firedog
Member of DD Central
Posts: 367
Likes: 461
|
Post by firedog on Jul 28, 2023 9:14:39 GMT
I suppose one tactic might be to buy small chunks of loans now while you can – I expect they'll be in some demand in the SM after the changes. Yes, it was clear that some decided to do that yesterday as the majority of smaller chunks got hoovered up. Lots available again today. Presumably from smaller investors who have decided to sell up. We'll probably see this ebb and flow for a few days. Which is not a good thing for business, I don't think – if more of the buying and selling activity is taking place in the SM, all the less for the main market.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 28, 2023 10:01:09 GMT
Thanks for taking the time to explain this in great detail Ace. I should have known better thinking that you wouldn't have reported it! Such a shame the FCA are not actively policing this. You are absolutely right, I just thought the figure shown was the AER but having just re-checked the FAQ see that they call it the "gross annual interest equivalent rate" - are they just making up new terminology as they see fit! When I check the FAQ link - i can see the table on how they calculate this so called GAIER but as far as I understand AER is actually calculated per year and not over the whole term hence the inaccurate percentage figure shown and implied as yearly. (which I think is the point you are making) You can only achieve that percentage if you stay invested until the term ends and that figure cannot be compared with other platforms who quote the AER. (this IMO makes a big mockery of the FCA if they don't enforce these rules for all - AER is AER and should be calculated and presented in the same way) I am new to Kuflink but it's becoming clear to me that they are the masters of spin and sadly seem to lack transparency.
Yes, "gross annual interest equivalent rate" is a term created by Kuflink to describe their misleading headline rates. Outrageously, they previously used the term "Annual Equivalent Rate" to describe these misleading rates, and also abbreviated it to AER. In their final response to my FOS complaint they were still using that term and even had the audacity to state that this was a "Kuflink-defined term". This was the final straw that made me determined to follow the complaint through to the bitter end. As a small correction to your post: The generally accepted definition of AER and Kuflink's GAIER are both annualised measures. The problems with Kuflink's measure are that: - It misleads investors into believing that they will earn a higher return than they actually will (as you've illustrated that it did for you).
- It cant be used to compare Kuflink's rates with other savings and investments, because no-one else uses that measure.
- It can't be used in the same way that AER can to determine one expected returns.
If we take Kuflink's new 3 year term as an example (where they advertise a rate of 9.83%, but the true AER is 9.00%), and assuming no losses: If you used Kuflink's rate to calculate your total return on a £1,000 investment after 3 years in the same way that you would for a true AER, you would incorrectly assume that you would receive a total repayment of £1,324.83 (£1,000 * 1.0983 * 1.0983 * 1.0983), but you would axialactually receive £1,295.02 (£1,000 * 1.09 * 1.09 * 1.09). If you choose to select the annual interest option on this same investment, most people seeing a rate of 9.83% would naturally assume that they would receive £98.30 interest per year, but they would actually receive £90 per year, because the true AER is 9.00% not 9.83%. Hence my assertion that Kuflink's rates are misleading, and that they FCA are falling in their duty by allowing this. For clarity, I'm in no way suggesting that Kuflink's products are bad, or that their rates are bad. Just that their rates are misleading.
|
|
SteveK
Member of DD Central
Posts: 63
Likes: 33
|
Post by SteveK on Jul 28, 2023 13:20:20 GMT
Thanks for taking the time to explain this in great detail Ace. I should have known better thinking that you wouldn't have reported it! Such a shame the FCA are not actively policing this. You are absolutely right, I just thought the figure shown was the AER but having just re-checked the FAQ see that they call it the "gross annual interest equivalent rate" - are they just making up new terminology as they see fit! When I check the FAQ link - i can see the table on how they calculate this so called GAIER but as far as I understand AER is actually calculated per year and not over the whole term hence the inaccurate percentage figure shown and implied as yearly. (which I think is the point you are making) You can only achieve that percentage if you stay invested until the term ends and that figure cannot be compared with other platforms who quote the AER. (this IMO makes a big mockery of the FCA if they don't enforce these rules for all - AER is AER and should be calculated and presented in the same way) I am new to Kuflink but it's becoming clear to me that they are the masters of spin and sadly seem to lack transparency.
