|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2016 9:46:15 GMT
Shrapnelator working well at the moment, stimulated, I guess, by the sudden new deals (all that waiting for so little) and people moving some money around. Pity that two of the loans have so little to attract punters lenders. Still, as Andrew says, if you don't like them leave them alone. Should be be only small amount of a loan for each lender due to the last 9 months of lack of supply. Chris, I know I knock on about this, and you are probably bored by the issue, but how many AC transactions end up being "a bit odd" ? To me it seems like most of them but I guess I'm very sensitive to the issue. Chris, any chance you could ask Operations if, when they scan a document in they could try for 1) Vertical, 2) all the words to appear in the PDF, 3) all the words to be readable, 4) the PDF to be readable by most good PDF readers on the market (for some reason #207 has a bunch of issues). It is so frustrating when a good company and a good product is miss-managed by basically incompetent-quality processes.  A good test would be the staff just to open it up after they loaded it and checked.... |
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092 
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jan 26, 2016 9:53:47 GMT
Shrapnelator working well at the moment, stimulated, I guess, by the sudden new deals (all that waiting for so little) and people moving some money around. Indeed - the "ripples" caused by throwing a couple of stones in the pond (and perhaps also the effect of a few more stones in the air and due to land later this week) seem to have spread around quite a few more odd bits of loan units... I've personally reached my investment target on several loans as a result, and will probably need to think about adding more funds soon, especially if similar ripples are generated by the drawdowns due to occur this week. I wonder if GBBA and GEIA similarly experienced the effect of such "ripples" and managed to get a few more users fully invested?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2016 10:07:46 GMT
At my AC limit now, so selling deals that are about to close to fund the new ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by pepperpot on Jan 26, 2016 11:03:19 GMT
Presumably the system is currently set only to display a new loan once any units first become available for MLIA purchase. The problem would be solved if instead it displayed new loans as soon as they go live for "retail lender" purchase, even if the entire loan is allocated to the QAA or GBBA initially. Can you imagine the uproar on 2 Oct last year when in the middle of the drought, 207 drew and allocated £0 to MLIA. Was probably not worth the backlash to tell everyone at the time and can understand the hushed launch. I'd put this one down to exceptional circumstances. I found it interesting that, if it's the case, QAA has held onto this for as long as it has (and may still hold the majority - only £15k was released to MLIA yesterday), but may be that was the result of nothing else to feed QAA. I guess the rest will be released over the next few weeks/months. I did wonder how the QAA was able to grow at the pace it did, maybe there are a few more 207's out there?
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jan 26, 2016 11:25:52 GMT
Presumably the system is currently set only to display a new loan once any units first become available for MLIA purchase. The problem would be solved if instead it displayed new loans as soon as they go live for "retail lender" purchase, even if the entire loan is allocated to the QAA or GBBA initially. Can you imagine the uproar on 2 Oct last year when in the middle of the drought, 207 drew and allocated £0 to MLIA. Was probably not worth the backlash to tell everyone at the time and can understand the hushed launch. I'd put this one down to exceptional circumstances. I found it interesting that, if it's the case, QAA has held onto this for as long as it has (and may still hold the majority - only £15k was released to MLIA yesterday), but may be that was the result of nothing else to feed QAA. I guess the rest will be released over the next few weeks/months. I did wonder how the QAA was able to grow at the pace it did, maybe there are a few more 207's out there? I'm assured 206 and 207 were the only two held in this way by the QAA. Everything else has been spread across visible loans.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Jan 26, 2016 11:38:47 GMT
Presumably the system is currently set only to display a new loan once any units first become available for MLIA purchase. The problem would be solved if instead it displayed new loans as soon as they go live for "retail lender" purchase, even if the entire loan is allocated to the QAA or GBBA initially. Can you imagine the uproar on 2 Oct last year when in the middle of the drought, 207 drew and allocated £0 to MLIA. Was probably not worth the backlash to tell everyone at the time and can understand the hushed launch. I'd put this one down to exceptional circumstances. I found it interesting that, if it's the case, QAA has held onto this for as long as it has (and may still hold the majority - only £15k was released to MLIA yesterday), but may be that was the result of nothing else to feed QAA. I guess the rest will be released over the next few weeks/months. I did wonder how the QAA was able to grow at the pace it did, maybe there are a few more 207's out there? Fair point. Hopefully there won't be the need to "hide" loans in future if the pipeline is gushing. Out of interest, how / where can you see it was only £15k that was released yesterday from QAA to MLIA?
