agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,055 
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Nov 5, 2015 19:16:43 GMT
211 underwriting called (did that just happen or have I not been paying attention again).
Drawdown stated as 18th. Will it go early?
|
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Nov 5, 2015 19:23:11 GMT
Is this a record, announced today underwriting called immediately, drawdown 18th or who knows tomorrow, has a fire been lit somewhere or has this been diverted from the institutions to quieten the restless mob.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Nov 5, 2015 20:05:15 GMT
210 underwriting called (did that just happen or have I not been paying attention again). Drawdown stated as 18th. Will it go early? : I think it's actually #211. And I think it did just happen -- the documents show as being uploaded at 1630 today. The fact that 'underwriting' has been called seems inconsistent with an estimated drawdown date of 18/Nov. A question about that has been asked, but I'd expect to see a revised drawdown date appear tomorrow. Well the underwriting panel wasn't shown it, so either it's an institution or the QAA underwriting it (my guess the latter). At 10% for a 5-year loan with 70% OMV LTV (89% under special assumptions) it's not exactly lighting my fire. Nonetheless with nothing else to buy, and some quite large redemptions in the pipeline, I'll be bidding for some anyway ... That's an interesting revelation about the underwriting panel having been bypassed. I think I'd bet on it being underwritten by the QAA. If that's the case, then AC have the money in hand already, and drawdown could be imminent. With the dearth of alternative opportunities within AC, I'd expect this to be very oversubscribed, with a sub-£1000 maximum allocation.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Nov 5, 2015 20:08:53 GMT
Tripadvisor is encouraging (yes, I do have pinches of salt to hand). This is a rescue pub (ex Punch taverns disaster!!!). Recent reviews are very good. The borrowers respond to criticism. Grumpy will have a bit of this. Maybe this will draw down as soon as enough buying instructions have been set. My tenpence is in  |
|
jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on Nov 5, 2015 21:42:15 GMT
An extra few hundred k going through this month at an ok if not outstanding rate is a positive though. Just hope 212 lights people's bonfire a little more. |
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,055
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Nov 5, 2015 22:01:29 GMT
210 underwriting called (did that just happen or have I not been paying attention again). Drawdown stated as 18th. Will it go early? : I think it's actually #211. Edited to correct.
|
|
tonyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 477
Likes: 258
|
Post by tonyr on Nov 6, 2015 6:41:47 GMT
210 underwriting called (did that just happen or have I not been paying attention again). Drawdown stated as 18th. Will it go early? : I think it's actually #211. And I think it did just happen -- the documents show as being uploaded at 1630 today. The fact that 'underwriting' has been called seems inconsistent with an estimated drawdown date of 18/Nov. A question about that has been asked, but I'd expect to see a revised drawdown date appear tomorrow. Well the underwriting panel wasn't shown it, so either it's an institution or the QAA underwriting it (my guess the latter). At 10% for a 5-year loan with 70% OMV LTV (89% under special assumptions) it's not exactly lighting my fire. Nonetheless with nothing else to buy, and some quite large redemptions in the pipeline, I'll be bidding for some anyway ... That's an interesting revelation about the underwriting panel having been bypassed. I think I'd bet on it being underwritten by the QAA. If that's the case, then AC have the money in hand already, and drawdown could be imminent. With the dearth of alternative opportunities within AC, I'd expect this to be very oversubscribed, with a sub-£1000 maximum allocation. My guess is also that it is QAA money. There's enough money in the QAA to take the lot, and feeding the MLIA via the QAA keeps the MLIA investors hungry so we take whatever is offered and also boosts the QAA size so the same thing can keep happening. With the dark QAA pool and new institutional underwriters AC has become a lot more complicated. I don't understand it any more which troubles me.
|
|
j
Member of DD Central
Penguins are very misunderstood!
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 540
|
Post by j on Nov 6, 2015 8:18:17 GMT
My guess is also that it is QAA money. There's enough money in the QAA to take the lot, and feeding the MLIA via the QAA keeps the MLIA investors hungry so we take whatever is offered and also boosts the QAA size so the same thing can keep happening. With the dark QAA pool and new institutional underwriters AC has become a lot more complicated. I don't understand it any more which troubles me. It's somewhat comical reading all this. Gone are the days when AC would be ringing up trying to get me to invest in smallish loans paying 15-20% pa just to try & fill them up & get them moving off the ground. How times change indeed!
