Balder
Member of DD Central
Posts: 646 
Likes: 622
|
Post by Balder on Mar 1, 2016 9:18:48 GMT
Like the credit facility, but Saving Stream need to clamp down on those that abuse the system. Perhaps payment should be made within 24 hours and not 48 hours. Unfortunately even in this day and age all banks can't meet 24 hours, sad but true.
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Mar 1, 2016 9:20:46 GMT
I'm only starting to invest, but I would be happy to have to send a deposit first. Would you still be happy if you deposited £5k, entered a £5k pre-funding request... and were allocated just £500? What's the problem? If you can use it elsewhere just withdraw it. A minute's work. Well worth the time if it solved or at least alleviated the gaming problem.
|
|
webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Mar 1, 2016 9:22:51 GMT
Like the credit facility, but Saving Stream need to clamp down on those that abuse the system. Perhaps payment should be made within 24 hours and not 48 hours. Unfortunately even in this day and age all banks can't meet 24 hours, sad but true. Change your bank. This morning I made a transfer from Natwest to Santander and it was in the latter account before I had time to log on. Must have taken less than a minute so must have been completely automatic.
|
|
Balder
Member of DD Central
Posts: 646
Likes: 622
|
Post by Balder on Mar 1, 2016 9:25:29 GMT
Unfortunately even in this day and age all banks can't meet 24 hours, sad but true. Change your bank. This morning I made a transfer from Natwest to Santander and it was in the latter account before I had time to log on. Must have taken less than a minute so musty have been completely automatic. I can't the bank is aligned to my SIPP . Personal account with First Direct is as your experience above.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiseclerk on Mar 1, 2016 9:43:51 GMT
Would you still be happy if you deposited £5k, entered a £5k pre-funding request... and were allocated just £500? What's the problem? If you can use it elsewhere just withdraw it. A minute's work. Well worth the time if it solved or at least alleviated the gaming problem. Not for those in the Eurozone. Cost and at least 2 business days via Transferwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by meledor on Mar 1, 2016 9:50:44 GMT
I can't see the point of this poll. Why would anyone not want to have the existing system whereby we can commit to a loan whether on the PM or SM before we deposit funds? It is a system that works very well so why even think about suggesting something else? That may be your opinion and experience, but it is obvious to me that INPL is a major factor in the pre-funding gaming shambles. That it is obvious to you is your opinion, it's not mine. I think there is a lot of unnecessary whingeing about gaming on this forum, which is just sour grapes, when there is/was a simple mis-match between supply and demand. This was also the problem last summer when because of excess demand it was fastest finger first (assuming you could even get on to the site as it struggled to cope with everyone logging on at the same time). In response Saving Stream introduced a really good method which is an attractive feature compared to other platforms. Constantly tinkering with the system is a futile quest that does not address the root cause of the problem, which is a supply/demand imbalance.
If I have to transfer funds before a loan goes live then I am going to start gaming the system - transferring loads more than is necessary to make the extra hassle worthwhile.
|
|
sam i am
Member of DD Central
Posts: 697
Likes: 555
|
Post by sam i am on Mar 1, 2016 9:52:42 GMT
I really like the buy now, pay soon after system. It gives so much more flexibility in adding funds to the platform. But more than that, it makes it much easier to re-balance portfolios by waiting until you are able to purchase a loan part you want before selling something else on the SM. If deposits are required, I predict that the SM would become much, much slower. Then we would have a whole host of other complaints.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Mar 1, 2016 10:08:05 GMT
I'm only starting to invest, but I would be happy to have to send a deposit first. Would you still be happy if you deposited £5k, entered a £5k pre-funding request... and were allocated just £500? This scenario would only create work for saving stream, as people would withdraw the balance. It's up to savingstream, if they want a deposit first system they will introduce it, if they dont they will keep the current system.
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Mar 1, 2016 10:08:13 GMT
I can't see the point of this poll. Why would anyone not want to have the existing system whereby we can commit to a loan whether on the PM or SM before we deposit funds? It is a system that works very well so why even think about suggesting something else? The poll is there for you to express your opinion; that is all. If you don't want to take part, then don't  . I didn't want to comment in my first post to avoid bias voting; however I will now... I've been a great fan of the INPL (invest now, pay later), but I'm starting to get concerned that the SM is be played. I have 2 accounts (business & personal), and could easily attempt to invest in everything that appears on the SM throughout the day, then sell after midnight to my other account; no need to deposit any money but keep every penny of interest.... and repeat. Last night we saw over £1,000,000 worth of transactions, most being hoovered up by a single investor; now if he is a genuine multi-millionaire, then I have no problem with that, but I am starting to form the opinion that something fishy is going on. I must point out, that I am not complaining; I have no more money to invest and have found it quite simple to invest over the last 3 months. If you browse these forums you will note that I am a big advocate of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". I love the INPL, it gives me so much flexibility, and would hate to see it go; but to think there may be £1,000,000 out there earning a member interest, just floating about without any cash against it; it just seem unfair to the SS community and risks the security of the platform. I'm quite happy with the way the PM is, my issue is chiefly with the above situation After some musing; I have voted "Deposit Required For SM but not PM", however I think that the same rules that apply to the PM pre-funding should apply to SM; All investors can INPL up to £50,000 then no investor can INPL more than they have already invested + what the member has deposited.
