|
|
Post by meledor on Sept 16, 2015 10:14:15 GMT
I think you should not be able to sell a loan that you've pre-funded unless you've cleared your BACS funding deficit related to that loan - of course other loans could be sold. We are getting a benefit from Pre-funding in terms of an allocation (which despite the name we do not have to pre-fund unlike some other platforms) and Saving Stream benefit from seeing the level of demand for a particular loan before it goes live. People setting grossly inflated pre-funding level promises that they are unable to keep is working against these benefits on both sides. But that would simply cause headaches for genuine investors who slightly misjudge aggregate demand for a specific loan and need to trim their allocation slightly within the first 24 hours. Don't tar everyone with the same brush by putting in needless blanket controls. Focus any action to upstream controls on the Pre-Funding options of repeat offenders.
If genuine investors have misjudged it slightly then they should be able to sell other loans make up the shortfall. What you need is a something that is coded into the system not the extra admin involved in giving offenders warnings - remember KISS.
|
|
|
|
Post by fiatlender on Sept 16, 2015 10:17:10 GMT
Im not sure where poeple are getting this £330k from, as just after midnight, I only witnessed the % rise from about 29% to 32%, thus 3% of £3m would have been £90,000 back onto the market.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875 
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Sept 16, 2015 10:20:03 GMT
But that would simply cause headaches for genuine investors who slightly misjudge aggregate demand for a specific loan and need to trim their allocation slightly within the first 24 hours. Don't tar everyone with the same brush by putting in needless blanket controls. Focus any action to upstream controls on the Pre-Funding options of repeat offenders.
If genuine investors have misjudged it slightly then they should be able to sell other loans make up the shortfall. What you need is a something that is coded into the system not the extra admin involved in giving offenders warnings - remember KISS.
In that case, if it's really caused by people wanting to bag a day's free interest (are people really that petty?), simply start the interest accrual on new loans on the day FOLLOWING launch
|
|
pom
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,922 
Likes: 1,244
|
Post by pom on Sept 16, 2015 10:33:35 GMT
If genuine investors have misjudged it slightly then they should be able to sell other loans make up the shortfall. What you need is a something that is coded into the system not the extra admin involved in giving offenders warnings - remember KISS.
In that case, if it's really caused by people wanting to bag a day's free interest (are people really that petty?), simply start the interest accrual on new loans on the day FOLLOWING launch Or only start paying interest on a loan part when the deficit is cleared (either by sales or FPS)...tho that could be a coding nightmare and also a total pain for me if they don't manage to fix their problem spotting my payments. But it would certainly stop people profiting whilst still allowing a bit of flex to try get what you're willing to pay for. Edit : although given they already pause interest during selling, maybe introducing it during buying wouldn't be too difficult after all....but I can imagine that putting up with lots of "why haven't you credited my payment" emails would soon become a nightmare
|
|
|
|
Post by solicitorious on Sept 16, 2015 10:39:29 GMT
As I've said before, prefunding should be capped at 1% of the loan per investor (with scaling down if necessary, as presently).
On the smaller loans, this would prevent a Big Hitter walking away with a huge chunk, smaller investors getting a pittance, and smaller investors oversubscribing in an attempt to circumvent this.
On the larger loans, it would prevent interest-hunters from abusing the system, would make no difference to smaller investors who would likely get what they desire, and Big Hitters would still have every opportunity of filling their boots on the SM.
|
|
arbster
Member of DD Central
Posts: 810
Likes: 426
|
Post by arbster on Sept 16, 2015 10:44:45 GMT
In that case, if it's really caused by people wanting to bag a day's free interest (are people really that petty?), simply start the interest accrual on new loans on the day FOLLOWING launch Or only start paying interest on a loan part when the deficit is cleared (either by sales or FPS)...tho that could be a coding nightmare and also a total pain for me if they don't manage to fix their problem spotting my payments. But it would certainly stop people profiting whilst still allowing a bit of flex to try get what you're willing to pay for. Given that all loans pay 12%, they could simply register "negative" interest on any BACS deficits over and above available funds at midnight each night. This would offset any interest earned on money that had not yet been sent/received. To echo others' points, SS would need to speed up the reconciliation of funds transferred, and/or take debit card payments.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickthefool on Sept 16, 2015 10:47:28 GMT
As I've said before, prefunding should be capped at 1% of the loan per investor (with scaling down if necessary, as presently). On the smaller loans, this would prevent a Big Hitter walking away with a huge chunk, smaller investors getting a pittance, and smaller investors oversubscribing in an attempt to circumvent this. On the larger loans, it would prevent interest-hunters from abusing the system, would make no difference to smaller investors who would likely get what they desire, and Big Hitters would still have every opportunity of filling their boots on the SM. So called "interest hunters" could surely still abuse the instant deposit system to buy a large part of an unfilled loan manually, though? I don't see that prefunding affects it materially.
