kermie
Member of DD Central
Posts: 691 
Likes: 462
|
Post by kermie on Sept 8, 2015 17:46:54 GMT
The % of our account that can be withdrawn in seconds is designed to be many times higher than the % of withdrawals that a bank could stand before folding. The flipside is we are limiting the account size, initially to £1m so first come first served. So, if all your 'active' lenders (we don't know the figure) have £1m lent each (highly unlikely) via QAA & all decided to withdraw 100% at the same time, will AC have enough cash reserves to meet the demand? - A vey doomsday scenario I know & will never happen but, if the answer is yes then it puts everyones mind to rest that the QAA option is THE place to park money until auto invest limits ar called in by AC & will then automatically sell & transfer monies from QAA into MLIA. I believe there's a limit of £25k per lender - £1M in the whole account across all lenders.
|
|
j
Member of DD Central
Penguins are very misunderstood!
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 540
|
Post by j on Sept 8, 2015 18:02:11 GMT
So, if all your 'active' lenders (we don't know the figure) have £1m lent each (highly unlikely) via QAA & all decided to withdraw 100% at the same time, will AC have enough cash reserves to meet the demand? - A vey doomsday scenario I know & will never happen but, if the answer is yes then it puts everyones mind to rest that the QAA option is THE place to park money until auto invest limits ar called in by AC & will then automatically sell & transfer monies from QAA into MLIA. I believe there's a limit of £25k per lender - £1M in the whole account across all lenders. If that's the case then I misread in my haste. The question still stands but at £25k has far less negative implications than at £1m (highly unlikely as it might be that we all will invest at such high level).
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,563
Likes: 1,171
|
Post by shimself on Sept 8, 2015 18:14:10 GMT
Is this still launching today? Been checking my account but no sign of it yet. Working on it but have just run into a compliance change that we're implementing (display only rather than functionality). how's wednesday looking?
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Sept 8, 2015 18:17:07 GMT
Working on it but have just run into a compliance change that we're implementing (display only rather than functionality). how's wednesday looking? Looking good  Yeah we finished working on it at 6pm which is just too late in the day to set it live. There was a last minute snag where the clean we were testing failed a check and required some changes, and there was also a last minute change due to feedback from compliance (barring SIPP investors from the QAA functions) that took a little while to implement. We'll be taking it live tomorrow morning.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Sept 8, 2015 18:18:47 GMT
I believe there's a limit of £25k per lender - £1M in the whole account across all lenders. If that's the case then I misread in my haste. The question still stands but at £25k has far less negative implications than at £1m (highly unlikely as it might be that we all will invest at such high level). Yes it's £25k per lender, £1m globally. Both limits are likely to rise over time, especially the global amount we allow into the account, as we gain understanding of real world usage and demand.
|
|
jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on Sept 8, 2015 18:38:45 GMT
Looking good Yeah we finished working on it at 6pm which is just too late in the day to set it live. There was a last minute snag where the clean we were testing failed a check and required some changes, and there was also a last minute change due to feedback from compliance (barring SIPP investors from the QAA functions) that took a little while to implement. We'll be taking it live tomorrow morning. I assume that this will run a 'double' interest or accrued interest catchup? on a more serious note, being a day late and getting it right is sometimes a lot harder to do when people are pressing you to go live. So well done on fixing issues before go live and I hope tomorrow goes smoothly.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Sept 8, 2015 18:51:51 GMT
A million pounds is in the account. There will be inflow and outflow to and from it constantly. How will my funds waiting to get in it be allowed; some automatic queueing system, or manual, pot luck? There's a queue that's first come first served. So in addition to cash being present there should also be a weight of funds waiting to invest. Wouldn't it be "fairer" to use the same allocation system as for investment in loans? i.e. evaluate the total demand from all investors, and allow everyone up to the same size chunk of the available capacity (or £1 each for a random subset if there is not enough to allow everyone to have £1). There would then also be less need for an explicit £25k limit - there would be a naturally-evolving limit (possibly much less than £25k) based on the total allowance and how many people were trying to get "as much as possible" into the account.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Sept 8, 2015 19:18:09 GMT
Looking good Yeah we finished working on it at 6pm which is just too late in the day to set it live. There was a last minute snag where the clean we were testing failed a check and required some changes, and there was also a last minute change due to feedback from compliance (barring SIPP investors from the QAA functions) that took a little while to implement. We'll be taking it live tomorrow morning. I assume that this will run a 'double' interest or accrued interest catchup? on a more serious note, being a day late and getting it right is sometimes a lot harder to do when people are pressing you to go live. So well done on fixing issues before go live and I hope tomorrow goes smoothly. Yes. It's calculated point in time rather than accumulating something daily. So instead of adding x each day to a figure to accumulate the total that figure is calculated from scratch each time it is updated.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Sept 8, 2015 19:23:33 GMT
