jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Feb 17, 2021 16:42:11 GMT
Peeps, go easy on the assumptions-squared. Firstly, there’s an assumption by the original poster that AAs might be buying GBBA2 holdings. For my pint’s worth - coz that’s all I’ve got left in AAs, that’s £4 or so for those that can’t remember how much a pint costs - I’m not convinced that AAs are buying GBBA2 holdings. Secondly, by definition any loan with trading suspended isn’t being bought or sold! Just FYI. I only have suspended loans in the old investment accounts so don't know what is happening from personal experience as it doesn't impact me. I asked the help desk and this was there reply in case it is of any use. Anyone who wants more info is probably best off asking the help desk follow up questions. Question: "Since the access accounts stopped operating in normal market conditions, have the access accounts being buying loan parts from the GBBA accounts or the Manual account?" Answer: "Whilst the historic accounts are closed for new investment, you are able to sell the holdings via the Marketplace to other investors in the AAs and MLA. This is subject to demand of other investors buying those holdings from you and as a result withdrawal timeframes cannot be forecasted." And in response to a follow up question to AC: "The AAs have not bought any loan parts from other investment accounts since normal market conditions ceased in March 2020. The AAs are currently only funding tranches for existing development loans held within the AAs prior to normal market conditions ceasing."
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Feb 18, 2021 12:33:52 GMT
Currently it does. But AC have warned (many months ago), this will probably change. Not exactly my understanding - it depends on the PF's having enough cash in them when/if they don't then there's a lock-in of some sort, probably just the loans where they've gone over the amount that CAN be ring-fenced by the relevent PF Here's my copy of the PF's recently d=ditto for the previous months/quarter(?)'s value Thanks for this in the round it indicates the size of the funds have reduced by 15% £33m and will continue to do so until AC incentivise investors with a product which offers better returns and or agreed redemption terms
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 3, 2021 8:20:33 GMT
I suspect we will see another 10/20% distribution Friday which will save AC a few quid in terms of the 1% cash back incentive which closes 11:59 6/3/21.
For those eligible you may want to adjust your withdrawal notice in order to qualify for the bonus.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 4, 2021 9:39:57 GMT
What’s happening with 1197??
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 4, 2021 9:51:39 GMT
What’s happening with 1197?? Do you mean other than what was recently voted on by 99%? I’d imagine other than the vote no one here will know anything additional. It’s indicating 0 months term like the other 2 - possibly it’s been redeemed as the borrower was looking at alternative finance at the same time - if it has that’s a 2% payout for the access accounts with the others
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329 
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 4, 2021 9:55:11 GMT
What’s happening with 1197?? Do you mean other than what was recently voted on by 99%? I’d imagine other than the vote no one here will know anything additional. Probably referring to the fact its hit term and the rate has dropped to 0. Fairly regular occurrence, just needs an internal extension, which they say they are doing but havent done, someone will nudge them via Q&A. Edit crossed with ian clarifying Edit 2 Ive nudged them.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Mar 4, 2021 9:57:08 GMT
Do you mean other than what was recently voted on by 99%? I’d imagine other than the vote no one here will know anything additional. It’s indicating 0 months term like the other 2 - possibly it’s been redeemed as the borrower was looking at alternative finance at the same time - if it has that’s a 2% payout for the access accounts with the others The 0 months term and Lender/Borrower rates at 0% are probably because it's past the final repayment date of 1 Mar 2021. Assume AC will be correcting these soon, now that the results of the Lender Vote are known. Crossed with ilmoro
Loans #535 also shows as 0 months term and 0% rates with final repayment date of 26/2/2021, loan #1031 ditto with date 3/3/2021, loan #1118 ditto with date 26/2/2021.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 4, 2021 10:12:30 GMT
It’s indicating 0 months term like the other 2 - possibly it’s been redeemed as the borrower was looking at alternative finance at the same time - if it has that’s a 2% payout for the access accounts with the others The 0 months term and Lender/Borrower rates at 0% are probably because it's past the final repayment date of 1 Mar 2021. Assume AC will be correcting these soon, now that the results of the Lender Vote are known. Thanks - not noticed that before .... but I rely on you for information Re redemptions ! As with most information you can’t rely on AC for it!
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 4, 2021 10:24:23 GMT
It’s indicating 0 months term like the other 2 - possibly it’s been redeemed as the borrower was looking at alternative finance at the same time - if it has that’s a 2% payout for the access accounts with the others The 0 months term and Lender/Borrower rates at 0% are probably because it's past the final repayment date of 1 Mar 2021. Assume AC will be correcting these soon, now that the results of the Lender Vote are known.
Loans #535 also shows as 0 months term and 0% rates with final repayment date of 26/2/2021, loan #1031 ditto with date 3/3/2021, loan #1118 ditto with date 26/2/2021.
Usual AC lack of attention to housekeeping. I suspect most lenders dont realise how much poking goes on unseen to get these minor issues fixed. stuartassetzcapital any chance this long running issue could finally get fixed? Im afraid some of your staff just arent on top of their basic loan management and lenders are consistently having to do their jobs for them. Its not rocket science, diarise the end of term so it can be extended, check the front end regularly for zero rates, check that if you say a internal extension has been applied its actually happened on the front end. Send me a cheque for all the work Ive done 
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 4, 2021 16:01:12 GMT
And then there was one ... three loans repaid including #1118 which was obviously a little slow it getting its update, and two magically re-rated and most people none the wiser. Just #1031 left which we'll see if they can fix unaided.
