|
|
Post by mrclondon on Feb 16, 2015 20:46:35 GMT
After a little bit of detective work, it appears only the eternity ring sold at auction on 12th February. www.specialauctionservices.com/large/jw110215/page012.htmlThe overall LTV of the FS loan was 70% Eternity Ring ------------- FS Valuation May 14: £350 FS Condition: Good Auction Lot: 597 Estimate: £200-£300 Condition: in need of replating Sold: £200 Sold / FS Valuation: 57% Engagement Ring ------------------ FS Valuation May 14: £2800 FS Condtion: Good Auction Lot: 596 Estimate: £1500-£2000 Condition: no specific note Not Sold Lower Estimate / FS Valuation: 53% EDITED to add: The auction house is in Newbury, Berkshire and having unsold lots is a regular feature of their auction catalogue. Not sure if this is typical for auctions of jewellery such as this. So between the 12th (last Thursday) and now the unsold engagement ring has been disposed of. Hmm ... I wonder what process determines that a fair price can be obtained for a disposal in such a short time frame.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Feb 16, 2015 21:42:17 GMT
After a little bit of detective work, it appears only the eternity ring sold at auction on 12th February. ... Engagement Ring ------------------ FS Valuation May 14: £2800 FS Condtion: Good Auction Lot: 596 Estimate: £1500-£2000 Condition: no specific note Not Sold Lower Estimate / FS Valuation: 53% ... So between the 12th (last Thursday) and now the unsold engagement ring has been disposed of. Hmm ... I wonder what process determines that a fair price can be obtained for a disposal in such a short time frame. Well my fiance is well happy. Got myself a bargain....little does she know....
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Feb 16, 2015 21:43:29 GMT
After a little bit of detective work... <snip> EDITED to add: So between the 12th (last Thursday) and now the unsold engagement ring has been disposed of. Hmm ... I wonder what process determines that a fair price can be obtained for a disposal in such a short time frame. : Congratulations on your brilliant detective work. You deserve to be awarded a 'Sherlock' award! Or perhaps, considering the circumstances, that should be a Shylock award? In answer to the final query above, here's a guess... See the FS Ts&Cs... Based on the auction estimate, the lower end of the range might have been set as the reserve price. And while T&C 7.4 above is aimed at closing the books for the borrower, FS might have decided to use the same -- or a very similar -- number to close out the auction from the lenders side as well. (Certainly the £1688 of proceeds reported and the £200 auction sale price of the eternity ring suggest the engagement ring price was very close to £1500.) Or perhaps FS went to a jeweller for help in setting the reserve price, and came away with an agreement that if the ring didn't sell at auction the jeweller would buy it for the reserve price. That would explain how it could be sold so quickly after the failed auction.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Feb 16, 2015 22:11:03 GMT
I don't think FS are trying to hide this in any way as it's on the 'My Investment History' tab. As ramblin rose has pointed out, that info is available only to the lenders on this item. Any other FS lender would be unable to access this info because FS do not give access to loan info to anyone not directly involved in the loan. (Even forum followers can't find that info unless they work out how to build the appropriate URL.) As I've said before, in the interest of transparency, I think FS should made the data available to all, so that new potential investors can have access to FS's full 'track record'. I wonder how long it will take before fundingsecure update their statistics to reflect the capital loss and its impact on lenders' average return. Or, for that matter, when FS will reclassify all defaulted loans as Defaulted. For instance, the entry for Loan 1845919867, the defaulted Yamaha Thundercat, appears in my lending history as 'Loan Completed' and 'Repaid', and there's nothing on that loan's page that gives any hint that the sale proceeds were so low that lenders received no interest at all.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Feb 16, 2015 22:44:50 GMT