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,055
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Nov 6, 2015 8:59:41 GMT
My guess is also that it is QAA money. There's enough money in the QAA to take the lot, and feeding the MLIA via the QAA keeps the MLIA investors hungry so we take whatever is offered and also boosts the QAA size so the same thing can keep happening. With the dark QAA pool and new institutional underwriters AC has become a lot more complicated. I don't understand it any more which troubles me. It's somewhat comical reading all this. Gone are the days when AC would be ringing up trying to get me to invest in smallish loans paying 15-20% pa just to try & fill them up & get them moving off the ground. How times change indeed! Some things change, others not so.
Still diddley squat on the SM.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Nov 6, 2015 10:04:05 GMT
agent69: I think it's actually #211. And I think it did just happen -- the documents show as being uploaded at 1630 today. The fact that 'underwriting' has been called seems inconsistent with an estimated drawdown date of 18/Nov. A question about that has been asked, but I'd expect to see a revised drawdown date appear tomorrow. That's an interesting revelation about the underwriting panel having been bypassed. I think I'd bet on it being underwritten by the QAA. If that's the case, then AC have the money in hand already, and drawdown could be imminent. With the dearth of alternative opportunities within AC, I'd expect this to be very oversubscribed, with a sub-£1000 maximum allocation. My guess is also that it is QAA money. There's enough money in the QAA to take the lot, and feeding the MLIA via the QAA keeps the MLIA investors hungry so we take whatever is offered and also boosts the QAA size so the same thing can keep happening. With the dark QAA pool and new institutional underwriters AC has become a lot more complicated. I don't understand it any more which troubles me. I don't feel that AC has become more complicated even though on the surface the deal flow has gone to a trickle and a couple of extras thrown in - GBBA and QAA. Coincidental but the retail deal flow started slowing once institutional investors became involved and they can be a hungry bunch. Funny, well not really, as to zero offerings of bridging loans to the retail market once an institution or two became involved. I'm certainly under no illusions as to where many of the loans are being offered but if I was in the shoes of AC, I'd probably do the same. Easier dealing with a single investor than...... No proof on my part - just putting 2 and 2 together and hopefully making 4.
|
|
bigfoot12
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 816
|
Post by bigfoot12 on Nov 6, 2015 10:21:59 GMT
Coincidental but the retail deal flow started slowing once institutional investors became involved and they can be a hungry bunch. I'm not sure it did really. There has been a shortage of loans for most of the last 12 months, and as of July VPC hadn't bought any. (Data 'checked' by flicking carelessly through a few of p2p-banking.com's charts - only a couple of months in the last year had a higher volume than the previous year.) NB wiseclerk it would be good if each turnover table was linked to the previous one.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Nov 6, 2015 10:44:10 GMT
Coincidental but the retail deal flow started slowing once institutional investors became involved and they can be a hungry bunch. I'm not sure it did really. There has been a shortage of loans for most of the last 12 months, and as of July VPC hadn't bought any. (Data 'checked' by flicking carelessly through a few of p2p-banking.com's charts - only a couple of months in the last year had a higher volume than the previous year.) NB wiseclerk it would be good if each turnover table was linked to the previous one. If that is the case and who really knows - probably only AC themselves, then I would have thought that the AC P&L is not looking very healthy although IIRC their prospectus issued on SEEDRS did forecast a 2015 loss and then a sudden upturn for 2016. All supposition on my part and there are other P2* opportunities. All depends what you are comfortable with and single digit returns simply doesn't do it for me.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Nov 6, 2015 10:48:13 GMT
....their prospectus (issued on SEEDRS) did forecast (a 2015 loss and then) a sudden upturn for 2016.
Well, I do hope AC's forecasts are less reliable than those of the last twelve months regarding deal flow.  ...I think ... |
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Nov 6, 2015 11:17:53 GMT
211 underwriting called (did that just happen or have I not been paying attention again). Drawdown stated as 18th. Will it go early? Drawdown forecast brought forward to 9 November! Wow!
|
|
pikestaff
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,189
Likes: 1,546
|
Post by pikestaff on Nov 6, 2015 12:16:14 GMT
....their prospectus (issued on SEEDRS) did forecast (a 2015 loss and then) a sudden upturn for 2016.
Well, I do hope AC's forecasts are less reliable than those of the last twelve months regarding deal flow. ...I think ... I would think they are about equally reliable because both depend on deal flow. As of now they must be looking at a much larger than expected loss for 2015 and they will need a massive turnaround if they are going to be profitable in 2016.
|
|
