alanh
Posts: 556
Likes: 560
|
Post by alanh on Apr 18, 2020 18:59:51 GMT
What's wrong with Abl or Unbolted? Both are performing better than AC, given that both continue to repay lenders as normal Nothing is wrong, only considering platforms where your forced to hold right now. (should of specfied that) If I was invested in any P2P other than AC, I'd be out of the door for sure in the current situation, at least no more than 5% exposure. There's a lot of people that think completely the opposite but unfortunately with AC there is no door at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harland Kearney on Apr 18, 2020 20:36:32 GMT
Nothing is wrong, only considering platforms where your forced to hold right now. (should of specfied that) If I was invested in any P2P other than AC, I'd be out of the door for sure in the current situation, at least no more than 5% exposure. There's a lot of people that think completely the opposite but unfortunately with AC there is no door at all. With every platform that is under stress there is no door instantly, or one that is far from sight. Imagine liquidity dries up and investors are locked in for the duration of said loans or until liquidity slowly removes investors from the queue, wow really! Your point for qouting me is? Other than stating the obvious of course. My post simply saying, I would exit from peer to peer entirely if given the choice. Of which I have, other than the queued funds in A.C. However I am happier with first charge security over the valueless P.G that many non-commerical/property loans offer.
|
|
alanh
Posts: 556
Likes: 560
|
Post by alanh on Apr 19, 2020 13:21:43 GMT
There's a lot of people that think completely the opposite but unfortunately with AC there is no door at all. With every platform that is under stress there is no door instantly, or one that is far from sight. Imagine liquidity dries up and investors are locked in for the duration of said loans or until liquidity slowly removes investors from the queue, wow really! Your point for qouting me is? Other than stating the obvious of course. My post simply saying, I would exit from peer to peer entirely if given the choice. Of which I have, other than the queued funds in A.C. However I am happier with first charge security over the valueless P.G that many non-commerical/property loans offer. You don't expect much in the way of repayments for 18 months? The access accounts have 580 loans underlying them. 260 of these have a remaining term of 18 months or less and an outstanding value of around £270m. Where do you think all this money is going to go then if its not being returned to investors? You must be expecting a ridiculous number of defaults, and it can't all be getting used to fund existing loan commitments. We already know that AC are experiencing dire cashflow problems from their desperate imposition of lender fees in order to keep the operation running. I sincerely hope that they are not able to get their hands on any of this £270m by changing their T&C's overnight again without anyones consent.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981 
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Apr 19, 2020 14:10:34 GMT
With every platform that is under stress there is no door instantly, or one that is far from sight. Imagine liquidity dries up and investors are locked in for the duration of said loans or until liquidity slowly removes investors from the queue, wow really! Your point for qouting me is? Other than stating the obvious of course. My post simply saying, I would exit from peer to peer entirely if given the choice. Of which I have, other than the queued funds in A.C. However I am happier with first charge security over the valueless P.G that many non-commerical/property loans offer. You don't expect much in the way of repayments for 18 months? The access accounts have 580 loans underlying them. 260 of these have a remaining term of 18 months or less and an outstanding value of around £270m. Where do you think all this money is going to go then if its not being returned to investors? You must be expecting a ridiculous number of defaults, and it can't all be getting used to fund existing loan commitments. We already know that AC are experiencing dire cashflow problems from their desperate imposition of lender fees in order to keep the operation running. I sincerely hope that they are not able to get their hands on any of this £270m by changing their T&C's overnight again without anyones consent. I have check my recent loan book for a QAA account from 1/4/20 to 17/4/20 found 3 loans repaid, these had a total value of £1,946,482.58. 46 loans have increased in value with a total increase of £4,833,965.89. AC have increased my holding in 32 of these loans which are 590, 691, 784, 828, 844, 878, 926, 962, 1000, 1038, 1051, 1055, 1084, 1088, 1105, 1108, 1124, 1129, 1136, 1155, 1156, 1198, 1205, 1226, 1236, 1243, 1246, 1253, 1257, 1272, 1273 and 1276. In all of the other loans my holdings slightly decreased. No loans have decreased in value except the repaid loans i.e. no partial repayments.