Yes, "gross annual interest equivalent rate" is a term created by Kuflink to describe their misleading headline rates. Outrageously, they previously used the term "Annual Equivalent Rate" to describe these misleading rates, and also abbreviated it to AER. In their final response to my FOS complaint they were still using that term and even had the audacity to state that this was a "Kuflink-defined term". This was the final straw that made me determined to follow the complaint through to the bitter end. As a small correction to your post: The generally accepted definition of AER and Kuflink's GAIER are both annualised measures. The problems with Kuflink's measure are that: - It misleads investors into believing that they will earn a higher return than they actually will (as you've illustrated that it did for you).
- It cant be used to compare Kuflink's rates with other savings and investments, because no-one else uses that measure.
- It can't be used in the same way that AER can to determine one expected returns.
If we take Kuflink's new 3 year term as an example (where they advertise a rate of 9.83%, but the true AER is 9.00%), and assuming no losses: If you used Kuflink's rate to calculate your total return on a £1,000 investment after 3 years in the same way that you would for a true AER, you would incorrectly assume that you would receive a total repayment of £1,324.83 (£1,000 * 1.0983 * 1.0983 * 1.0983), but you would axialactually receive £1,295.02 (£1,000 * 1.09 * 1.09 * 1.09). If you choose to select the annual interest option on this same investment, most people seeing a rate of 9.83% would naturally assume that they would receive £98.30 interest per year, but they would actually receive £90 per year, because the true AER is 9.00% not 9.83%. Hence my assertion that Kuflink's rates are misleading, and that they FCA are falling in their duty by allowing this. For clarity, I'm in no way suggesting that Kuflink's products are bad, or that their rates are bad. Just that their rates are misleading.
So, for your example Ace, the 3 year interest rate is 29.5%, divide this by 3 to get Kuflink's GAIER of 9.83%! Okay that is one way to look at it, but it does look like it's done to mislead as, it appears, it's not used anywhere else, and the comparison with AER is obvious. Okay maybe harsh to say Kuflink did it knowingly but once they realised that it was being mistaken for AER why not change it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 28, 2023 13:36:55 GMT
Yes, "gross annual interest equivalent rate" is a term created by Kuflink to describe their misleading headline rates. Outrageously, they previously used the term "Annual Equivalent Rate" to describe these misleading rates, and also abbreviated it to AER. In their final response to my FOS complaint they were still using that term and even had the audacity to state that this was a "Kuflink-defined term". This was the final straw that made me determined to follow the complaint through to the bitter end. As a small correction to your post: The generally accepted definition of AER and Kuflink's GAIER are both annualised measures. The problems with Kuflink's measure are that: - It misleads investors into believing that they will earn a higher return than they actually will (as you've illustrated that it did for you).
- It cant be used to compare Kuflink's rates with other savings and investments, because no-one else uses that measure.
- It can't be used in the same way that AER can to determine one expected returns.
If we take Kuflink's new 3 year term as an example (where they advertise a rate of 9.83%, but the true AER is 9.00%), and assuming no losses: If you used Kuflink's rate to calculate your total return on a £1,000 investment after 3 years in the same way that you would for a true AER, you would incorrectly assume that you would receive a total repayment of £1,324.83 (£1,000 * 1.0983 * 1.0983 * 1.0983), but you would axialactually receive £1,295.02 (£1,000 * 1.09 * 1.09 * 1.09). If you choose to select the annual interest option on this same investment, most people seeing a rate of 9.83% would naturally assume that they would receive £98.30 interest per year, but they would actually receive £90 per year, because the true AER is 9.00% not 9.83%. Hence my assertion that Kuflink's rates are misleading, and that they FCA are falling in their duty by allowing this. For clarity, I'm in no way suggesting that Kuflink's products are bad, or that their rates are bad. Just that their rates are misleading.
