bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368 
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 24, 2020 15:55:40 GMT
I don't want to be rude, but just a simple glance at the site, without even entering the terms of service screams the same phrase. Access times cannot be guaranteed. It's repeated again and again, I'm not ever gonna waste my time listing all the times this is repeated in the Terms of Service.
I'm sorry its not a instant cash savings account. Why are you even posting this, like its just out right wrong. Of course its not a QAA right now in name, because we are in non-normal market conditions. This is the first time AC has ever implemented this situation because todays economy is nothing short than sureal. The only arguments I agree with in this whole thread is the reinvestment of capital without any real consent. As well as it would be nice if a AC representive actually just answered some of the questions here so we can stop this echo chamber of nonsense. Agree with Harland Kearny. 100% accurate. Jasonnewman, this was stated clearly, unfortunately. The retrospective change to pooling (meaning QAA, which yields the highest %profit to AC is delayed equally to 30AA and 90AA which yield lower %profit) is borderline illegal. The "we hold repaid capital" and not return it, without investors' approval, is illegal: 1. so AC can keep reinvesting in defaulting loans that MLA does not touch 2. and use lower QAA, 30AA, 90AA rates% than MLA, for their own profit 3. and if they default lenders lose their capital, who cares, AC keeps making the % difference as profit Seriously, you cannot keep someone's repaid (putting in capital, referring to repaid loans and capital only) and invest it without their consent. Will take more legal advice on the matter and proceed. Nobody can invest in a defaulted loan. All defaulted loans are suspended from trading. There has been no indication from AC that they will be using QAA funds to invest in new loans. They haven't done so since withdrawals were pooled and I don't think they will going forwards. They will continue to invest in future tranches of existing dev loans. I don't think this is unreasonable or against investors interests, bear in mind that every QAA investor owns a slice of each of these dev loans. If AC were to fail to honour these future drawdowns then they would be breaching the loan agreement and lenders would likely be liable for this alongside losing their existing holding in the loan. I for one am happy for them to continue to fund these tranches to protect my interests.
|
|
alexk
Posts: 17
Likes: 26
|
Post by alexk on Mar 24, 2020 18:45:15 GMT
Agree with Harland Kearny. 100% accurate. Jasonnewman, this was stated clearly, unfortunately. The retrospective change to pooling (meaning QAA, which yields the highest %profit to AC is delayed equally to 30AA and 90AA which yield lower %profit) is borderline illegal. The "we hold repaid capital" and not return it, without investors' approval, is illegal: 1. so AC can keep reinvesting in defaulting loans that MLA does not touch 2. and use lower QAA, 30AA, 90AA rates% than MLA, for their own profit 3. and if they default lenders lose their capital, who cares, AC keeps making the % difference as profit Seriously, you cannot keep someone's repaid (putting in capital, referring to repaid loans and capital only) and invest it without their consent. Will take more legal advice on the matter and proceed. Nobody can invest in a defaulted loan. All defaulted loans are suspended from trading. There has been no indication from AC that they will be using QAA funds to invest in new loans. They haven't done so since withdrawals were pooled and I don't think they will going forwards. They will continue to invest in future tranches of existing dev loans. I don't think this is unreasonable or against investors interests, bear in mind that every QAA investor owns a slice of each of these dev loans. If AC were to fail to honour these future drawdowns then they would be breaching the loan agreement and lenders would likely be liable for this alongside losing their existing holding in the loan. I for one am happy for them to continue to fund these tranches to protect my interests. I am not sure if I should reply with an attached discussion I had earlier today with AC (in case of violating any rules). But I have been given the following answer (if there is no violation I am happy to upload the pdf or a print screen): My Question was what happened to the 2 options regarding loan repayments, on repaid (matured) loans ONLY. So once a loan has matured, the capital is repaid, what happens to that repaid capital. The 2 options were, "On Repayment, 1. withdraw capital, 2. withdraw interest only". Or you could choose to automatically reinvest both interest and capital. The option one 1. is gone. Please check your own accounts to verify.
