ben
Posts: 2,020 
Likes: 589
|
Post by ben on Feb 25, 2016 20:58:40 GMT
true good point and yes I agree to that, although if it does default and is worthless will damage SS quite a bit
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Feb 25, 2016 20:59:05 GMT
One to skip. SS didn't really need to pollute their pipeline with this type of loan.
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Feb 25, 2016 21:05:50 GMT
Unless the whole point of this thread is to persuade people to cancel their prefunds - leaving more for the perpetrators! Only kidding  I've cancelled mine. |
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Feb 25, 2016 21:11:05 GMT
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Feb 25, 2016 21:11:59 GMT
Will be giving this a skip as well,So many better loans coming up soon He'll need a few of those 
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Feb 25, 2016 21:17:16 GMT
I've set my pre-fund multiplier to zero; but I am a bit ambivalent to the proposition, I just don't have enough time for any extra DD I think I need, and as others have said it's not the only loan on the book or in the pipeline. I hope presume that SS know more than we do, and it isn't and doesn't turn out to be a lemon. After all, we may not be holding any of the loan personally but it won't benefit us if SS is contaminated by it.
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Feb 25, 2016 21:26:57 GMT
|
|
j
Member of DD Central
Penguins are very misunderstood!
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 540
|
Post by j on Feb 25, 2016 22:17:09 GMT
There's also the question of why the borrower needs £1.3m for a site for which he doesn't even know whether he's going to get planning permission yet. I wonder what he's purchasing the site for. Surely that's the value that should be used in the LTV. If, as his accountant says, he has £5m in liquid assets, why borrow £1.3m at the very high rates on SS. Maybe he's not that confident about the project himself. With a loan like this the risk is quite low on his part. Now where's that very safe PG.......
|
|
Investor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 590
|
Post by Investor on Feb 25, 2016 22:55:12 GMT
I hope there is a mug someone who will be pre-funding on this one as I will need the percentages for the PF info thread. Of course assuming this is not deemed to be such a damp squib that everyone gets their full 100%, and the extra hits the SM. Seems quite likely.
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Feb 25, 2016 22:58:42 GMT
I hope there is a mug someone who will be pre-funding on this one as I will need the percentages for the PF info thread. Of course assuming this is not deemed to be such a damp squib that everyone gets their full 100%, and the extra hits the SM. Seems quite likely. I've allocated £100 just out of curiosity, and will update my first post with the allocation % It will be back on the SM if you want it........
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 1,212
|
Post by sqh on Feb 26, 2016 1:03:08 GMT
There's also the question of why the borrower needs £1.3m for a site for which he doesn't even know whether he's going to get planning permission yet. I wonder what he's purchasing the site for. Surely that's the value that should be used in the LTV. If, as his accountant says, he has £5m in liquid assets, why borrow £1.3m at the very high rates on SS. I presume the borrower is a company that can offset the costs of a loan against profits.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2016 1:33:28 GMT
First SS loan that's really concerned me. Strikes me this at a higher risk level and 12% doesn't attract me very much on this.
My default pre fund level is set at £1,000. Normally I up that figure quite a bit. On this one I'm reducing. I don't want much exposure to it. I'm going to take a small chunk simply so I can offload a bit more of something that's likely to repay soon, but I won't be holding it very long - and nowhere near to loan maturity.
Will be interesting to see if bits of this fly off the SM like the all others. In a way it would be good if it didn't as it would show investors aren't blinded by 12% return and do look at what they are investing in.
I hope SS aren't going to go more down this route with PG backed loans on problem sites in order to keep the flow of new loans coming and to expand. I'd prefer to see less quantity but higher quality.It's inevitable there will be other defaults in time and while this isn't a massive loan it's still quite a big one to go wrong.
I note MT vary their rates according to the risk / circumstances. 10% on some, 12% on others and recently there was a 13% because the loan was 2nd charge backed.I guess most people like the simplicity of a straight 12% across the board, and so do I, but wonder if higher risk loans like this should go higher to 13% or 14% to attract funds and compensate for extra risk. We will find out tomorrow. If it fills or is oversubscribed we will know the answer.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Feb 26, 2016 3:25:45 GMT
I hope there is a mug someone who will be pre-funding on this one as I will need the percentages for the PF info thread. Of course assuming this is not deemed to be such a damp squib that everyone gets their full 100%, and the extra hits the SM. Seems quite likely. The pre-funding of this loan will tell us a lot about how much DD the typical SS investor does, or whether they'll just throw money at anything offering 12% interest. I'd like to think this loan will be undersubscribed, but I'm afraid I'm expecting it to be overfunded. Perhaps not to the same degree as loans with more conventional security, but still overfunded. I've set my pre-funding to zero, and offer my grateful thanks to those who have done some DD and posted here to let the rest of us know what turned up.
|
|
freddy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 147
Likes: 145
|
Post by freddy on Feb 26, 2016 3:27:59 GMT
Given that this is a relatively small loan I suspect that it will easily fill, despite the reservations being aired here. What will be interesting is how quickly and how much of it appears on the SM, particularly as more attractive loans are launched (hopefully next week). As pointed out, the risk is much smaller in the first few months and buying on that strategy isn't a terrible thing providing it can be shifted on the SM. Personally though, I'd rather buy £500 of the Super Yacht than end up stuck with this one.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Feb 26, 2016 3:58:00 GMT
I doubt it would have been launched under the old terms You misunderstand; I know that it won't be launched under the old terms, just that for the security of the SS platform I'm glad that the new T&Cs are in place. On the old T&Cs a defaulted loan could affect all investors whether you had invested in the defaulted loan or not. I took ben's comment to mean that if SS still were operating under the old Ts&Cs then Lendy would never have allowed this loan to proceed because it would be their neck on the block if it went spectacularly bad, whereas now they can be a bit more relaxed because any losses will affect the SS investors directly rather than Lendy. And while I accept that the the new Ts&Cs would insulate lenders in other SS loans from the direct consequences of a really bad default, there are indirect consequences to consider. The obvious one is the bad publicity that would result from such a default and how it might damage SS's image as a relatively safe platform to invest through. That would reduce the inflow of new investors and might prompt an outflow of existing ones. And the good news is that the Provision Fund could do a lot to help out the affected investors. But it's not all good news. PBL083 is a £1.3M loan. The balance in the PF is £1.46M. A disaster with PBL083 could put a huge dent in the PF. And we really don't know how SS/Lendy will behave if the PF ever pays out. They contribute 2% of every loan made to the PF. If that were left in place, then a loan successfully repaying would help build up a cushion against future defaults, and as long as the level of defaults was reasonable the PF would be self-sustaining. However, the published figures for the PF indicate that whenever a loan repays, SS withdraw the 2% contribution associated with that loan. Which means the PF always contains 2% of the total outstanding capital lent. And it's very unclear what would happen to the PF balance if the fund ever paid out. Would the PF balance be rebuilt? How? If SS/Lendy contribute enough to bring the balance back to the 2% level, then it would be they who effectively made the payout. I'd be more than happy with that, but it does seem rather unlikely.
|
|
