|
Post by oldnick on Mar 26, 2014 22:17:45 GMT
Of course, we are a self selected group of relatively financially aware, relatively hands on investors. If p2p/b is to grow to match the ambitions of all the backers of all the surviving companies it will require money from people who just want a reasonable return without having to make too many decisions themselves. In which case a 'fund of funds', which spreads the risk widely, could well appeal to a mass market. I'm not sure how competitor funds would differentiate themselves, but I suppose 'Virgin' and other famous brands set an example of how it could be done. As for the p2p companies not wanting to give margin away - if the volume of money justified it, and the lender marketing bill was reduced enough, it might make good business sense. Hopefully there would still be a few 'boutique' p2p/b providers for us to invest directly in, but I rather fear the direction ZOPA have taken is a signpost to the future (if p2p/b has a future that is). Yes & no. I find large financial institutions tend to c**k things up for everybody else once they get involved. Granted, p2p might need some input from them in terms of funding at some point, but that will only guarantee reduction of rates & quality of loans for those happy to put some time & effort in research & dd, as opposed to large crops running the whole thing along the lines of a share index tracking fund. They might be called experts but, I doubt they could do better than many of us current lenders on here do, probably quite the opposite, which is very scary Absolutely - large financial institutions could not do better than us - but they wouldn't have to to satisfy a mass market. Beating inflation would be quite enough - sugar coated with some familiar music and maybe the odd celebrity face or voice over, or maybe just a couple of cute kittens...
|
|