jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on May 24, 2016 18:59:01 GMT
jjc a like seems far to little for that post, thank you.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414 
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on May 24, 2016 22:57:36 GMT
Happy to help when I can jonah . Naturally all disclaimers, not investment advice (DYOR etc), though I am an investor in those funds. Refocusing attention slightly, whilst some of the increased risk factors I mentioned also impact other P2P / single turbine wind deals, those under AC’s control are harder to stomach. These are the monitoring/reporting & (perhaps worse imo if only because it affects MLIA lenders investing in ANY auto-account eligible loans) the non-transparent “discretionary fund management” by a little-visible, but certainly present, hand behind these accounts somewhere at AC Towers. I’m not an expert so have no idea if there could potentially be compliance issues & would welcome others views. As a future shareholder it does worry me. Q’s posted on a couple of WT loans (93 & 106) a few mins ago to try & obtain more clarity. stuartassetzcapital & chris not sure under who’s remit this falls but simple common sense tells me that the MINIMUM Assetz should be doing is notifying MLIA lenders if/when the little-visible hand decides to stop (even temporarily) the purchases of eligible loans, ideally with prior notice stating date/time this change will take place from (& suspending MLIA targets on these loans). Ditto when they restart investing. Any thoughts? I'd also like to know what existing procedures & measures AC has in place to ensure there's a level playing field. |
|
|
|
Post by chris on May 25, 2016 4:57:08 GMT
Happy to help when I can jonah . Naturally all disclaimers, not investment advice (DYOR etc), though I am an investor in those funds. Refocusing attention slightly, whilst some of the increased risk factors I mentioned also impact other P2P / single turbine wind deals, those under AC’s control are harder to stomach. These are the monitoring/reporting & (perhaps worse imo if only because it affects MLIA lenders investing in ANY auto-account eligible loans) the non-transparent “discretionary fund management” by a little-visible, but certainly present, hand behind these accounts somewhere at AC Towers. I’m not an expert so have no idea if there could potentially be compliance issues & would welcome others views. As a future shareholder it does worry me. Q’s posted on a couple of WT loans (93 & 106) a few mins ago to try & obtain more clarity. stuartassetzcapital & chris not sure under who’s remit this falls but simple common sense tells me that the MINIMUM Assetz should be doing is notifying MLIA lenders if/when the little-visible hand decides to stop (even temporarily) the purchases of eligible loans, ideally with prior notice stating date/time this change will take place from (& suspending MLIA targets on these loans). Ditto when they restart investing. Any thoughts? I'd also like to know what existing procedures & measures AC has in place to ensure there's a level playing field. I can categorically state that there is no mechanism coded for the admin team to remove a specific loan from eligibility for an account unless they change the data for the loan and that takes it outside the scope of the mandate. For example if they edited the security value so that the LTV went out of range then it would no longer qualify and the system would try and sell. Or if they removed the "green" flag from a loan that lets the system know that the loan is specifically a green loan, but then that could make it qualify for the GBBA instead if the other criteria match and would result in the GEIA selling its entire holding in that loan as quickly as it could which would be very publicly visible. Beyond that everything is 100% automated. There is no mechanism to temporarily stop buying, beyond the credit monitoring system which does notify all lenders. There is no manual mechanism to control the maximum amount bought or to instruct a sale. Just an automated strategy that responds to the same information, and changes to it, as given to every other lender on the platform via the same market and mechanisms as every other lender - except that the green account has a certain priority of purchase and the QAA has the option to sell some of its holdings only to the GEIA (or GBBA or MLIA). But that is not a sinister guiding hand as you describe so I'd be interested in understanding why you feel that there is one.
|
|
pikestaff
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,187
Likes: 1,546
|
Post by pikestaff on May 25, 2016 5:54:41 GMT
...Just an automated strategy that responds to the same information, and changes to it, as given to every other lender on the platform via the same market and mechanisms as every other lender ...But that is not a sinister guiding hand as you describe so I'd be interested in understanding why you feel that there is one. I have never thought there was a sinister guiding hand, but the bit I've put in bold makes me wonder. For the avoidance of doubt, does the algorithm respond to information such as generation updates and management accounts, if these do not result in a change in the loan status? I'd be surprised if it does (because someone would need to be feeding the algorithm with data) but please can you confirm one way or the other. Obviously if the generation update led somebody to change the LTV this could have an effect as you explain earlier in your post, but apart from that?