The loans I am looking at may well be split between AAs and MLA but this is the information from QAA.
The amount of my QAA loans has increase by 0.51% so I guess this must have been taken from cash in QAA.
It looks like the bulk of the repayments in AAs + cash in the AAs is being used to fund tranches for existing loans, so not mush chance of getting much capital at present or perhaps quite a long time.
I cannot find any information on how much AC have promised in future tranches on current loans so without this information we can only guess how long we are locked in, the loan terms are up to 5 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harland Kearney on Apr 19, 2020 14:29:26 GMT
With every platform that is under stress there is no door instantly, or one that is far from sight. Imagine liquidity dries up and investors are locked in for the duration of said loans or until liquidity slowly removes investors from the queue, wow really! Your point for qouting me is? Other than stating the obvious of course. My post simply saying, I would exit from peer to peer entirely if given the choice. Of which I have, other than the queued funds in A.C. However I am happier with first charge security over the valueless P.G that many non-commerical/property loans offer. You don't expect much in the way of repayments for 18 months? The access accounts have 580 loans underlying them. 260 of these have a remaining term of 18 months or less and an outstanding value of around £270m. Where do you think all this money is going to go then if its not being returned to investors? You must be expecting a ridiculous number of defaults, and it can't all be getting used to fund existing loan commitments. We already know that AC are experiencing dire cashflow problems from their desperate imposition of lender fees in order to keep the operation running. I sincerely hope that they are not able to get their hands on any of this £270m by changing their T&C's overnight again without anyones consent. I never said any of the above. I said you can't make any comparision on the health of the loan book until around the 18 month mark, when you include defaults which have gone into recovery mode with receivers. 8 months if u talking about loans which end up over running and needing to arrange re-finance in this soon to be brave new world. It will be quite clear of course if the loan book to a nose dive you would see it easily within 4-8 months, but it will take many many many months after that point to see how much capital recovery can return to investors. My bet is that it wont' get to that sorry state affairs on a large scale. But you just never know!  I hope to God we do not see high defaults, but nobody can really know other than the general out look of things look not so great. The only good thing is we hold asset security, in the context things did hit the fan; then it will take a very long to recover any of those capital defaults. Being that the AA is not under writing new loans currently, the anaylsis of taking default loans to the real value to the loan book/investor is now far more revelent which it sort of wasn't with the quasi quick access stuff all going on to the individal investor could largely ignore. Interestingly alender post points towards loan parts still be swapped around between investors. We are seeing capital repayments already, very small, but that I expect that numbers will start increasing much more 90 days from now. If we do get a stream of repayments in the future, say 4-8 months from now then I do think AC could pay off the current queued funds and return the platform to a MOL or at least get into a more fair queue system if that kind of liquidity is free (so that large investors can exit, rather than taking years...)
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Apr 19, 2020 14:51:52 GMT
You don't expect much in the way of repayments for 18 months? The access accounts have 580 loans underlying them. 260 of these have a remaining term of 18 months or less and an outstanding value of around £270m. Where do you think all this money is going to go then if its not being returned to investors? You must be expecting a ridiculous number of defaults, and it can't all be getting used to fund existing loan commitments. We already know that AC are experiencing dire cashflow problems from their desperate imposition of lender fees in order to keep the operation running. I sincerely hope that they are not able to get their hands on any of this £270m by changing their T&C's overnight again without anyones consent. I have check my recent loan book for a QAA account from 1/4/20 to 17/4/20 found 3 loans repaid, these had a total value of £1,946,482.58. 46 loans have increased in value with a total increase of £4,833,965.89. AC have increased my holding in 32 of these loans which are 590, 691, 784, 828, 844, 878, 926, 962, 1000, 1038, 1051, 1055, 1084, 1088, 1105, 1108, 1124, 1129, 1136, 1155, 1156, 1198, 1205, 1226, 1236, 1243, 1246, 1253, 1257, 1272, 1273 and 1276. In all of the other loans my holdings slightly decreased. No loans have decreased in value except the repaid loans i.e. no partial repayments.
