|
Post by dan1 on Feb 4, 2020 10:49:15 GMT
I'm still undecided regarding the long term impact on LendingWorks of their late November announcement and subsequent implementation this year. I guess it'll take six months to a year (particularly with the move to quarterly reporting) to see whether they can reverse the state of the Shield and retain sufficient investor confidence to progress over the longer term. The main reason for posting is to raise this with both RateSetter and their investors. I hope RateSetter are not deep in their silo with their fingers in their ears but considering how they'd handle such an event themselves. I hope the situation at LW recovers if not from a LW perspective but because it should reduce the probability of RS just shutting up shop one day without warning. From an investor perspective, I wonder if the LW news has had a deeper impact on RS than, say, the recent Times article? I doubt it given the reach of RS is far beyond that of LW. Perhaps RS are unconcerned with recent spikes given they know a wall of ISA cash is to come shortly especially considering the reduction to GR - are they actively discouraging retail investors and replacing them with institutional and the recently announced move into the adviser space (https://financialadvisers.ratesetter.com/)? LendingWorks: 6,842 investors, £93.8m under management RateSetter: 84,673 investors, £860.9m under management The backlash if RS were to do as per LW would be 10x as bad. It's inevitable that LW will move to the main P2X Sites board further increasing the awareness among our small readership. Yikes!
|
|
alanh
Posts: 556
Likes: 560
|
Post by alanh on Feb 4, 2020 11:58:46 GMT
Don't really see any comparison between these sites at all. RS has already reduced interest rates in the rebranding of the rolling/1yr/5yr markets. Whilst we still get spikes above the GR a huge amount of business is going through at much lower rates than before. This interest rate reduction has happened smoothly, without any rate changes to existing loans and with investors still having penalty free (apart from the usual sell out fees) access to their capital. LW on the other hand have communicated changes very poorly, chopped interest rates on existing loans and introduced huge penalties for those attempting to withdraw their money, thereby totalling alienating most of their investor base. You say you wonder about RS would handle such an event themselves.......but its already happened, and apart from the lower rates now on offer everything is pretty much carrying on as before.
|
|
|
Post by skidrow on Feb 4, 2020 17:39:12 GMT
LW are in a mess for several reasons, not least because they delayed and delayed before deciding to do something about the lack of sustainability of the shield.
It is possible that if they had reduced rates in the first half of 2019 then they could have stabilised the shield without introducing the present draconian measures.
I can't see any evidence that Ratesetter would go stumbling towards the abyss in the same way. Indeed, the current rates are unattractive for investors IMHO yet they still manage to attract the money.
I'm withdrawing repayments currently and feel comfortable doing so. Nevertheless it's important to keep vigilant and aware of various possibilities.
|
|
alanh
Posts: 556
Likes: 560
|
Post by alanh on Feb 4, 2020 18:23:26 GMT
Yes I would agree that the standard 3%/3.5%/4% rates on RS are totally unattractive and yet, as you say, they somehow attract the money. I am withdrawing all my repayments from RS as they come in.......and yet, occasionally you get these big spikes in the rates, as was the case recently when 5%+ on access was easily available (I got a decent amount done at 5.7%). When that happens it all goes back in again.
|
|
|
Post by propman on Feb 5, 2020 10:24:56 GMT
RS made similar changes to their T&Cs some time ago to allow interest rate (and potentially) capital haircuts. So if RS has the same issues there will be no fee free withdrawal. The main difference I have noted is that there are no "cohorts", all RS loans are treated as a single group. This means that the pain for previously too high rates will be bourne by all loans rather than just those that were at too high a rate. This makes the lower rates accepted by many more recently even more problematic. I cannot see how the current rules would give support to those continuing to lend (ie their future), although there is no detail I'm aware of as to whether the rate cuts will be equal. Perhaps they could draw a line in the sand and only cut rates on loans made at the date of the announcement (or perhaps earlier date before they started taking a greater cut for the PF).
As for lessons, I think that watching the cash in the PF is key as they are likely to delay a haircut as long as possible to tryu and trade their way out of trouble. This may mean that a draconian cut might be necessary. In addition, they say that they would impose the cut to get the PF to 100% of expected defaults. THis might mean that they retain a very high (possibly 100%) of interest for a relatively short period rather than the more prolonged approach expected. Alternatively they could treat the haircut going to the PF as future income and so allow a smoother withdrawal.
|
|