I don't think FS are trying to hide this in any way as it's on the 'My Investment History' tab. I wonder how long it will take before fundingsecure update their statistics to reflect the capital loss and its impact on lenders' average return. Or, for that matter, when FS will reclassify all defaulted loans as Defaulted. For instance, the entry for Loan 1845919867, the defaulted Yamaha Thundercat, appears in my lending history as 'Loan Completed' and 'Repaid', and there's nothing on that loan's page that gives any hint that the sale proceeds were so low that lenders received no interest at all. I don't believe they will. They have built up a 'head of steam' now and have enough lenders to fund most things hence I do not feel they felt any necessity to put their hands in their pockets over this mini disaster - unlike previous losses. To state the obvious, no P2P investment can ever be 100% secure but the actual value was so far away from the original value that whilst it may have only affected a tiny minority of lenders and the loss is not going to break the bank, nonetheless I feel some clarification from FS would be welcome even if it is they've changed their valuers, etc. Believe ramblin rose has dropped them a note asking for a comment but I doubt if one will be forthcoming. Agree with the general sentiments that the returns are or look good but as they are moving into higher value items some clarification wouldn't go amiss IMO. It is though only a few FS lenders that visit these forums so most will carry on as normal.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Feb 16, 2015 22:56:58 GMT
I think I've now identified the items in loan 24181978 which was also resolved today, this time with all capital and most but not all interest returned. Overall loan was 70% LTV. The 7 items were in the same auction as previously discussed on this thread www.specialauctionservices.com/large/jw110215/page012.html (for all items except the watch) www.specialauctionservices.com/large/jw110215/page014.html (watch lot 683) Sold ----- Earings Lot 556 sold for 400 (est 400-600) 66% of FS valuation (600) Necklace Lot 558 sold for 280 (est 100-200) 140% of FS valuation (200) Bracelet Lot 560 sold for 720 (est 600-800) 90% of FS valuation (800) Watch Lot 683 sold for 520 (est 400-600) 87% of FS valuation (600) Not sold --------- Necklace Lot 565 est 600-800, lower est. 75% of FS valuation (800) Bracelet Lot 566 est 300-500, lower est. 60% of FS valuation (500) Earings Lot 567 est 150-200, lower est. 75% of FS valuation (200) Whilst at a first glance these valuation do seem to be better, if you add up the seven lower estimates you get £2,550 which is marginally less than the £2,600 of the loan. We could easily have been looking at zero interest and a small capital loss on this one. I have major concerns about the integrity of valuations being presented to us by Funding Secure.
If auction lower estimates are coming in at or below the loan value, there is something fundamentally wrong with the valuation process adopted by Funding Secure, and calls into question the credibility of the platform I'll split these auction results out onto a separate thread as a summary of what is going on in due course, but I think its important the focus of the discussion on the FS valuations and LTV's we are expected to trust is on a single thread for now.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Feb 16, 2015 23:09:06 GMT
Or, for that matter, when FS will reclassify all defaulted loans as Defaulted. For instance, the entry for Loan 1845919867, the defaulted Yamaha Thundercat, appears in my lending history as 'Loan Completed' and 'Repaid', and there's nothing on that loan's page that gives any hint that the sale proceeds were so low that lenders received no interest at all. On a similiar subject, one of the larger loans (> £10,000 < 50% LTV) loans that is awaiting recovery does have some explanation on the loan page as to what is happening in the background, but omits the crucial detail that lenders are unlikely to receive all their accrued interest as it will take many months to sell the assets (and its now several months since the maturity date of the loan). Complete lack of transparency, bordering on the misleading for new potential lenders.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Feb 16, 2015 23:13:57 GMT
I think I've now identified the items in loan 24181978 which was also resolved today, this time with all capital and most but not all interest returned. Overall loan was 70% LTV. The 7 items were in the same auction as previously discussed on this thread www.specialauctionservices.com/large/jw110215/page012.html (for all items except the watch) www.specialauctionservices.com/large/jw110215/page014.html (watch lot 683) Sold ----- Earings Lot 556 sold for 400 (est 400-600) 66% of FS valuation (600) Necklace Lot 558 sold for 280 (est 100-200) 140% of FS valuation (200) Bracelet Lot 560 sold for 720 (est 600-800) 90% of FS valuation (800) Watch Lot 683 sold for 520 (est 400-600) 87% of FS valuation (600) Not sold --------- Necklace Lot 565 est 600-800, lower est. 75% of FS valuation (800) Bracelet Lot 566 est 300-500, lower est. 60% of FS valuation (500) Earings Lot 567 est 150-200, lower est. 75% of FS valuation (200) Whilst at a first glance these valuation do seem to be better, if you add up the seven lower estimates you get £2,550 which is marginally less than the £2,600 of the loan. We could easily have been looking at zero interest and a small capital loss on this one. I have major concerns about the integrity of valuations being presented to us by Funding Secure.
