Assetz Capital investor's crowd behaviour.

It's not the players fault, it's the game.

The products we were presented with on some (not all) P2P platforms always had a fundamental design conflict, in that platforms love cheap unquestioning cash whilst investors want easy to make investments that are easy to withdraw at a fixed rate of interest. This combination is a breeding ground for maturity mismatch i.e actively encouraging a situation of lending short, borrowing long.

Normal banks are doing the same thing of course, and in the past the crowd behaved exactly the same. The difference now of course is that the Government stand behind the banks in the form of FSCS.

Without that, what you're going to see is exactly what we've seen:

a) Some sort of trigger - virus, recession, suggestions of fraud, some miscreant on here spreading rumours. Whatever. It was gonna happen with or without COVID-19.
b) Smart money reacting very quickly indeed.
c) Others noticing depletion of accounts and exiting stage left.
d) Finally, mass withdrawals as nearly everyone cottons on that there's an issue here.

b) c) and d) are all totally rational and understandable behaviours, and a) was inevitable at some point, so what else would you expect? For everyone to stay and take one for the team? 

So, if everyone is acting as anyone looking at the rules of this particular game would suggest they might, then if there's a problem I say again it's not with the players, it's with the game.

P2P is a totally totally different asset class to shares. As a passive equity investor, I have confidence that in the long-term my retained shares will rebound in value. I also have taken the opportunity to buy more as the price has fallen. Shares are discounted hugely whilst the QAA is not (self select being totally different of course). I'm hardly alone here, hence the "time to sell P2P and buy equities" thread. 

I'm afraid it's too late for this now really, but in investing in a product like the QAA, there are 3 things to take into account:

Plan A - in the event of trouble, get out quick. As above, this was inevitable one day. So what do you do? Well a few things. Perhaps stick with funds in QAA/30d, not 90d, to be able to react faster. Monitor loan levels closely. If you decide to invest in 30d, then spread out your investments so that in the event of some very severe event (like this one) you at least get some of your money back.

Plan B -The fundamentals. How good are the underlying loans? Find some metrics. In Assetz's case they're pretty good actually, although IMV the provision fund is effectively already used up. But that's ok, you don't get something for nothing. However, if the fundamentals had deteriorated sufficiently, then it might have been worth exiting even with the whole crowd still there, as the time everyone else would realise would come nearer and nearer and the financial downside greater.

Plan C - worst case. It's P2P. It's more risky than passive equities, be in a position where if the worst comes you can be philosophical about losing all of your investment. Not just because of failed projects, but also failed platforms. Worse than failed platforms, what if you fall victim to massive platform fraud (not the case here, but has been elsewhere). Upshot = only invest a very small amount of your portfolio, no matter how sound the fundamentals appear.

That's my opinion, anyway.

Your analogies are correct too. Mine were directed at those that think because they have a lot invested they should get more interest out. 

I was not suggesting AC were perfect or the best but without the AC platform without doubt  capital losses will be much worse. We also need to consider the borrowers who can't service their debt whatever some may say. Yes beware of the unscrupulous. We need to have empathy. If we pull the plug on borrowers the only beneficiaries will be lawyers. Plus as Iv'e written before the Vultures waiting for lawyers to feed them.

Given the amount of cash that gov.uk seems to be splashing around, there may well be at least some borrowers who are easily able to maintain minimum require repayments during the crisis, or even to refinance at least part of it onto a cheaper government-backed loan.

I agree but AC are in the best position to know that. Most of them will also do the honourable thing. Definitely not a Scottish hotel owner!!!! 

If you continue to hear voices in your head may I suggest seeking professional help.

They should get more out in absolute terms.  If AC are replacing a queue with a pool then everyone in that pool should have the same proportional access to their investment.  This is how the access accounts have always worked.  By changing the rules Assetz have created a situation where larger investors are having their cash entitlement taken away from them and given to small investors.  In return they receive the small investors loan portfolio, some of which have defaulted.  Great if you are a small investor, disastrous if you are a large investor.  Differential treatment of different parts of the investor base has now created a situation where those that are worse off are exiting, exacerbating the general selling that is going on and causing a huge backlog that as far as I can see will never clear.  

Assetz reputation has taken a huge beating.  Poor decision making, rule changes, selective treatment of certain investors.  If they manage to get through this, what on earth do they think is going to be left of their investor base?