ianb
Posts: 161 
Likes: 54
|
Post by ianb on Sept 24, 2015 13:46:58 GMT
I also got £721 (in each of two accounts) which I guess is the max anyone could get. Can't say i'm at all happy, to have only this allocation after the long summer wait - combined with the new operation going away from set targets which are just annoying to me at least as they make more work. Maybe there are £3m of additional investments coming along soon though history would say this wont all turn up, but theres also 4 loans due to repay in the next 2 months totalling £1.8m so the net investment inflow will be considerably less. Compared to the last law loan which was also over subscribed I picked up £1179 of it. By some probably dodgy sums demand has increased 61% which means there is a quite serious problem for AC. At the moment AC seems to be frustrating investors who want an average loan investment more than these amounts, while SS launches 2 new loans today.... the little voice inside my head is pointing me that a way. However being soft I'll give it another week or so. 
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Sept 24, 2015 13:52:17 GMT
Does anyone know what the allocation rules are? We have reports of £50 and £500 orders filled completely, and a report from kermie that he received "most" of what he asked for. (How much did you ask for, kermie?) I received £721.31909346047749287663 of the £1000 I asked for, i.e. 72.132%. chris: Can you please tell us how the allocations were worked out? Also, does the amount of available cash in an account affect the allocation? For instance, if I had only £800 in my account, would I still have received £721 of the new loan? Or would I have been treated as if I had put in a £800 order? Ditto, mikes1531, I got £721 out of requested £1000. I suspect anyone who wanted less than £721 got their requirement met in full. I *don't* think that the system favours larger lenders here - I believe allocations tend to be done based on "absolute fairness" rather than "relative fairness" - so if anything it favours smaller lenders. Well, it could be that. Or it could be that orders up to £500 were filled completely, and orders above that were allocated £500 plus 44.2% of the excess over £500 requested. Or it could have been a more complicated tiered allocation. It even could have included a 'nothing for the big boys' factor as was used in the Royal Mail offering. AC do seem to have a tendency to do things in an elaborate way, so IMHO anything is possible. But I do feel it is appropriate for AC to give us a clue what the rules are. Is there anyone else who received less than a 100% allocation who is willing to tell us what they asked for and what they received? (And if they didn't have enough cash available in their account to cover their full request it would be helpful to know how much cash they did have available.)
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Sept 24, 2015 14:01:04 GMT
I also got £721 (in each of two accounts) which I guess is the max anyone could get. Did either of those accounts request an amount different from £1000? Maybe there are £3m of additional investments coming along soon though history would say this wont all turn up, but theres also 4 loans due to repay in the next 2 months totalling £1.8m so the net investment inflow will be considerably less. There are also a number of loans in the 'default recovery' process. Some of those might be settled soon, further unbalancing the supply/demand situation. (Or is that just me being wildly overoptimistic?  )
|
|
ianb
Posts: 161
Likes: 54
|
Post by ianb on Sept 24, 2015 14:07:36 GMT
I also got £721 (in each of two accounts) which I guess is the max anyone could get. Did either of those accounts request an amount different from £1000? Maybe there are £3m of additional investments coming along soon though history would say this wont all turn up, but theres also 4 loans due to repay in the next 2 months totalling £1.8m so the net investment inflow will be considerably less. There are also a number of loans in the 'default recovery' process. Some of those might be settled soon, further unbalancing the supply/demand situation. (Or is that just me being wildly overoptimistic? ) Yep - both those accounts requested more than £1000 (not that I especially like this loan, just I want to invest in SOMETHING). I also manage an account for my daughter which requested £425 and that was met spot on. I think theres a big supply/demand problem which isn't allowing me to manage my investments as I want to. Last time this happened I ended up getting snagged by Plumby.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Sept 24, 2015 14:10:37 GMT
Ditto, mikes1531, I got £721 out of requested £1000. I suspect anyone who wanted less than £721 got their requirement met in full. I *don't* think that the system favours larger lenders here - I believe allocations tend to be done based on "absolute fairness" rather than "relative fairness" - so if anything it favours smaller lenders. Well, it could be that. Or it could be that orders up to £500 were filled completely, and orders above that were allocated £500 plus 44.2% of the excess over £500 requested. Or it could have been a more complicated tiered allocation. It even could have included a 'nothing for the big boys' factor as was used in the Royal Mail offering. AC do seem to have a tendency to do things in an elaborate way, so IMHO anything is possible. But I do feel it is appropriate for AC to give us a clue what the rules are. Is there anyone else who received less than a 100% allocation who is willing to tell us what they asked for and what they received? (And if they didn't have enough cash available in their account to cover their full request it would be helpful to know how much cash they did have available.) I'm our defence I have said several times what the allocation algorithm is. The amount for sale is divided equally amongst all buyers and if that amount exceeds someone's total then the excess is shared equally amongst everyone else. That same algorithm is still used.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Sept 24, 2015 14:13:46 GMT
I've always understood that both new loans and SM loan sales are allocated across everyone that has an open order, starting from the smallest requests and working upwards. So if there is more demand than supply, smaller orders are filled fully and anyone wanting more than that gets the same share (in absolute terms).