So, for your example Ace, the 3 year interest rate is 29.5%, divide this by 3 to get Kuflink's GAIER of 9.83%! Okay that is one way to look at it, but it does look like it's done to mislead as, it appears, it's not used anywhere else, and the comparison with AER is obvious. Okay maybe harsh to say Kuflink did it knowingly but once they realised that it was being mistaken for AER why not change it? Yes, that's how they calculate their rate. They used to use the correct AER rates, but changed to this new method and advertised a higher rate without actually raising their rates at all. This is what first drew my attention to it. I'm not saying that the rate isn't correct by their definition, it is. The problem is that it misleads a large proportion of their lenders. IMO the FCA should force them to display the true AER as the most prominent figure, as that's what we are all used to, so that lenders can fairly compare rates between platforms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 28, 2023 14:41:52 GMT
I'm going to take some time to consider my position with Kuflink. My instant reaction is to just pull out, but I like having Kuflink in my portfolio for diversification 🤔 It would mean that it would no longer make sense for me to select the monthly interest option, which I currently do to invest the £50ish monthly payment into a new loan for added diversification, but also gives me the option of withdrawing it if needed along with any capital repayments. I would now need to suffer around 10 months of cash drag until I'd built up sufficient interest to add a new loan. This is made worse by the half-arsed flexible ISA implementation. All in all this seems like another dumb rule change. I certainly feel their comment " At Kuflink, we continuously strive to improve our investment process and provide the best experience for our users. We are constantly reviewing the feedback we receive from our investors and make suitable changes where necessary." to be disingenuous. I can't believe any investor has ever asked them to raise the minimum investment. It seems odd that a platform that is already well set up to handle very small loan parts would decide to implement such a large rise in the minimum. Could it be more idiotic pressure from our esteemed regulator? It also makes a mockery of the new £1k minimum for first investments. They might just as well have a flat £500 minimum across the board, rather than bother to implement two different minimums. If I stay, the options are: - Select the option to compound monthly interest in the existing loans, so lowering my potential diversification.
- Use the auto products, which have decent rates right now. But, I don't like the fixed terms, and I don't like being forced to invest in the higher risk tiers. Perhaps creating a rolling set of these is worth considering.
- Accept the cash drag and lower diversification.
I'm not keen on any of these options...
I'm also wondering if this is the thin end of the wedge, with further rises to come. Having taken a couple of days to mull over whether to quit Kuflink, I've decided to stay. Kuflink are 1 of only 4 of the first 20 P2P platforms I invested with where I'm still actively investing. They've proven that they can provide a smooth and steady income for me over the past 5.5 years. Even without the cashbacks they've outperformed global S&S trackers over that time, which I wasn't expecting, and the returns have been way smother. They've earned their place in my portfolio (despite my gripes with them on other issues). I didn't like any of the options that I listed above, but it has come to light that the third option " Accept the cash drag and lower diversification." Won't be as bad as I thought. The bulk of my funds in Kuflink are in previous-year ISA funds. So, the news that the £500 minimum investment won't apply to these funds when there is less than £500 available means that I won't be forced to suffer cash drag. I also have some non-ISA funds on the platform, but I'd been generally removing those anyway to move the cash into ISAs. So, I'll continue to run those funds down. I won't be using the SM to liquidate these loans because I'm too tight to pay the fee, and there's nothing wrong with the loans. When I look at my expected repayment schedule, I'm due to receive more than £500 of capital and interest each month for the foreseeable future. So I'll be able to pick at least 1 new loan per month, and usually at least 2. I should also be able to invest much smaller amounts in many loans due to the previous-year ISA funds exception mentioned above. I'm expecting £3k+ of ISA funds back from my last PeaOne loan on ABLrate in Dec, which I had earmarked to transfer to Kuflink to compensate for my non-ISA withdrawals. I will probably still go ahead with this, but I've got a few months to see how things go before having to decide. I really do think that the £500 minimum is short sighted. It was the only platform I can think of where new lenders could learn the ropes of P2P self-select investing without committing larger sums. That must have convinced those wanting to give it a try to use Kuflink. Given that no-one has lost money with Kuflink, it will surely have resulted in many of them scaling up and becoming larger lenders. I know of quite a few examples of this. When I joined Kuflink they offered both me and my referrer £100 for my £200 investment. I thought this was crazy money at the time, but they will have made that back many times over from my subsequent investments. So, it might now be considered to have been a shrewd move. Although they vastly reduced the size of those rewards over time, they continued to be one of the most generous in this respect until the FCA called a halt to the practice. Having spent vast sums trying to attract small lenders it does seem madness to now be trying to get rid of them! Kuflink really are a bit of an enigma for me.