The loans I am looking at may well be split between AAs and MLA but this is the information from QAA.
The amount of my QAA loans has increase by 0.51% so I guess this must have been taken from cash in QAA.
It looks like the bulk of the repayments in AAs + cash in the AAs is being used to fund tranches for existing loans, so not mush chance of getting much capital at present or perhaps quite a long time.
I cannot find any information on how much AC have promised in future tranches on current loans so without this information we can only guess how long we are locked in, the loan terms are up to 5 years.
I think the 'Principal further advance' amounts in the Repayments tab are the amounts the borrower has received. Seems to fit for loan #691 anyway - initial advance of £780.2K from the original Credit Report, plus £4.19m from 'Principal further advance' amounts up to 2 Apr 2020, totals £4.97m which agrees with the 'Principal remaining' figure shown for the loan. Those of a nervous disposition might want to stop reading now.....next 'Principal further advance' is for £2.945m on 24 May 2020.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 19, 2020 14:59:51 GMT
I have check my recent loan book for a QAA account from 1/4/20 to 17/4/20 found 3 loans repaid, these had a total value of £1,946,482.58. 46 loans have increased in value with a total increase of £4,833,965.89. AC have increased my holding in 32 of these loans which are 590, 691, 784, 828, 844, 878, 926, 962, 1000, 1038, 1051, 1055, 1084, 1088, 1105, 1108, 1124, 1129, 1136, 1155, 1156, 1198, 1205, 1226, 1236, 1243, 1246, 1253, 1257, 1272, 1273 and 1276. In all of the other loans my holdings slightly decreased. No loans have decreased in value except the repaid loans i.e. no partial repayments.
The loans I am looking at may well be split between AAs and MLA but this is the information from QAA.
The amount of my QAA loans has increase by 0.51% so I guess this must have been taken from cash in QAA.
It looks like the bulk of the repayments in AAs + cash in the AAs is being used to fund tranches for existing loans, so not mush chance of getting much capital at present or perhaps quite a long time.
I cannot find any information on how much AC have promised in future tranches on current loans so without this information we can only guess how long we are locked in, the loan terms are up to 5 years.
I think the 'Principal further advance' amounts in the Repayments tab are the amounts the borrower has received. Seems to fit for loan #691 anyway - initial advance of £780.2K from the original Credit Report, plus £4.19m from 'Principal further advance' amounts up to 2 Apr 2020, totals £4.97m which agrees with the 'Principal remaining' figure shown for the loan. Those of a nervous disposition might want to stop reading now.....next 'Principal further advance' is for £2.945m on 24 May 2020. Tranche drawdowns will slow down as the sites are shut or work slows due to supply chain & distancing impact. The number of requests made has decreased 75% in number since start of April. So likely that free funds in the access accounts will increasingly not be required to cover existing commitments once they have caught up with accrued expenditure.
