|
Post by xjlc on Jun 19, 2020 6:33:06 GMT
Hi guys
I understand RS does not guarantee your equity return, etc etc.
Access is clearly marketed as the way to keep your cash most accessible whilst using RateSetter, and we pay a price for that through less interest than the 1 and 5 year markets.
So why are Access payments not being processed in a priority fashion? I'm sure there's something obvious I'm missing. It just seems that the access account is relatively pointless, as you'd get quicker access in 1 and 5, accruing more interest, hopefully not needing to dip into it, but simply taking the interest haircut if you did, thus resulting in a similar return to Access anyway, with faster access...
|
|
|
Post by gar on Jun 19, 2020 7:40:43 GMT
Hi guys So why are Access payments not being processed in a priority fashion? Its Catch 22, you forgot to read the small print. Have a browse through these boards it's been covered to the point of boredom.
|
|
johnt
Investing in Ratesetter, Zopa and Assetz Capital since 2013
Posts: 127
Likes: 71
|
Post by johnt on Jun 19, 2020 8:11:48 GMT
It really wouldn't surprise me if RS were throttling the RYI's in the Access market and prioritising 1 year and 5 year to take advantage of the release fees and banking on this Metro Bank takeover to deal with the Access RYI's.
|
|
|
Post by erniec on Jun 19, 2020 9:11:35 GMT
It really wouldn't surprise me if RS were throttling the RYI's in the Access market and prioritising 1 year and 5 year to take advantage of the release fees and banking on this Metro Bank takeover to deal with the Access RYI's. That, as has been explained ad nauseam, is simply not happening. The 1 and 5 year markets are completely separate from the Access family of markets.
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Jun 19, 2020 9:22:54 GMT
It really wouldn't surprise me if RS were throttling the RYI's in the Access market and prioritising 1 year and 5 year to take advantage of the release fees and banking on this Metro Bank takeover to deal with the Access RYI's. That, as has been explained ad nauseam, is simply not happening. The 1 and 5 year markets are completely separate from the Access family of markets. They would also earn fees by prioritising Plus and Max within the Access markets and that's simply not happening either. The evidence we have, bar a few hiccoughs, is that it really does seem to be chronological by request date and time within each market.
|
|
savernake
Member of DD Central
Posts: 174
Likes: 142
|
Post by savernake on Jun 19, 2020 9:45:58 GMT
The Access queue is far bigger than the others, that's probably why it appears to be moving more slowly.
When the world has returned to normal economic conditions I think RS should take a hard look at the way their products operate and make changes to ensure that this sort of liquidity problem can never happen again. I don't see any future for 'Access' type accounts in P2P as consumer confidence in them has vanished. Maybe they should just offer fixed term products in future? That's assuming Metro Bank even want to continue to accept retail lenders - they may decide to go down the institutional route instead.
|
|
one21
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 265
|
Post by one21 on Jun 19, 2020 10:07:18 GMT
The Access queue is far bigger than the others, that's probably why it appears to be moving more slowly. When the world has returned to normal economic conditions I think RS should take a hard look at the way their products operate and make changes to ensure that this sort of liquidity problem can never happen again. I don't see any future for 'Access' type accounts in P2P as consumer confidence in them has vanished. Maybe they should just offer fixed term products in future? That's assuming Metro Bank even want to continue to accept retail lenders - they may decide to go down the institutional route instead. Agree, the so called 'Access' account should only have contained loan contracts for a maximum of 12 months in my opinion, as it's turned out to be a contradiction in terms!
|
|
robski
Member of DD Central
Posts: 772
Likes: 462
|
Post by robski on Jun 19, 2020 10:16:58 GMT
The Access queue is far bigger than the others, that's probably why it appears to be moving more slowly. When the world has returned to normal economic conditions I think RS should take a hard look at the way their products operate and make changes to ensure that this sort of liquidity problem can never happen again. I don't see any future for 'Access' type accounts in P2P as consumer confidence in them has vanished. Maybe they should just offer fixed term products in future? That's assuming Metro Bank even want to continue to accept retail lenders - they may decide to go down the institutional route instead. I think the problem RS have is that if everyone was fully aware of the risks of capital tie in (as the vast majority surely are now) then they will see more people looking for higher rates. We know they cannot make enough margin now so that would skew even harder to the worse should for example every lender require 5% I do agree the labelling of the product could be viewed by some as misleading, but really anyone who invested in this, on the guarantee of liquidity was fooling themselves. Clearly in normal times the products were liquid, but like many things in unusual times this can change. If there had been a run on RS similar to Northern Rock then maybe they would have been able to maintain or at least keep closer to normal levels of liquidity. What completely killed the liquidity was the interest haircut in combination with the general economics. A fairly deadly combo. Take the FTSE look how hard it fell and yet how quickly it recovered, clearly with all the government interventions investors are looking and going, its not so bad. The fiscal alledged prudence of the Cons has been destroyed, so they may as well give themselves the best chance of reelection, pump virtually unlimited money into the economy and pray. Doing nothing would be a disaster, so why not roll the dice and see if doing something is better, if its a disaster they will probably be out on their ear come the next election. With the current interest rates earning 5-6% on P2P should be good, the problem is now we aren't, if we were I would be surprised if people were not investing. I can see RS surviving this right now but I do think the model coming out the other side may need to be different. Maybe rates fixed for investors, and a fixed declared rate for RS, with the balance going into a provision pot, which can pay dividends when surpluses are there. Will be interesting if they do try to change or do try to hang on
|
|
robski
Member of DD Central
Posts: 772
Likes: 462
|
Post by robski on Jun 19, 2020 10:19:40 GMT
The Access queue is far bigger than the others, that's probably why it appears to be moving more slowly. When the world has returned to normal economic conditions I think RS should take a hard look at the way their products operate and make changes to ensure that this sort of liquidity problem can never happen again. I don't see any future for 'Access' type accounts in P2P as consumer confidence in them has vanished. Maybe they should just offer fixed term products in future? That's assuming Metro Bank even want to continue to accept retail lenders - they may decide to go down the institutional route instead. Agree, the so called 'Access' account should only have contained loan contracts for a maximum of 12 months in my opinion, as it's turned out to be a contradiction in terms! In normal times it did operate as access though, in unusual times its not, but that should have been fully expected by anyone who thought about what they were investing in I wonder how many who dumped all their money, or lots of, into access and also declared themselves a sophisticated lender are now complaining its pretty il-liquid right now
|
|
gg
Posts: 83
Likes: 61
|
Post by gg on Jun 19, 2020 10:26:06 GMT
People say it’s been discussed many times but I must have missed it.
