alanh
Posts: 556
Likes: 560
|
Post by alanh on Apr 1, 2020 17:05:22 GMT
Hi all I appreciate and understand that many investors are angry at AC, and feel they have valid points. However, as a previous poster has said, other investments in stocks and shares are tanking by 30%+, with someway to go. The last thing we should be collectively doing is creating a run on AC or undermining market confidence. We really don't want to see the platform fail, do we? I would like to see AC running an investor's forum where we can discuss and share ideas confidentially. Discounting and/or creating a secondary market is a very good idea, as others have said. I can see forbearance on repayments also extending to a six month period or longer, and would be favour of this if it also reduces our exposure to capital loss. We need our borrowers to keep solvent if they can and recover quickly with the economic upturn that is likely to come in the near future. As much as I wince, charging fees is reasonable. They could have implemented a haircut, like other platforms have done recently, but I appreciate this would have drawbacks too, in terms of cashflow generation. I'm pleased that AC is helping with the Government-backed loan scheme to small businesses and wish them every success in this area. This will, I'm sure, help secure the platform's future significantly. You may not have noticed, but there already is a run on AC. The creation of a secondary market for the access accounts would allow those that want to stay to do so and those that want to exit to do so (at whatever price the market balances at).
|
|
victors
Member of DD Central
Posts: 157 
Likes: 86
|
Post by victors on Apr 1, 2020 17:11:07 GMT
I like the idea of discounting, but fear that the queue for the door is so great that it would need involvement from the big hitters to make a meaningful dent in that queue (the same big hitters that AC appear to have alienated by their shenanigans) They should implement this as a matter of urgency. Its the only way the access account exit queue will ever clear. I did suggest this in an email to AC on Monday. If sellers and buyers are happy to trade at a discount level it would be a good thing.
|
|
Mikeme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 428
Likes: 331
|
Post by Mikeme on Apr 1, 2020 17:13:24 GMT
Hi all I appreciate and understand that many investors are angry at AC, and feel they have valid points. However, as a previous poster has said, other investments in stocks and shares are tanking by 30%+, with someway to go. The last thing we should be collectively doing is creating a run on AC or undermining market confidence. We really don't want to see the platform fail, do we? I would like to see AC running an investor's forum where we can discuss and share ideas confidentially. Discounting and/or creating a secondary market is a very good idea, as others have said. I can see forbearance on repayments also extending to a six month period or longer, and would be favour of this if it also reduces our exposure to capital loss. We need our borrowers to keep solvent if they can and recover quickly with the economic upturn that is likely to come in the near future. As much as I wince, charging fees is reasonable. They could have implemented a haircut, like other platforms have done recently, but I appreciate this would have drawbacks too, in terms of cashflow generation. I'm pleased that AC is helping with the Government-backed loan scheme to small businesses and wish them every success in this area. This will, I'm sure, help secure the platform's future significantly. You may not have noticed, but there already is a run on AC. The creation of a secondary market for the access accounts would allow those that want to stay to do so and those that want to exit to do so (at whatever price the market balances at). Wow You didn't understand about a'run' before. Progress towards reality.
|
|
alanh
Posts: 556
Likes: 560
|
Post by alanh on Apr 1, 2020 17:23:01 GMT
You may not have noticed, but there already is a run on AC. The creation of a secondary market for the access accounts would allow those that want to stay to do so and those that want to exit to do so (at whatever price the market balances at). Wow You didn't understand about a'run' before. Progress towards reality. Yes I thought it was a bit peculiar that there are some people out there who don't realise that there is a run on the access accounts. I suppose there may be people who don't log in very often and so haven't tried to withdraw any of their money lately. They are in for a bit of a shock when they do.
|
|
dave4
Member of DD Central
Cynical is a hobby not a lifestyle
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 617
|
Post by dave4 on Apr 1, 2020 18:31:52 GMT
Thank god for a "discussion", with what seems "so far anyway" ideas and counter ideas. Hopefully we all can play nice and all benefit, those that want out and those that want to stay. Crack on lads and lasses.
|
|
warn
Member of DD Central
Curmudgeon
Posts: 637
Likes: 658
|
Post by warn on Apr 1, 2020 19:27:00 GMT
AC have to be able to fund committed future tranches (assuming any borrowers are still progressing well enough to ask for them). They also have to have access to enough cash to keep ticking over while this pandemic lasts, and to help rebuild afterwards. It'll cost me a few quid, I suppose, but I've put pretty much all my MLA loans up for sale, and any sales proceeds plus repays of cap and int I'm moving to the 90D Access Account, in the hope that some of it will (a) provide short-term cash to AC for useful purposes, and (b) increase the withdrawal speed for all those hiding their desperate need for the return of their investment under a patina of flailing anger and blame.