|
|
SteveK
Member of DD Central
Posts: 63
Likes: 33
|
Post by SteveK on Jul 28, 2023 14:50:30 GMT
So, for your example Ace, the 3 year interest rate is 29.5%, divide this by 3 to get Kuflink's GAIER of 9.83%! Okay that is one way to look at it, but it does look like it's done to mislead as, it appears, it's not used anywhere else, and the comparison with AER is obvious. Okay maybe harsh to say Kuflink did it knowingly but once they realised that it was being mistaken for AER why not change it? Yes, that's how they calculate their rate. They used to use the correct AER rates, but changed to this new method and advertised a higher rate without actually raising their rates at all. This is what first drew my attention to it. I'm not saying that the rate isn't correct by their definition, it is. The problem is that it misleads a large proportion of their lenders. IMO the FCA should force them to display the true AER as the most prominent figure, as that's what we are all used to, so that lenders can fairly compare rates between platforms. Do you think all at Kuflink are on board with this? Maybe the Kuflink optimist(s) have taken over, with all the half baked ideas shooting out from everywhere, the pessimists need to fight back and pull the optimist(s) back down to earth!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 28, 2023 15:20:15 GMT
Yes, that's how they calculate their rate. They used to use the correct AER rates, but changed to this new method and advertised a higher rate without actually raising their rates at all. This is what first drew my attention to it. I'm not saying that the rate isn't correct by their definition, it is. The problem is that it misleads a large proportion of their lenders. IMO the FCA should force them to display the true AER as the most prominent figure, as that's what we are all used to, so that lenders can fairly compare rates between platforms. Do you think all at Kuflink are on board with this? Maybe the Kuflink optimist(s) have taken over, with all the half baked ideas shooting out from everywhere, the pessimists need to fight back and pull the optimist(s) back down to earth! I would assume that it's been discussed at the top level given that it was referred to both the FOS and FCA.
|
|
|
|
Post by birdie on Jul 29, 2023 7:57:19 GMT
I'm still happy to stay with them for now, nearly all of my 76 loans are in £250 chunks so as they are ( eventually ) repaid I will just have to invest in a smaller amount of loans, my ISA with them is un-affected.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 29, 2023 17:01:52 GMT
I'm still happy to stay with them for now, nearly all of my 76 loans are in £250 chunks so as they are ( eventually ) repaid I will just have to invest in a smaller amount of loans, my ISA with them is un-affected. The only way I can see that your ISA could be unaffected is if it was only invested in auto loans in chunks of over £500. Perhaps you're referring to the FAQ that states that you will be able to invest in loans with less £500 when your previous year ISA wallet contains less than £500 cash. If that is the case you are still likely to be affected by it. E.g. if two of your £250 loans repay before you get the chance to reinvest the funds from the first, you will have to invest at least £500 in your next loan.
|
|
scooter
Member of DD Central
Posts: 403
Likes: 379
|
Post by scooter on Jul 29, 2023 17:29:09 GMT
Still don't understand why they have a previous years wallet. Perhaps they could add a question to the investor test. "can you as an investor keep a record of how much money you invest with us in the current tax year?" they must think we would all fail....
|
|
|
|
Post by birdie on Jul 30, 2023 7:02:29 GMT
I'm still happy to stay with them for now, nearly all of my 76 loans are in £250 chunks so as they are ( eventually ) repaid I will just have to invest in a smaller amount of loans, my ISA with them is un-affected. The only way I can see that your ISA could be unaffected is if it was only invested in auto loans in chunks of over £500. Perhaps you're referring to the FAQ that states that you will be able to invest in loans with less £500 when your previous year ISA wallet contains less than £500 cash. If that is the case you are still likely to be affected by it. E.g. if two of your £250 loans repay before you get the chance to reinvest the funds from the first, you will have to invest at least £500 in your next loan. I should have been clearer, my 1 year Auto IF-ISA is unaffected.
|
|
|
|
Post by frank121 on Jul 30, 2023 16:06:56 GMT
I'm going to take some time to consider my position with Kuflink. My instant reaction is to just pull out, but I like having Kuflink in my portfolio for diversification 🤔 It would mean that it would no longer make sense for me to select the monthly interest option, which I currently do to invest the £50ish monthly payment into a new loan for added diversification, but also gives me the option of withdrawing it if needed along with any capital repayments. I would now need to suffer around 10 months of cash drag until I'd built up sufficient interest to add a new loan. This is made worse by the half-arsed flexible ISA implementation. All in all this seems like another dumb rule change. I certainly feel their comment " At Kuflink, we continuously strive to improve our investment process and provide the best experience for our users. We are constantly reviewing the feedback we receive from our investors and make suitable changes where necessary." to be disingenuous. I can't believe any investor has ever asked them to raise the minimum investment. It seems odd that a platform that is already well set up to handle very small loan parts would decide to implement such a large rise in the minimum. Could it be more idiotic pressure from our esteemed regulator? It also makes a mockery of the new £1k minimum for first investments. They might just as well have a flat £500 minimum across the board, rather than bother to implement two different minimums. If I stay, the options are: - Select the option to compound monthly interest in the existing loans, so lowering my potential diversification.
