|
|
Post by simons on Apr 29, 2020 17:36:37 GMT
In conjunction with associated thread, what losses are you expecting on access account holdings
|
|
|
|
Post by oppsididitagain on Apr 29, 2020 19:30:25 GMT
If we don't vote, will that still be classed as Zero losses :-)
|
|
littleoldlady
Member of DD Central
Running down all platforms due to age
Posts: 3,045
Likes: 1,862
|
Post by littleoldlady on Apr 29, 2020 20:27:23 GMT
I have taken the question to mean "loss on your capital" without taking account of interest earned.
|
|
corto
Member of DD Central
one-syllabistic
Posts: 851
Likes: 356
|
Post by corto on Apr 29, 2020 21:20:06 GMT
What percentage of loss of life will be as a result of cow attacks during the hours of 2300 to 0445 next Monday. Work that one out then answer the less challenging original question. Are you a McKinsey consultant?
|
|
corto
Member of DD Central
one-syllabistic
Posts: 851
Likes: 356
|
Post by corto on Apr 29, 2020 22:57:12 GMT
Are you a McKinsey consultant? I sense that we are both financial mystical thinker aficionados. Good one!
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Apr 30, 2020 7:06:09 GMT
Depends on entirely how much you’ve got invested with the present distribution process anyone with less than £20k should get 100% out of the access accounts. Anyone with £100k plus will lose 20% plus.
|
|
|
|
Post by gobuchul on Apr 30, 2020 7:31:54 GMT
Depends on entirely how much you’ve got invested with the present distribution process anyone with less than £20k should get 100% out of the access accounts. Anyone with £100k plus will lose 20% plus. But only if the current flat rate distribution system continues until all the money runs out, which is unlikely to happen. It also extrapolates up the distribution data gained during the lockdown and takes no account of how this will change as the lockdown eases and the mortgage market unfreezes. But don't let the facts spoil a good bit of alarmist story telling.
|
|
mrsb
Posts: 196
Likes: 102
|
Post by mrsb on Apr 30, 2020 7:36:12 GMT
Depends on entirely how much you’ve got invested with the present distribution process anyone with less than £20k should get 100% out of the access accounts. Anyone with £100k plus will lose 20% plus. But only if the current flat rate distribution system continues until all the money runs out, which is unlikely to happen. It also extrapolates up the distribution data gained during the lockdown and takes no account of how this will change as the lockdown eases and the mortgage market unfreezes. But don't let the facts spoil a good bit of alarmist story telling. But no one actually knows - alarmist or otherwise. It's fair to ask the question, and fair to reply. I think the "depends how deep your in" comment is very valid. There will be people who've already had 100% back, and others that have had 0.0000001% (or whatever!).
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Apr 30, 2020 7:40:48 GMT
Depends on entirely how much you’ve got invested with the present distribution process anyone with less than £20k should get 100% out of the access accounts. Anyone with £100k plus will lose 20% plus. But only if the current flat rate distribution system continues until all the money runs out, which is unlikely to happen. It also extrapolates up the distribution data gained during the lockdown and takes no account of how this will change as the lockdown eases and the mortgage market unfreezes. But don't let the facts spoil a good bit of alarmist story telling. This isn’t alarmist - it quite reassuring for smaller investors & as I said is based on the present system. I sincerely hope Stuart@assetz will share with us modelling they have done, to reassure us all.
|
|
mrsb
Posts: 196
Likes: 102
|
Post by mrsb on Apr 30, 2020 7:43:29 GMT
But only if the current flat rate distribution system continues until all the money runs out, which is unlikely to happen. It also extrapolates up the distribution data gained during the lockdown and takes no account of how this will change as the lockdown eases and the mortgage market unfreezes. But don't let the facts spoil a good bit of alarmist story telling. This isn’t alarmist - it quite reassuring for smaller investors & as I said is based on the present system. I sincerely hope Stuart@assetz will share with us modelling they have done, to reassure us all.That (my bold) really is (to paraphrase M-P) - an expression [act] or purest optimism!
|
|
|
|
Post by simons on Apr 30, 2020 8:18:13 GMT
But only if the current flat rate distribution system continues until all the money runs out, which is unlikely to happen. It also extrapolates up the distribution data gained during the lockdown and takes no account of how this will change as the lockdown eases and the mortgage market unfreezes. But don't let the facts spoil a good bit of alarmist story telling. But no one actually knows - alarmist or otherwise. It's fair to ask the question, and fair to reply. I think the "depends how deep your in" comment is very valid. There will be people who've already had 100% back, and others that have had 0.0000001% (or whatever!). I think this is exactly the point. I realised after I did the poll that it takes no account of investment size. I would therefore think that the zero votes are heavily skewed towards those with lower amounts invested - not all, but a lot of them. Unfortunately with £200k invested I fear I am somewhere toward the bottom of the poll. I have currently received about 0.2% back.
|
|
|
|
Post by carpecyprinidae on Apr 30, 2020 8:33:02 GMT
I voted 10% because I've already had 45% of my balance repaid since hitting withdraw in mid March. If there are many more like me who had very low 4 figure balances in here, it'll skew the poll towards smaller losses. I had five figures in P2P (AC&RS, 50% split) last year 'til I pulled nearly all of it as a house deposit. Knowing what I do now I'd never recommend P2P as a deposit building fund, though it did well for me.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Apr 30, 2020 9:20:39 GMT
Aren't there many criteria that are essential to provide a framework for the answers being given? For example, 1. Amount of holding 2a. Whether attempting to exit or continuing to hold 2b. If exiting, what date the withdrawal request was made. 3. If exiting, whether the expectation is that the existing pooled situation will persist or whether it will switch back to the 'original' queued facility. 4. Others .... Having carefully considered all the above and other, less tangible criterion and entered them into the most appropriate modelling tool, the answer can be found here |
|
|
|
Post by honda2ner on Apr 30, 2020 9:46:38 GMT
But no one actually knows - alarmist or otherwise. It's fair to ask the question, and fair to reply. I think the "depends how deep your in" comment is very valid. There will be people who've already had 100% back, and others that have had 0.0000001% (or whatever!). I think this is exactly the point. I realised after I did the poll that it takes no account of investment size. I would therefore think that the zero votes are heavily skewed towards those with lower amounts invested - not all, but a lot of them. Unfortunately with £200k invested I fear I am somewhere toward the bottom of the poll. I have currently received about 0.2% back. My gut feeling is that larger investors are overly represented on these forums, if you only have a couple of hundred quid in AC you aren't going to invest much time trawling through every post on here. If you're a 'whale' then I expect this forum is on its own browser tab 24/7. Again, just a guess, might be wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Apr 30, 2020 11:11:48 GMT
If those afraid of losing 50% acted logically they could cut their losses to 20% by selling out at that rate to those who expected losses of 10% or less and everyone would be happier (though clearly not actually happy).
|
|
