|
|
Post by peertopier on Jun 25, 2020 23:54:13 GMT
Hi there, your update from 4 May said the platform would reopen to new investors within a week or two yet here we are almost 2 months on and it's still closed. Do you have an update as to when it will reopen? A bit of transparency would be appreciated. Regards, Romain
Hi there, thank you for your message. Unfortunately this is taking a little longer than we expected, but we have been working on this and hope to be able to reopen to new investor registrations again soon.
From
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Jun 26, 2020 9:23:07 GMT
I dont think we can blame them for everything. It would be pretty likely Metro is holding this up. It could also be the FCA keeping the door locked. RS would not simply reject fresh funds in. There will be a reason it is likely they can not disclose it.
|
|
|
|
Post by diversifier on Jun 26, 2020 9:59:04 GMT
Much as it might seem to be in my / our interest, it would be really stupid for RS to reopen to new investors now. It would just emphasise the lack of willing new investors for their offering, which would then compromise their other options.
Apart from anything else, Zopa has just launched Z bank (!), offering 1.6% for 5yr fixed term, 1.5% yr, *FSCS backed*.
Compared to RS’s only remaining offering, which is 1.5%, effectively 3-5 years depending on how you count it (being generous for the sake of this post), without either interest or capital guarantee.
It’s really not a hard choice. Z have clearly chosen their rates carefully.
It would be pointless ever competing against banks at same rates. We can guess RS can’t really reopen until its rates go back to 3%, earliest end of the year.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Jun 26, 2020 10:01:53 GMT
I dont think we can blame them for everything. It would be pretty likely Metro is holding this up. It could also be the FCA keeping the door locked. RS would not simply reject fresh funds in. There will be a reason it is likely they can not disclose it. My best guess is that this is almost certainly related to RS getting FCA approval (not sure how (in)formal such approval would be) for their new Appropriateness Test. The FCA probably isn't a massive fan of how RS is displaying its interest rates right now* and I wouldn't be surprised if there is a fair bit of back-and-forth on how RS can adequately assure that new investors understand what's going on. Personally, it would surprise me if Metro Bank had anything much to do with this, but there we go. *Edit: And, as puddleduck rightly points out below, likely has concerns re the current (lack of) ability to withdraw from the platform.
|
|
|
|
Post by diversifier on Jun 26, 2020 10:03:51 GMT
I dont think we can blame them for everything. It would be pretty likely Metro is holding this up. It could also be the FCA keeping the door locked. RS would not simply reject fresh funds in. There will be a reason it is likely they can not disclose it. RS wouldn’t reject fresh funds. But they couldn’t accept opening their doors, no fresh funds arriving, and that fact being publically visible (unlike in a bank), because the investing volumes are visible. That would make them unbuyable by anybody who wanted it as a going concern, which in turn reduces the transaction market value to Metro.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Jun 26, 2020 10:08:35 GMT
I dont think we can blame them for everything. It would be pretty likely Metro is holding this up. It could also be the FCA keeping the door locked. RS would not simply reject fresh funds in. There will be a reason it is likely they can not disclose it. RS wouldn’t reject fresh funds. But they couldn’t accept opening their doors, no fresh funds arriving, and that fact being publically visible (unlike in a bank), because the investing volumes are visible. That would make them unbuyable by anybody who wanted it as a going concern, which in turn reduces the transaction market value to Metro. I'm not sure I understand this logic (nor your previous post). Businesses don't like uncertainty. If a buyer did potentially want RS as a going concern (maintaining a retail offering), I don't think just gambling as to whether new investors might want to join RS would be much more attractive than seeing them re-open and not many joining. I mean, these people aren't stupid. They're not going to look at the current situation and say "oh I'm sure it's fine" only to have this impression destroyed by RS struggling to attract new investors.
|
|
|
|
Post by shanghaiscouse on Jun 26, 2020 12:01:33 GMT
3 possibilities or a combo:
1. Not taking on new investors at the moment improves their attractiveness, or more accurately avoids a spot appearing on the end of your nose just when you are about to go on a blind date. By stopping taking on new investors, it is impossible for Metro to see what impact the interest rate cut has had on new investment
2. FCA challenging them on how they present interest rates, etc
3. With no new capital coming in, directors advised they need to consider their responsibilities and if there is a possibility of insolvency they need to be very careful about taking on new business if they can expect the company will not be trading in future
None of them good. I can't think of a single positive reason.