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on May 25, 2016 6:08:36 GMT
...Just an automated strategy that responds to the same information, and changes to it, as given to every other lender on the platform via the same market and mechanisms as every other lender ...But that is not a sinister guiding hand as you describe so I'd be interested in understanding why you feel that there is one. I have never thought there was a sinister guiding hand, but the bit I've put in bold makes me wonder. For the avoidance of doubt, does the algorithm respond to information such as generation updates and management accounts, if these do not result in a change in the loan status? I'd be surprised if it does (because someone would need to be feeding the algorithm with data) but please can you confirm one way or the other. No, currently it does not if it doesn't affect the headline figures. The eligibility criteria for loans in the GEIA are published, although the actual implementation is slightly stricter (e.g. the highest LTVs allowed in require a 1% higher MLIA rate). What I was referring to by automated strategy is the part of the system that decides how much to invest in each loan. There are a series of discrete functions that determine lending: eligibility (should this account lend to this loan yes / no); account wide investment decision (how much to invest as a total for the account); individual lender investment decision (how much of that total should lender x contribute); marketplace (buy / sell orders are processed across all accounts). Each step is fully automatic.
|
|
gnasher
Member of DD Central
Posts: 207
Likes: 146
|
Post by gnasher on Jun 3, 2016 4:24:37 GMT
Buy & sell them at a click on very liquid markets. The Renewables Investment Group (TRIG) - solar & wind farms in UK/IE/FR
Greencoat Capital (UKW) – wind farms
Bluefield Solar (BSIF) – solar parks
Foresight Solar (FSFL) – solar parks
John Laing Environmental (JLEN) – solar, wind & waste
Next Energy Solar (NESF) - solar parks
None of my Fund Supermarkets seem to have any of these funds available. Could anyone point me to one that does.
|
|
jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on Jun 3, 2016 4:41:24 GMT
Buy & sell them at a click on very liquid markets. The Renewables Investment Group (TRIG) - solar & wind farms in UK/IE/FR
Greencoat Capital (UKW) – wind farms
Bluefield Solar (BSIF) – solar parks
Foresight Solar (FSFL) – solar parks
John Laing Environmental (JLEN) – solar, wind & waste
Next Energy Solar (NESF) - solar parks
None of my Fund Supermarkets seem to have any of these funds available. Could anyone point me to one that does. These are all ITs so would be shares not funds.
|
|
gnasher
Member of DD Central
Posts: 207
Likes: 146
|
Post by gnasher on Jun 3, 2016 6:40:57 GMT
OK, but the OP did say "(the following are all publicly listed funds paying 6.2 – 7.5% for a diversified portfolio of operating assets.) "
But my question still remains, can someone please advise a portal for trading in this type of thing. Thanks
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Jun 3, 2016 6:48:21 GMT
OK, but the OP did say "(the following are all publicly listed funds paying 6.2 – 7.5% for a diversified portfolio of operating assets.) "But my question still remains, can someone please advise a portal for trading in this type of thing. Thanks They are all quoted on the London Stock Exchange so should be available via any stockbroker. I use TrustNet Direct (whose back-office is handled by Interactive Investor) and all of these ITs are available. Which fund supermarket are you using? You may need to search for "shares" rather than "funds"
|
|
gnasher
Member of DD Central
Posts: 207
Likes: 146
|
Post by gnasher on Jun 3, 2016 10:40:55 GMT
Thanks, Fidelity and Old Mutual, they just seem to do funds and their own ITs. Anyway I think I have diverted this this thread long enough.