The answer was: "Yes, you're correct. That was how the setting used to be displayed. Now, only Interest can be automatically withdrawn on the first of each month and capital can be withdrawn via the 'Withdraw' button. Capital repayments will be automatically reinvested back into the qaa and if you need to withdrawn them, there is the withdraw button to help you do that Writing again to be clearly seen:"...Capital repayments will be automatically reinvested back into the qaa.." so when you hold £1,000 in a loan (capital) and the loan has been repaid (0/60 months remaining), you no longer get your £1,000 back, even though the borrower has given your £1,000 back. AC keeps your £1,000, to reinvest it in qaa's new loans or existing ones, as they see fit. So I am afraid bg that you are 100% wrong there.Regarding the other part, of defaulted loans, when you withdraw and invest money in QAA, they are automatically distributed equally, so if x% of your total QAA (e.g. 10% of your £10,000 QAA) is held in loan##, then so does everyone else (e.g. 10% out of £2,000 someone else's QAA). And when I was depositing money in QAA, my share on defaulted loans was increasing in porportion to the rest. My point is that MLA users will avoid bad loans (i.e. restaurants, pubs, leisure centres etc.) which means that people who do not decide where their money goes are getting the  ... My point is that I and everyone here have invested capital in Y1 number of loans and we knew the risks. Till those Y1 are repaid we cannot get capital back. But once those are repaid, we are due to get our money back, unless we choose to reinvest them in Y2 new loans. No platform has the legal right to hold repaid capital from Y1 and do whatever they want with someone else's capital. P2P by defition is peer-to-peer, we hold the loans, through platform, what is happening is illegal... please check legal terms of peer-to-peer for yourself, AC is a platform, loans are on us (hence we also have the liability of losing capital, otherwise it would be AC, not us)
|
|
|
|
Post by jenna on Mar 24, 2020 19:32:58 GMT
Thanks Marky, that is very good to know and more useful than what AC has been letting out. Cheers for the £2, I'm one of the 10,000 unfortunately! Got a few million more to invest?  Hi, My wife and I just moved £10,000 (each) from a cash ISA into an Assetz Capital IFISA and, interestingly, at the EXACT moment we invested our £10,000 (from Assetz Capital IFISA Cash Account into an ISA 90DAA) - we were repaid £1 into our QAA that has been queued for days .... I then invested my wife's £10,000 (in the same way) and that triggered another £1 payment ....... payments timed 11:07 and 11:09. So, in the absence of any transparency of how big the queue is (to withdraw cash) .... it looks like I've just discovered it (by accident) ..... and for all of you that received a £1 (at 11:07 and 11:09) .... you've got my wife and I to thank! Looks like it's going to be a long wait to get the rest of the money out of the QAA account! GLA Marky |
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 24, 2020 20:02:06 GMT
Writing again to be clearly seen:"...Capital repayments will be automatically reinvested back into the qaa.." so when you hold £1,000 in a loan (capital) and the loan has been repaid (0/60 months remaining), you no longer get your £1,000 back, even though the borrower has given your £1,000 back. AC keeps your £1,000, to reinvest it in qaa's new loans or existing ones, as they see fit. So I am afraid bg that you are 100% wrong there.Regarding the other part, of defaulted loans, when you withdraw and invest money in QAA, they are automatically distributed equally, so if x% of your total QAA (e.g. 10% of your £10,000 QAA) is held in loan##, then so does everyone else (e.g. 10% out of £2,000 someone else's QAA). And when I was depositing money in QAA, my share on defaulted loans was increasing in porportion to the rest. My point is that MLA users will avoid bad loans (i.e. restaurants, pubs, leisure centres etc.) which means that people who do not decide where their money goes are getting the ... My point is that I and everyone here have invested capital in Y1 number of loans and we knew the risks. Till those Y1 are repaid we cannot get capital back. But once those are repaid, we are due to get our money back, unless we choose to reinvest them in Y2 new loans. No platform has the legal right to hold repaid capital from Y1 and do whatever they want with someone else's capital. P2P by defition is peer-to-peer, we hold the loans, through platform, what is happening is illegal... please check legal terms of peer-to-peer for yourself, AC is a platform, loans are on us (hence we also have the liability of losing capital, otherwise it would be AC, not us) It is clear to all for many years that the QAA has used spare cash to fund new loans. This is a great advantage of the account and is one of the main reasons it can pay a market leading rate as underwriter fees are avoided. Capital repayments always went back into the QAA, if you wanted your money back you had to choose to withdraw it. You were more than happy with this and accept the reward paid for taking the risk. As stated previously AC is not now funding any new loans out of this account and I imagine they will be unable to until they satisfy all withdrawals. You say I am 100% wrong saying they are not funding new loans so perhaps you would like to give me a loan number of one that has been funded since the freeze to prove it? If you do I am happy to admit I am wrong. You agreed to the T&C's when you went in so now you just have to live with it. If you had wanted to avoid the restaurants, pubs, leisure centres etc you should have avoided the QAA and invested through the MLA.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Mar 24, 2020 20:26:12 GMT
The way I see is that is if the lender has asked for the loan repayments they should be given to the lender as the lender is the owner of these funds so these should not be withheld by AC no matter what AC intends to do with these funds. I did not see anything in the T&Cs when I invested the money that gave AC the right to redirect these funds as it sees fit.
