shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,560
Likes: 1,169
|
Post by shimself on Dec 10, 2013 22:25:03 GMT
Dolphin C****** **** have appeared on bethelender in addition to other "investment" sites
It's a funny mix, they have excellent credit reports, there must be something there, and yet the blurb reeks to me of hype
I've had a google and this is what I've come up with
The website has a brochure for Wasserstadt Spindersfeld in Berlin. I googled it, yes plenty of mentions. But if one adds Dolphin to the search there are NO mentions apart from people somehow promoting Dolphin's next project, nothing on selling the apartments. That is hard to understand.
I looked up Charles Smeth**** on Duedil, and it doesn't look like someone who has been building on such a scale in Germany for 19 years. Combined with Dolphin there are no mentions in google germany preceding 1 Jan 2010, none at all. But there are lots of mentions of money raising activities in the preceding years, Dolphin C****** Wealth Management founded 2007, apparently having lost £200k to date.
And then we have Lucian C******, selling much the same proposition in 2010, now struck off.
Their partner SFG who sell the buildings, they are pitching them as investments, not as somewhere to live, not to German clients which is what we are told.
But with all this I can't find howls of pain from people saying they've been ripped off
So, I'm a believer in property in Germany generally, their edge sounds nice, there has to be something there, but but they are just too keen to have my money and to promise 12%. What do other people think? (other than if it sounds too good.....)
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,560
Likes: 1,169
|
Post by shimself on Dec 11, 2013 22:32:15 GMT
Moderator it seems a bit overzealous to anonymise these names which appear in plain view on bethelender page www.bethelender.co.uk/marketplace/?appID=223932
There's a thread quite similar to my musings on moneysavingexpert which hasn't been censored.
Censorship doesn't quite seem in the spirit of helping the crowd to inform each other.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Dec 11, 2013 22:49:46 GMT
Moderator it seems a bit overzealous to anonymise these names which appear in plain view on bethelender page www.bethelender.co.uk/marketplace/?appID=223932
There's a thread quite similar to my musings on moneysavingexpert which hasn't been censored.
Censorship doesn't quite seem in the spirit of helping the crowd to inform each other.
Apologies if you felt I was overzealous in moderating your post in light of the forum rule "Please obscure the identity of borrowers - e.g. by asterisking out part of the name, or by using a loan reference number." The golden rule of moderating is "Be Consistent" which means in this case applying the same rule to borrowers on all platforms. The point here is that the borrower will have given explicit permission for their details to be published on the bethelender site, and may or may not be happy to have their name on forums such as this. It would be great if some of the borrowers from the newer P2x platforms registered on this forum and put their case directly to us, but in their absence we should be circumspect of their privacy.
|
|
andy2001
Member of DD Central
Posts: 361
Likes: 34
|
Post by andy2001 on Dec 12, 2013 17:00:24 GMT
Moderator it seems a bit overzealous to anonymise these names which appear in plain view on bethelender page www.bethelender.co.uk/marketplace/?appID=223932
There's a thread quite similar to my musings on moneysavingexpert which hasn't been censored.
Censorship doesn't quite seem in the spirit of helping the crowd to inform each other.
Apologies if you felt I was overzealous in moderating your post in light of the forum rule "Please obscure the identity of borrowers - e.g. by asterisking out part of the name, or by using a loan reference number." The golden rule of moderating is "Be Consistent" which means in this case applying the same rule to borrowers on all platforms. The point here is that the borrower will have given explicit permission for their details to be published on the bethelender site, and may or may not be happy to have their name on forums such as this. It would be great if some of the borrowers from the newer P2x platforms registered on this forum and put their case directly to us, but in their absence we should be circumspect of their privacy.
This makes some sense on a site like Funding Circle where you have to be logged in to view the loans. But when your just naming something that is available on the site without even being logged in then the information is clearly in the public domain, and it make no sense to censor it here.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Dec 12, 2013 20:29:38 GMT
A few observations on that:
1. To make the judgement to leave the name in some cases and not others would require moderators to go check the site and see if it was publicly displayed, which seems like a bit of extra workload, or a knowledge of exactly which sites put up the names in public and which don't. 2. Allowing exceptions in those cases will tend to give the impression that it is OK in general. Better to reinforce the norm than undermine it. 3. You noted that they are 'on other investment sites'. I don't know which, and I don't know whether in that case they are also publicly named, but probably not. In which case they have been publicly outed in relation to investment / borrowing intent which would not otherwise be in the public domain.
Hpoe that makes some sense
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,841
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by bugs4me on Dec 12, 2013 23:02:56 GMT
A few observations on that: 1. To make the judgement to leave the name in some cases and not others would require moderators to go check the site and see if it was publicly displayed, which seems like a bit of extra workload, or a knowledge of exactly which sites put up the names in public and which don't. 2. Allowing exceptions in those cases will tend to give the impression that it is OK in general. Better to reinforce the norm than undermine it. 3. You noted that they are 'on other investment sites'. I don't know which, and I don't know whether in that case they are also publicly named, but probably not. In which case they have been publicly outed in relation to investment / borrowing intent which would not otherwise be in the public domain. Hpoe that makes some sense It makes perfect sense to me and I agree that the OP required amending by the mods. You didn't need the full details to read a warning message was being sent so it is then up to the individual reader to go and investigate further if they so wish. Correct decision by the mods IMO.
|
|