|
|
Post by Come_on_Grandad on Feb 17, 2015 12:15:16 GMT
There is a post higher up indicating that if you join via the link fees are halved for us, (this wasn't made clear on the email alas so I don't think I used it).
Looking at the seedr web site I have a suspicion this is being achieved by AC getting the referral credit and having chosen to pass it back to us. Perhaps stuartassetzcapital could confirm if I am correct and that all the benefit is being passed back to us. If that is the case perhaps the normal rule on referral links (which I agree with) might be relaxed.
My understanding, after an email exchange with Mark Wardrop, is that it doesn't matter how you join (you may already belong), but to benefit you should use the referral link when you invest. I agree that the whole thing could be a lot clearer, please.
|
|
Grezza
Member of DD Central
Posts: 152 
Likes: 101
|
Post by Grezza on Feb 17, 2015 12:37:07 GMT
I used the link to join seeders and read through the documentation, decided to make a small investment and did not use the promo code, unfortunately after communicating with AC this morning, they are not hopeful of retrospectively being able to reduce the fees costs on the investment. I can't complain, it was my mistake, but it defo could have been clearer in the AC mailing.
|
|
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 12:47:02 GMT
.......................but it defo could have been clearer in the AC mailing. Well, that raises a smile - that pretty much sums up my time with AC since last April 
|
|
|
|
Post by solicitorious on Feb 17, 2015 13:30:13 GMT
There is a post higher up indicating that if you join via the link fees are halved for us, (this wasn't made clear on the email alas so I don't think I used it).
Looking at the seedr web site I have a suspicion this is being achieved by AC getting the referral credit and having chosen to pass it back to us. Perhaps stuartassetzcapital could confirm if I am correct and that all the benefit is being passed back to us. If that is the case perhaps the normal rule on referral links (which I agree with) might be relaxed.
My understanding, after an email exchange with Mark Wardrop, is that it doesn't matter how you join (you may already belong), but to benefit you should use the referral link when you invest. I agree that the whole thing could be a lot clearer, please. Can someone clarify how the referral link is going to be verified? Seems that if you go to the invest page the URL is the same whether or not you use that link. And why is it being posted on an open forum. Surely it's for the benefit of existing AC investors. What am I missing here? 
|
|
misscas
Member of DD Central
Posts: 64
Likes: 55
|
Post by misscas on Feb 17, 2015 13:36:41 GMT
There is a post higher up indicating that if you join via the link fees are halved for us, (this wasn't made clear on the email alas so I don't think I used it).
Looking at the seedr web site I have a suspicion this is being achieved by AC getting the referral credit and having chosen to pass it back to us. Perhaps stuartassetzcapital could confirm if I am correct and that all the benefit is being passed back to us. If that is the case perhaps the normal rule on referral links (which I agree with) might be relaxed.
My understanding, after an email exchange with Mark Wardrop, is that it doesn't matter how you join (you may already belong), but to benefit you should use the referral link when you invest. I agree that the whole thing could be a lot clearer, please. Just spoken to someone at Seedrs who confirmed that the referral fee reduced by the promo link/code is the one payable by Assetz to Seedrs for getting the investments for them. If we use the link we are helping Assetz as they only have to pay 3.75% rather than 7.5%. The fee we will have to pay to Seedrs on any profit,dividends etc is also 7.5% and has nothing to do with the promotion. The misunderstanding that has arisen has not been helped by the % being the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Feb 17, 2015 14:21:08 GMT
Does anyone understand the Q&A exchange regarding the £5m HMRC limit on an equity raise for EIS eligibility ?
Part of the answer given by seedrs staff is "The £5m limit is with respect to how much can be raised pursuant to the EIS eligible round. Any institutional capital would not be EIS eligible in any event. "
Considering seedrs is about raising money from the crowd, the clarity of the processes involved are very poor.
If I knew for sure this raise was to be EIS eligible I might be tempted, but given the amateurish way this whole exercise is being undertaken I'll probably restrict any investment to a token few pounds as a learning exercise.
|
|
misscas
Member of DD Central
Posts: 64
Likes: 55
|
Post by misscas on Feb 17, 2015 14:52:02 GMT
Does anyone understand the Q&A exchange regarding the £5m HMRC limit on an equity raise for EIS eligibility ? Part of the answer given by seedrs staff is "The £5m limit is with respect to how much can be raised pursuant to the EIS eligible round. Any institutional capital would not be EIS eligible in any event. " Considering seedrs is about raising money from the crowd, the clarity of the processes involved are very poor. If I knew for sure this raise was to be EIS eligible I might be tempted, but given the amateurish way this whole exercise is being undertaken I'll probably restrict any investment to a token few pounds as a learning exercise. As I understand it the EIS eligibiltiy is the £2m Seedrs are raising for Assetz. The £4m balance of the current Assetz raise is/will be from private and institutional investors direct with Assetz. Disclaimer: I have not checked this with anyone and may be wrong. Edit: Sorry, above is wrong as the private investors direct with Assetz will of course qualify too. I would be surprised if the Institutions take less than £1M though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Come_on_Grandad on Feb 17, 2015 14:55:00 GMT
Does anyone understand the Q&A exchange regarding the £5m HMRC limit on an equity raise for EIS eligibility ? Part of the answer given by seedrs staff is "The £5m limit is with respect to how much can be raised pursuant to the EIS eligible round. Any institutional capital would not be EIS eligible in any event. " Considering seedrs is about raising money from the crowd, the clarity of the processes involved are very poor. If I knew for sure this raise was to be EIS eligible I might be tempted, but given the amateurish way this whole exercise is being undertaken I'll probably restrict any investment to a token few pounds as a learning exercise. Googling the quote used in the original question "If any share issue breaks that limit, none of the investors in that issue will be able to claim any of the EIS tax reliefs" leads to www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-enterprise-investment-scheme-introduction/enterprise-investment-scheme and it seems to me from para 2.2 therein (other opinions welcome) that the questioner's premise is mistaken. The £5m limit applies not to money raised, but to money raised under venture capital schemes (e.g EIS) or any other form of state aid. Steep learning curve this!