There's a queue that's first come first served. So in addition to cash being present there should also be a weight of funds waiting to invest. Wouldn't it be "fairer" to use the same allocation system as for investment in loans? i.e. evaluate the total demand from all investors, and allow everyone up to the same size chunk of the available capacity (or £1 each for a random subset if there is not enough to allow everyone to have £1). There would then also be less need for an explicit £25k limit - there would be a naturally-evolving limit (possibly much less than £25k) based on the total allowance and how many people were trying to get "as much as possible" into the account. I've thought about it and it's a possibility for the future. Our thinking is that first come first served is more likely to create a weight of funds waiting to get in. It also happens to reduce the number of transactions when someone pulls out funds (if one person has the funds then it's one transaction rather than 100), which is therefore also lower load on the servers. With the dynamic release of funds on demand there's potential for load to be an issue.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Sept 8, 2015 20:08:09 GMT
I've thought about it and it's a possibility for the future. Our thinking is that first come first served is more likely to create a weight of funds waiting to get in. It also happens to reduce the number of transactions when someone pulls out funds (if one person has the funds then it's one transaction rather than 100), which is therefore also lower load on the servers. With the dynamic release of funds on demand there's potential for load to be an issue. Fair enough... only other question is how the system would tie-break between multiple users whose funds have exactly the same queue time... or would it pro-rate in that case? e.g. lots of users lent to borrower X, and all have the relevant accounts set to use QAA for surplus funds. Borrower X settles their £1M+ loan, so suddenly there are £1M of funds from lots of different users all with exactly the same queue time.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Sept 8, 2015 20:12:30 GMT
I've thought about it and it's a possibility for the future. Our thinking is that first come first served is more likely to create a weight of funds waiting to get in. It also happens to reduce the number of transactions when someone pulls out funds (if one person has the funds then it's one transaction rather than 100), which is therefore also lower load on the servers. With the dynamic release of funds on demand there's potential for load to be an issue. Fair enough... only other question is how the system would tie-break between multiple users whose funds have exactly the same queue time... or would it pro-rate in that case? e.g. lots of users lent to borrower X, and all have the relevant accounts set to use QAA for surplus funds. Borrower X settles their £1M+ loan, so suddenly there are £1M of funds from lots of different users all with exactly the same queue time. In the database there's always a deterministic order, so there is always an order to the queue.
|
|
|
|
Post by ogwellian on Sept 8, 2015 20:29:49 GMT
Given 30 days' notice on my stash in Wellesley's 3.5%. The instant access and the extra 0.25% make the switch worthwhile.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Sept 8, 2015 23:23:21 GMT
Fair enough... only other question is how the system would tie-break between multiple users whose funds have exactly the same queue time... or would it pro-rate in that case? e.g. lots of users lent to borrower X, and all have the relevant accounts set to use QAA for surplus funds. Borrower X settles their £1M+ loan, so suddenly there are £1M of funds from lots of different users all with exactly the same queue time. In the database there's always a deterministic order, so there is always an order to the queue. So, at risk of repeating the earlier question, in cases such as this where the order cannot be determined by the time (because a large number of users received payment at exactly the same time and are simultaneously adding funds to the QAA), what additional criteria does the database use to deterministically decide that one user gets their funds re-invested in the QAA "immediately", but another is determined to be at the back of the queue and must wait until everyone else has had their turn? Does the database prioritise the earliest sign-up date? Alphabetical by username? Amount of funds being queued? The order in which the users acquired their loan units? AC staff users over others? Something else?
|
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Sept 8, 2015 23:41:10 GMT
Yes it's £25k per lender, £1m globally.  Is the following interpretation of that statement correct? £1m globally, £25k per lender therefore the QAA could be filled by 40 “big hitters” who consider £25k small change. 
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Sept 9, 2015 5:22:36 GMT
Yes it's £25k per lender, £1m globally. Is the following interpretation of that statement correct? £1m globally, £25k per lender therefore the QAA could be filled by 40 “big hitters” who consider £25k small change. Yes it's possible. But if that happens quickly then we'll just up the global cap. The global cap is there to make sure there's a weight of funds waiting to get into the account to provide liquidity to those wanting to leave on top the cash balance we'll maintain, and to make sure the account balances so that we can maintain the right level of cash vs the amount deployed and earning interest.
|
|