My view was that it is easier to sell loans with higher rates than those with lower rates. Hence, the 5 year market loans are more attractive than those at 3%. But this was view was shot down without an explanation as to why.
So, what is the reason that the 5 year market’s RYIs are releasing faster than the Access market’s RYIs?
gg
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Jun 19, 2020 10:36:04 GMT
People say it’s been discussed many times but I must have missed it. My view was that it is easier to sell loans with higher rates than those with lower rates. Hence, the 5 year market loans are more attractive than those at 3%. But this was view was shot down without an explanation as to why. So, what is the reason that the 5 year market’s RYIs are releasing faster than the Access market’s RYIs? gg I tend to agree, I must have missed this conclusive debate. As far as I can see, whilst still obeying chronological release order within respective queues, the 5-yr and 1-yr are being handled much more quickly. The higher rate of debt and juicy release fees seem obvious reasons as to why this would be the case. edit: This said, we don't have enough data to really tell us. I the access requests are gigantic in comparison then it could just be giving the appearance of preference. Still, I'm somewhat sceptical that the relative speeds are coincidence.
|
|
one21
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 265
|
Post by one21 on Jun 19, 2020 10:44:10 GMT
Agree, the so called 'Access' account should only have contained loan contracts for a maximum of 12 months in my opinion, as it's turned out to be a contradiction in terms! In normal times it did operate as access though, in unusual times its not, but that should have been fully expected by anyone who thought about what they were investing in I wonder how many who dumped all their money, or lots of, into access and also declared themselves a sophisticated lender are now complaining its pretty il-liquid right now P2P is a relatively new concept compared with traditional savings and investments and many investors were not sophisticated, they were lured in due to the derisory rates being offered by traditional institutions. P2P platforms must have been aware of this and many took advantage of the fact. (imho)
|
|
robski
Member of DD Central
Posts: 772
Likes: 462
|
Post by robski on Jun 19, 2020 10:56:23 GMT
People say it’s been discussed many times but I must have missed it. My view was that it is easier to sell loans with higher rates than those with lower rates. Hence, the 5 year market loans are more attractive than those at 3%. But this was view was shot down without an explanation as to why. So, what is the reason that the 5 year market’s RYIs are releasing faster than the Access market’s RYIs? gg Because the markets are separate Your naturally going to have the more flighty members in access so the proportion in that is likely to be higher who are wanting out RS also say the markets operate separately And if you log on you can see the funds available within each
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Jun 19, 2020 11:04:08 GMT
People say it’s been discussed many times but I must have missed it. My view was that it is easier to sell loans with higher rates than those with lower rates. Hence, the 5 year market loans are more attractive than those at 3%. But this was view was shot down without an explanation as to why. So, what is the reason that the 5 year market’s RYIs are releasing faster than the Access market’s RYIs? gg Because the markets are separate Your naturally going to have the more flighty members in access so the proportion in that is likely to be higher who are wanting out RS also say the markets operate separately And if you log on you can see the funds available within each I don't think that really answers it definitively to be honest, there's no proof there. Just because markets are separate doesn't mean RS aren't prioritising one over the other. Just because they operate separately at our level doesn't mean RS don't have latitude to direct RYI's at one over the other. You might be right, of course, I don't think we can really know for sure. Unless RS have definitively stated somewhere that it's totally equally treated.
|
|
robski
Member of DD Central
Posts: 772
Likes: 462
|
Post by robski on Jun 19, 2020 11:45:21 GMT
Because the markets are separate Your naturally going to have the more flighty members in access so the proportion in that is likely to be higher who are wanting out RS also say the markets operate separately And if you log on you can see the funds available within each I don't think that really answers it definitively to be honest, there's no proof there. Just because markets are separate doesn't mean RS aren't prioritising one over the other. Just because they operate separately at our level doesn't mean RS don't have latitude to direct RYI's at one over the other. You might be right, of course, I don't think we can really know for sure. Unless RS have definitively stated somewhere that it's totally equally treated. True but look at available funds its clear they are not ignoring one or any I suspect each has a rate they wont go over, could the rate the are releasing back or some other level I agree its not definative, I dont think anyoe has said tehre is But all balance of likelyhood is they are, and the contra point they are prioritising fee paying seems to have no evidence at all
|
|