|
|
|
|
Post by james1london on Mar 24, 2020 20:48:57 GMT
They are doing exactly the right thing, and people should sit tight for 3-6 months, by holding funds in the company and preventing 'a run' they have the advantage over traditional banks of at least protecting the long term returns. The virus situation will pass and things will return to normal, it could not return to normal if 70% of us want our funds back immediately, be happy that we are temporarily restricted, EQUALLY.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 24, 2020 20:56:47 GMT
Personally I think the que is smaller than people are thinking it really is, as AC pointed out. Massive lenders tried to exit, including some companies. Due to needing funds to either invest in the stock market or help cash flow during the coming weeks/months. Many lenders aren't even going for the exit, they simply trying to get funds from the QAA into the 90daa, ISA & MLA accounts. Some lenders are running for the hills  I assume mainly small lenders, looking at the amounts recently available at ridiculous discounts. I'm content with current daily drips from access accounts and MLA, I wouldn't want to significantly reduce my AC allocation.
|
|
alexk
Posts: 17
Likes: 26
|
Post by alexk on Mar 24, 2020 21:00:42 GMT
Writing again to be clearly seen:"...Capital repayments will be automatically reinvested back into the qaa.." so when you hold £1,000 in a loan (capital) and the loan has been repaid (0/60 months remaining), you no longer get your £1,000 back, even though the borrower has given your £1,000 back. AC keeps your £1,000, to reinvest it in qaa's new loans or existing ones, as they see fit. So I am afraid bg that you are 100% wrong there.Regarding the other part, of defaulted loans, when you withdraw and invest money in QAA, they are automatically distributed equally, so if x% of your total QAA (e.g. 10% of your £10,000 QAA) is held in loan##, then so does everyone else (e.g. 10% out of £2,000 someone else's QAA). And when I was depositing money in QAA, my share on defaulted loans was increasing in porportion to the rest. My point is that MLA users will avoid bad loans (i.e. restaurants, pubs, leisure centres etc.) which means that people who do not decide where their money goes are getting the ... My point is that I and everyone here have invested capital in Y1 number of loans and we knew the risks. Till those Y1 are repaid we cannot get capital back. But once those are repaid, we are due to get our money back, unless we choose to reinvest them in Y2 new loans. No platform has the legal right to hold repaid capital from Y1 and do whatever they want with someone else's capital. P2P by defition is peer-to-peer, we hold the loans, through platform, what is happening is illegal... please check legal terms of peer-to-peer for yourself, AC is a platform, loans are on us (hence we also have the liability of losing capital, otherwise it would be AC, not us) It is clear to all for many years that the QAA has used spare cash to fund new loans. This is a great advantage of the account and is one of the main reasons it can pay a market leading rate as underwriter fees are avoided. Capital repayments always went back into the QAA, if you wanted your money back you had to choose to withdraw it. You were more than happy with this and accept the reward paid for taking the risk. As stated previously AC is not now funding any new loans out of this account and I imagine they will be unable to until they satisfy all withdrawals. You say I am 100% wrong saying they are not funding new loans so perhaps you would like to give me a loan number of one that has been funded since the freeze to prove it? If you do I am happy to admit I am wrong. You agreed to the T&C's when you went in so now you just have to live with it. If you had wanted to avoid the restaurants, pubs, leisure centres etc you should have avoided the QAA and invested through the MLA. Again, their answer not mine: "...Capital repayments will be automatically reinvested back into the qaa.." What you say is that exact opposite on what they have said and are actually doing.