|
|
alanh
Posts: 556
Likes: 560
|
Post by alanh on Apr 19, 2020 15:11:24 GMT
You don't expect much in the way of repayments for 18 months? The access accounts have 580 loans underlying them. 260 of these have a remaining term of 18 months or less and an outstanding value of around £270m. Where do you think all this money is going to go then if its not being returned to investors? You must be expecting a ridiculous number of defaults, and it can't all be getting used to fund existing loan commitments. We already know that AC are experiencing dire cashflow problems from their desperate imposition of lender fees in order to keep the operation running. I sincerely hope that they are not able to get their hands on any of this £270m by changing their T&C's overnight again without anyones consent. I never said any of the above. I said you can't make any comparision on the health of the loan book until around the 18 month mark, when you include defaults which have gone into recovery mode with receivers. 8 months if u talking about loans which end up over running and needing to arrange re-finance in this soon to be brave new world. It will be quite clear of course if the loan book to a nose dive you would see it easily within 4-8 months, but it will take many many many months after that point to see how much capital recovery can return to investors. My bet is that it wont' get to that sorry state affairs on a large scale. But you just never know! I hope to God we do not see high defaults, but nobody can really know other than the general out look of things look not so great. The only good thing is we hold asset security, in the context things did hit the fan; then it will take a very long to recover any of those capital defaults. Being that the AA is not under writing new loans currently, the anaylsis of taking default loans to the real value to the loan book/investor is now far more revelent which it sort of wasn't with the quasi quick access stuff all going on to the individal investor could largely ignore. Interestingly alender post points towards loan parts still be swapped around between investors. We are seeing capital repayments already, very small, but that I expect that numbers will start increasing much more 90 days from now. If we do get a stream of repayments in the future, say 4-8 months from now then I do think AC could pay off the current queued funds and return the platform to a MOL or at least get into a more fair queue system if that kind of liquidity is free (so that large investors can exit, rather than taking years...) This is what you said yesterday - maybe you should go back and have a look if you can't remember: "We will not see any large repayments for quite some months. I would say gauge 18 months from now, and then come back and post did you recieve more return from AC or Funding Circle in capital repayments. God forbid your right of course, we'd all lose a large ton of money then!" Maybe you've changed your mind? Or just making things up as you go along like AC?
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Apr 19, 2020 15:25:20 GMT
I think the 'Principal further advance' amounts in the Repayments tab are the amounts the borrower has received. Seems to fit for loan #691 anyway - initial advance of £780.2K from the original Credit Report, plus £4.19m from 'Principal further advance' amounts up to 2 Apr 2020, totals £4.97m which agrees with the 'Principal remaining' figure shown for the loan. Those of a nervous disposition might want to stop reading now.....next 'Principal further advance' is for £2.945m on 24 May 2020. Tranche drawdowns will slow down as the sites are shut or work slows due to supply chain & distancing impact. The number of requests made has decreased 75% in number since start of April. So likely that free funds in the access accounts will increasingly not be required to cover existing commitments once they have caught up with accrued expenditure. Looks like the information is there, however unless someone wants to go through all the Loans in the AAs which would take a very large amount of time, not sure if it would be technical possible to automatically go to each of the web pages for these loans and screen scrap the info. In my old role this is the type of task I could easily do but of course I would need access to the data, in fact this is the type of thing where we would have daily reports projecting in the future to the last commitment so future funding can be planed and would be part of the risk assessment process.
Therefore I am not sure how we can get an overall picture unless AC tell us this, would be really nice to know how much has been committed (if it does not cause too much anxiety), the worst case scenario is there will be a point in time where AC have promised more than the repayments can handle and no significant funds coming in which case I would expect there is no other alternative apart from a resolution event, not something I want to see.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Apr 19, 2020 15:41:36 GMT
I never said any of the above. I said you can't make any comparision on the health of the loan book until around the 18 month mark, when you include defaults which have gone into recovery mode with receivers. 8 months if u talking about loans which end up over running and needing to arrange re-finance in this soon to be brave new world. It will be quite clear of course if the loan book to a nose dive you would see it easily within 4-8 months, but it will take many many many months after that point to see how much capital recovery can return to investors. My bet is that it wont' get to that sorry state affairs on a large scale. But you just never know! I hope to God we do not see high defaults, but nobody can really know other than the general out look of things look not so great. The only good thing is we hold asset security, in the context things did hit the fan; then it will take a very long to recover any of those capital defaults. Being that the AA is not under writing new loans currently, the anaylsis of taking default loans to the real value to the loan book/investor is now far more revelent which it sort of wasn't with the quasi quick access stuff all going on to the individal investor could largely ignore. Interestingly alender post points towards loan parts still be swapped around between investors. We are seeing capital repayments already, very small, but that I expect that numbers will start increasing much more 90 days from now. If we do get a stream of repayments in the future, say 4-8 months from now then I do think AC could pay off the current queued funds and return the platform to a MOL or at least get into a more fair queue system if that kind of liquidity is free (so that large investors can exit, rather than taking years...) This is what you said yesterday - maybe you should go back and have a look if you can't remember: "We will not see any large repayments for quite some months. I would say gauge 18 months from now, and then come back and post did you recieve more return from AC or Funding Circle in capital repayments. God forbid your right of course, we'd all lose a large ton of money then!" Maybe you've changed your mind? Or just making things up as you go along like AC? Do you not understand the meaning of the word “gauge”? It means measure or assess. ie. “Wait 18 months before assessing which platform returned more”
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Apr 19, 2020 19:41:38 GMT
Looks like the information is there, however unless someone wants to go through all the Loans in the AAs which would take a very large amount of time, not sure if it would be technical possible to automatically go to each of the web pages for these loans and screen scrap the info. [...]