Easy for me to say, perhaps, because I have been cautious enough to salt away six-nine months of living expenses in a boring old Nationwide account before embarking on this P2P adventure. If this plague lasts longer than that, or I've made a wrong choice, then I'm screwed. I'll have to sell one of the grandkids. Fingers crossed.
|
|
theta
Posts: 46
Likes: 44
|
Post by theta on Apr 5, 2020 17:28:08 GMT
One more upvote for a secondary market for QAA accounts. It would be really helpful in providing liquidity for those that need it at the right price. I personally would gladly sell at 95p right now, and I would be willing to buy more at 80p to the pound. I'm sure with others participating, a clearing level would be found pretty soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by scepticalinvestor on Apr 5, 2020 18:28:30 GMT
Maybe some form of a secondary market (at least for the so-called "Quick Access" accounts) is part of the changes that Stuart has alluded to. One can hope! If it weren't for my RYI queued Access funds over at RS (which if RS continue as they are, should be fully paid out in a couple of weeks), I would have been happy to exit the QAA at upto a 10% discount. One more upvote for a secondary market for QAA accounts. It would be really helpful in providing liquidity for those that need it at the right price. I personally would gladly sell at 95p right now, and I would be willing to buy more at 80p to the pound. I'm sure with others participating, a clearing level would be found pretty soon. |
|
|
|
Post by oppsididitagain on May 1, 2020 21:17:43 GMT
Just some idea's , Im sure there will be opinions on pro's/con's and some would have help some wouldn't have helped in these times but these are just ideas.
The main problem Ive witnessed over the past 2 months is cashflow management.
1. Reduce interest rates on AA accounts. I would say by .25% -.50%
2. Charge a small fee (.25%) for selling or buying loans (not both) on the secondary market. Fee's to go into the PF (or AC version of it)
3 Launch a fixed rate product with a known maturity date with limited subscriptions - That should help AC manage their cashflows better and attract new money to the platform
E.G's 6 month product paying 5%. 1 yr Product paying 5.5%
4. Limit the amount of withdrawal per user. from AA - E.G A daily 10K / weekly 50K limit. This will help us the user know our limitations of getting our money back so we can plan the future better.
IMHO AC never indicated EVER the timeframe of how much was available from the AA at any given time. Just said in normal market conditions.
5. Get rid of monthly/yearly management fee's - This will not attract new money to the platform.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on May 1, 2020 22:13:08 GMT
Just some idea's , Im sure there will be opinions on pro's/con's and some would have help some wouldn't have helped in these times but these are just ideas. The main problem Ive witnessed over the past 2 months is cashflow management. 1. Reduce interest rates on AA accounts. I would say by .25% -.50% 2. Charge a small fee (.25%) for selling or buying loans (not both) on the secondary market. Fee's to go into the PF (or AC version of it) 3 Launch a fixed rate product with a known maturity date with limited subscriptions - That should help AC manage their cashflows better and attract new money to the platform E.G's 6 month product paying 5%. 1 yr Product paying 5.5% 4. Limit the amount of withdrawal per user. from AA - E.G A daily 10K / weekly 50K limit. This will help us the user know our limitations of getting our money back so we can plan the future better. IMHO AC never indicated EVER the timeframe of how much was available from the AA at any given time. Just said in normal market conditions. 5. Get rid of monthly/yearly management fee's - This will not attract new money to the platform. 1. AC are way ahead of you on this one, with reductions up to 2%
3. Given AC's loans can't deliver even 4% at the moment, how do you expect them to deliver 5%-5.5%?
4. i) how would it help AC if I had money stuck in my holding account that they wouldn't let me withdraw (as I don't believe it can be used for loans)? ii) I would hope FCA rules didn't allow platforms to block cash withdrawals for some perceived benefit to the platform
|
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on May 2, 2020 10:40:46 GMT
If the withdrawal pool was to continue I suggest a system where the funds available are split into two.
The first repayment pass could pay a flat sum to all withdrawal requests as happens now.
The second repayment pass would exclude smaller withdrawal requests, perhaps only pay a flat rate where > £5000 is pending (This is an arbitrary sum - would depend on actual numbers in queue). This would immediately reduce the benefit of gaming when trading begins. If would ensure smaller requests continue to be paid out and would provide a very slight degree of redress for those with larger sums stuck.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on May 2, 2020 10:46:45 GMT
If the withdrawal pool was to continue I suggest a system where the funds available are split into two. The first repayment pass could pay a flat sum to all withdrawal requests as happens now. The second repayment pass would exclude smaller withdrawal requests, perhaps only pay a flat rate where > £5000 is pending (This is an arbitrary sum - would depend on actual numbers in queue). This would immediately reduce the benefit of gaming when trading begins. If would ensure smaller requests continue to be paid out and would provide a very slight degree of redress for those with larger sums stuck. If the sums paid out are the same as now, albeit under different rules, how would that help AC (given it would cheese off the many smaller investors)?
