IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,661
Likes: 2,984
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 22, 2020 14:00:23 GMT
Think there is a general withholding of money with p2p at the moment which is not helped by the Likes of the Times & Mail etc running stories (based only on problems rather then success most of the time) I have not felt with the last couple of loans that the security was quite as good as previous offerings and as described by the "asset backed lending" part of the platform name.Also you mention Red flags(and i'm not saying there were) but i no longer expect any platform to give linkage to previous loans or business etc so i am sure many people first google names of companies & people to death now,where as before it was invest on FFF then read up "but i no longer expect any platform to give linkage to previous loans or business etc" - with the new platform we are specigfically enhancing this part of the platform. We will manually be adding connected loan and companies in a format like below; very welcome additions
|
|
|
Post by davidspindle on Jan 22, 2020 14:52:00 GMT
In the new era of p2p I decided to invest only repayments and only in amortising loans. Although I receive repayments almost daily, it takes perhaps a week or so to accumulate enough for a worthwhile investment in a new loan. I didn't make it in time for 139. The resulting cash drag would be less if Ablrate would specify in their advance notices whether the upcoming loan was interest only or amortising. A bit longer notice would also help, with the advantage for all that there would be more trading on the secondary market during quiet periods.
|
|
tommo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 70
Likes: 97
|
Post by tommo on Jan 22, 2020 15:15:01 GMT
Well done ablrate I remember well the Lendy shed in Somerset where many commented on the "history" of the borrower - Lendy responded with it's all about the security nothing else matters - we all know how that ended! Indeed. It is a credit to the DD of lenders and the engagement of the platform which actually takes lender concerns seriously. Working together for mutual benefit.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 22, 2020 16:25:59 GMT
Well done ablrate I remember well the Lendy shed in Somerset where many commented on the "history" of the borrower - Lendy responded with it's all about the security nothing else matters - we all know how that ended! Indeed. It is a credit to the DD of lenders and the engagement of the platform which actually takes lender concerns seriously. Working together for mutual benefit. A 'like' is not sufficient endorsement of this post, which is spot on. I am also convinced that it was the posts of concern just before launch, by others, that caused this loan not fill, and therefore that this forum is very influential. I cannot believe that all the potential bidders did full DD and found issues of non-disclosure that ablrate had not found. Even if the loan had filled, I believe that the issues raised would have prevented draw down. Note to self: be more aware of how influential posts on this forum can be. Having said that I agree with ablrate that there was no significant issue with the security, that the downside risk of keeping to term was not that high, given that ablrate would supervise the use of funds, the state of the security, and the mobility of the security - having had those problems before in containers and Welsh pubs. The key issue was the track record of the owner, we assume not fully disclosed.
The other issue for ablrate to consider would be the end-loading of the risk on this loan. Given that the principal, interest and fees were borrowed for six months, how would any latent issues with the loan have been found before the borrower was required to actually make a payment - after seven months? Personally I would have expected to move on before six months, maybe at a modest discount, but if there were an inherent problem, it would very much more likely happen after six months. It's not just about the security. The security is contingent upon failure of the loan, which we all wish to avoid.
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Jan 22, 2020 23:16:41 GMT
Indeed. It is a credit to the DD of lenders and the engagement of the platform which actually takes lender concerns seriously. Working together for mutual benefit. A 'like' is not sufficient endorsement of this post, which is spot on. I am also convinced that it was the posts of concern just before launch, by others, that caused this loan not fill, and therefore that this forum is very influential. I cannot believe that all the potential bidders did full DD and found issues of non-disclosure that ablrate had not found. Even if the loan had filled, I believe that the issues raised would have prevented draw down. Note to self: be more aware of how influential posts on this forum can be. Having said that I agree with ablrate that there was no significant issue with the security, that the downside risk of keeping to term was not that high, given that ablrate would supervise the use of funds, the state of the security, and the mobility of the security - having had those problems before in containers and Welsh pubs. The key issue was the track record of the owner, we assume not fully disclosed.
The other issue for ablrate to consider would be the end-loading of the risk on this loan. Given that the principal, interest and fees were borrowed for six months, how would any latent issues with the loan have been found before the borrower was required to actually make a payment - after seven months? Personally I would have expected to move on before six months, maybe at a modest discount, but if there were an inherent problem, it would very much more likely happen after six months. It's not just about the security. The security is contingent upon failure of the loan, which we all wish to avoid.
Ah, now I always rather naively assumed the main point of the forum was to collectively dissect loans and attempt to sort the risky (which they will all be) from the downright avoid at all costs. I never saw that activity as anti platform although the platforms might view it differently. Obviously events have moved it a fair away from that currently. Anybody who looks at DDc will see the large amount of information compiled by the Administrators and some Mods (I have no idea why, few help them with the task and take potentially useful information elsewhere - I appreciate their work and if they were a touch slower might be able to contribute more-) the position of the borrower on this loan was there for anybody to see. I do however understand why Ablrate may well not have known about it, clearly their reaction shows once they were they acted wisely. It is probably the case that the Forum is evolving into something different currently, but useful posts will always have an effect (I really must try and do some)
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 23, 2020 0:47:50 GMT
I was not meaning to suggest that it is anti-platform to make adverse comments on loans - it was my own posts I was suggesting should have been better considered in this case. But there is a difference between a few of the lenders discussing loan opportunities for mutual benefit, and those discussions affecting the decisions of a large proportion of potential lenders - in this case probably in the right direction. I am just saying that if this forum board has that power, then it comes with a need for responsible use. This is a general observation, in no way a criticism of those who called this one correctly. Looking at the whole indy forum, there is a lot of negativity not only about the particular platforms which have failed and dud loans, but also generally about p2p and encouraging complaints to regulators. The net result is that we risk losing the golden geese as well as the leaden geese. Just sharing an opportunity for reflection.
|
|