|
|
puddleduck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 537
Likes: 489
|
Post by puddleduck on Jun 26, 2020 12:08:28 GMT
3 possibilities or a combo: 1. Not taking on new investors at the moment improves their attractiveness, or more accurately avoids a spot appearing on the end of your nose just when you are about to go on a blind date. By stopping taking on new investors, it is impossible for Metro to see what impact the interest rate cut has had on new investment 2. FCA challenging them on how they present interest rates, etc 3. With no new capital coming in, directors advised they need to consider their responsibilities and if there is a possibility of insolvency they need to be very careful about taking on new business if they can expect the company will not be trading in future None of them good. I can't think of a single positive reason. I think you are overthinking this. I suspect the reason is that currently, if you put money in, you can't get it out. I'd be surprised if the reason for stopping new investors was anything more than that.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Jun 26, 2020 12:11:46 GMT
3 possibilities or a combo: 1. Not taking on new investors at the moment improves their attractiveness, or more accurately avoids a spot appearing on the end of your nose just when you are about to go on a blind date. By stopping taking on new investors, it is impossible for Metro to see what impact the interest rate cut has had on new investment 2. FCA challenging them on how they present interest rates, etc 3. With no new capital coming in, directors advised they need to consider their responsibilities and if there is a possibility of insolvency they need to be very careful about taking on new business if they can expect the company will not be trading in future None of them good. I can't think of a single positive reason. I think you are overthinking this. I suspect the reason is that currently, if you put money in, you can't get it out. I'd be surprised if the reason for stopping new investors was anything more than that. Quite (although I think the cut interest rates issue is also relevant given how they're displayed). RS have said themselves that this is a regulatory issue regarding their Appropriateness Test. Of course we aren't always told of the full story in such matters, but this one really does seem quite logical so, unless anyone has information to the contrary, I'm inclined to believe them.
|
|
|
|
Post by shanghaiscouse on Jun 26, 2020 12:20:59 GMT
3 possibilities or a combo: 1. Not taking on new investors at the moment improves their attractiveness, or more accurately avoids a spot appearing on the end of your nose just when you are about to go on a blind date. By stopping taking on new investors, it is impossible for Metro to see what impact the interest rate cut has had on new investment 2. FCA challenging them on how they present interest rates, etc 3. With no new capital coming in, directors advised they need to consider their responsibilities and if there is a possibility of insolvency they need to be very careful about taking on new business if they can expect the company will not be trading in future None of them good. I can't think of a single positive reason. I think you are overthinking this. I suspect the reason is that currently, if you put money in, you can't get it out. I'd be surprised if the reason for stopping new investors was anything more than that. Could well be true. In fact, most likely.
|
|
starfished
Member of DD Central
Posts: 296 
Likes: 216
|
Post by starfished on Jun 26, 2020 12:32:25 GMT
Are RS and LW (lending works) the only two p2p to have reduced "historic" interest rates and also closed to new lenders (not new money)?
New lenders means onboarding costs, money laundering checks, etc and I just assumed such staff/activity had been put on the ice to keep costs dow. Then add in the whole conduct risk of how do you communicate the reduction to someone new, it seemed easier for them not to accept new members but I might just be naive. I have not RYI'd and I do still have money in RS albeit they don't want it.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Jun 26, 2020 12:38:50 GMT
Are RS and LW (lending works) the only two p2p to have reduced "historic" interest rates and also closed to new lenders (not new money)? New lenders means onboarding costs, money laundering checks, etc and I just assumed such staff/activity had been put on the ice to keep costs dow. Then add in the whole conduct risk of how do you communicate the reduction to someone new, it seemed easier for them not to accept new members but I might just be naive. I have not RYI'd and I do still have money in RS albeit they don't want it. LW is literally paying zero interest and has entirely suspended the ability to withdraw before the loan is repaid. There is no way possible they could hope to have taken on new investors in those circumstances, even if anyone was idiotic enough to 'invest' in something paying them zero interest...! RS is nowhere near that extreme so, my assumption is, it's more about providing sufficient comfort that any new investors understand the new changes (hence the relevance of the Appropriateness Test).
|
|
gg
Posts: 83 
Likes: 61
|
Post by gg on Jun 26, 2020 12:49:26 GMT
I’ve really enjoyed P2P up to now. I really hope that it survives. However, it really needs to enjoy ‘some’ FSCS protection if it is to get through this immediate crisis.
Maybe not the full £85k and maybe not in all markets. But Access could be a contender and perhaps, if 80% of your capital up to £85k was covered, perhaps investors would return.
The Government needs to think differently. The big banks are not the answer.
gg
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Jun 26, 2020 12:55:20 GMT
I’ve really enjoyed P2P up to now. I really hope that it survives. However, it really needs to enjoy ‘some’ FSCS protection if it is to get through this immediate crisis. Maybe not the full £85k and maybe not in all markets. But Access could be a contender and perhaps, if 80% of your capital up to £85k was covered, perhaps investors would return. The Government needs to think differently. The big banks are not the answer. gg As has been said by several others on this forum, there is absolutely no way the government would give FSCS protection to any form of investment product; and nor should it. It would set a bizarre precedent.
|
|
bt
Sir Bufton Tufton, Jean Paul Sartre Zippy, Bungle, Jeffrey Archer Andre Previn and the LSO Hello
Posts: 129
Likes: 53
|
Post by bt on Jun 26, 2020 13:24:07 GMT
I suspect the reason is that currently, if you put money in, you can't get it out. You could. When someone else invested. And there would be a queue of those doing the same. Would sound pretty pyramidy to me!
|
|
