Steerpike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,977 
Likes: 1,687
|
Post by Steerpike on Oct 1, 2020 12:27:31 GMT
And lest we forget, AC does have another significant grouping from among the public that have their own agenda - shareholders. I do wonder how many of the most rabid 'cheerleaders' fall into this category. Their motivations will differ significantly from those of pure lenders. My investment in AC as a lender is approximately 30 times the value of my shareholding, my motivation as an investor is not affected by the comparatively small value of my shares and I suspect that the same applies to most retail investors/shareholders. I do want AC to be profitable and succeed, primarily because I have experienced the negative impact on my investments when a platform fails.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuartassetzcapital on Oct 1, 2020 12:28:32 GMT
Assetz Capital taking no pain, but lenders are. What's this about no fee income ? A few points to think about 1) £70m CBILS expected to double to £ 140m. Fee 3%. Fixed Income £4.2m. Would new ordinary loans have pulled in any more ? 2) £750m loans with monitoring fee 0.25% per month or 3% pa. Income £22.5m pa 3) Lender fee £750m @ 0.9% pa. £6.75m pa bunce 4) Originally at the outset. Furloughed staff. Costs substantially reduced. Wages cut. 5) They are making a profit. As we’ve said we have had pain but positive results. Exactly the same as for lenders, and indeed many borrowers that we have supported. Fees in CBILS are lower than normal and required to be so. That monitoring fee sounds great but unfortunately nowhere at all near what we actually get, I wish! We have a c £380m loan book at present not £750m, that may be next year. But your version of the company sounds very profitable indeed but we wouldn’t have many borrowers nor investors if we took those fees so I guess our loan book would be rather small to non existent making the percentages a bit of theoretical point only. If we deliver value to everyone we will make a profit and the better the value the better we will require our profits to be. All in balance.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Oct 1, 2020 12:30:38 GMT
stuartassetzcapitalIt was the irrational behaviour of lenders using the QAA as a bank account that caused the biggest problem for AC, despite all the warnings. Now MLA investors are paying a much higher fee than the QAA lenders. Eg, MLA investors in 5% loans are losing 18% of their income. For QAA lenders it's only 8.5%. When will you redress the imbalance? Irrational behaviour of lenders is totally unfair - the Access were marketed at term accounts ... (yes there’s the T&Cs etc) but they were completely dressed up to appear as bank accounts.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 1, 2020 12:39:12 GMT
Assetz Capital taking no pain, but lenders are. What's this about no fee income ? A few points to think about 1) £70m CBILS expected to double to £ 140m. Fee 3%. Fixed Income £4.2m. Would new ordinary loans have pulled in any more ? 2) £750m loans with monitoring fee 0.25% per month or 3% pa. Income £22.5m pa 3) Lender fee £750m @ 0.9% pa. £6.75m pa bunce 4) Originally at the outset. Furloughed staff. Costs substantially reduced. Wages cut. 5) They are making a profit. As we’ve said we have had pain but positive results. Exactly the same as for lenders, and indeed many borrowers that we have supported. Fees in CBILS are lower than normal and required to be so. That monitoring fee sounds great but unfortunately nowhere at all near what we actually get, I wish! We have a c £380m loan book at present not £750m, that may be next year. But your version of the company sounds very profitable indeed but we wouldn’t have many borrowers nor investors if we took those fees so I guess our loan book would be rather small to non existent making the percentages a bit of theoretical point only. If we deliver value to everyone we will make a profit and the better the value the better we will require our profits to be. All in balance. 1) £70m CBILS expected to double to £ 140m in 7 months. Fee 2.5%%. Fixed Income £3.5m. 2) Would new ordinary loans have pulled in (the equivalent of £240m pa) any more under ordinary circumstances ? 2) £380m loans with monitoring fee 0.25% per month or 3% pa. Income £11.4m pa 2a) £140m CBILS loans with monitoring fee 0.25% per month or 3% pa. Income £4.2m pa 3) Lender fee £380m @ 0.9% pa. £3.61m pa bunce 4) Originally at the outset. Furloughed staff. Costs substantially reduced. Wages cut. 5) To early September when you say you were making a profit, lender fees were £380m x 4 momths x 0.9%. £1.2m 6) How much of the lender fees contribute towards your profit ?