|
|
jayjay
Member of DD Central
Posts: 264
Likes: 116
|
Post by jayjay on Mar 1, 2016 10:20:14 GMT
I have a lot of money tied up in P2P platforms - but am reluctant on SS. The practice on SS of buy now pay later is one of several factors that in my opinion makes SS one of the riskier platforms out there. As a contrarian, I would invest more if they got rid of it. I am talking platform risk not loan risk here.
|
|
|
|
Post by meledor on Mar 1, 2016 10:24:50 GMT
I can't see the point of this poll. Why would anyone not want to have the existing system whereby we can commit to a loan whether on the PM or SM before we deposit funds? It is a system that works very well so why even think about suggesting something else? The poll is there for you to express your opinion; that is all. If you don't want to take part, then don't . I didn't want to comment in my first post to avoid bias voting; however I will now... I've been a great fan of the INPL (invest now, pay later), but I'm starting to get concerned that the SM is be played. I have 2 accounts (business & personal), and could easily attempt to invest in everything that appears on the SM throughout the day, then sell after midnight to my other account; no need to deposit any money but keep every penny of interest.... and repeat. Last night we saw over £1,000,000 worth of transactions, most being hoovered up by a single investor; now if he is a genuine multi-millionaire, then I have no problem with that, but I am starting to form the opinion that something fishy is going on. I must point out, that I am not complaining; I have no more money to invest and have found it quite simple to invest over the last 3 months. If you browse these forums you will note that I am a big advocate of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". I love the INPL, it gives me so much flexibility, and would hate to see it go; but to think there may be £1,000,000 out there earning a member interest, just floating about without any cash against it; it just seem unfair to the SS community and risks the security of the platform. I'm quite happy with the way the PM is, my issue is chiefly with the above situation After some musing; I have voted "Deposit Required For SM but not PM", however I think that the same rules that apply to the PM pre-funding should apply to SM; All investors can INPL up to £50,000 then no investor can INPL more than they have already invested + what the member has deposited.
You think there is "something fishy going on". And it "risks the security of the platform".
Wouldn't it be far better to contact Saving Stream so they can examine you concerns than have this poll?
It is in Saving Stream's interest to have the system the way it is - no one has forced them to do this.
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Mar 1, 2016 10:31:14 GMT
You think there is "something fishy going on". And it "risks the security of the platform".
Wouldn't it be far better to contact Saving Stream so they can examine you concerns than have this poll?
It is in Saving Stream's interest to have the system the way it is - no one has forced them to do this. I have and always do contact SS with my concerns. Thankfully these are few and far between. Despite this, there is no reason to have a discussion on these forums, and a poll lets SS know the users opinion on the subject, likewise with the posts in this thread. I really don't understand your problem with this post & poll; I haven't been rude or tried to force my opinion on to you, in fact, I acknowledge and respect others opinion and hope that I become wiser because of it. However, you seem to have taken offence, not by my opinion but simply that this thread exists.....
|
|
huxs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 300 
Likes: 218
|
Post by huxs on Mar 1, 2016 10:36:26 GMT
I really like the buy now, pay soon after system. It gives so much more flexibility in adding funds to the platform. But more than that, it makes it much easier to re-balance portfolios by waiting until you are able to purchase a loan part you want before selling something else on the SM. If deposits are required, I predict that the SM would become much, much slower. Then we would have a whole host of other complaints. Agreed, if its a choice between gaming caused by this approach (which I am still not convinced about) or reducing the SM liquidity (that this would definitely do unless everyone was happy to have money sitting around waiting for people to sell). Then I say stick with the current approach.
SS fundamentally works and any changes will more than likely come with unforeseen problems as people try to beat the systems in other ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by meledor on Mar 1, 2016 10:41:13 GMT
You think there is "something fishy going on". And it "risks the security of the platform".
Wouldn't it be far better to contact Saving Stream so they can examine you concerns than have this poll?
It is in Saving Stream's interest to have the system the way it is - no one has forced them to do this. I have and always do contact SS with my concerns. Thankfully these are few and far between. Despite this, there is no reason to have a discussion on these forums, and a poll lets SS know the users opinion on the subject, likewise with the posts in this thread. I really don't understand your problem with this post & poll; I haven't been rude or tried to force my opinion on to you, in fact, I acknowledge and respect others opinion and hope that I become wiser because of it. However, you seem to have taken offence, not by my opinion but simply that this post exists.....
I've not taken offence, merely saying it is rather pointless. Even more so now that you have explained that it arose because you think something fishy is going on. As I have said that is up to Saving Stream to sort out, and it is good that you have alerted them.
Equally I could say I do not understand your problem with my viewpoint.
If there is a issue here then I would expect Saving Stream to be aware of it and resolve it. Please do let us know if Saving Stream respond to your concerns.
|
|
huxs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 300
Likes: 218
|
Post by huxs on Mar 1, 2016 10:42:41 GMT
I have a lot of money tied up in P2P platforms - but am reluctant on SS. The practice on SS of buy now pay later is one of several factors that in my opinion makes SS one of the riskier platforms out there. As a contrarian, I would invest more if they got rid of it. I am talking platform risk not loan risk here. I am not going to try and change your mind on this but given the investor demand on SS even if certain investors fail to pay-up any unsold parts will fly off the SM anyway and SS will not be left carrying the risk for any great length of time. I would suggest this only becomes a genuine risk if investor demand plummets and multiple loans don't fill for days on end but that would be a problem regardless of when you pay for your loan part.
|
|
.
