|
Post by p2plender on Apr 20, 2020 6:05:27 GMT
That's if they, and many other P2P lenders have one. Can't help thinking that the likes of RS are going to struggle to attract funds after what has happened. Ultimately many who thought they could access their funds and hence took a low rate to mitigate this have effectively been left shell shocked and high and dry awaiting 'instant access'... I don't think many investors will come back and will probably put their 'instant access' fund in the bank (where it should be if you want virtually guaranteed instant access). I know quite a few business owners used RS 'access' and have been very much hampered by current events, some terribly. In some ways RS can't be blamed, and in some ways they can. Clearly they have 'working' 'short term funds' into long term lending - very much like a certain North East financial institution did in 2007... Again, RS have tried to engineer investor's funds in various ways to produce a profit, yet still they've failed to achieve this. Bad loans have had a huge impact, as has happened on many so called 'better quality' platforms. I do wonder what the future holds for this industry. I really didn't expect investors would be waiting months for 'instant returns', and let's hope it is months......
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 971
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Apr 20, 2020 7:51:05 GMT
That's if they, and many other P2P lenders have one. Can't help thinking that the likes of RS are going to struggle to attract funds after what has happened. Ultimately many who thought they could access their funds and hence took a low rate to mitigate this have effectively been left shell shocked and high and dry awaiting 'instant access'... I don't think many investors will come back and will probably put their 'instant access' fund in the bank (where it should be if you want virtually guaranteed instant access). I know quite a few business owners used RS 'access' and have been very much hampered by current events, some terribly. In some ways RS can't be blamed, and in some ways they can. Clearly they have 'working' 'short term funds' into long term lending - very much like a certain North East financial institution did in 2007... Again, RS have tried to engineer investor's funds in various ways to produce a profit, yet still they've failed to achieve this. Bad loans have had a huge impact, as has happened on many so called 'better quality' platforms. I do wonder what the future holds for this industry. I really didn't expect investors would be waiting months for 'instant returns', and let's hope it is months...... Fair questions. One might hope that the investors who don't come back are the ones who should never have been in these products (not just RS) in the first place. Anyone who put urgently needed cash into an "Instant Access P2P" - well, let's just say that they now probably realise the magnitude of the mistake they were making. The platforms' contribution to this has been to offer accounts - in RS case, "Access" - which someone who didn't stop to think might be somehow equivalent to a bank account. OTOH, products like RS 1Y and 5Y, although now deprecated by RS, are a lot clearer in their construction, especially if they manage to supply loans which actually match the stated duration (which has not always been the case). I can see a future for products like that, and also the more transparent individual loan markets (such as ABL, or AC MLA). But products which depend on continuing cash liquidity to function don't have a future IMHO. What might that mean specifically for RS? Well, how about a return to 1Y, 3Y, 5Y markets?
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Apr 20, 2020 8:34:18 GMT
The dash to the exit might well have been prompted by concerns over the provision fund.
Under current rules any request for forbearance from borrowers would lead to a payout in full.
I would expect to see some change to this due to current unprecedented conditions. If the pf were to pay out only when loans were defaulted (after the current required forbearance) this would relieve the pressure.
Longer term much depends on inflation and interest rates. If the BOE prints sufficient money, and deliberately stokes inflation to mitigate public debt, then RS can thrive. Another 10 years of near zero interest rates makes it impossible to compete with the Banks for quality borrowers. A stock market float is unlikely, and backers such as Woodford have rather threadbare pockets, so a white knight investor will be needed to maintain business cash-flow in the face of ongoing losses.
A speculative possibility is that Zopa exits P2P completely once the Bank side is up and running. This would leave the Personal P2P market to RS (I do not expect lesser also-rans to survive).
|
|
|
Post by p2plender on Apr 20, 2020 9:09:09 GMT
It worked fine for years re instant access for business...
I know one chap who had between 200-400k a month in 'instant access' all with a nice 3%+.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 971
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Apr 20, 2020 14:10:36 GMT
... Is it fair to criticise the naivety of those that placed their money in an "Access" account and now find that it is anything but? ... Yep, absolutely. Anyone who thinks there is such a thing as a free lunch is the very definition of naive. Well, the rules of the Rolling Market were certainly friendlier to lenders than the Access accounts, I can't argue with that, but you could also say that the Access construction is clearer about what it is. You do realise, don't you, that "Rolling" loans were never actually what they seemed and that in circumstances like todays you would have been similarly locked in?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2020 14:32:09 GMT
Surely the point is that Rolling didn't give any impression about access (if anything, it implied loans would keep on rolling over) whereas Access definitely does.
I think the names should allude to the early access fees charged, as 5 year has proved more Access-ible than Access.
|
|
|
Post by cinereus on Apr 20, 2020 16:44:07 GMT
Surely the point is that Rolling didn't give any impression about access (if anything, it implied loans would keep on rolling over) whereas Access definitely does. I think the names should allude to the early access fees charged, as 5 year has proved more Access-ible than Access. Agreed. Naïveté aside, RS intentionally marketed it as quick access. And the fact 5 Year is outperforming everything right now is definitely a bit riling.
|
|
|
Post by p2plender on Apr 21, 2020 0:36:45 GMT
So ultimately RS should just have one market! Because as many stated pretty much from the outset, RS use investor's funds to invest in all markets.