|
|
Mikeme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 428
Likes: 331
|
Post by Mikeme on Oct 1, 2020 12:42:00 GMT
stuartassetzcapital It was the irrational behaviour of lenders using the QAA as a bank account that caused the biggest problem for AC, despite all the warnings. Now MLA investors are paying a much higher fee than the QAA lenders. Eg, MLA investors in 5% loans are losing 18% of their income. For QAA lenders it's only 8.5%. When will you redress the imbalance? Irrational behaviour of lenders is totally unfair - the Access were marketed at term accounts ... (yes there’s the T&Cs etc) but they were completely dressed up to appear as bank accounts. Long time since I bothered to comment on your constant criticism of both AC and individuals but IN NORMAL MARKET CONDITIONS was clear for all. You know it but ignore FACTS. Baa humbug
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 1, 2020 12:47:21 GMT
Some lenders into the Access Accounts knew the risks of liquidity very well, and balanced that against the good returns. When Covid was approaching and when it hit, were they irrational in trying to get their cash out? My point is that it was Covid that caused run on the Access accounts, and the reasons for being invested were second-order factors. If you believe that you are going to be trapped - you get out.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuartassetzcapital on Oct 1, 2020 13:08:32 GMT
As we’ve said we have had pain but positive results. Exactly the same as for lenders, and indeed many borrowers that we have supported. Fees in CBILS are lower than normal and required to be so. That monitoring fee sounds great but unfortunately nowhere at all near what we actually get, I wish! We have a c £380m loan book at present not £750m, that may be next year. But your version of the company sounds very profitable indeed but we wouldn’t have many borrowers nor investors if we took those fees so I guess our loan book would be rather small to non existent making the percentages a bit of theoretical point only. If we deliver value to everyone we will make a profit and the better the value the better we will require our profits to be. All in balance. 1) £70m CBILS expected to double to £ 140m. Fee 2.5%%. Fixed Income £3.5m. 2) Would new ordinary loans have pulled in any more under ordinary circumstances ? 2) £380m loans with monitoring fee 0.25% per month or 3% pa. Income £11.4m pa 2a) £140m CBILS loans with monitoring fee 0.25% per month or 3% pa. Income £4.2m pa 3) Lender fee £380m @ 0.9% pa. £3.61m pa bunce 4) Originally at the outset. Furloughed staff. Costs substantially reduced. Wages cut. 5) To early September when you say you were making a profit, lender fees were £380m x 4 momths x 0.9%. £1.2m 6) How much of the lender fees contribute towards your profit ? 1) £70m CBILS expected to double to £ 140m. Fee 2.5%%. Fixed Income £3.5m. A bit less but similar yes 2) Would new ordinary loans have pulled in any more under ordinary circumstances ? ordinary loans would have been higher 2) £380m loans with monitoring fee 0.25% per month or 3% pa. Income £11.4m pa Monitoring fees are way lower than that - we only take about 1% pa 2a) £140m CBILS loans with monitoring fee 0.25% per month or 3% pa. Income £4.2m pa Ditto 3) Lender fee £380m @ 0.9% pa. £3.61m pa bunce Not all the book attracts the lender fee as we have said. So lower than that as for example we only get paid if you do on each loan. 4) Originally at the outset. Furloughed staff. Costs substantially reduced. Wages cut. Correct 5) To early September when you say you were making a profit, lender fees were £380m x 4 momths x 0.9%. £1.2m As above, lower and not much per month. 6) How much of the lender fees contribute towards your profit ? They don't they just help cover a little overhead. Our latest full company accounts are with Companies House around now and it's all there to see the numbers and overheads. We think that versus pretty much all other companies in our sector they will be comfortingly solid and the changes put in place recently are to make sure they stay so for the benefit of all of us.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 1, 2020 13:15:32 GMT
Would you still be making a profit without the £1.2m lender fee to date ?
|
|
|
|
Post by stuartassetzcapital on Oct 1, 2020 13:36:37 GMT
Would you still be making a profit without the £1.2m lender fee to date ? No. We entirely ceased new lending in March and have set things like the lender fee at a level to achieve break even only over the 6 main months of covid impact (for us, not suggesting other business have potentially recovered so quickly). The profits we refer to are what are in the pipeline if we deliver strongly in the coming months before year end. That is something likely to only start showing in Q1 next year but we will see it coming beforehand. All our changes have been on a prudent basis for the benefit of all in the bigger picture.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 1, 2020 13:40:32 GMT
Would you still be making a profit without the £1.2m lender fee to date ? No. We entirely ceased new lending in March and have set things like the lender fee at a level to achieve break even only over the 6 main months of covid impact (for us, not suggesting other business have potentially recovered so quickly). The profits we refer to are what are in the pipeline if we deliver strongly in the coming months before year end. That is something likely to only start showing in Q1 next year but we will see it coming beforehand. All our changes have been on a prudent basis for the benefit of all in the bigger picture.