|
|
|
|
Post by oppsididitagain on May 2, 2020 10:55:53 GMT
Just some idea's , Im sure there will be opinions on pro's/con's and some would have help some wouldn't have helped in these times but these are just ideas. The main problem Ive witnessed over the past 2 months is cashflow management. 1. Reduce interest rates on AA accounts. I would say by .25% -.50% 2. Charge a small fee (.25%) for selling or buying loans (not both) on the secondary market. Fee's to go into the PF (or AC version of it) 3 Launch a fixed rate product with a known maturity date with limited subscriptions - That should help AC manage their cashflows better and attract new money to the platform E.G's 6 month product paying 5%. 1 yr Product paying 5.5% 4. Limit the amount of withdrawal per user. from AA - E.G A daily 10K / weekly 50K limit. This will help us the user know our limitations of getting our money back so we can plan the future better. IMHO AC never indicated EVER the timeframe of how much was available from the AA at any given time. Just said in normal market conditions. 5. Get rid of monthly/yearly management fee's - This will not attract new money to the platform. 1. AC are way ahead of you on this one, with reductions up to 2%
3. Given AC's loans can't deliver even 4% at the moment, how do you expect them to deliver 5%-5.5%?
4. i) how would it help AC if I had money stuck in my holding account that they wouldn't let me withdraw (as I don't believe it can be used for loans)? ii) I would hope FCA rules didn't allow platforms to block cash withdrawals for some perceived benefit to the platform
1. No, they have only paid interest to the value of 3.75%. The rest is to follow apparently .
3. They can't deliver 4% as there is a run on the money pot, better money planning in the future (limit size of withdrawal) and to slow down an exodus/
Higher rates to attract people, they need funds on the platform.
4. If you limited the amounts, it would stop say one user asking for 200K in one go, and clogging up the system. If it was 10K (example) 20 people would at least get something daily.
ii) Im sure there are FCA rules somewhere , like you say, but this limit is to benefit the flow of funds in abnormal conditions, like now - so all users would see a more stable exit.
I would be curious to know how much has been demanded from the AA's (still waiting in the pool) and how many lucky people got sizeable chunks out prior to March 12.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,043
Likes: 4,437
Member is Online
|
Post by agent69 on May 2, 2020 11:11:13 GMT
If the withdrawal pool was to continue I suggest a system where the funds available are split into two. The first repayment pass could pay a flat sum to all withdrawal requests as happens now. The second repayment pass would exclude smaller withdrawal requests, perhaps only pay a flat rate where > £5000 is pending (This is an arbitrary sum - would depend on actual numbers in queue). This would immediately reduce the benefit of gaming when trading begins. If would ensure smaller requests continue to be paid out and would provide a very slight degree of redress for those with larger sums stuck. How about if the second repayment pass was pro rata to the amount you have in the pool (accepting that it is meaningless unless serious money arrives from somewhere).
For example assume 25% of money in the access accounts is looking for the door (£50m in round numbers) and there are 5000 investors in the pool. So if £1m was available for repayments:
- in the first pass everyone gets £500k / 5000 = £100 each
- in the second pass an investor with £1k invested has 0.002% of the pool so gets £500k * 0.00002 = £10
- in the second pass an investor with £100k invested has 0.2% of the pool so gets £500k * 0.002 = £1000
So overall the small investor gets £110 back and the larger investor £1100
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on May 2, 2020 11:13:53 GMT
If the withdrawal pool was to continue I suggest a system where the funds available are split into two. The first repayment pass could pay a flat sum to all withdrawal requests as happens now. The second repayment pass would exclude smaller withdrawal requests, perhaps only pay a flat rate where > £5000 is pending (This is an arbitrary sum - would depend on actual numbers in queue). This would immediately reduce the benefit of gaming when trading begins. If would ensure smaller requests continue to be paid out and would provide a very slight degree of redress for those with larger sums stuck. How about if the second repayment pass was pro rata to the amount you have in the pool (accepting that it is meaningless unless serious money arrives from somewhere).
For example assume 25% of money in the access accounts is looking for the door (£50m in round numbers) and there are 5000 investors in the pool. So if £1m was available for repayments:
- in the first pass everyone gets £500k / 5000 = £100 each
- in the second pass an investor with £1k invested has 0.002% of the pool so gets £500k * 0.00002 = £10
- in the second pass an investor with £100k invested has 0.2% of the pool so gets £500k * 0.002 = £1000
So overall the small investor gets £110 back and the larger investor £1100 How does that (still paying out £1m) help AC? You'll have a few happier large investors (me being one of them), but lots of unhappier smaller investors.
|
|