On the subject of things unnoticed both #663 & #792 which disappeared into the repaid section with significant accrued interest outstanding have repaid all sums due so can happy rest out of sight forevermore
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 6, 2021 11:21:34 GMT
Ooops, #1197 seems to have suffered a relapse... boney appendage extended in a metaphorical forward thrusting motion.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 6, 2021 13:00:04 GMT
<snip>Quite the uplift and February shaping up to be even better. Updated table to include Feb's figures, average daily payment received by month per £10k of holding: | Jun '20 | 3.60 | Sep '20 | 3.88 | Dec '20 | 6.61 | Mar '21 | - | | Jul '20 | 8.65 | Oct '20 | 5.38 | Jan '21 | 36.71 | Apr '21 | - | | Aug '20 | 8.61 | Nov '20 | 3.27 | Feb '21 | 72.18 | May '21 | - |
Having gone some way to set expectations, it's not entirely surprising that March looks unlikely to match or exceed Feb's level of repayment but early days, so fingers crossed.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Mar 6, 2021 15:54:36 GMT
iRobot Do you or anyone else have a good or the best handle, in the circumstances, of capital distributions made pre correcting the method to the current pro rata distribution? I’m interested in “sizing” the AC error. It was a huge error in fair treatment of lenders with larger amounts invested but in quantum terms the monies involved were relatively small in percentage terms is my understanding. How small a percentage I don’t know. And it might be impossible to nail down accurately as it wasn’t per £1 held but rather per account. But it might be possible to put an upper limit on the answer. Eg had the pro rata distribution been in place the most anyone would have got to the key date is, say 1.5% of total rather than a flat £100. I'm not sure I can answer the question, but it is a very interesting one. I've never gone along with the view, loudly stated by a few people here, that big hitters were unfairly treated - simply because the numbers involved, especially if you are a big hitter, are so small. (The analogy was well made that when there's a run on a bank then the limited cash withdrawals that are possible will usually be done flat rate!). We know how much was paid out in flat rate terms per account (its on iRobot's helpful chart). You'd need an estimate of the proportion of accounts that had withdrawal turned on - 50%  And the number of active accounts. That would tell you the total amount paid out, then turn that into a percentage of the total AA funds ... my guess is that its a small number.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Mar 7, 2021 0:10:08 GMT
OK, here's my attempt from another angle. The flat-rate payments (mid March to the beginning of June) according to iRobot 's table come to just over £800 per account. Please excuse me if this has already been done but there's a lot of noise in these parts... I want to know the total ££ paid out from the AAs in this time - this is £800 x the number of active AA accounts with withdrawals set on. I don't know that number so I'm going to guess - if someone has better data then please throw it in. AC claim to have 40,000 investors - many of those will be in MLA or the older packaged accounts. 20,000 in the AAs? But many of those will have multiple AA accounts - average of two each? => 40,000 AA accounts total. But only some of those will have withdrawal on: in April, Stuart said 75% of accounts weren't withdrawing (that number might be very different now but its March to June I'm interested in, so => 10,000 active AA accounts in withdrawal * £800 each = £8M paid out, from a total AA value in the region of £200M. PLEASE NOTE THIS IS BASED ON A MIX OF REAL NUMBERS AND OUTRIGHT GUESSES. ITS NOT AN ACCURATE CALCULATION. But it does pass a finger-in-the-air plausibility test. If that's right, if we'd had pro-rata withdrawal at that time, we'd all have had about 4% of our funds returned during this period. For a £100k holder, they actually got £800 instead of £4k - a shortfall of £3200. Frankly, if that isn't small change for a £100k investor then I don't know what is - I know my S&S investments were gyrating by huge amounts by comparison. A delta of a few percent investment gain by being able to put it somewhere else gives a maximum actual loss in the order of £50-£150, but even that would be IMHO an optimistic claim to be making. |
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 7, 2021 17:00:52 GMT
OK, here's my attempt from another angle. The flat-rate payments (mid March to the beginning of June) according to iRobot 's table come to just over £800 per account. Please excuse me if this has already been done but there's a lot of noise in these parts... I want to know the total ££ paid out from the AAs in this time - this is £800 x the number of active AA accounts with withdrawals set on. I don't know that number so I'm going to guess - if someone has better data then please throw it in. AC claim to have 40,000 investors - many of those will be in MLA or the older packaged accounts. 20,000 in the AAs?But many of those will have multiple AA accounts - average of two each? => 40,000 AA accounts total. But only some of those will have withdrawal on: in April, Stuart said 75% of accounts weren't withdrawing (that number might be very different now but its March to June I'm interested in, so => 10,000 active AA accounts in withdrawal * £800 each = £8M paid out, from a total AA value in the region of £200M. Available data (4Apr-1Jun) collated from the individual AA pages suggests an average number of accounts of 32,766 with an average total investment of £216M. (Actual recorded figures for 1Jun were 32,600 and £217M) Perhaps also worth keeping in view that AC needn't have changed anything and could have kept the original 'first-come-first-served' queuing system in place. Those wishing to exit don't know how exactly much was queued in front of them and therefore whether they are ultimately better or worse off.
|
|
And the number of active accounts. That would tell you the total amount paid out, then turn that into a percentage of the total AA funds ... my guess is that its a small number.