- Use the auto products, which have decent rates right now. But, I don't like the fixed terms, and I don't like being forced to invest in the higher risk tiers. Perhaps creating a rolling set of these is worth considering.
- Accept the cash drag and lower diversification.
I'm not keen on any of these options...
I'm also wondering if this is the thin end of the wedge, with further rises to come. Having taken a couple of days to mull over whether to quit Kuflink, I've decided to stay. Kuflink are 1 of only 4 of the first 20 P2P platforms I invested with where I'm still actively investing. They've proven that they can provide a smooth and steady income for me over the past 5.5 years. Even without the cashbacks they've outperformed global S&S trackers over that time, which I wasn't expecting, and the returns have been way smother. They've earned their place in my portfolio (despite my gripes with them on other issues). I didn't like any of the options that I listed above, but it has come to light that the third option " Accept the cash drag and lower diversification." Won't be as bad as I thought. The bulk of my funds in Kuflink are in previous-year ISA funds. So, the news that the £500 minimum investment won't apply to these funds when there is less than £500 available means that I won't be forced to suffer cash drag. I also have some non-ISA funds on the platform, but I'd been generally removing those anyway to move the cash into ISAs. So, I'll continue to run those funds down. I won't be using the SM to liquidate these loans because I'm too tight to pay the fee, and there's nothing wrong with the loans. When I look at my expected repayment schedule, I'm due to receive more than £500 of capital and interest each month for the foreseeable future. So I'll be able to pick at least 1 new loan per month, and usually at least 2. I should also be able to invest much smaller amounts in many loans due to the previous-year ISA funds exception mentioned above. I'm expecting £3k+ of ISA funds back from my last PeaOne loan on ABLrate in Dec, which I had earmarked to transfer to Kuflink to compensate for my non-ISA withdrawals. I will probably still go ahead with this, but I've got a few months to see how things go before having to decide. I really do think that the £500 minimum is short sighted. It was the only platform I can think of where new lenders could learn the ropes of P2P self-select investing without committing larger sums. That must have convinced those wanting to give it a try to use Kuflink. Given that no-one has lost money with Kuflink, it will surely have resulted in many of them scaling up and becoming larger lenders. I know of quite a few examples of this. When I joined Kuflink they offered both me and my referrer £100 for my £200 investment. I thought this was crazy money at the time, but they will have made that back many times over from my subsequent investments. So, it might now be considered to have been a shrewd move. Although they vastly reduced the size of those rewards over time, they continued to be one of the most generous in this respect until the FCA called a halt to the practice. Having spent vast sums trying to attract small lenders it does seem madness to now be trying to get rid of them! Kuflink really are a bit of an enigma for me.
Hi Ace. Thanks for sharing your plan. Like you I am also not a fan of the fixed options; although with these forced minimums in the select market, it' the only way to diversify for the smaller investors. You make an interesting point about creating a rolling set; I had not considered this approach yet but it is something I already do in loan pad to achieve 30 days terms in their 60 day product. I guess it’s frequently used strategy and probally already used by many considering you can do it today for £100 per month.