|
|
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 16:30:31 GMT
Did not like Seed's entry process, nor being forced to have a particular specification, effectively being forced to give up some of my rights, not a nice feeling. Will think on, but good to see that AC has 34% by 4pm  All the equity crowdfunding sites do that - I think it's a requirement. I just wished I hadn't had to register with another one to see what was going on  , although I thought it was rather daft that I needed a surname for my 'display name'. Currently waiting for them to approve my display surname of '*'. (Space didn't cut it!) Well, well. I expect more than me have just found out that seedrs don't allow any sort of anonymous display name - yet another thing to add to the list of things to dislike about them. Yes, your investments can be anonymous, but your questions can't; that is if you want to help the public at large out by asking your question in public. You do have the option of asking private questions. Doesn't seem particularly the right way to be going about things in this day and age. Still, I don't have to use them. I haven't yet decided what to do about this one, but it's certain I won't be using them again regardless.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2015 17:03:12 GMT
I've been mulling this for 24 hours now and, on top of my own frustrations with the Seedrs site, I've been reading the confusion amongst these, normally sensible, writers. Since I make most of my money riding the ups and downs of UK and US shares I find the whole lack of transparency a bit worrying and I expect I will stay with the devil I know rather than the badly presented devil that Seedrs seems to be displaying. I'm not especially understanding of why a broker expects to receive 7.5% of any profits (for doing close to SF adams). Seedrs does seem to add a touch of the china seller and his barra' to what looks like a simple financial transaction. On the other hand it has been an eye opener to where the "red braces" have gone and I do appreciate having had the time to understand and read other's views on this new and exciting corner of the market Good luck to all those who go with this.  |
|
baz657
Member of DD Central
Posts: 500
Likes: 189
|
Post by baz657 on Feb 17, 2015 17:16:35 GMT
I've emailed AC as I can't remember what link I used to get onto the site, join or whatever - I didn't think it would be important until I read more here. I still don't know where I am in the great scheme of things. I've also had the same email back as ramblin rose in regard to showing your choice of ID (or not). If it hadn't been for Assetz I'd have given this site the heave-ho well before now and not looked back. |
|
|
|
Post by reeknralf on Feb 17, 2015 17:59:00 GMT
I freely admit I've never done anything quite like this before so may have misunderstood.
This seems not to be equity raising, but instead an opportunity to make what is in effect, an unsecured loan to AC at ~10% a year. "Interest" will be paid for a maximum of 2 years only. AC might decide to keep my money longer than 2 years. If they keep it for less than a year, I still get 10%. I can't imagine many of us would ordinarily go for a loan on these terms.
The only bonus is that if/when AC do actually raise equity, at a price as yet to be determined, I would be guaranteed to get some of it. This still seems a pretty bum deal. Am I missing something?
|
|
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 18:26:14 GMT
I freely admit I've never done anything quite like this before so may have misunderstood. This seems not to be equity raising, but instead an opportunity to make what is in effect, an unsecured loan to AC at ~10% a year. "Interest" will be paid for a maximum of 2 years only. AC might decide to keep my money longer than 2 years. If they keep it for less than a year, I still get 10%. I can't imagine many of us would ordinarily go for a loan on these terms. The only bonus is that if/when AC do actually raise equity, at a price as yet to be determined, I would be guaranteed to get some of it. This still seems a pretty bum deal. Am I missing something? No, it's not a loan reeknralf. You are buying equity, but it won't be valued, and your money actually turned into shares, until some point in the future. Until then it's like a loan, but with no interest. When that point arrives (most likely later this year, but any time up to 2 years) your shares will cost 10% less (rising to max 20% depending on how long it actually takes) than those that are purchased by others at that point. The problem for everybody considering the investment is that we don't know what the valuation will be - that is the unknown, and what we must each make a judgement on. Edit: because the shares are not quoted on a stock exchange, you have to keep them until such time as somebody offers to purchase them from you, via a future IPO or whatever the exit method is. If you find somebody to purchase them from you, you are able to sell them, but you have to agree the purchase price between you. This is the case for all unquoted shares. You buy them if you believe the company is going to do well enough that when you come to sell them they will be worth more than you invested. It's not for anybody needing an 'out' as others have said before.
|
|
|
|
Post by solicitorious on Feb 17, 2015 18:43:17 GMT
Is there any benefit or necessity for those who invest in the initial offering to also invest in the next round?
Also, the next round won't benefit from EIS, I take it?
|
|
j
Member of DD Central
Penguins are very misunderstood!
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 540
|
Post by j on Feb 17, 2015 18:57:49 GMT
The main issue is the valuation of AC as we speak. We do not even have an idea of their P&L for say the last 6 months. Appreciate they've said they've been profitable for a few months now but if you make 1p then that's profit. Also, the market is still very green in terms of IPOs in this area, it could be a real bumper in a few years or it could a real bummer. In making an investment, it must be written off immediately as a loss by the investor as there is no clear path to what will happen over the next 12+ months or beyond
|
|
, although I thought it was rather daft that I needed a surname for my 'display name'. Currently waiting for them to approve my display surname of '*'. (Space didn't cut it!)