All these different markets and rates are nothing more than a farce. RS Aus is starting to go this way, sadly.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 971
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Apr 21, 2020 9:10:12 GMT
So ultimately RS should just have one market! Because as many stated pretty much from the outset, RS use investor's funds to invest in all markets. ... Well, that's where RS have been heading, for sure - Access/Plus/Max being essentially one market with three different rate/exit fee options. The problem as I see it is that highly bundled black box products like this are precisely the ones that are struggling most in the current conditions. They've been constructed that way to make life easy for the platforms, and also easy to detach the reality of the underlying assets so that lenders don't really know what they're getting into. This is why people are getting so upset (see the AC board, if you haven't already!) about not being able to get their "cash" out. I think the 1Y/3Y/5Y products are potentially much clearer, but only if they can find borrowers to match. If you know when you take on a 1Y loan or a 5Y loan then that's what you're getting - with the option to sell on a secondary market as a bonus and not a right - then there would be a lot less kerfuffle in difficult times. Of course, its a harder sell to lenders so the market would be smaller, but I think its the most sustainable option.
|
|
|
Post by redpete on Apr 22, 2020 11:44:25 GMT
It worked fine for years re instant access for business... I know one chap who had between 200-400k a month in 'instant access' all with a nice 3%+. Anyone running a business should understand how to manage low probability but high impact risks, and actually I would consider it not such a low probability that economic conditions could go south and have the impact on p2p lending that we are experiencing now. They should also look into the T&Cs and underlying characteristics of an investment beyond the name that a provider chooses to give it.
|
|
|
Post by scepticalinvestor on Apr 23, 2020 9:52:45 GMT
As others have alluded to, in 6-12 months time, I am almost certain that there will be fewer accounts named "Access", "Quick Access", etc. Either due to pressure from regulators or as a result of FOS complaints in volume (even if the complaints arent upheld by the FOS).
On a slightly tangential note, I was chatting to a mate who owns a small development firm in the midlands. They are raising development finance for a small plot (8 houses) on which they expect to recieve planning permission. In the current environment, he was quite pessimistic about raising the required finance at reasonable rates but he was apparently swamped with offers from lenders. None of the traditional larger names were in the mix (the couple of BDMs he spoke to mentioned that they could not price risk or value currently), it was all P2P type startups and the terms,rates they were offering was as if covid had never even happened!
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Apr 23, 2020 18:06:31 GMT
Not particularly thread relevant, but unworthy of a separate one.
There has been a minor alteration to the 'Money on Loan' area of the access style loans.
It is now displayed in separate columns, defaulting to an 'Existing Contracts' display, but with a 'New Contracts' column adjacent. Possible indication that loans might renew without the visible display that seems to confuse so many?
|
|
jcb208
Member of DD Central
Posts: 821
Likes: 608
|
Post by jcb208 on Apr 23, 2020 18:23:32 GMT
Many people will return to Ratesetter once they Weather this Covid outbreak ,especially when they realise what rubbish rates FSCS protected accounts attract and falling
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,486
Likes: 919
|
Post by aju on Apr 23, 2020 18:38:53 GMT
Not particularly thread relevant, but unworthy of a separate one. There has been a minor alteration to the 'Money on Loan' area of the access style loans. It is now displayed in separate columns, defaulting to an 'Existing Contracts' display, but with a 'New Contracts' column adjacent. Possible indication that loans might renew without the visible display that seems to confuse so many? It's not actually a minor change in my view especially as being able to line up some contracts with loan id's, especially Access (Old rollover) as in fact there is a further hoop to jump to find out the Loan ID. Really is a pain in the ar-se. Lining up contracts with the loan ID's was very easy in the previous side by side screens but now there is a broken link until one gets into the detail where to ne honest htere is little useful info other than the LoanID. Makes it much harder to see the rollovers. Not sure how this helps the users having this disconnection but then I guess most people are not keeping track of loans starting, finishing and forming. Edit: Thought I had better check the transactions but thankfully the csv data there is not changed (Yet), not sure if the initial onscreen transactions are changed but they are not in the same order of the csv data. If they change that then i'll have to be passing it through a translation screen or worse have to regig all my overview spreadsheets. I hate it when I've spent a considerable time collecting data and these companies have little regard for this and just change things as they see fit. Overall its not a big deal but not sure its improved things in my view. Oh well if this corona virus malarkey carry's on much longer - it looks like it will too - then i'll probably be getting out of P2P soon anyway if Mrs Aju has her way!.
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Apr 23, 2020 18:49:03 GMT
Not particularly thread relevant, but unworthy of a separate one. There has been a minor alteration to the 'Money on Loan' area of the access style loans. It is now displayed in separate columns, defaulting to an 'Existing Contracts' display, but with a 'New Contracts' column adjacent. Possible indication that loans might renew without the visible display that seems to confuse so many? It's not actually a minor change in my view especially as being able to line up some contracts, especially Access (Old rollover) as in fact there is a further hoop to jump to find out the Loan ID. Really is a pain in the ar-se trying to line up Access ID's too. Lining up contracts with the loan ID's was very easy in the previous screens but now there is a broken link until one gets into the detail. Makes it much harder to see the rollovers. Not sure how this helps the users having this disconnection but then I guess most people are not keeping track of loans starting, finishing and forming. Well in that case all I can say is....... The higher you build your barriers The taller I become The farther you take my rights away The faster I will run You can deny me You can decide to turn your face away No matter, cos there's.... Something inside so strong I know that I can make it Tho' you're doing me wrong, so wrong You thought that my pride was gone Oh no, something inside so strong Oh oh oh oh oh something inside so strong The more you refuse to hear my voice The louder I will sing You hide behind walls of Jericho Your lies will come tumbling Deny my place in time You squander wealth that's mine My light will shine so brightly It will blind you Cos there's...... Something inside so strong I know that I can make it Tho' you're doing me wrong, so wrong You thought that my pride was gone Oh no, something inside so strong Oh oh oh oh oh something inside so strong Must go, some chap called Labi on the phone complaining about plagiarism.
|
|