Pretty sure that bg scrapes a lot of info from individual loan pages in order to give the reports on stuff like amounts for sale at a discount etc.
Perhaps he also already has stats on further principal advances due, or could easily create such a report.
These kinds of specialised reports that are only of interest to a tiny minority of the customer base seem to be the kind of thing that I would NOT expect AC to waste their time on.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Apr 19, 2020 20:41:09 GMT
Tranche drawdowns will slow down as the sites are shut or work slows due to supply chain & distancing impact. The number of requests made has decreased 75% in number since start of April. So likely that free funds in the access accounts will increasingly not be required to cover existing commitments once they have caught up with accrued expenditure. Looks like the information is there, however unless someone wants to go through all the Loans in the AAs which would take a very large amount of time, not sure if it would be technical possible to automatically go to each of the web pages for these loans and screen scrap the info. In my old role this is the type of task I could easily do but of course I would need access to the data, in fact this is the type of thing where we would have daily reports projecting in the future to the last commitment so future funding can be planed and would be part of the risk assessment process.
Therefore I am not sure how we can get an overall picture unless AC tell us this, would be really nice to know how much has been committed (if it does not cause too much anxiety), the worst case scenario is there will be a point in time where AC have promised more than the repayments can handle and no significant funds coming in which case I would expect there is no other alternative apart from a resolution event, not something I want to see.
Very quick'n'dirty, with little in the way of data integrity checking and therefore no claim to absolute accuracy, some 'Principal further advance' figures in the images below. I've gone with 'forecast' instead of 'commitment', on the basis that the commitments are only there if progress has been made such that it meets various criteria, and that is unlikely to have been the case in any number of instances. There's a faulty premise hidden within that, such that these are all Property Development loans, which I know isn't the case but not to what degree. Those that aren't Dev loans may also has conditional clauses, but I need to be more certain on the accuracy of the core data before spending time on the minutiae. For instance, I'm suspicious about the May figure and wonder if AC use the next month as a roll-up period to display any non-drawn down sums from previous period. In other words, AC aren't expecting to payout the thick end of £26m in May, but were expecting to have paid more in previous months, so this is how their system tracks it. Dunno - pure speculation on my part. And with that said, about the only thing worth noting is the tail off of 'Paid' versus 'Forecast' in the last few weeks. Using it for any kind of forward looking analysis is quite pointless, IMO. (And to answer the question probably no one is asking: " I did it 'cos I was bored, copper".) (Edit: By way of a PS, the data goes further back, but I chose not to include the older stuff.)  