Check the number of loans that are 1/60 at this point, some of which will be finishing the following days, some of which have done the past week. In 2-3 of those I had a total of a bit above £1,000. None of that repaid capital is in my account. And check the options "On repayment withdraw" is gone!
No, I agreed to diferrent terms hence my decision to proceed legally on the matter. Will be making next steps this week actually.
Simple: 10 people have decided to pool their capital to lend to A. The agreement between A and the 10 lenders is done through a platform B, B gets a service fee. But if A does not repay, the 10 lenders lose, not B. When the loan has matured, the 10 lenders get their money back. B faciliated the loan with A, this is peer-to-peer, B does not own the capital, it is illegal to withhold it. Hence why I will be moving legally from now on.
Yourself, feel free to do what you want with your repaid capital, in my case, once capital is repaid by the borrower I want it return to the legal owner, me, not AC.
|
|
alexk
Posts: 17
Likes: 26
|
Post by alexk on Mar 24, 2020 21:03:52 GMT
The way I see is that is if the lender has asked for the loan repayments they should be given to the lender as the lender is the owner of these funds so these should not be withheld by AC no matter what AC intends to do with these funds. I did not see anything in the T&Cs when I invested the money that gave AC the right to redirect these funds as it sees fit. Absolutely right and on point. Cannot understand how people here do not understands simple legal terms of what peer-to-peer means and their rights. They should have not invested in P2P, for their sake and the rest.
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,609
Likes: 1,738
|
Post by benaj on Mar 24, 2020 21:32:21 GMT
Hi, My wife and I just moved £10,000 (each) from a cash ISA into an Assetz Capital IFISA and, interestingly, at the EXACT moment we invested our £10,000 (from Assetz Capital IFISA Cash Account into an ISA 90DAA) - we were repaid £1 into our QAA that has been queued for days .... I then invested my wife's £10,000 (in the same way) and that triggered another £1 payment ....... payments timed 11:07 and 11:09. So, in the absence of any transparency of how big the queue is (to withdraw cash) .... it looks like I've just discovered it (by accident) ..... and for all of you that received a £1 (at 11:07 and 11:09) .... you've got my wife and I to thank! Looks like it's going to be a long wait to get the rest of the money out of the QAA account! GLA Marky , could you explain the reason why you invested £10000 QAA within IFiSS in the first place ? And the reason to withdraw money in the QAA? I thought the idea of IFASA is nothing short term investment and doesn't require the need of instant Access within IFISA.
|
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Mar 24, 2020 22:12:05 GMT
Once again people have no idea what the access accounts are.
If you put £100 in a unit trust the manager will take your money and invest it in £100 of stocks. If you ask for your money back the manager will sell stocks and repay you, unless you fell for the charms of Woodford and the c*** he bought cannot be sold.
When you invest in the QAA you will buy a share in a number of loans. These are owned in equal proportion by all investors. By investing you have authorized Assetz to make loans as they see fit and allocate you a share. As the loans repay the money is pooled within the fund, it is not your money, it is part of QAA.
When you ask to withdraw, Assetz will use cash reserves or try and sell a portion of ALL of your loans to other lenders. At the moment there is a withdrawal queue due to insufficient new funds.
Repayments into the funds are NOT automatically lent on new loans, thus depriving you of your birthright. Some of the money will be allocated to the cash element of your loan holdings. This cash float is being allowed to build up by Assetz and used to manage withdrawals.
So yes, the funds stay in the QAA and cannot be withdrawn directly, I suspect this is a function which never actually worked since it goes against the principles behind the account.