So when I said Assetz Capital are not taking any pain, but lenders are, I was right.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuartassetzcapital on Oct 1, 2020 13:43:46 GMT
No. We entirely ceased new lending in March and have set things like the lender fee at a level to achieve break even only over the 6 main months of covid impact (for us, not suggesting other business have potentially recovered so quickly). The profits we refer to are what are in the pipeline if we deliver strongly in the coming months before year end. That is something likely to only start showing in Q1 next year but we will see it coming beforehand. All our changes have been on a prudent basis for the benefit of all in the bigger picture.
So when I said Assetz Capital are not taking any pain, but lenders are, I was right. I don't think anyone would say that at all - at least our lenders are making profits, albeit a bit reduced whereas we have had a 6 month breakeven and reduced salaries for some and rather an excessive work level to boot. No-one complaining but the opposite of no pain and the other way around to what you are suggesting if we are being fair about it.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 1, 2020 13:49:52 GMT
'have set things like the lender fee at a level to achieve break even'
So when I said Assetz Capital are not taking any pain, but lenders are, I was right. I don't think anyone would say that at all - at least our lenders are making profits, albeit a bit reduced whereas we have had a 6 month breakeven and reduced salaries for some and rather an excessive work level to boot. No-one complaining but the opposite of no pain and the other way around to what you are suggesting if we are being fair about it. Have you considered, when your profits start to increase, paying back all the fees you have charged to date, as a thank you for lender support. Take the fee as a loan to help you through hard times & pay us back when profits increase in good times.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Oct 1, 2020 13:57:59 GMT
The range of fees are on the website. There are details on individual loans and summary information (see below for an example from the access accounts) for everyone to see. It is not hidden.
As an example the recent new 12month loan had an arrangement fee of 2.5%,monitoring fee of 3% and exit fee of 0.5%, taken from the credit report.
There are also enhanced monitoring fees on some forbearance loans which in some cases are several times higher than the normal monitoring fees.
-----
Assetz Capital Fees charged to borrowers
Notes:
There are no formal upper or lower limits to the fees Assetz Capital charges to borrowers for arranging and managing a loan, but the current range of fees at origination for different fee types are shown here. Assetz Capital may earn additional monitoring fees if the loan defaults.
Arrangement fee (net of broker fees) - % of loan facility 0 % to 7.5 %
Monitoring fees paid to Assetz Capital - % per annum based on loan outstanding 0 % to 5.5 %
Exit fees - % of loan facility 0 % to 2 %
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 1, 2020 14:05:45 GMT
The range of fees are on the website. There are details on individual loans and summary information (see below for an example from the access accounts) for everyone to see. It is not hidden. As an example the recent new 12month loan had an arrangement fee of 2.5%,monitoring fee of 3% and exit fee of 0.5%, taken from the credit report. There are also enhanced monitoring fees on some forbearance loans which in some cases are several times higher than the normal monitoring fees. ----- Assetz Capital Fees charged to borrowers Notes: There are no formal upper or lower limits to the fees Assetz Capital charges to borrowers for arranging and managing a loan, but the current range of fees at origination for different fee types are shown here. Assetz Capital may earn additional monitoring fees if the loan defaults. Arrangement fee (net of broker fees) - % of loan facility 0 % to 7.5 % Monitoring fees paid to Assetz Capital - % per annum based on loan outstanding 0 % to 5.5 % Exit fees - % of loan facility 0 % to 2 % So my figures were nearer the mark !
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Oct 1, 2020 14:15:18 GMT
The range of fees are on the website. There are details on individual loans and summary information (see below for an example from the access accounts) for everyone to see. It is not hidden. As an example the recent new 12month loan had an arrangement fee of 2.5%,monitoring fee of 3% and exit fee of 0.5%, taken from the credit report. There are also enhanced monitoring fees on some forbearance loans which in some cases are several times higher than the normal monitoring fees. ----- Assetz Capital Fees charged to borrowers Notes: There are no formal upper or lower limits to the fees Assetz Capital charges to borrowers for arranging and managing a loan, but the current range of fees at origination for different fee types are shown here. Assetz Capital may earn additional monitoring fees if the loan defaults. Arrangement fee (net of broker fees) - % of loan facility 0 % to 7.5 % Monitoring fees paid to Assetz Capital - % per annum based on loan outstanding 0 % to 5.5 % Exit fees - % of loan facility 0 % to 2 % So my figures were nearer the mark ! To be fair I think Stuart would have been writing about averages. I have no idea what they are, you would have to ask or check yourself. My post was simply to highlight what information AC already provide.
|
|