|
|
|
|
Post by Butch Cassidy on Jan 26, 2016 11:52:03 GMT
Can you imagine the uproar on 2 Oct last year when in the middle of the drought, 207 drew and allocated £0 to MLIA. Was probably not worth the backlash to tell everyone at the time and can understand the hushed launch. I'd put this one down to exceptional circumstances. I found it interesting that, if it's the case, QAA has held onto this for as long as it has (and may still hold the majority - only £15k was released to MLIA yesterday), but may be that was the result of nothing else to feed QAA. I guess the rest will be released over the next few weeks/months. I did wonder how the QAA was able to grow at the pace it did, maybe there are a few more 207's out there? Fair point. Hopefully there won't be the need to "hide" loans in future if the pipeline is gushing. Out of interest, how / where can you see it was only £15k that was released yesterday from QAA to MLIA? When I noticed it there was £19K + change available; I set a target but got nothing, so assumed it was a display error but about an hour later my target had been filled ( chris did say some allocation delays were apparent). AC are quite at liberty to allocate loans as they see fit but to retain investor confidence I would have thought open & honest disclosure would be paramount, especially regarding the loan book. If this was genuinely a "one off" to aid launch the QAA I can accept that & would hope such actions were not going to be needed in future, but conspiracy theories can only flourish when secrecy & obfuscation prevail.
|
|
|
|
Post by pepperpot on Jan 26, 2016 11:58:24 GMT
Can you imagine the uproar on 2 Oct last year when in the middle of the drought, 207 drew and allocated £0 to MLIA. Was probably not worth the backlash to tell everyone at the time and can understand the hushed launch. I'd put this one down to exceptional circumstances. I found it interesting that, if it's the case, QAA has held onto this for as long as it has (and may still hold the majority - only £15k was released to MLIA yesterday), but may be that was the result of nothing else to feed QAA. I guess the rest will be released over the next few weeks/months. I did wonder how the QAA was able to grow at the pace it did, maybe there are a few more 207's out there? Fair point. Hopefully there won't be the need to "hide" loans in future if the pipeline is gushing. Out of interest, how / where can you see it was only £15k that was released yesterday from QAA to MLIA? I guess I shouldn't have been so exact! Would you accept a retrospective c£15k... ish?
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Jan 26, 2016 12:09:31 GMT
Fair point. Hopefully there won't be the need to "hide" loans in future if the pipeline is gushing. Out of interest, how / where can you see it was only £15k that was released yesterday from QAA to MLIA? I guess I shouldn't have been so exact! Would you accept a retrospective c£15k... ish? Just checking there wasn't a "total loan book summary" somewhere that I'd failed to find!