Go out and find some Ambulance Chasing Lawyers, I am sure they could do with a good laugh.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harland Kearney on Mar 24, 2020 22:43:00 GMT
Once again people have no idea what the access accounts are. If you put £100 in a unit trust the manager will take your money and invest it in £100 of stocks. If you ask for your money back the manager will sell stocks and repay you, unless you fell for the charms of Woodford and the c*** he bought cannot be sold. When you invest in the QAA you will buy a share in a number of loans. These are owned in equal proportion by all investors. By investing you have authorized Assetz to make loans as they see fit and allocate you a share. As the loans repay the money is pooled within the fund, it is not your money, it is part of QAA. When you ask to withdraw, Assetz will use cash reserves or try and sell a portion of ALL of your loans to other lenders. At the moment there is a withdrawal queue due to insufficient new funds. Repayments into the funds are NOT automatically lent on new loans, thus depriving you of your birthright. Some of the money will be allocated to the cash element of your loan holdings. This cash float is being allowed to build up by Assetz and used to manage withdrawals. So yes, the funds stay in the QAA and cannot be withdrawn directly, I suspect this is a function which never actually worked since it goes against the principles behind the account. Go out and find some Ambulance Chasing Lawyers, I am sure they could do with a good laugh. Thank you, somebody speaking sense. The amount of investors losing it due to market change is insane. Just hold the investment, that is what they are or sit on the withdrawal request and wait. It is not like anybody has had a great time with their investments this month; goes without saying. I understand some people have over-exposed themselves to P2P (This is why the *quiz* states only invest 10%), are stressed out as it is ect. But these endless posts & threads basically turning into a echo chamber of conflicting information. Being that Chris liked your comment means it must be spot on correct.  Anyway, don't all pile onto qoute and tell me how wrong I am please. 
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Mar 24, 2020 22:59:38 GMT
Once again people have no idea what the access accounts are. If you put £100 in a unit trust the manager will take your money and invest it in £100 of stocks. If you ask for your money back the manager will sell stocks and repay you, unless you fell for the charms of Woodford and the c*** he bought cannot be sold. When you invest in the QAA you will buy a share in a number of loans. These are owned in equal proportion by all investors. By investing you have authorized Assetz to make loans as they see fit and allocate you a share. As the loans repay the money is pooled within the fund, it is not your money, it is part of QAA. When you ask to withdraw, Assetz will use cash reserves or try and sell a portion of ALL of your loans to other lenders. At the moment there is a withdrawal queue due to insufficient new funds. Repayments into the funds are NOT automatically lent on new loans, thus depriving you of your birthright. Some of the money will be allocated to the cash element of your loan holdings. This cash float is being allowed to build up by Assetz and used to manage withdrawals. So yes, the funds stay in the QAA and cannot be withdrawn directly, I suspect this is a function which never actually worked since it goes against the principles behind the account. Go out and find some Ambulance Chasing Lawyers, I am sure they could do with a good laugh. The difference is this is Peer to Peer Lending not a unit trust, as explained by the name (P2P) Lender lends to Borrower, it is administrated by the Platform but the Lender owns the loans (I believe this is an FCA requirement), if the platform collapses the loans in effect revert the Lender but will be administrated by a company in charge of winding down the loan book (I do not believe Lenders are entitled to any other assets) and repaying the Lenders on a Pro Rata basis with payments made by the Borrowers. There are some differences for AA accounts in that some of the profit is used for a PF and loans are distributed between all of the Lenders as are the defaults but it is still P2P.
Unit trusts generally invest in shares, shares have no end date, i.e. not amortising or repaid after a certain period not controlled by a contract therefore no capital repayments and therefore no option to take these payments unlike P2P.
Extract from How Unit Trusts Work
A unit trust is a trust where the rights of the beneficiaries (unit holders) to income and capital are fixed. This is in the sense that they are not subject to any discretions on the part of a trustee, and are unitized, in the sense that those rights are divided amongst the beneficiaries based on how many units have been issued to them.
A unit trust is where the unit holders, who are all predominantly un-related members of two or more separate families getting together to hold an asset together (usually a large property or shareholding) or run a business together. The trustee has no discretion on which unit holder gets which distribution portion of income or capital of the trust. All income and capital is distributed according to unit holding.