If auction lower estimates are coming in at or below the loan value, there is something fundamentally wrong with the valuation process adopted by Funding Secure, and calls into question the credibility of the platform I'll split these auction results out onto a separate thread as a summary of what is going on in due course, but I think its important the focus of the discussion on the FS valuations and LTV's we are expected to trust is on a single thread for now. - thanks for these figures. Moving very much into mikes1531 train of thought over transparency - or a lack of it ATM. Certainly more caution is required until (or if) clarification is received from FS. Most of these smaller loans are very much scrum like at inception which doesn't help. I sure hope the valuations on the larger loans are more robust to say the least.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Feb 16, 2015 23:17:28 GMT
Or, for that matter, when FS will reclassify all defaulted loans as Defaulted. For instance, the entry for Loan 1845919867, the defaulted Yamaha Thundercat, appears in my lending history as 'Loan Completed' and 'Repaid', and there's nothing on that loan's page that gives any hint that the sale proceeds were so low that lenders received no interest at all. On a similiar subject, one of the larger loans (> £10,000 < 50% LTV) loans that is awaiting recovery does have some explanation on the loan page as to what is happening in the background, but omits the crucial detail that lenders are unlikely to receive all their accrued interest as it will take many months to sell the assets (and its now several months since the maturity date of the loan). Complete lack of transparency, bordering on the misleading for new potential lenders. As I'm not involved in that one then it's news to me and probably many others as well. '....Complete lack of transparency, bordering on the misleading for new potential lenders....' - beginning to look that way.
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,428 
Likes: 1,212
|
Post by sqh on Feb 17, 2015 0:34:26 GMT
Well done for finding the auction mrclondon. I actually live within 10 miles of the auction house. FS offices used to be within 10 miles before they relocated to Beaconsfield. I wonder if they will use the Newbury auction house in future. The buyers rate on the jewellry was 15% +VAT =18%. That's significant, and I wonder whether FS include it in the LTV. 70% LTV is too high unless there is a prospective buyer. Perhaps we should discuss more items on the forum before bidding. With lots more bidders it may be interesting to discover if anyone would want to buy the item if it defaults. Before xmas there was a pretty dress ring which failed to sell at auction but a private buyer was found. Potentially, there are bargains to be had, before bracknellboy tries snapping them all up at fire sale prices. |
|
merlin
Minor shareholder in Assetz and many other companies.
Posts: 902
Likes: 302
|
Post by merlin on Feb 17, 2015 10:16:11 GMT
I too am concerned about valuations and raised this as a concern on the last Train set that came up recently. You only needed to look on eBay to see that the prices quoted on the offer for some of the items were on the high to very high side. Realistically at auction they would possibly only fetch half their value. I flagged this up on another thread bur it still sold without any trouble!
|
|
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 10:22:35 GMT
As all we have to go on is the valuation, it has to at least tally with the estimate from the same auction house come auction day, if not... I feel like pointing fingers, but I think we are probably just seeing the vagueness of evaluating trinkets for auction generally and it's not necessarily the fault of anyone in particular, but if that vagueness exists then I'm afraid I will have to evaluate items myself from now on. If I can... if not, I won't take part, and if the investment isn't large enough to warrant any time spent, it's just not worth it. It's why I've always said I like the cars - main stream is easy to value and has a large market, classic is usually sought after and therefore has known sale prices. Bottles of brandy and shiny bit of metal, I'm out of my comfort zone and therefore in the hands of a valuation, and if that is questionable... It clearly is very difficult to value items that have an element of personal taste in their desirability. In this post last year I made the point that since valuation of many items it not an exact science and is bound to be wrong quite frequently, then our only defence is to be lending at conservative LTVs. I don't know whether this is going to alter my lending on the FS platform yet, but there's a good chance it will; for a while now I've stopped renewing on baskets of trinkets due to my belief there was too much risk of one or more of them not selling at auction and needing to be got rid of at a knock down price elsewhere, and my general feeling that most of the unrealistic people who won't be able to redeem their items probably have one go at paying the interest to renew before giving in to the inevitable. I still feel that, so I might carry on lending on them in the first place. Regarding fundingsecure's more recent disengagement with the forum, I have to register a great deal of disappointment. It was their willingness to engage in the early days and be responsive, coupled with their ongoing professionalism that gained all our trust. This trust is waning a little at the moment. I suspect more of their lenders frequent the forum than either they or us realise - almost all of their early lenders were forum members. As time has gone by, I'll bet a large number of the new lenders have come via either forum members or forum lurkers. We have no way of knowing how many lurkers we have, but my feeling is the number is 'many'. I suppose it will be less and less the more time goes by. I wouldn't expect important stuff to be on the forum - the place for that is the platform - but they would continue to get good 'press' and in effect free advertising if they spent a little time with us here.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Feb 17, 2015 10:33:12 GMT
