mark
Posts: 163 
Likes: 166
|
Post by mark on Apr 1, 2020 9:31:10 GMT
Prior today's DUMB actions by AC management most investors seemed they wanted to put money in 30 and 90 day access accounts and were willing buyers of loans at a discount from the MLA and thus support the platform. But what we have is cow boy behaviour of changing terms of business at a whim, locking up people's funds and then charge fees for funds investors can't access. Not exactly the type of behaviour you would expect from people to keep lending your hard earned cash to is it? Prior to todays actions AC had more sources of capital, but they have blown it in one shot - How stupid can one be? Now they are reliant on borrowers repaying when the economy is closed. If I was an AC employee I would dust up my CV and prepare for a wind down, it is all about confidence and we have none in your handling of affairs at AC and therefore you are un-investable. I am out. jasonnewman. Have you considered an anger management course my friend ?
|
|
capucino
Member of DD Central
Posts: 90
Likes: 40
|
Post by capucino on Apr 1, 2020 9:32:04 GMT
Voted A as well. We have be rational about it. Not that I am thrilled.
I have some corporate bonds that halved in value. My Assetz Savings may fare better actually.
|
|
|
|
Post by ladolcevita on Apr 1, 2020 9:46:38 GMT
I don't think it matters which way the vote goes. Events in the wider economy will actually dictate. In the narrow platform context Voting B may slow procedures a little. I voted A. Voting B does not merely slow procedures it opens up the loan book to a massive raid by lawyers, liquidators and predators.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Apr 1, 2020 10:22:42 GMT
Do you think the same fees etc will apply to institutional investors
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Apr 1, 2020 11:13:52 GMT
I voted yes, but the "Lender fee" sticks in my throat. stuartassetzcapital if this "lender fee" lenders effectively helping tide AC over this difficult period then it should be converted into equity in AC at a down round valuation. |
|
tjtl
Posts: 232
Likes: 351
|
Post by tjtl on Apr 1, 2020 11:37:56 GMT
I voted yes. In the business I run I am begging my banks (Bank of Ireland and HSBC) for support, deferrals of covenant tests and interest, and cancellation of cash-sweeps. It seems hypocritical of me not to offer similar flexibility to those I am lending to. The world is going to get very ugly in the next few weeks- I am sure we will have some losses, but forcing businesses under now will only increase those losses.
|
|
kpo
New Member
Posts: 5
Likes: 11
|
Post by kpo on Apr 1, 2020 11:51:26 GMT
I voted yes. In the business I run I am begging my banks (Bank of Ireland and HSBC) for support, deferrals of covenant tests and interest, and cancellation of cash-sweeps. It seems hypocritical of me not to offer similar flexibility to those I am lending to. The world is going to get very ugly in the next few weeks- I am sure we will have some losses, but forcing businesses under now will only increase those losses. I agree with this, and with everything AC has done so far in this crisis to protect the generality of its lenders and borrowers from the short-term panicky behaviour of individual lenders, who if they had their way would drag everyone and everything down along with themselves. There are far too many people in P2P who treat their holdings like bank accounts, despite endlessly being told (and supposedly passing tests demonstrating their understanding) that their capital is at risk, that they should view their deposits as long-term investments, etc.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Apr 1, 2020 12:51:43 GMT
I think it is important to look at the proposals calmly, and consider whether this gives the best chance of returning capital in full over time. It would perhaps have been better if AC had been able to sweeten the pill by guaranteeing lenders who want to withdraw they could have at least, say, 15% of their capital back from the Access Accounts (subject to notice as required) each month in exchange for the effective reduction in interest rate. Where would AC be able to get the funds to make such a guarantee?
|
|
mark
Posts: 163
Likes: 166
|
Post by mark on Apr 1, 2020 13:03:52 GMT
I voted yes. In the business I run I am begging my banks (Bank of Ireland and HSBC) for support, deferrals of covenant tests and interest, and cancellation of cash-sweeps. It seems hypocritical of me not to offer similar flexibility to those I am lending to. The world is going to get very ugly in the next few weeks- I am sure we will have some losses, but forcing businesses under now will only increase those losses. I agree with this, and with everything AC has done so far in this crisis to protect the generality of its lenders and borrowers from the short-term panicky behaviour of individual lenders, who if they had their way would drag everyone and everything down along with themselves. There are far too many people in P2P who treat their holdings like bank accounts, despite endlessly being told (and supposedly passing tests demonstrating their understanding) that their capital is at risk, that they should view their deposits as long-term investments, etc. Refreshing rational sanity. Investment advice perfection.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 6,768
|
Post by Mousey on Apr 1, 2020 13:12:37 GMT
Could someone post or PM me with a copy of the Vote text. I don't seem to be able to access it anymore.
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Apr 1, 2020 13:17:22 GMT
Its Reputational Damage, and loss of lenders trust that AC have acquired in one swoop. Nice one guys.
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Apr 1, 2020 13:19:58 GMT
I voted yes, but the "Lender fee" sticks in my throat. stuartassetzcapital if this "lender fee" lenders effectively helping tide AC over this difficult period then it should be converted into equity in AC at a down round valuation. So you are agreeable to a bail-in. I cant see AC agreeing to a decent valuation for the equity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harland Kearney on Apr 1, 2020 13:39:07 GMT
Prior today's DUMB actions by AC management most investors seemed they wanted to put money in 30 and 90 day access accounts and were willing buyers of loans at a discount from the MLA and thus support the platform. But what we have is cow boy behaviour of changing terms of business at a whim, locking up people's funds and then charge fees for funds investors can't access. Not exactly the type of behaviour you would expect from people to keep lending your hard earned cash to is it? Prior to todays actions AC had more sources of capital, but they have blown it in one shot - How stupid can one be? Now they are reliant on borrowers repaying when the economy is closed. If I was an AC employee I would dust up my CV and prepare for a wind down, it is all about confidence and we have none in your handling of affairs at AC and therefore you are un-investable. I am out. jasonnewman. Have you considered an anger management course my friend ? Your posts always make me crack up haha 
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Apr 1, 2020 14:57:01 GMT
What gives AC the right to determine borrowers access to capital is more important than that of your investors.
In simple terms if you are presently lending £240m on a 2 year term, your actions have just given the borrowers a £30m payment holiday, whist preventing lenders having access to funds that might pay their mortgages, save their businesses etc.
Why doesn't Assetz Capital get this funding from your institutional investors? Have institutional investors agreed to take capital repayment holidays & have they agreed to you stupid lender Fee?
If I get my capital back I will never invest with Assetz again. Its actions are reckless & ill conceived, particularly given borrowers may have access to government funding. Funds that would have been repaid to investors, may now be diverted to borrowers other funding areas weakening lenders security & putting us firmly at the back of the queue.
To top it all, you propose to add additional fees to both borrowers & lenders alike. It’s clear your desire is to increase assetz capitals profits rather than look after its customers. Assetz Capital now has the modus operandi that the greedy ex RBS bankers would be proud, not surprising really given how many of them are at the helm.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Apr 1, 2020 14:57:28 GMT
My vote was YES for two reasons: 1 - compassion, 2 - practicality. No second thought.
|
|
