, can be shoehorned into 'tech' Same thing happened with WeWork - the business model was renting, sub-dividing and re-letting property. That had a stupidly high 'tech' valuation for a traditional bricks and mortar business model. If you can attach buzzwords i.e tech, blockchain etc you can fool a lot of people who should know better. It was an astonishing move back to the days of, "The computer says 'no'". However, they were hoping to have enough information to be able to say yes enough of the time. I think a lot of the underwriting hinges on the underlying PG. Tech companies typically have recurring revenue streams with the potential for exponential growth. As a platform the vast majority of income comes from arrangement fees. These are only paid from new loans. the minute you stop pedalling the income dries up. This means vast sums are spent on marketing. This is not helped when loans are taken over 3-5 years. Their hope was customers would simply renew without the need for expensive marketing. I am not sure many businesses use loans in this manner. That said, I wish I had founded it and taken it to an IPO.
|
|
c88dnf
Member of DD Central
Posts: 364
Likes: 266
|
Post by c88dnf on Sept 24, 2020 1:19:08 GMT
Share price in London 62.0p as of close of business September 23rd. 25.2p down over 12 months. 378p (86%) down since launch just shy of 2 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by shanghaiscouse on Sept 24, 2020 11:43:11 GMT
Me neither, but I did note that now they have a very different risk profile as they have to warehouse the loans before selling them on in securitisations, and as it has not been possible to securitise during the covid market they have lots of these loans sitting on their own balance sheet now. Their cash resources are getting more and more stretched, they still have 120m or so which sounds like a lot but 18 months ago they had 320m....
|
|
|
Post by shanghaiscouse on Sept 24, 2020 14:15:56 GMT
Exactly, that was an amazing comment by Samir which shows you what he thinks about his investors, that unfortunately he was not able to dump all the losses onto them! It seems FC still haven't figured out a business model that works, P2P was too slow and too tedious to deal with retail investors, securitisations mean you end up with lots of loans on own balance sheet (at least temporarily) and are exposed.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Sept 24, 2020 15:51:30 GMT
totally agree with the prior comments - we expressed concern long before we had heard of C19 so this is a pretty lame excuse - personally I think the original business could have worked with more care and less greed but they are stuffed - am looking to short the share price - seems on a constant road down. Of course they will go bust unless they very quickly sort-out their business model although I suspect it is too late. Short them baby- short them!
|
|
|
Post by camraid on Oct 4, 2020 18:54:36 GMT
Exactly, that was an amazing comment by Samir which shows you what he thinks about his investors, that unfortunately he was not able to dump all the losses onto them! It seems FC still haven't figured out a business model that works, P2P was too slow and too tedious to deal with retail investors, securitisations mean you end up with lots of loans on own balance sheet (at least temporarily) and are exposed. I think C19 did impact on the sale of the loans and the resulting downturn. That was unlucky. However, they have also benefitted from CBILS loans and have propped up their income with fees from the government. It also allowed them to refinance previous loans, many of which would have resulted in retail investors getting repaid, and managed to get fees again for what is arguably the same loan restructured. I still think the momentum will have been taken out of the loan market for the foreseeable future. The spike in income from CBILS should not be viewed as a trend. I think the reality remains this is marketing driven income rather than repeat income.
|
|