[oops, crossed with Chris]
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Sept 24, 2015 14:14:40 GMT
I've always understood that both new loans and SM loan sales are allocated across everyone that has an open order, starting from the smallest requests and working upwards. So if there is more demand than supply, smaller orders are filled fully and anyone wanting more than that gets the same share (in absolute terms). [oops, crossed with Chris] That is correct, which stops people gaming the system by requesting more than they want and protects the smaller investors.
|
|
rogerbu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 213
|
Post by rogerbu on Sept 24, 2015 14:19:06 GMT
Well, it could be that. Or it could be that orders up to £500 were filled completely, and orders above that were allocated £500 plus 44.2% of the excess over £500 requested. Or it could have been a more complicated tiered allocation. It even could have included a 'nothing for the big boys' factor as was used in the Royal Mail offering. AC do seem to have a tendency to do things in an elaborate way, so IMHO anything is possible. But I do feel it is appropriate for AC to give us a clue what the rules are. Is there anyone else who received less than a 100% allocation who is willing to tell us what they asked for and what they received? (And if they didn't have enough cash available in their account to cover their full request it would be helpful to know how much cash they did have available.) I'm our defence I have said several times what the allocation algorithm is. The amount for sale is divided equally amongst all buyers and if that amount exceeds someone's total then the excess is shared equally amongst everyone else. That same algorithm is still used. Why then if I had a request for £500 with £1500 in the QAA did I get >£0.01? I cannot see that the fair AC algorithm was actually used
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Sept 24, 2015 14:21:43 GMT
I'm our defence I have said several times what the allocation algorithm is. The amount for sale is divided equally amongst all buyers and if that amount exceeds someone's total then the excess is shared equally amongst everyone else. That same algorithm is still used. Why then if I had a request for £500 with £1500 in the QAA did I get >£0.01? Was your QAA money invested directly or swept in via the MLIA?
|
|
rogerbu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 213
|
Post by rogerbu on Sept 24, 2015 14:25:43 GMT
Why then if I had a request for £500 with £1500 in the QAA did I get >£0.01? Was your QAA money invested directly or swept in via the MLIA? It was invested into the QAA directly by manually transferring it from the Cash Account as I have not managed to get the Sweeping setting to work (I have tried all settings)
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Sept 24, 2015 14:27:55 GMT
In that case, you had no "available funds" in your MLIA when the loan drew down. Direct investments into your QAA are unconnected with your MLIA.
|
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Sept 24, 2015 14:46:50 GMT
Was your QAA money invested directly or swept in via the MLIA? It was invested into the QAA directly by manually transferring it from the Cash Account as I have not managed to get the Sweeping setting to work (I have tried all settings) So that poses the question, how do we get the sweeping setting to work? because I'm damned if I could.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Sept 24, 2015 14:59:14 GMT
It was invested into the QAA directly by manually transferring it from the Cash Account as I have not managed to get the Sweeping setting to work (I have tried all settings) So that poses the question, how do we get the sweeping setting to work? because I'm damned if I could. I simply clicked on the "Invest Idle Funds" button (bottom left in the QAA banner) and selected "Invest idle funds from other Assetz Investment Accounts and your Cash account". Of course, with the QAA queue currently full, it won't actually sweep anything from your MLIA until / unless you reach the front of the queue.
|
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Sept 24, 2015 14:59:31 GMT
So that poses the question, how do we get the sweeping setting to work? because I'm damned if I could. While the QAA is full, it's not going to :-( That's what I like about AC, the surprises of learning by trial and error how new accounts / systems work.  Having said that, I did get all of my order for 198. 
|
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Sept 24, 2015 15:04:21 GMT
So that poses the question, how do we get the sweeping setting to work? because I'm damned if I could. I simply clicked on the "Invest Idle Funds" button (bottom left in the QAA banner) and selected "Invest idle funds from other Assetz Investment Accounts and your Cash account". Of course, with the QAA queue currently full, it won't actually sweep anything from your MLIA until / unless you reach the front of the queue. Thanks for the info. However IIRC, when I clicked the "Invest Idle Funds" button nothing happened let alone having the option of selecting "Invest idle funds etc."
|
|
)