|
|
Steerpike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,977
Likes: 1,687
|
Post by Steerpike on Jun 3, 2016 18:41:14 GMT
Some references for other market opportunities (the following are all publicly listed funds paying 6.2 – 7.5% for a diversified portfolio of operating assets.) Buy & sell them at a click on very liquid markets. The Renewables Investment Group (TRIG) - solar & wind farms in UK/IE/FR
Greencoat Capital (UKW) – wind farms
Bluefield Solar (BSIF) – solar parks
Foresight Solar (FSFL) – solar parks
John Laing Environmental (JLEN) – solar, wind & waste
Next Energy Solar (NESF) - solar parks
These, to my mind, are a world away from AC’s (or other P2P single turbine) deals, developed & monitored using sophisticated software, passed serious duedil by experienced renewables investment funds with strong O&M contracts in place etc. You’re basically buying into large portfolios of geographically diversified professionally managed wind farms/solar parks etc. If I can get 7% on large solar parks (no moving parts, very predictable output) already in operation I’d need to think carefully before investing heavily into GEIA (let alone single WT on-a-farm deals via MLIA where I could be up against a GEIA “fund manager” with more info &/or tools at his disposal than me.) Interesting post, thank you, however, there are other factors to be considered when comparing these ITs with GEIA, for example dealing costs, buy/sell spread, and for some of these average dividends appear to be below 6%.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jun 3, 2016 19:47:37 GMT
Yes Steerpike. These are factors I’m happy with (hold long-term so spreads & dealing costs marginal), if you’re looking to make many small trades on them the costs will start to bite. Dividends I believe will recover as the IT’s enlarge their portfolios (haven’t followed closely but may have been some cash drag there). The key point (for me) is that these are large diversified & professionally developed & monitored portfolios, a world away from single WT deals. Chuck lots of money at them & leave them alone. I say this heavy of heart btw. I would love small wind projects to thrive & flourish, the cuts in support have badly hurt the (already fragile) small operators in this field, with risks that (imo) can’t be ignored now. Genuinely felt torn between keeping shtum & sharing my concerns with p2p lenders. Would be more than happy to be proved wrong. Btw a new recycled cooking oil offer (7Y debenture) on Abundance announced today, 8% with 12% possibility on a follow-up bond I believe (haven’t looked at it yet). AC’s upcoming 282 loan in a similar vein. |
|
Steerpike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,977
Likes: 1,687
|
Post by Steerpike on Jun 3, 2016 20:33:35 GMT
Yes Steerpike . These are factors I’m happy with (hold long-term so spreads & dealing costs marginal), if you’re looking to make many small trades on them the costs will start to bite. Dividends I believe will recover as the IT’s enlarge their portfolios (haven’t followed closely but may have been some cash drag there). The key point (for me) is that these are large diversified & professionally developed & monitored portfolios, a world away from single WT deals. Chuck lots of money at them & leave them alone. I say this heavy of heart btw. I would love small wind projects to thrive & flourish, the cuts in support have badly hurt the (already fragile) small operators in this field, with risks that (imo) can’t be ignored now. Genuinely felt torn between keeping shtum & sharing my concerns with p2p lenders. Would be more than happy to be proved wrong. Btw a new recycled cooking oil offer (7Y debenture) on Abundance announced today, 8% with 12% possibility on a follow-up bond I believe (haven’t looked at it yet). AC’s upcoming 282 loan in a similar vein. I'm glad that you did post, I agree with your points and I too am looking at the 7yr Abundance chippie oil burner, I think I have enough of the 20 year debentures.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jun 3, 2016 21:48:41 GMT
Just to clarify on posts further up this thread I think my concerns re. AC’s GEIA potentially seeking alpha to MLIA investors’ detriment have been largely assuaged by chris’ comments (I’d noticed some things on trades made which however could well have been due to other aspects of the algorithm.) The question as to whether AC (or any p2p platform) can seek alpha with their on-platform “managed/diversified funds”, or if the powers-that-be might have an issue with this, remains open. Important point for MLIA lenders (& shareholders). Happy to hear AC’s view on this seeing we’re on their thread. |
|
Tony
Posts: 51
Likes: 36
|
Post by Tony on Jun 9, 2016 16:19:38 GMT
OK, I got some things wrong. Mea culpa et paenitet me. I am not going to make statements that I cannot keep in future. First point to make is that competition in this market is even more fierce and we lost some deals to others at a lower price. I stand by my principles and will not take deals just for the sake of volume. I run a business and that business needs to make money, plus lenders need to make a return commensurate with the risk. We came under fierce criticism when rates were dropping, yet we still need to offer competitive rates to borrowers. There is a fine balance. Second point is that we have increased head count substantially in recent weeks and these people will take a little while to bed in. However, the pipeline looks strong and we have been listing 2-3 deals per week for underwriters in May and I expect that to be 3-5 per week in June and steadily increasing. Time will tell. I can assure you the account has a future. We have worked hard in recent weeks to secure new deals for the account. These will be coming on to the platform soon. Keep calm, I hear your concerns and I am working hard to resolve them. A Andrew, would you comment on the future now....
|
|
