|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 13:17:45 GMT
Just filled in a loooooong survey for these guys, looks like a reasonably pro job, though the logic in 14 and 19 defeated me (and no way of telling them that the logic had defeated me) so I just filled in some nonsense. Must be stupid in my own age. Still I think they could have told me how long it would take before I started..  |
|
arbster
Member of DD Central
Posts: 810 
Likes: 426
|
Post by arbster on Jul 28, 2015 13:21:41 GMT
Agree. I think it was at least worth a full-sized iPad! My wife gave up before the end...
|
|
arbster
Member of DD Central
Posts: 810
Likes: 426
|
Post by arbster on Jul 28, 2015 13:42:16 GMT
Gave up at page 3...far too many options. Great. That improved my odds of winning the iPad... 
|
|
nairda
Member of DD Central
Posts: 112
Likes: 43
|
Post by nairda on Jul 28, 2015 15:27:13 GMT
I gave up at about page 5 when I saw how much was still left, especially with so many options in most questions.
|
|
jo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 727
Likes: 492
|
Post by jo on Jul 28, 2015 15:39:56 GMT
Gave up.
Too long.
|
|
pikestaff
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,136
Likes: 1,484
|
Post by pikestaff on Jul 28, 2015 15:57:51 GMT
I gave up at Q3 when it asked me to rank 16 characteristics of investing/saving in order of importance.
It's utterly daft to ask for so many, plus it depends on the purpose of the investment.
Even worse, the question insists on ranking all 16. As soon as you give a rank to one, the others are pre-populated. I hope incomplete answers are ignored.
|
|
|
|
Post by pepperpot on Jul 28, 2015 16:28:29 GMT
arbster, our odds are improving all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by goldservice on Jul 29, 2015 7:48:27 GMT
This questionnaire is so stupid that perhaps it comes from the same department that gave us the purple peril, poor contrast, web page design.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,745
Likes: 3,138
Member is Online
|
Post by jonno on Jul 29, 2015 8:45:12 GMT
Jeez! Just completed it. Not sure if I've done a survey or sat a bloody exam.
|
|
|
|
Post by westonkevRS on Jul 29, 2015 9:00:35 GMT
Jeez! Just completed it. Not sure if I've done a survey or sat a bloody exam. Checked your results, " must try harder, could do better" is the kindest I can say.
|
|
|
|
Post by closetotheedge on Jul 29, 2015 9:12:25 GMT
Sorry RS but I gave up too after 10 mins.
I have three RS accounts so maybe I should persevere and line up three iPads and answer all three at the same time.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jul 29, 2015 17:54:01 GMT
I gave up at Q3 when it asked me to rank 16 characteristics of investing/saving in order of importance. I can only assume they weren't interested in my answers to any of questions 4 onwards, as they refused to let me skip that one. Oh well.
|
|
c88dnf
Member of DD Central
Posts: 364
Likes: 266
|
Post by c88dnf on Jul 30, 2015 0:16:13 GMT
I completed the survey, but treated the questions with the same degree of care obviously used in designing the survey: very little.
Anyone else notice that more than one question asked how investors would feel about a product not backed by a provision fund? Really RS, don't even think about it. My money will leave as soon as it's recycled if you go down that path.
|
|
spiral
Member of DD Central
Posts: 909
Likes: 456
|
Post by spiral on Jul 30, 2015 9:15:27 GMT
Anyone else notice that more than one question asked how investors would feel about a product not backed by a provision fund? Really RS, don't even think about it. My money will leave as soon as it's recycled if you go down that path. Why? It doesn't necessarily mean that the current system would go. If they could find a simple way to adopt it within the current scheme then it would serve to offer more choice and therefore a potentially larger customer base. On the face of it, it seems quite simple. Offer the current markets with a choice of protected or unprotected . If you choose unprotected, you get a proportion of the PF fee equivalent to the loan amount you make. If you choose protected, that fee goes into the PF (think of it as an insurance premium that you are paying but the other guy is keeping). In the event that the loan goes bad, one of you claims on your insurance, the other doesn't have it. The only obstacles to overcome (and maybe you wouldn't/couldn't) is alowing the lenders to select risk markets (similar to Zopa have with A, B and C borrowers) and the issue of easily limiting your exposure to any single borrower without having to drip feed your funds.
|
|
|
|
Post by westonkevRS on Jul 30, 2015 17:15:12 GMT
Anyone else notice that more than one question asked how investors would feel about a product not backed by a provision fund? Really RS, don't even think about it. My money will leave as soon as it's recycled if you go down that path. I agree, strange question because it'll almost certainly never happen. Years ago I tabled the idea of a "setting" where lenders could opt out, take the risk, and if I've got my pricing right they increase returns with the surplus. But that was only because I'd always been a big fan of Zopa and the riskier old model. But that isn't RateSetter's business model objective, i.e. simple, boring, easy. I think if it did ever happen, RMM Ltd would do it under a different brand. www.risksetters.com anyone? westonkevRSP.S. please don't click the web page, I made that up
|
|
