jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on Mar 8, 2016 21:55:26 GMT
It's crawled to just 16% filled after 9 hours. Could be a short (but hopefully conclusive) pilot ... Or, at that rate..... Quite a long one!
|
|
|
|
Post by polonius on Mar 8, 2016 22:26:34 GMT
Apparently it is a leading tennis star and she will be promoting a major sports brand. Maria Sharapova?
|
|
|
|
Post by cpaken on Mar 9, 2016 3:47:59 GMT
There's one important thing missing in the ad - the duration of the loan. It could be 6 months or 60 years!
|
|
|
|
Post by xyon100 on Mar 9, 2016 7:17:11 GMT
No security, no details of the borrower at all. I'm astounded that anybody would invest in this. This looks like a very dangerous path indeed. Should this loan default the consequences will be massive. I for one am not investing one penny more with FS.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875 
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Mar 9, 2016 7:48:38 GMT
No security, no details of the borrower at all. I'm astounded that anybody would invest in this. This looks like a very dangerous path indeed. Should this loan default the consequences will be massive. I for one am not investing one penny more with FS. Even FC loans come with the fig-leaf of a personal guarantee. If this "high profile" individual is genuinely also "high net worth" (begging the obvious question why they need to borrow against future earnings at >15%) then the lack of a PG is incomprehensible to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Mar 9, 2016 11:09:15 GMT
I have invested in this. I obviously have the same concerns as most people have on here about this, "why would a high-net-worth individual want/need a loan at such a high rate?" "why all the secrecy/sketchiness etc". FS are asking us to trust them with this loan, they wouldn't condone it if they didn't think it would pay imo, the risks far outweigh the benefits for them. I'm not too sure why they have brought this on themselves, but there must be a good reason and strategy behind it.
FS can't afford for this one to go sour, by hook or by crook I strongly believe I will get my money back +15%, they simply can't afford for this seemingly very 'risky' loan to fail. The negative PR and serious risk of annoying those that invest and those that change their opinion about the platform as a whole on account of this bizarre strategy will leave in droves if it goes bad. Most of you won't invest and it is already making you doubt the platform's credibility. FS would basically be committing suicide if they let this one default, so that is the only reason I am investing. It's probably the safest loan on their books when you think about what they are actually doing here, no security on the loan other than the entire future of the platform in my eyes, and for me at 15% its a punt worth taking.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Mar 9, 2016 11:37:45 GMT
bluechip, I admire your faith in FS but wonder if their reserves would stretch to covering much / all of a £125k loan default (should the individual concerned do a Sharapova / Johnson)
|
|
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 Mar 9, 2016 12:06:00 GMT
Maybe it does all make sense.
What if the major brand is Funding Secure itself ?
Technically, we can't lend directly to FS, but we can make a loan to a HNWI.
We don't know what the Heads of Terms involves, but the HNWI may get paid in stages based on the success of an advertising campaign. Effectively, FS would be paying back lenders if the campaign was a success and the HNWI wouldn't get paid if it wasn't a success.
|
|
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 Mar 9, 2016 12:11:13 GMT
Maybe it does all make sense. What if the major brand is Funding Secure itself ? Technically, we can't lend directly to FS, but we can make a loan to a HNWI. We don't know what the Heads of Terms involves, but the HNWI may get paid in stages based on the success of an advertising campaign. Effectively, FS would be paying back lenders if the campaign was a success and the HNWI wouldn't get paid if it wasn't a success. Come on ribs own up. James Marshall has pimped himself to FS and we're financing for your high rolling lifestyle 
|
|
littleoldlady
Member of DD Central
Running down all platforms due to age
Posts: 3,045
Likes: 1,862
|
Post by littleoldlady on Mar 9, 2016 12:43:06 GMT
I have invested in this. I obviously have the same concerns as most people have on here about this, "why would a high-net-worth individual want/need a loan at such a high rate?" "why all the secrecy/sketchiness etc". FS are asking us to trust them with this loan, they wouldn't condone it if they didn't think it would pay imo, the risks far outweigh the benefits for them. I'm not too sure why they have brought this on themselves, but there must be a good reason and strategy behind it.
FS can't afford for this one to go sour, by hook or by crook I strongly believe I will get my money back +15%, they simply can't afford for this seemingly very 'risky' loan to fail. The negative PR and serious risk of annoying those that invest and those that change their opinion about the platform as a whole on account of this bizarre strategy will leave in droves if it goes bad. Most of you won't invest and it is already making you doubt the platform's credibility. FS would basically be committing suicide if they let this one default, so that is the only reason I am investing. It's probably the safest loan on their books when you think about what they are actually doing here, no security on the loan other than the entire future of the platform in my eyes, and for me at 15% its a punt worth taking.
I am almost persuaded by this argument. It is basically a punt on FS surviving - and that is just what any other investment is (albeit to a lesser degree for solid asset backed loans). But how much to put in is a difficult question. A small punt will not earn anything worth while and a large one could cost in sleep terms if not in cash.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Mar 9, 2016 13:29:15 GMT
There's one important thing missing in the ad - the duration of the loan. It could be 6 months or 60 years! : Perhaps it's been edited recently, but the web page for this loan says...
|
|
|
|
Post by fundingsecure on Mar 9, 2016 13:45:18 GMT
Thank you to all those taking the time to comment on the unsecured loan. The response to this loan has been mixed and we take on board all comments.
As previously advised this loan was put on to the platform as a one-off test. In this particular case we were very confident of the borrower’s ability to repay, which is why we accepted the loan, which has been fully underwritten.
To be clear - it is not FundingSecure’s intention to expand our offering to include unsecured loans. However if and when a lending opportunity occurs that is outside of our normal offering we would consider placing it on our platform, provided we are confident that the loan offers a fair risk / reward balance.
Ultimately investment in all of our loans is up to individual members.
FundingSecure
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Mar 9, 2016 13:45:56 GMT
FS can't afford for this one to go sour, by hook or by crook I strongly believe I will get my money back +15%, they simply can't afford for this seemingly very 'risky' loan to fail.
Specious and dangerous reasoning. You could justify any investment on any platform with that rationale.
|
|
investibod
Member of DD Central
Posts: 288
Likes: 152
|
Post by investibod on Mar 9, 2016 14:00:23 GMT
I decided to take a (very) small bite.
This is the update I have just received:
|
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Mar 9, 2016 14:00:48 GMT
FS can't afford for this one to go sour, by hook or by crook I strongly believe I will get my money back +15%, they simply can't afford for this seemingly very 'risky' loan to fail.
Specious and dangerous reasoning. You could justify any investment on any platform with that rationale. I think there are different extremes though. This type of loan is unique, if a 'typical' FS loan defaulted then I don't think the pressure/scrutiny would be quite as intense as it would be if they messed this one up (3% extra doesn't compensate sufficiently for the risk on paper). The potential upside/downside ratio isn't worthwhile to FS for one small-medium sized loan, unless they knew it to be a sure thing. Horses for courses, but I have more confidence in this one than several of the others I have invested in for reasons explained in my OP. Be interesting to see what happens but I'm certainly not gambling anything I couldn't afford to lose, (kind of goes without saying when it comes to P2P).
|
|
