Draw down timescales

One must admit that it's a bit of a poor show bang in the middle of a promotional period that there should me a better flow of loans, esp with bank hols on the horizon. Also, one loan recently closed within a couple of hours of opening, understandably there was a lot of interest in it, but it went live with about an hour of being put on site & many people missed out (btw I did catch it but did not invest so not complaining but do understand others' gripes). We were told there would be a gap of at least 24 hours to allow proper dd!

I'm with oldgrumpy on this one, and am fairly relaxed about the drawdown situation. Of the 12 (?) loans awaiting drawdown, the 3 from February are all accruing interest, 2 are from March and the rest are April's. Of the two from March the wind turbine I'll accept is irritating given it was flagged as a quick drawdown, but Aberystwyth is only just a month since the loan filled, and was never going to be a quick one with two sets of second charges to implement. And one of April's is a re-finance of an existing AC loan which will happen within the next few working days.

But I agree with the general sentiment that the lack of new loans is rather embarrassing for AC given the cashback promotion.

I'm afraid I have to agree as well.  Maybe what Assetz need to do is to extend the cashback eligibility period to the end of May. 

PS.  I see that cashback is getting contagious -- SS have just made a cashback offer to try to help them raise funding for their two recent, property-based, bridging loans.

I hope I'm not misunderstanding the Up*** situation, but AIUI contracts were exchanged on 10/Mar and those set the completion date to be 25/Apr.  So there should be no need "for the seller to shift", and I think you can expect a request to settle your shadow bids as soon as the Easter break is over.

I have a slightly different take to Merlin. I don't see P2P as an alternative to equities. Rather I regard P2P as just another fixed income instrument - more an alternative to government bonds than equities. Both have a place in a diversified portfolio. For me, the basic conundrum with the various P2P platforms is that, if like Merlin you are looking to invest sizeable amounts, there are more attractive alternatives. Whole loans with low LTV backed by chattel mortgages, security held in escrow and double digit returns spring immediately to mind but there are others. Basic problem with P2P is putting a large amount into any given opportunity is less attractive than putting a large chunk into one of the alternatives while constructing a portfolio requires much more self-directed research than I was allowing for. This situation is not helped by extended drawdowns, increasingly sales-oriented credit reports and anonymous borrowers - not to mention investors who seemingly would buy options on the Brooklyn Bridge if it had a 15% coupon! I have some sympathy with Assetz Capital, which in my opinion has been the most professional and organized of the platforms. However, no platform can provide a service at odds with its economic constraints. Consider that a £500K loan with 3% upfront fee and 1% continuing will yield fee income of £15K in year one and £5K thereafter (I have no idea what the actual fee structure is but I would be willing to bet not hugely different). This income needs to cover origination expense (pay for the ones that are thrown back not just the ones taken), central overhead, IT, legal and other costs etc. It needs to cover all of the 'hard' due diligence (security exists? prior claims? ... ) and IM preparation. This does not leave a lot left over for 'soft' due diligence (industry dynamics, competition, quality of management ... ). Personally, I would be a lot happier if AC would stop being a one stop shop and start concentrating on companies operating in one or a limited number of areas in which it could develop industry-leading expertise (property-related maybe).  To be fair, this seems to be already happening to a certain extent although it is not clear whether this is accidental or planned. Like Merlin, I think I am ready to press the pause button on AC and see which way the wind blows for a while.

It seems to me that the drawdown risk is likely born by the lender - not by the borrower or AC - for financial rather than operational reasons. It should be feasible to make it standard that interest accrues from a fixed date whether the loan is drawn down by that date or not. It should also be possible to start trading obligations before they are drawn down (call them debt obligation rights if necessary). This of course would mean that someone other than myself bears the cost of delayed drawdown or non-drawdown. On the other hand, if bidders know for sure from when they will be paid and can access the SM they might be more inclined to participate in some of the larger loans thereby reducing the need for underwriting. AC any comment?

E*S has paid up so their new loan London Law must be drawdown imminent. (It will have been drawn down already to pay off the first loan, so we just anticipate the announcement).