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 26, 2016 15:00:42 GMT
Pity that two of the loans have so little to attract punters lenders. Should be be only small amount of a loan for each lender due to the last 9 months of lack of supply. I used to think that MLIA investors would get only small chunks of new loans. Then #224 can along and totally upset my thinking. Only £25k of that £70k loan was released to the MLIAs, and yet the maximum allocation to any individual account was over £900. If behaviour like that continues, then any of the loans expected to draw down this week easily could supply more than £25k to the MLIAs and potentially produce a four-digit maximum allocation. With three loans totalling £870k -- and possibly even more if some of the other 'January' loans make further progress -- now expected to draw down on the same day, maximum MLIA allocations actually could be quite large. I used to set the combined buying instructions for new loans to total well above the amount of cash available in my account, figuring that the allocations would be small and less than my buying instructions. I don't think I should do that this week, lest the first loan to drawdown use all my available cash and leave me with nothing at all of any subsequent drawdowns. AC need to pressure the lawyers to spread drawdowns throughout the week rather than bunching them up on Fridays, especially if they're going to have multiple drawdowns on many/most weeks from here forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2016 16:00:13 GMT
Mike, didn't really like #224 but a good point well made.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jan 26, 2016 16:48:43 GMT
I used to set the combined buying instructions for new loans to total well above the amount of cash available in my account, figuring that the allocations would be small and less than my buying instructions. I don't think I should do that this week, lest the first loan to drawdown use all my available cash and leave me with nothing at all of any subsequent drawdowns. Given how AC's allocation works (you get the amount you ask for capped at an equal share of what is instantly available), I don't see the point of asking for an amount more than you actually want to get... and even if you do end up in the situation of having more than you want invested in the first loan, market conditions are currently such that you would likely be able to "instantly" resell it in time for the next loan, unless the drawdowns are almost simultaneous... Personally, I also find it useful to have a little more cash on standby over and above what I want to use towards the new loans as this can be used towards unfulfilled buy instructions on other loans when some investors will sell off units of existing loans in order to diversify into the new one(s).
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jan 26, 2016 17:23:17 GMT
I used to set the combined buying instructions for new loans to total well above the amount of cash available in my account, figuring that the allocations would be small and less than my buying instructions. I don't think I should do that this week, lest the first loan to drawdown use all my available cash and leave me with nothing at all of any subsequent drawdowns. Given how AC's allocation works (you get the amount you ask for capped at an equal share of what is instantly available), I don't see the point of asking for an amount more than you actually want to get... and even if you do end up in the situation of having more than you want invested in the first loan, market conditions are currently such that you would likely be able to "instantly" resell it in time for the next loan, unless the drawdowns are almost simultaneous... Personally, I also find it useful to have a little more cash on standby over and above what I want to use towards the new loans as this can be used towards unfulfilled buy instructions on other loans when some investors will sell off units of existing loans in order to diversify into the new one(s). There is deliberately no advantage to gaming the system (that I'm aware of). Best to set the totals to what you want and work your way up to that as funds and availability allow. In terms of mikes1531 point about pushing lawyers not to aim for Fridays - we do already but we're almost always having to work with third party lawyers who are contracted to the borrower. That makes organising such things a little tricky but we do have some more ideas to try and ease it if it becomes a real problem.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 30, 2016 15:10:20 GMT
Shrapnelator working well at the moment, stimulated, I guess, by the sudden new deals (all that waiting for so little) and people moving some money around. Indeed - the "ripples" caused by throwing a couple of stones in the pond (and perhaps also the effect of a few more stones in the air and due to land later this week) seem to have spread around quite a few more odd bits of loan units... I've personally reached my investment target on several loans as a result, and will probably need to think about adding more funds soon, especially if similar ripples are generated by the drawdowns due to occur this week. I wonder if GBBA and GEIA similarly experienced the effect of such "ripples" and managed to get a few more users fully invested? Yes and No... My GEIA did. It bought enough of #180 to become fully invested. It had been about 95% invested, but it's a small account so it didn't take a large amount to top it up to 100%. My GBBA, also small and not fully invested -- though almost 99% invested -- has had absolutely no buying activity for over ten weeks. (It could well be, of course, that any buying done by the GBBA is allocated to accounts that are much less than 99% invested.)
|
|
jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on Jan 30, 2016 15:39:54 GMT
My GIEA only has to femto purchases, both this week. Nothing else this month.
GBBA though has several nano purchases this week. The most recent >£1 is a couple of weeks back.
|
|
A good test would be the staff just to open it up after they loaded it and checked....
