acorn
Posts: 118
Likes: 23
|
Post by acorn on Jan 10, 2015 12:48:41 GMT
I think I saw on a thread somewhere that the UW's had a voluntary agreement to retain only 30-35% of their holdings though I don't know if this agreement is still active.
Perhaps someone better at searches than I am can find it....
Edit: After seeing bg's post below, I suspect I may have seen something regarding the total % of a particular loan held by U/Ws.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,808 
Likes: 3,242
|
Post by jonno on Jan 10, 2015 13:54:28 GMT
chris; can you remind me as to whether there will be some form of notification either to "target setters" or more generally, when drawdown is imminent?
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Jan 10, 2015 14:39:59 GMT
Surely that depends on whether the loan is going to be in high demand relative to its size and how quickly the underwriters exit. I expect this one will be hard to get. It also depends on how much you are prepared to invest, on a loan like this I would have been looking at between £1k and £5k (though I haven't dug deeply as I am withdrawing from the platform so I may not have bid) and with shadow bid I would probably have got that type of investment. However even with £5k standing idle in my MLIA it is highly unlikely that I would get that size of investment, more likely given the way the system shares out loans and even with the UW placing the whole loan on the market in one go an individual share is going to be a sub £100 share. For this loan 25% has been retained by underwriters (meaning they can sell down when they wish after drawdown). The remaining 75% will hit the market on drawdown and will be split evenly between the bidders. I imagine if you have a bid in (and the cash in your account on drawdown) you would be allocated in the region of £3k.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 10, 2015 18:16:49 GMT
It also depends on how much you are prepared to invest, on a loan like this I would have been looking at between £1k and £5k (though I haven't dug deeply as I am withdrawing from the platform so I may not have bid) and with shadow bid I would probably have got that type of investment. However even with £5k standing idle in my MLIA it is highly unlikely that I would get that size of investment, more likely given the way the system shares out loans and even with the UW placing the whole loan on the market in one go an individual share is going to be a sub £100 share. For this loan 25% has been retained by underwriters (meaning they can sell down when they wish after drawdown). The remaining 75% will hit the market on drawdown and will be split evenly between the bidders. I imagine if you have a bid in (and the cash in your account on drawdown) you would be allocated in the region of £3k. 's suggested outcome seems a lot more likely to me than batchoy's. For the result to be sub-£100 shares there would need to be 1000 lenders with targets set and money available and I don't get the feeling AC have that many lenders eager to invest further. (But that feeling is based on no facts at all!  ) My own guess would be that the loan would be spread around with the largest holdings being in the £1-2k range. (But again, that's based on nothing.)
|
|
|
|
Post by batchoy on Jan 10, 2015 18:44:16 GMT
For this loan 25% has been retained by underwriters (meaning they can sell down when they wish after drawdown). The remaining 75% will hit the market on drawdown and will be split evenly between the bidders. I imagine if you have a bid in (and the cash in your account on drawdown) you would be allocated in the region of £3k. 's suggested outcome seems a lot more likely to me than batchoy's. For the result to be sub-£100 shares there would need to be 1000 lenders with targets set and money available and I don't get the feeling AC have that many lenders eager to invest further. (But that feeling is based on no facts at all! ) My own guess would be that the loan would be spread around with the largest holdings being in the £1-2k range. (But again, that's based on nothing.) The AC website states that they have over 6700 lenders. If UWs release 75% then that's £67,500 available to regular lenders which equates to £10 each to 6750 lenders or £100 each to 675 lenders which makes sub £100 allocations quite probable.
|
|
j
Member of DD Central
Penguins are very misunderstood!
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 540
|
Post by j on Jan 10, 2015 19:46:25 GMT
tonyr & bg, thanks for the clarification.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Jan 10, 2015 19:59:41 GMT
tonyr & bg, thanks for the clarification. At first glance they seem to conflict, but on reading their contributions again there does seem to be a way of working, confusing but still it's a way.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jan 10, 2015 20:08:56 GMT
The AC website states that they have over 6700 lenders. If UWs release 75% then that's £67,500 available to regular lenders which equates to £10 each to 6750 lenders or £100 each to 675 lenders which makes sub £100 allocations quite probable. It seems to me that a very large proportion of those lenders will either: - not have set a target on that loan. - not be seeking as much as their "fair share" allocation. Further, it has been my experience that soon after a new loan has been disbursed, further units become frequently available - possibly including allocations made to people who were using it as a relatively short-term place to "park" some of their money. For myself, it seems highly unlikely I'll initially have my full desired exposure immediately available in cash. The system can and should buy up to the amount of cash I'll have available at that time (if it's less than my target), and will probably pick up odd extra amounts as and when further amounts become available.
