j
Member of DD Central
Penguins are very misunderstood!
Posts: 2,188 
Likes: 540
|
Post by j on Feb 12, 2015 21:36:56 GMT
The FCA have also tightened the rules (or is it enforced them?) on exactly who can invest. We now seem to have three categories Sophisticated investor, High Net Worth Investor and a restricted investor who certifies they will not invest any more that 10% of their investible resources. The bureaucracy part is that you are supposed to confirm which one you are every 12 months. So having moved the goalposts once the game has started, what exactly happens when, 12 months in, you get one of these forms and tick (D) None of the above? Forced to liquidate your position until you are back at 10%? Possibly incurring losses (for which the FCA will shoulder shrug ... ) Forced to acquire more wealth until you are at 10%? Possibly ending up with a record for the bank robbery  Fined? (Platform, or investor?) Other crazier alternatives? Or just a big fat "Tut tut, well don't do that " advisory letter? When I joined THC, there was no such rule in place, and you had to be a HNW, or SI, or a member of our special interest group of < 150 people sent this offer. And that 10%, is that per institution, or P2P/P2B/Equity as a total blob? Someones said the FSA/FCA acts after problems happens & re-brands when the brown stuff hits the fan to avoid bad press. Well....the above sure ties in this train of thought
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Feb 13, 2015 18:46:09 GMT
So having moved the goalposts once the game has started, what exactly happens when, 12 months in, you get one of these forms and tick (D) None of the above? Forced to liquidate your position until you are back at 10%? Possibly incurring losses (for which the FCA will shoulder shrug ... ) Forced to acquire more wealth until you are at 10%? Possibly ending up with a record for the bank robbery Fined? (Platform, or investor?) Other crazier alternatives? Or just a big fat "Tut tut, well don't do that " advisory letter? When I joined THC, there was no such rule in place, and you had to be a HNW, or SI, or a member of our special interest group of < 150 people sent this offer. And that 10%, is that per institution, or P2P/P2B/Equity as a total blob? Someones said the FSA/FCA acts after problems happens & re-brands when the brown stuff hits the fan to avoid bad press. Well....the above sure ties in this train of thought I'm not sure what the point is you're making there. Are you criticizing me for asking, me for being over 10% when adding up THC+Z+FC+RS+AC, THC for daring to offer their product to people that aren't millionaires, or the FCA for being slow? Glad to see that P2P doesn't appear to be included in the 10% rule then, as I suppose they count it as "realisable" lending (even though it's investment, not savings). That's what I was querying.
|
|
j
Member of DD Central
Penguins are very misunderstood!
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 540
|
Post by j on Feb 14, 2015 17:50:17 GMT
Someones said the FSA/FCA acts after problems happens & re-brands when the brown stuff hits the fan to avoid bad press. Well....the above sure ties in this train of thought I'm not sure what the point is you're making there. Are you criticizing me for asking, me for being over 10% when adding up THC+Z+FC+RS+AC, THC for daring to offer their product to people that aren't millionaires, or the FCA for being slow? Glad to see that P2P doesn't appear to be included in the 10% rule then, as I suppose they count it as "realisable" lending (even though it's investment, not savings). That's what I was querying. Huh?! Are you maybe reading too deeply & sensitively into the post. I simply stated the FCA in all its incarnations shifts posts as it suits. No one was being criticised!
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Feb 14, 2015 19:01:09 GMT
That's okay then, no harm done All good, nothing to see here ... no rules being violated or anything (ahem). |
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Feb 17, 2015 18:12:02 GMT
Doesn't seem to be as much crossover with them and p2p as you'd think - somebody tried to get this going on here a while back but there wasn't the interest at the time. I did a spate of crowdcube investing for a while (now got as much allocated to those types of investment as I want and it'll take a few years before they run their course) and tried discussing the merits and otherwise of my chosen pitches with a few forum members who I recognised the names of, but generally speaking they were not as comfortable with company investments as with p2p, and were just playing with small amounts in crowdcube. I'm very happy relying on my own instincts with regard to company investments, but it's always good to get other viewpoints. Going back to my earlier point that the vast majority of p2p lenders are not company investors, I think this is definitely being made clear by the lack of any informed discussion around the merits or lack thereof of the current AC pitch for funding (other than a couple of private conversations - perhaps that's it - we're all keeping our thoughts private  ). I'd have thought there might have been some. I think there's a fair number of investors who have gone in to it because they believe, maybe rightly, that AC will be a one-way bet - I'm certain not all of them have given it much more thought than that. Other than that, and a few of us not being impressed by the seedrs platform, it's deathly quiet. I suppose I could initiate something a bit more in-depth, but I don't feel like having the conversation with myself!
|
|
j
Member of DD Central
Penguins are very misunderstood!