I too am concerned about valuations and raised this as a concern on the last Train set that came up recently. You only needed to look on eBay to see that the prices quoted on the offer for some of the items were on the high to very high side. Realistically at auction they would possibly only fetch half their value. I flagged this up on another thread bur it still sold without any trouble! I'm also joining this club. Fortunately the lender loss on the loan in question was fairly minimal. What did red flag it for me was just how far away the original valuation was from the eventual sale price. Another point posted by mrclondon for example was the condition of one of the items which was described originally by FS as 'good' but the condition at auction was described as 'in need of replating'. Not exactly confidence inspiring. I don't feel that FS will have any problems filling their loan offerings as folks usually just view the headline rate and as they no doubt have a fair number of lenders now on their books - hence the scramble to get into loans and of course the majority of these lenders never visit this forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Feb 17, 2015 10:48:14 GMT
My very limited experience of buying and selling at auction (model trains) is that you cannot expect to achieve retail market value, but you can hope that an item is subject to a bidding war.
The buyers will include a number of dealers as well as private individuals. The individuals will bid on items they like (possibly irrespective of value). Dealers will need to keep a margin in reserve, but will go for anything they can sell on at a profit. Add on the buyers premium (20%) and profit margin (20%) and you would not want to bid more than 60% of retail value (allow for simplification of figures). I would expect that the market value quoted is actually based on 'price that might be realized at auction' to account for this. There is then a degree of luck, if your item is one of many similar ones in the sale the price could be lower than expected. Jewelry valuation is not an exact science unfortunately.
One disadvantage to the FS model is the online nature of the business. My local high street pawnbroker sells jewelry via his shop window.
Default, or rather the non redemption of pledged items, is run of the mill in pawnbroking and should be part of the profit stream. A possible concern is that due to the lack of deals the LTV is set high to stop potential customers walking away.
I am not currently investing here, there are too few loans to get sensible diversification.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Feb 17, 2015 13:07:55 GMT
I wonder how long it will take before fundingsecure update their statistics to reflect the capital loss and its impact on lenders' average return. Or, for that matter, when FS will reclassify all defaulted loans as Defaulted. For instance, the entry for Loan 1845919867, the defaulted Yamaha Thundercat, appears in my lending history as 'Loan Completed' and 'Repaid', and there's nothing on that loan's page that gives any hint that the sale proceeds were so low that lenders received no interest at all. I don't believe they will. They have built up a 'head of steam' now and have enough lenders to fund most things hence I do not feel they felt any necessity to put their hands in their pockets over this mini disaster - unlike previous losses. To state the obvious, no P2P investment can ever be 100% secure but the actual value was so far away from the original value that whilst it may have only affected a tiny minority of lenders and the loss is not going to break the bank, nonetheless I feel some clarification from FS would be welcome even if it is they've changed their valuers, etc. I think bugs4me may have misinterpreted my question. I was not asking whether FS might dig into their pocket to cover the loss on this loan in order to preserve their 'no capital lost' track record. If they were going to do that they would have done it before now and not published the disappointing auction results, especially as those have raised such serious questions about the reliability of their valuations. I agree that they have enough support now that they may not feel the need to do that in order to encourage investors. Most loans are funded very quickly -- though I notice that today's £5k loan has been available for over an hour now, and isn't fully funded. What I was asking was how long it will take before FS update the performance statistics shown on their website. That's where they show their 'no capital lost' track record, and that's clearly out of date now. And probably could be described as misleading, since there isn't even a note saying "Data correct as of dd/mm/yy" they could hide behind.
|
|
