iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 30, 2021 17:35:56 GMT
Q: How big was the MLA in the past, say about a year ago? Wayback Machine has it at £113M for 26/05/20, so still after CV19 kicked in proper unfortunately, but not by so much that a great deal would have come out? PS: sum of the AAs was £216M on 26/05/20; so currently sits at 74.5% of that value. MLA is currently 75.2% of its earlier value, but that may just be coincidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Mar 30, 2021 19:12:03 GMT
Thx iRobot I’m now pretty sure my assumption was based on a total AC loan book of circa £400m (rounding up) split simplistically between AAs and MLA (flawed) with circa £200m (underestimate) in the AAs. Several errors creeping in there to overestimate the MLA. | Account | £ms @ 31/03/20 | | Total AC (CoHse Filing) | £392 | | AAs | £214 | | REST: MLA plus closed (GBBA etc) | £178 |
AC said that the loan book was ~£400m June2020 funding round.
These two sets of figs don't marry up exactly but give a fair idea, but may reflect the possible size of GBBA etc (when compared to your figs above?)
|
|
zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 333
|
Post by zlb on Mar 30, 2021 21:14:36 GMT
CBILS loans, on c2f, look like the previously higher risk loan types they had (typically 12-14% interest), so I'm not interested in an entire portfolio of that kind of risk - the Government guarantee to pay the interest is no reassurance there, for me. They went through a very rocky patch of rubbish DD so there's still that risk too, unless CBILS lending has more stringent rules? But with AC, will CBILS lending be separate from other investment? Will they all be lumped in with the AAs for example? How will the risk differ for the current, what some still refer to as 'retail' investing? Are they pulling in institutional lenders? Why is the sector with so many losses and failed platforms being trusted with this? Is it because CBILS is perceived to be high risk / high loss, or simply that p2p platforms had the infrastructure in place? CBILS Lending is institutionals only, no P2P retail participation allowed. Many developers have jumped from drawing down further tranches on P2P loans to CBILS loans, so to some extent it's taken the pressure off AAs for future tranche funding.
The downside is that's there's close to zero new P2P loans in the pipeline and minimal loan parts available to buy on MLA marketplace. (Not relevant if you aren't a MLA lender)
NB The AAs aren't participating in future loans, only the MLA lenders, at least until the recently announced 'Exit' account is created for the 'awkward squad'. ok, I've prob misunderstood, are the AAs remaining open for retail investors but not lending to any CBILS loans? But that means any investment in the AAs won't be well diversified because there are so few P2P retail loans? Or has the risk changed, and that's why people want the exit account? Their email implies upcoming increased loan flow. I saw the email about the exit ... AC emails seem to prioritise the small print rather than actual news delivered succinctly.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 30, 2021 21:43:34 GMT
CBILS Lending is institutionals only, no P2P retail participation allowed. Many developers have jumped from drawing down further tranches on P2P loans to CBILS loans, so to some extent it's taken the pressure off AAs for future tranche funding.
The downside is that's there's close to zero new P2P loans in the pipeline and minimal loan parts available to buy on MLA marketplace. (Not relevant if you aren't a MLA lender)
NB The AAs aren't participating in future loans, only the MLA lenders, at least until the recently announced 'Exit' account is created for the 'awkward squad'. ok, I've prob misunderstood, are the AAs remaining open for retail investors but not lending to any CBILS loans? But that means any investment in the AAs won't be well diversified because there are so few P2P retail loans? Or has the risk changed, and that's why people want the exit account? Their email implies upcoming increased loan flow. I saw the email about the exit ... AC emails seem to prioritise the small print rather than actual news delivered succinctly. Yes, CBILS are not funded by AAs and as loans are repaying AAs loan book is getting thiner. If anticipated new loan flow resumes AAs should be able to get back to normal.
|
|
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: 11,548
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 30, 2021 23:22:18 GMT
CBILS Lending is institutionals only, no P2P retail participation allowed. Many developers have jumped from drawing down further tranches on P2P loans to CBILS loans, so to some extent it's taken the pressure off AAs for future tranche funding.
The downside is that's there's close to zero new P2P loans in the pipeline and minimal loan parts available to buy on MLA marketplace. (Not relevant if you aren't a MLA lender)
NB The AAs aren't participating in future loans, only the MLA lenders, at least until the recently announced 'Exit' account is created for the 'awkward squad'. ok, I've prob misunderstood, are the AAs remaining open for retail investors but not lending to any CBILS loans? But that means any investment in the AAs won't be well diversified because there are so few P2P retail loans? Or has the risk changed, and that's why people want the exit account? Their email implies upcoming increased loan flow. I saw the email about the exit ... AC emails seem to prioritise the small print rather than actual news delivered succinctly. Completely. CBILS are not allowed to be funded by retail investors only institutional. AAs remain open to retail investors, and investors are diversified across the entirety of the AC loan book, except loans that were in default prior to the launch of the accounts and two recent loans, so fully diversified. The AA will be investing in new loans from May.
|
|
zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 333
|
Post by zlb on Mar 31, 2021 8:58:31 GMT
ok, I've prob misunderstood, are the AAs remaining open for retail investors but not lending to any CBILS loans? But that means any investment in the AAs won't be well diversified because there are so few P2P retail loans? Or has the risk changed, and that's why people want the exit account? Their email implies upcoming increased loan flow. I saw the email about the exit ... AC emails seem to prioritise the small print rather than actual news delivered succinctly. Completely. CBILS are not allowed to be funded by retail investors only institutional. AAs remain open to retail investors, and investors are diversified across the entirety of the AC loan book, except loans that were in default prior to the launch of the accounts and two recent loans, so fully diversified. The AA will be investing in new loans from May. ah I see, hence the significance of the new lending announcement. Thank you! And thank you df ... so the perception is on reading, that many borrowers have moved their loans to CBILS and we're not too sure how many new loans will not be CBILS. AC are simply administrators for CBILS, what's in it for AC?
|
|
ptr120
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 1,350
|
Post by ptr120 on Mar 31, 2021 9:48:34 GMT
AC are simply administrators for CBILS, what's in it for AC? They still take a fee. They will also hope to become the 'go to' lender for borrowers who might want non-CBILS loans in the future.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Apr 6, 2021 13:32:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Jun 5, 2021 23:31:18 GMT
I can't see AC in the list of lenders, funding lines exhausted already?
Going by the loan numbers that we can see in MLA, it jumps from 1281 to 1342, then to 1368 and finally 1410, so 127 missing loan numbers. I wonder if we can say they're CBILS loans. If so that would mean the average per loan is ~£1.5mm Total guess work.
(I'm assuming £200mm lent but one place says it's ~£300mm lent)
Ed. 17.6.21 - Total CBILS now appears to be pretty much £300mm, this is info from AC's front web-page, where it says total lent.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Jun 6, 2021 6:52:41 GMT
I can't see AC in the list of lenders, funding lines exhausted already?
Going by the loan numbers that we can see in MLA, it jumps from 1281 to 1342, then to 1368 and finally 1410, so 127 missing loan numbers. I wonder if we can say they're CBILS loans. If so that would mean the average per loan is ~£1.5mm Total guess work.
(I'm assuming £200mm lent but one place says it's ~£300mm lent)
There is a total figure for AC lending on the front page of the AC website which includes p2p, institutional, CIBL lending so from this you can get an idea of the amount of non p2p lending over time.
|
|