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 540
|
Post by j on Feb 17, 2015 19:02:48 GMT
I suppose I could initiate something a bit more in-depth, but I don't feel like having the conversation with myself! Och.....I've had many a conversation with me onesie before. it makes much more sense that way
|
|
|
|
Post by batchoy on Feb 17, 2015 19:22:35 GMT
Doesn't seem to be as much crossover with them and p2p as you'd think - somebody tried to get this going on here a while back but there wasn't the interest at the time. I did a spate of crowdcube investing for a while (now got as much allocated to those types of investment as I want and it'll take a few years before they run their course) and tried discussing the merits and otherwise of my chosen pitches with a few forum members who I recognised the names of, but generally speaking they were not as comfortable with company investments as with p2p, and were just playing with small amounts in crowdcube. I'm very happy relying on my own instincts with regard to company investments, but it's always good to get other viewpoints. Going back to my earlier point that the vast majority of p2p lenders are not company investors, I think this is definitely being made clear by the lack of any informed discussion around the merits or lack thereof of the current AC pitch for funding (other than a couple of private conversations - perhaps that's it - we're all keeping our thoughts private ). I'd have thought there might have been some. I think there's a fair number of investors who have gone in to it because they believe, maybe rightly, that AC will be a one-way bet - I'm certain not all of them have given it much more thought than that. Other than that, and a few of us not being impressed by the seedrs platform, it's deathly quiet. I suppose I could initiate something a bit more in-depth, but I don't feel like having the conversation with myself! You are probably right in your analysis and I think it is a potentially dangerous cocktail with P2P lenders in love with a platform being offered the opportunity of taking part in a funding pitch which they don't really understand being made by that platform. I was working my way through the paperwork for the AC pitch but have been sidetracked by Wellesley's P2P ISA Bond which fortunately is a little easier going. It is interesting to contrast Wellesley who seem to be performing better as a platform and who went for a fairly straight forward bond issue from their own platform with their mini-bonds against AC who are long on promises and short on results who have gone for convertible notes.
|
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Feb 17, 2015 19:47:02 GMT
It is interesting to contrast Wellesley who seem to be performing better as a platform and who went for a fairly straight forward bond issue from their own platform with their mini-bonds against AC who are long on promises and short on results who have gone for convertible notes. Hadn't thought of it like that, but it is interesting. To be fair to AC, they have been asked for a way for their lenders to get involved, and I do think it a great idea for a p2p to raise some of its money via crowdfunding - seems only right. It is, as you say, rather dangerous for those who don't know what they are getting into. But they're all grown-ups, and chances are they'll do somewhere between alright and well. If they don't, they did have the opportunity to do further research if they'd wanted. I'm unbelievably disappointed with the level of information that's been provided by default with the AC pitch. I'm hoping to receive something further, as I understand are others. If it isn't forthcoming, then I won't be investing. I'm on the fence on it at the moment, leaning towards the 'Im Out' side - but much of that is because I already had what I considered to be my allocation of unquoted company holdings before this came up and I can't really think of a good reason why I should put more dead money aside for a few years, when I've already done that with quite a lot. Added to which, there's the opportunity costs to consider - need to consider what else could I do with that money.
|
|
Vero
Member of DD Central
Posts: 196 
Likes: 163
|
Post by Vero on Feb 18, 2015 5:23:28 GMT
I suppose I could initiate something a bit more in-depth, but I don't feel like having the conversation with myself! Hands up... I have been keeping comments to myself on this too.
I joined SEEDRS in 2013. Back then they were known for completing the largest equity crowdfunding round ever - for their *own* equity raise. The interface is simple, perhaps "quirky", maybe I am just used to it by now?
SEEDRS was the first equity crowdfunding platform with financial regulatory approval (FCA in 2012). They have also EIS raised for publicly traded companies (eg Chapel Down, ISDX listed) with shares that can actually be traded.
Crowdcube is newer and website perhaps slicker, but I have had hiccups with it too. Happy enough with both for now. Both are pure speculation, and funds that I can accept I may never see again.
In 2013 I invested in a P2P platform on this very forum via SEEDRS, and am v happy so far (I find them professional, one of the lower risk/reward P2Ps).
The nominee structure protects investors - it ensures *ALL* SEEDRS investors get voting shares, pre-emption, consent and tag-along rights, and no investor gets more rights than any other, even large or institutional investors (all optional on Crowdcube).
SEEDRS are more involved, they help steer the campaigners, arrange SEIS/EIS advance assurance from HMRC, and ensure SEIS/EIS eligibility is achieved and maintained. It also takes admin workload/pressure off companies by dealing with them as a single pooled shareholder, instead of 100s of individuals, and issuing and distributing their SEIS/EIS certificates for them. (Crowdcube companies hate issuing certificates - some hire temp staff to do it, some get it wrong (ouch, I received an EIS cert instead of SEIS from a CrowdCube raise the other day), some only do it on special request, some refuse to even issue certificates at all for smaller investments!)
The 7.5% fee generally covers this behind the scenes management that SEEDRS does (it is 7.5% of profit, not counting the original investment amount).
Like you ramblin rose, I don't do PAYE and am tax efficient, so it can be an effort to earn enough taxable income (including p2p) to claim all my EIS/SEIS income tax relief.
I think there is usually a little more/clearer information provided than for the AC pitch (some better than others). Stuart (AC) and Thomas (Seedrs) have fielded questions v quickly and clearly so far (several Qs seem to stem from general equity crowdfunding/EIS/SEEDRS newbies).