In a way we might be better under the unit trust rules as AC would not be able to decide who gets what, as now the only way of getting capital repayments from AC is by withdrawal of funds, let hope it is not extended to interest but I fear this will come as AC get more desperate.
|
|
marky
Posts: 21
Likes: 60
|
Post by marky on Mar 25, 2020 8:15:11 GMT
Hi, My wife and I just moved £10,000 (each) from a cash ISA into an Assetz Capital IFISA and, interestingly, at the EXACT moment we invested our £10,000 (from Assetz Capital IFISA Cash Account into an ISA 90DAA) - we were repaid £1 into our QAA that has been queued for days .... I then invested my wife's £10,000 (in the same way) and that triggered another £1 payment ....... payments timed 11:07 and 11:09. So, in the absence of any transparency of how big the queue is (to withdraw cash) .... it looks like I've just discovered it (by accident) ..... and for all of you that received a £1 (at 11:07 and 11:09) .... you've got my wife and I to thank! Looks like it's going to be a long wait to get the rest of the money out of the QAA account! GLA Marky , could you explain the reason why you invested £10000 QAA within IFiSS in the first place ? And the reason to withdraw money in the QAA? I thought the idea of IFASA is nothing short term investment and doesn't require the need of instant Access within IFISA. Hi Benaj, I was using the QAA as a way of saving up for my 2020 / 2021 IFISA. The plan was to convert everything in my standard account to cash on April 6th 2020 and then move it all across into my Assetz Capital IFISA account. Also ... I had decided to move some money invested in a (lowish interest) cash ISA over to Assetz Capital IFISA and I started this process whilst we were still in normal market conditions. By the time the ISA transfer had completed, though, we were in lockdown. So I had to decide whether to simply withdraw the cash held in the iFISA (and lose the ISA wrapper as a result) or to continue faith with AC - and invest the cash, as planned, into the IFISA 90DAA. I chose to invest in the iFISA as I still have a great deal of faith in AC .... but it is frustrating that everything is clogged up at the moment. Marky
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 25, 2020 9:04:46 GMT
It is clear to all for many years that the QAA has used spare cash to fund new loans. This is a great advantage of the account and is one of the main reasons it can pay a market leading rate as underwriter fees are avoided. Capital repayments always went back into the QAA, if you wanted your money back you had to choose to withdraw it. You were more than happy with this and accept the reward paid for taking the risk. As stated previously AC is not now funding any new loans out of this account and I imagine they will be unable to until they satisfy all withdrawals. You say I am 100% wrong saying they are not funding new loans so perhaps you would like to give me a loan number of one that has been funded since the freeze to prove it? If you do I am happy to admit I am wrong. You agreed to the T&C's when you went in so now you just have to live with it. If you had wanted to avoid the restaurants, pubs, leisure centres etc you should have avoided the QAA and invested through the MLA. Again, their answer not mine: "...Capital repayments will be automatically reinvested back into the qaa.." What you say is that exact opposite on what they have said and are actually doing.
Check the number of loans that are 1/60 at this point, some of which will be finishing the following days, some of which have done the past week. In 2-3 of those I had a total of a bit above £1,000. None of that repaid capital is in my account. And check the options "On repayment withdraw" is gone!
No, I agreed to diferrent terms hence my decision to proceed legally on the matter. Will be making next steps this week actually.
Simple: 10 people have decided to pool their capital to lend to A. The agreement between A and the 10 lenders is done through a platform B, B gets a service fee. But if A does not repay, the 10 lenders lose, not B. When the loan has matured, the 10 lenders get their money back. B faciliated the loan with A, this is peer-to-peer, B does not own the capital, it is illegal to withhold it. Hence why I will be moving legally from now on.
Yourself, feel free to do what you want with your repaid capital, in my case, once capital is repaid by the borrower I want it return to the legal owner, me, not AC.
So you are worried about something they aren't going to do in the future but could do (ie fund new loans)? You want to take legal action over that? It's like me suing my bank just in case they were to steal my money in the future! Perhaps a better way would be for you to explain which of the T&C's they had broken instead? About a half of your QAA investment (and everyone else's) is in development loans that require further funding. Are you seriously telling us you want to turn your back on those investments, forfeit your capital and be liable for any legal action by the borrowers for breach of contract? That's what will happen if all loan repayments have to be repaid straight back in cash. I can guarantee the vast majority of investors would not be happy to take a 100% loss on half of their investment. From my analysis AC have around £100m of funding commitments on existing dev loans, probably better to worry about how that will be achieved as we all stand to lose a lot if it isn't.
|
|
...
I assume mainly small lenders, looking at the amounts recently available at ridiculous discounts. I'm content with current daily drips from access accounts and MLA, I wouldn't want to significantly reduce my AC allocation.