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Sept 16, 2015 10:55:04 GMT
To echo others' points, SS would need to speed up the reconciliation of funds transferred, and/or take debit card payments. Strange, I've never had any delay. Are you notifying them of the exact amount of your BACS transfer as specified in your "deposit" (or their auto-deposit after buying with a prefund)? I have seen posts from some people who think that they can simply BACS the amount in BACS deficit but if this does not match the Deposit, or auto-deposit, figure there will be an understandable delay. I think this is right but perhaps SS will confirm or otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by solicitorious on Sept 16, 2015 10:57:59 GMT
As I've said before, prefunding should be capped at 1% of the loan per investor (with scaling down if necessary, as presently). On the smaller loans, this would prevent a Big Hitter walking away with a huge chunk, smaller investors getting a pittance, and smaller investors oversubscribing in an attempt to circumvent this. On the larger loans, it would prevent interest-hunters from abusing the system, would make no difference to smaller investors who would likely get what they desire, and Big Hitters would still have every opportunity of filling their boots on the SM. So called "interest hunters" could surely still abuse the instant deposit system to buy a large part of an unfilled loan manually, though? I don't see that prefunding affects it materially. Well that problem would pre-exist the PF model, and was presumably handled by SS behind the scenes. The PF model, as presently constituted, just encourages the problem, imho.
|
|
arbster
Member of DD Central
Posts: 810
Likes: 426
|
Post by arbster on Sept 16, 2015 10:58:40 GMT
To echo others' points, SS would need to speed up the reconciliation of funds transferred, and/or take debit card payments. Strange, I've never had any delay. Are you notifying them of the exact amount of your BACS transfer as specified in your "deposit" (or their auto-deposit after buying with a prefund)? I have seen posts from some people who think that they can simply BACS the amount in BACS deficit but if this does not match the Deposit, or auto-deposit, figure there will be an understandable delay. I think this is right but perhaps SS will confirm or otherwise. Generally, it's ok, but if you deposit late on Friday you don't get credited in your account until Tuesday morning, despite leaving your account almost immediately.
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Sept 16, 2015 11:00:35 GMT
There were some naughty investors massively overbidding and subsequently releasing back into the market. Whilst this is working well enough, we are going to be tweaking the rules slightly to stop this kind of behaviour. Wait out. Clearly there are a myriad of solutions suggested both here and in the pre-fund model thread around here , hopefully SS will implement the simplest one that will solve the problem with least impact on everyone else. But, not 'cause I'm in the least bit naughty mind  , please make sure you communicate the "tweaking" rule change before the next loan goes live.  .
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Sept 16, 2015 11:07:18 GMT
I don't know of any other organisation that pays interest on funds not received. The ideal solution would be to pay interest from the date that the loan is funded, but as this might be either the same day as it is bought or a day or so later when the BACS deficit is cleared, it might not be so easy to code.
|
|
|
|
Post by supernumerary on Sept 16, 2015 11:24:12 GMT
Im not sure where people are getting this £330k from, as just after midnight, I only witnessed the % rise from about 29% to 32%, thus 3% of £3m would have been £90,000 back onto the market. £330k was mentioned by paulg. I recall it being at approx. £770k early evening, so that would make it £200k plus returned to the market based on my own observation. These are the earlier posts, that I am referring to; Gone up to £964k available. Which means there's about £330k been dumped back on the SM, so that's how much has got to sell before anyone else's SM sales of this loan will go through.  Which means there's about £330k been dumped back on the SM, so that's how much has got to sell before anyone else's SM sales of this loan will go through. Liz and paulg, thank you for quoting those figures. The last time I looked yesterday evening it was approx. £770k or thereabouts. So eventually, by late evening at some point, it went down to £630k approx. before another £330k appeared... Sales so far this morning are £17,400k. The amount available to fund, as I post, is £970,468.62
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Sept 16, 2015 12:01:36 GMT
Im not sure where poeple are getting this £330k from, as just after midnight, I only witnessed the % rise from about 29% to 32%, thus 3% of £3m would have been £90,000 back onto the market. It went down to 21% and about 650k, it then jumped up to 30%+ & nearly a million
|
|
alan
Posts: 55
Likes: 14
|
Post by alan on Sept 16, 2015 12:09:25 GMT
To echo others' points, SS would need to speed up the reconciliation of funds transferred, and/or take debit card payments. Strange, I've never had any delay. Are you notifying them of the exact amount of your BACS transfer as specified in your "deposit" (or their auto-deposit after buying with a prefund)? I have seen posts from some people who think that they can simply BACS the amount in BACS deficit but if this does not match the Deposit, or auto-deposit, figure there will be an understandable delay. I think this is right but perhaps SS will confirm or otherwise. Why do they need to use the value and not just use my a/c reference? I guess the answer is in the way their reconciliation is designed. If they just credit my amount I can reconcile myself. BTW I have tried exact amounts and others made no difference to showing on my account. Thanks Alan
|
|
, please make sure you communicate the "tweaking" rule change before the next loan goes live. 
.