I think it works like this:
12 monthly investments of £500 and then in month 13 – reinvest the £500 paid back from month 1. Repeat the cycle from month 14 – creating 30 day terms of £500. Something to ponder over; but I am losing the love with the Kuflink and all their jargon. We shall see. A couple of things that I didn't follow: - Did I miss the announcement that previous years ISA which are less than £500 won't be affected by this change? I honestly did just re-check the email and FAQ's but can't seem to find anything. That FAQ is some type of maze for me lol. - In your initial post above; you mentioned £50 a month in interest payments hence leading to a 10 month cash drag before you could invest £500 into a new loan. However in your latest post, you say it's around £500 a month. Did you just underestimate your figures the first time? If I follow your plan correctly; you are now thinking you will have enough funds each month to invest in 1-2 loans in the select ISA market. (current year) Does this mean you will accept the lower diversification which the £500 minimum creates? (assuming you wouldn't normally invest £500+ in a single loan) Perhaps it's an acceptable compromise over the Auto market where you can at least avoid the higher risk tiers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 30, 2023 16:52:47 GMT
Hi Ace. Thanks for sharing your plan. Like you I am also not a fan of the fixed options; although with these forced minimums in the select market, it' the only way to diversify for the smaller investors. You make an interesting point about creating a rolling set; I had not considered this approach yet but it is something I already do in loan pad to achieve 30 days terms in their 60 day product. I guess it’s frequently used strategy and probally already used by many considering you can do it today for £100 per month. I think it works like this: 12 monthly investments of £500 and then in month 13 – reinvest the £500 paid back from month 1. Repeat the cycle from month 14 – creating 30 day terms of £500. Something to ponder over; but I am losing the love with the Kuflink and all their jargon. We shall see. A couple of things that I didn't follow: - Did I miss the announcement that previous years ISA which are less than £500 won't be affected by this change? I honestly did just re-check the email and FAQ's but can't seem to find anything. That FAQ is some type of maze for me lol. Here's a link to the relevant FAQ: kb.kuflink.com/knowledge/what-if-the-money-in-my-wallet-is-currently-held-in-an-isa-previous-wrapper-that-i-cannot-top-upMy interest payments are currently around £50 per month, but my expected capital repayments are greater than £500 per month. I'll only have a previous-years ISA. I'm expecting over £500 per month of interest and capital in this wallet, so will make at least 2 new loans per month by reinvesting those funds (still within the previous-years ISA). I'll invest small amounts in as many new loans as possible (due to above FAQ), but I'll accept £500 chunks if necessary. Yes, I feel that this would be an acceptable compromise. Regarding the rolling auto investments (which I no longer think I need to use). If I did do them I would use the 3 year terms for higher interest. I would prefer to do one of those every 3 months than one per month in the 1-year term. But either would work. Just personal preference.
|
|
|
|
Post by frank121 on Jul 30, 2023 22:43:38 GMT
Hi Ace. Thanks for sharing your plan. Like you I am also not a fan of the fixed options; although with these forced minimums in the select market, it' the only way to diversify for the smaller investors. You make an interesting point about creating a rolling set; I had not considered this approach yet but it is something I already do in loan pad to achieve 30 days terms in their 60 day product. I guess it’s frequently used strategy and probally already used by many considering you can do it today for £100 per month. I think it works like this: 12 monthly investments of £500 and then in month 13 – reinvest the £500 paid back from month 1. Repeat the cycle from month 14 – creating 30 day terms of £500. Something to ponder over; but I am losing the love with the Kuflink and all their jargon. We shall see. A couple of things that I didn't follow: - Did I miss the announcement that previous years ISA which are less than £500 won't be affected by this change? I honestly did just re-check the email and FAQ's but can't seem to find anything. That FAQ is some type of maze for me lol. Here's a link to the relevant FAQ: kb.kuflink.com/knowledge/what-if-the-money-in-my-wallet-is-currently-held-in-an-isa-previous-wrapper-that-i-cannot-top-upMy interest payments are currently around £50 per month, but my expected capital repayments are greater than £500 per month. I'll only have a previous-years ISA. I'm expecting over £500 per month of interest and capital in this wallet, so will make at least 2 new loans per month by reinvesting those funds (still within the previous-years ISA). I'll invest small amounts in as many new loans as possible (due to above FAQ), but I'll accept £500 chunks if necessary. Yes, I feel that this would be an acceptable compromise. Regarding the rolling auto investments (which I no longer think I need to use). If I did do them I would use the 3 year terms for higher interest. I would prefer to do one of those every 3 months than one per month in the 1-year term. But either would work. Just personal preference. Thanks for clearing that up and sharing your strategy, all understood. It will certainly be very useful for me and others. (even if I don’t have any previous years wallets) I was in tears after you posted the faq link as I could not believe I could have missed yet another question! Your link indeed took me to the question but I still couldn’t find it myself even if I clicked on the highlighted “new minimum re-investment” section which was highlighted. Then eureka struck…there is a “more” link which reveals loads of extra questions! Honestly…what is the need to hide them!!!
I’ll have to think about what to do after the 21st; will have to possibly explore other platforms which is indeed time consuming and not something I was considering to do so soon after joining Kuflink.
Thanks for all your help.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,806 
Likes: 3,237
Member is Online
|
Post by jonno on Aug 1, 2023 9:58:42 GMT
I know it's a bit childish, but I've just had great fun spreading my monthly interest payment across available loans in very small investment chunks. I Know, I know.  |
|
