Post by extremis on Dec 8, 2019 20:41:47 GMT
IuteCredit and Monego license has recently been revoked in Kosovo, and Mintos has, once again, suspended loans from Secondary Market. As usual, some investors were informed about the problem (from another forum, social media, or the web) a few hours before the SM suspension and had plenty of time to sell everything (at par or very small discount) to other investors' AutoInvest profiles that happily grabbed them. Then suspension happens and nobody can sell a loan on SM anymore, even at a huge discount.
As a matter of fact, Mintos has recently changed their TOS (and informed us through email about the changes), adding a clause that grants them the right to suspend SM whenever they think appropriate in order to protect the platform and/or investors. However, no clear explanation is offered for their decision to suspend SM or not. For example, in case of Metrokredit's license problem there was no SM suspension; how is Metrokredit's case different from Iutecredit and Monego license problems?
If Mintos wants to protect investors, it is not necessary to suspend all trading on SM; they could just block Invest & Access and AutoInvest from automatically buying loans on SM while still letting manually investing. They could also add a warning flag on each affected loan, so everyone (manually) investing would be aware of the potential problem and make an informed decision whether to invest or not. Also, it makes no sense (and it is largely unfair) to block SM trading after a mass sell has already happened; Mintos has a rather big team of professionals, they should learn about potential problems before anyone else and take immediate action (or take no action at all if they choose to). (If legally possible) they could even reverse transactions on SM that happened after the bad news about a Loan Originator were publicly available.
What is your opinion on SM suspension? Are you satisfied with Mintos' reaction in case of problems, or would you prefer a different course of action?
As a matter of fact, Mintos has recently changed their TOS (and informed us through email about the changes), adding a clause that grants them the right to suspend SM whenever they think appropriate in order to protect the platform and/or investors. However, no clear explanation is offered for their decision to suspend SM or not. For example, in case of Metrokredit's license problem there was no SM suspension; how is Metrokredit's case different from Iutecredit and Monego license problems?
If Mintos wants to protect investors, it is not necessary to suspend all trading on SM; they could just block Invest & Access and AutoInvest from automatically buying loans on SM while still letting manually investing. They could also add a warning flag on each affected loan, so everyone (manually) investing would be aware of the potential problem and make an informed decision whether to invest or not. Also, it makes no sense (and it is largely unfair) to block SM trading after a mass sell has already happened; Mintos has a rather big team of professionals, they should learn about potential problems before anyone else and take immediate action (or take no action at all if they choose to). (If legally possible) they could even reverse transactions on SM that happened after the bad news about a Loan Originator were publicly available.
What is your opinion on SM suspension? Are you satisfied with Mintos' reaction in case of problems, or would you prefer a different course of action?