|
|
tonyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 477
Likes: 258
|
Post by tonyr on Jan 10, 2015 21:42:49 GMT
tonyr & bg, thanks for the clarification. At first glance they seem to conflict, but on reading their contributions again there does seem to be a way of working, confusing but still it's a way. Well let us know if we can clarify. We both have access to the same information (except our respective bidding on this one). There's no "rules" as to what underwriters can disclose but of course we all want to be fair to all parties and maximise the worth to all of the AC platform so we probably have disclosed what we know coming from different perspectives. I should perhaps add that I'm 100% behind AC, that is all of my deposit account funds, all of my pension and all of my companies funds. And when the time comes it'll be all of my ISA. That doesn't mean I'm afraid to have a fight to stand up for my rights, just that I don't think that anyone else can beat the risk/reward/liquidity combination offered here.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 10, 2015 22:48:36 GMT
bg's suggested outcome seems a lot more likely to me than batchoy's. For the result to be sub-£100 shares there would need to be 1000 lenders with targets set and money available and I don't get the feeling AC have that many lenders eager to invest further. (But that feeling is based on no facts at all! ) My own guess would be that the loan would be spread around with the largest holdings being in the £1-2k range. (But again, that's based on nothing.) The AC website states that they have over 6700 lenders. If UWs release 75% then that's £67,500 available to regular lenders which equates to £10 each to 6750 lenders or £100 each to 675 lenders which makes sub £100 allocations quite probable. : Thanks for providing the logic behind your estimate. I hadn't realised that AC had that many lenders. Now that I do, I'll withdraw my suggestion and agree that yours probably is quite reasonable. I think I'll go set a target for this loan now and see what I buy when it draws down. PS. I wonder if AC count lenders the same way Zopa do. Their number only ever increases, and probably includes a lot of people who signed up so they could see the info available only to registered 'members' but never actually lent anything, and lots who lent in Zopa's early days but who don't any more. The longer this continues, the further from reality the number becomes. AC, of course, has a much shorter history, so their numbers should be more realistic at this stage of their development.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Jan 10, 2015 23:56:02 GMT
Perhaps I misremember mikes1531 but at the time of the lost of Go Cardless membership was around 5.5k, that was also around the time that 6000 letters were sent to lenders asking them to sign a form; I think it was about the change of client money a/c, perhaps someone would correct me if I'm wrong. That does seem quite a big jump in numbers to 6.5kmembers that we have now, I'm wondering if some of the new joiners are the guys who've deposited 500k+ into GEIA and are not as yet interested in MLIA. I wonder if a good few of the loans awaiting drawdown will happen at about the same time, leaving many lenders temporarily without cash to buy into the next drawdown. With all the anticipation and pent up demand the first drawn this year I guess, depending on size & U/Ws, will sell quickly. |
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 11, 2015 4:01:54 GMT
Perhaps I misremember mikes1531 but at the time of the lost of Go Cardless membership was around 5.5k, that was also around the time that 6000 letters were sent to lenders asking them to sign a form; I think it was about the change of client money a/c, perhaps someone would correct me if I'm wrong. That does seem quite a big jump in numbers to 6.5kmembers that we have now, I'm wondering if some of the new joiners are the guys who've deposited 500k+ into GEIA and are not as yet interested in MLIA. The email regarding the change of client money account went out in late August. The 6000 lenders quoted then no doubt was a round number, but to grow from 6000 to 6700 over four and a half months doesn't strike me as a "big jump". In that same period, Zopa's count of members increased by about 150k. Since that total is now about 1.5M, the Zopa and AC growth rates are quite similar. However, it's probably nonsense to try to compare those two sets of numbers, because most of Zopa's new members will be people who want to apply for a loan.
|
|
unmadem
Member of DD Central
Posts: 377
Likes: 181
|
Post by unmadem on Mar 9, 2015 17:22:05 GMT
update on this loan (151) that might delay drawdown further and possibly have other impacts.
|
|
|
|
Post by solicitorious on Mar 9, 2015 17:39:18 GMT
Perhaps I misremember mikes1531 but at the time of the lost of Go Cardless membership was around 5.5k, that was also around the time that 6000 letters were sent to lenders asking them to sign a form; I think it was about the change of client money a/c, perhaps someone would correct me if I'm wrong. That does seem quite a big jump in numbers to 6.5kmembers that we have now, I'm wondering if some of the new joiners are the guys who've deposited 500k+ into GEIA and are not as yet interested in MLIA. The email regarding the change of client money account went out in late August. The 6000 lenders quoted then no doubt was a round number, but to grow from 6000 to 6700 over four and a half months doesn't strike me as a "big jump". In that same period, Zopa's count of members increased by about 150k. Since that total is now about 1.5M, the Zopa and AC growth rates are quite similar. However, it's probably nonsense to try to compare those two sets of numbers, because most of Zopa's new members will be people who want to apply for a loan. I make that about 34% annualized growth in AC's lenders.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Mar 10, 2015 8:56:00 GMT
We have ~7,900 registered lenders. If another figure was quoted then that'll be a different metric to absolute registered users, perhaps those with current investments, active in the last x days, etc.
|
|
) My own guess would be that the loan would be spread around with the largest holdings being in the £1-2k range. (But again, that's based on nothing.)