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 19, 2020 21:36:34 GMT
Very quick'n'dirty, with little in the way of data integrity checking and therefore no claim to absolute accuracy, some 'Principal further advance' figures in the images below. I've gone with 'forecast' instead of 'commitment', on the basis that the commitments are only there if progress has been made such that it meets various criteria, and that is unlikely to have been the case in any number of instances. There's a faulty premise hidden within that, such that these are all Property Development loans, which I know isn't the case but not to what degree. Those that aren't Dev loans may also has conditional clauses, but I need to be more certain on the accuracy of the core data before spending time on the minutiae. For instance, I'm suspicious about the May figure and wonder if AC use the next month as a roll-up period to display any non-drawn down sums from previous period. In other words, AC aren't expecting to payout the thick end of £26m in May, but were expecting to have paid more in previous months, so this is how their system tracks it. Dunno - pure speculation on my part. And with that said, about the only thing worth noting is the tail off of 'Paid' versus 'Forecast' in the last few weeks. Using it for any kind of forward looking analysis is quite pointless, IMO. (And to answer the question probably no one is asking: " I did it 'cos I was bored, copper".) (Edit: By way of a PS, the data goes further back, but I chose not to include the older stuff.) Great work. Pretty sure you are right on the rollup. There is currently £600k of drawdowns announced in April as pending but that don't feature in the repayments tab to be drawn in April so will be included in a future month. The figures can only show total commitment, distribution of when that commitment is likely to be called on is pointless in the current circumstances. AIUI 50% of sites are shut so drawdowns will be pushed. Others will drawdown slower or smaller amounts due to supply chain issues & distancing delays and a few will draw more as they try to advance buy materials to avoid supply chain issues (at least one of those in the pending column)
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Apr 19, 2020 21:55:31 GMT
Looks like the information is there, however unless someone wants to go through all the Loans in the AAs which would take a very large amount of time, not sure if it would be technical possible to automatically go to each of the web pages for these loans and screen scrap the info. In my old role this is the type of task I could easily do but of course I would need access to the data, in fact this is the type of thing where we would have daily reports projecting in the future to the last commitment so future funding can be planed and would be part of the risk assessment process.
Therefore I am not sure how we can get an overall picture unless AC tell us this, would be really nice to know how much has been committed (if it does not cause too much anxiety), the worst case scenario is there will be a point in time where AC have promised more than the repayments can handle and no significant funds coming in which case I would expect there is no other alternative apart from a resolution event, not something I want to see.
Very quick'n'dirty, with little in the way of data integrity checking and therefore no claim to absolute accuracy, some 'Principal further advance' figures in the images below. I've gone with 'forecast' instead of 'commitment', on the basis that the commitments are only there if progress has been made such that it meets various criteria, and that is unlikely to have been the case in any number of instances. There's a faulty premise hidden within that, such that these are all Property Development loans, which I know isn't the case but not to what degree. Those that aren't Dev loans may also has conditional clauses, but I need to be more certain on the accuracy of the core data before spending time on the minutiae. For instance, I'm suspicious about the May figure and wonder if AC use the next month as a roll-up period to display any non-drawn down sums from previous period. In other words, AC aren't expecting to payout the thick end of £26m in May, but were expecting to have paid more in previous months, so this is how their system tracks it. Dunno - pure speculation on my part. And with that said, about the only thing worth noting is the tail off of 'Paid' versus 'Forecast' in the last few weeks. Using it for any kind of forward looking analysis is quite pointless, IMO. (And to answer the question probably no one is asking: " I did it 'cos I was bored, copper".) (Edit: By way of a PS, the data goes further back, but I chose not to include the older stuff.)
If all repayments are made for the next year we get
Apr-20 46,643,441 May-20 45,331,571 Jun-20 8,491,152 Jul-20 22,513,998 Aug-20 8,122,178 Sep-20 14,551,196 Oct-20 6,316,322 Nov-20 11,518,531 Dec-20 10,802,551 Jan-21 9,248,859 Feb-21 10,792,168 Mar-21 32,079,762 226,411,731
Which is fortunately substantially more than the commitments made.
Of course we do not know how many repayments will be deferred or not made at all and how many of the commitments will be taken up.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Apr 21, 2020 19:06:28 GMT
Question for anyone out there. What is the latest level of institutional investment. If we assume the total investment is £425m is it approaching half £200m?
Might it be that all redemptions might be swallowed up with repayments to the institutions, as covenants are broken with the level of defaults or LTVs are breached with revised property prices.
|
|
