|
|
Post by aloanatlast on Oct 2, 2015 14:26:44 GMT
very much the feeling I get too. Lots of cosmetic tinkering -- nothing too likely to break, been like that for quite a long time, culminating in changes to the business operation to suit the software/hardware (tail wagging dog) spun as a positive decision and change ...
It's my impression there's a total embargo on software work in this area. If they haven't slashed the budget, they've diverted it all to other areas.
Live Bids is still in beta after about 2 years, and that was about the last significant thing they did. Since then, the "All Bids" list is now paged, but that's all I can find that's changed. All the old bugs are still there, and they aren't fixing the new bugs either.
But if the backers are aiming to sell the company, they may just think software work is money down the drain.
And yes, the need for software work seems to be the likeliest reason for the sudden "efficiency improvement".
|
|
|
|
Post by nightmare on Oct 2, 2015 14:40:27 GMT
Coding the validation is simple:
if (strpos($username, 'azinga') !== false) {
die("On your bike sunshine");
}
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072 
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Oct 2, 2015 17:24:32 GMT
very much the feeling I get too. Lots of cosmetic tinkering -- nothing too likely to break, been like that for quite a long time, culminating in changes to the business operation to suit the software/hardware (tail wagging dog) spun as a positive decision and change ... Live Bids is still in beta after about 2 years "Live bids" is not really in beta, despite the claim on the ever-increasingly-outdated website. It was switched off completely some time back to help stop the site collapsing. "Live bids" is now basically a post it note saying "hit refresh if you want live bids". Not even alpha. It's just not there 
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Oct 2, 2015 17:31:13 GMT
It's not even very useful any more, since your bid stands very low (should be zero, but hey, look at 16028!) chance of being knocked out after you place it.
Am I imagining it, or was one of the FC 'original coders' involved in starting ReBS (using a loan from FC) ?
|
|
fasty
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 388
|
Post by fasty on Oct 5, 2015 16:50:16 GMT
"E" 16273 if you hurry
|
|
chrisf
Member of DD Central
Posts: 224
Likes: 67
|
Post by chrisf on Oct 5, 2015 16:59:02 GMT
Thanks for that, I just got there in time.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Oct 6, 2015 16:41:02 GMT
Why don't they just throttle number of bids to 5 per minute and 50 per hour. This would help their server load, bandwidth and would have no impact on the vast majority of customers. 1 bid per auction per hour would be perfectly adequate (this could be treated as an accruing right - if the auction has not yet reached 100% funding, and you see it 8 hours after it went live, you can immediately place up to 8 bids). With bids allowed up to £2k, this would have little to no impact on "buy and hold" investors... and loans which run to term can receive up to 7 x 24 = 168 bids per user (theoretically up to £316,000 at th maximum £2k per bid!). Even if they can't stop excess bids being made (under the 20% rule or some other rule), it hardly seems rocket science to have the system enforce the rules after the event - cancelling any bids that breached the T&Cs; the system already caters for the concept of bids being cancelled after all...
|
|
fasty
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 388
|
Post by fasty on Oct 6, 2015 16:56:04 GMT
Many of us feel that the aggressive monopolisation of some loans is "unfair". There are clearly several ways it could be prevented. Unfortunately, what FC need is to fill the loans, and if B****** does that all in one swoop, then why should FC be bothered to make any changes?
|
|
nick
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 825
|
Post by nick on Oct 6, 2015 17:31:08 GMT
Many of us feel that the aggressive monopolisation of some loans is "unfair". There are clearly several ways it could be prevented. Unfortunately, what FC need is to fill the loans, and if B****** does that all in one swoop, then why should FC be bothered to make any changes? FC couldn't care less. In fact the proportion of whole loan now exceeds partial loans and I suspect this trend will continue. It makes sense for them, far as less resources for the same revenue. For P2P platforms it is a volume game, those who reach critical mass before we reach a tightening in interest rates and less benign conditions will survive and prosper, most won't. Even FC with its current volumes is barely break even.
|
|
TitoPuente
Member of DD Central
Posts: 624
Likes: 655
|
Post by TitoPuente on Oct 12, 2015 17:44:07 GMT
New D going fast.
|
|
min
Member of DD Central
Posts: 615
Likes: 182
|
Post by min on Oct 12, 2015 18:42:14 GMT
Gone by the time I got there. Do have to eat. Not that disappointed. Probably mean another withdrawal from Fairly  .
|
|
fasty
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 388
|
Post by fasty on Oct 14, 2015 11:38:42 GMT
E altert 16388 and 16403
|
|
|
|
Post by bonfemme on Oct 14, 2015 11:41:17 GMT
Put all my money into the larger one.... then saw the tastier smaller one ..... skint by then
|
|
acky
Posts: 481
Likes: 262
|
Post by acky on Oct 16, 2015 13:27:27 GMT
Financials on E 16551 look as strong as some of the recent A+'s!! No PG as not a limited company, which must be how FC work out the risk bands!
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Oct 16, 2015 13:35:34 GMT
Financials on E 16551 look as strong as some of the recent A+'s!! No PG as not a limited company, which must be how FC work out the risk bands! Yeah, I was looking at that too and came to the same conclusion. I wonder also whether, because it's a sole trader, we don't get to see any non-business related financials?
|
|
.