Instead of a single forum there are a separate "updates" area for pitch updates and a general crowd Q&A area. The post threading is chronological by post date, for the Q&A it's by Q date (agree could probably be improved).
Business plans/projections etc are not usually published as they can be commercially sensitive - the "Request Information" button at the top of the QA section is to request confidential documentation (or ask private questions you don't want showing to others). AC asked for NDAs before releasing docs - a bit unusual, but I guess being financial they are v sensitive.
Like Crowdcube, SEEDRS have regular investor events (MIXRS) where the campaigners can pitch to the crowd. I attended a local one at Facebook, who hosted it and were backing a tech pitch, and also met a few pitches I was interested in, tried their products out (lovely English sparking wine), spoke to the team, asked a barrage of questions, etc. So far I find the campaigns similar to Crowdcube - tiny, huge, huge/famous backers, early stage, late stage, slick, not so slick, been-on-dragons-den, EIS/SEIS/VCT, etc, and that while the idea and fundamentals are important, I feel the people running/backing the show make the difference in success or failure (so far).
Oh, sorry to ramble, that's a bit of a braindump this late at night(morning), I hope it's helpful in some way, let me know if I have under or mis-explained anything.
|
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Feb 18, 2015 8:32:42 GMT
Brilliant to hear from someone with actual recent experience of using seedrs Vero and your comparison with cc - fantastically useful perspective. Thank you. Like you, I place great importance on the people driving the unquoted companies I invest in; they are key in driving the vision and progress of small companies. So now I know where to come when I want additional input My comment about people keeping their thoughts to themselves was more about the AC offering itself though than the platform. Do you have any thoughts on that? Not trying to 'make you talk', but if there was anything you were happy to share about your thinking I'd certainly love to hear about. |
|
bigfoot12
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 816
|
Post by bigfoot12 on Feb 18, 2015 8:54:27 GMT
I am very surprised how little information is given on the Seedrs platform. I am one of those who have been pestering AC to make sure that it is possible to invest in the next round. I joined Seedrs to see the AC offering, had my screen name rejected (seems to be a right of passage - ramblin rose) and I expected to see much more information. For example, they don't actually tell us what event triggers the convert, and there are no accounts (we don't lend to people without seeing these things, how can we invest). In the past I have looked at things on the Syndicate Room platform - it is very different. There is a large amount of information. |
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Feb 18, 2015 9:11:56 GMT
I am very surprised how little information is given on the Seedrs platform. I am one of those who have been pestering AC to make sure that it is possible to invest in the next round. I joined Seedrs to see the AC offering, had my screen name rejected (seems to be a right of passage - ramblin rose) and I expected to see much more information. For example, they don't actually tell us what event triggers the convert, and there are no accounts (we don't lend to people without seeing these things, how can we invest). In the past I have looked at things on the Syndicate Room platform - it is very different. There is a large amount of information. Indeed. We just have to work with it; my thoughts about seedrs haven't really changed, but I've become a bit more tolerant after some sleep and time to digest things, and it's a case of just working out how to use the system to achieve what you want If you revisit the Q&A, Stuart has added more information and if you request accounts and business plans via the request button (private) they have said they will send out NDAs, presumably followed by the information. In hindsight, I absolutely see why they wouldn't publish these for all and sundry. The other companies I've invested in, and probably the ones you've looked at I would guess, were either absolute start-ups or already operating in fields where they either didn't have direct competition yet, or were already streets ahead of the competition. It is much less sensitive for them publish such information, but for Assetz it's clearly very sensitive indeed. As long as it comes on request I'm happy with that.
|
|
wysiati
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 86
|
Post by wysiati on Feb 18, 2015 9:34:40 GMT
If you revisit the Q&A, Stuart has added more information and if you request accounts and business plans via the request button (private) they have said they will send out NDAs, presumably followed by the information. From past experience expect an NDA with some attempted additional clause(s) which IMO go way beyond the scope of mere non-disclosure. For many this won't be a problem but something to check before agreeing to its terms.
|
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Feb 18, 2015 9:38:31 GMT
If you revisit the Q&A, Stuart has added more information and if you request accounts and business plans via the request button (private) they have said they will send out NDAs, presumably followed by the information. From past experience expect an NDA with some attempted additional clause(s) which IMO go way beyond the scope of mere non-disclosure. For many this won't be a problem but something to check before agreeing to its terms. Absolutely right - I've signed many an NDA in my time (and produced some myself!) and I always read the whole thing through before signing. It's very good advice.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Feb 18, 2015 12:03:23 GMT
I put in a request for the NDA last night & am still waiting for it. Perhaps the first to get it could drop a note so we're all aware.
I'll certainly read it before signing, that said the info on AC's business plan & financials is pretty key to understanding likely returns to investors, can't see how we can do more than guess without it.
|
|
). I'd have thought there might have been some. I think there's a fair number of investors who have gone in to it because they believe, maybe rightly, that AC will be a one-way bet - I'm certain not all of them have given it much more thought than that. Other than that, and a few of us not being impressed by the seedrs platform, it's deathly quiet. I suppose I could initiate something a bit more in-depth, but I don't feel like having the conversation with myself!
