|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Jun 2, 2016 9:34:01 GMT
The GMQAA (and your SMQAA) would usually be a helluva lot quicker than the 30DAA  PS - can't change my vote from no to yes in the poll. You should be able to change your vote, assuming the poll is not closed, but you have to un-tick the current one before you can tick anything else (only one vote allowed).
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092 
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jun 2, 2016 9:46:18 GMT
The GMQAA (and your SMQAA) would usually be a helluva lot quicker than the 30DAA PS - can't change my vote from no to yes in the poll. If I've understood correctly, the 30DAA can be used as a MQAA with a bit of advance planning and a larger "float" ... (I have better options outside AC, for surplus funds beyond the 1-day cash "float", but YMMV) In essence, you'd need to arrange for a pipeline of withdrawal requests (maybe having the ideal as aiming for each as 1/10 of the balance and spaced 3 days apart), cancelling the first one if the funds aren't required at that time and requesting a new one. Additional surplus funds (e.g. repaid funds or new investment) can be thrown into the mix too. Whether it's worth the extra hassle for an additional 0.5% would presumably depend on the total value of your "float", and possibly also your proficiency at writing a bot to do the donkey work for you.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jun 2, 2016 9:47:04 GMT
The GMQAA (and your SMQAA) would usually be a helluva lot quicker than the 30DAA PS - can't change my vote from no to yes in the poll. You should be able to change your vote, assuming the poll is not closed, but you have to un-tick the current one before you can tick anything else (only one vote allowed). Ah, yes. Tried to do it before without unticking. Ta
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jun 2, 2016 11:14:06 GMT
sl75 - wondered who would be the first to figure that one out...
|
|
Investboy
Member of DD Central
Trying to recover from P2P revolution
Posts: 564
Likes: 201
|
Post by Investboy on Jun 2, 2016 11:16:48 GMT
I had a thought (before my first banana). Currently, (due to circumstances we all grumple about) I have a moderate four figure sum sitting in QAA at 3.75% waiting for loan allocations of decent size (medium/high three figure) at a decent rate (9.75%+). Why not open my own private GMQAA*? Invest in all the small allocations we get in these small-medium size 7%-8%. This can mount up, and reduce my QAA tranche to what I actually might need quickly, but get a better rate than 3.75% If my QAA/MLIA funds get depleted, sell off some GMQAA (the loans being smallish, there shouldn't be too much available to cause a queue/delay in selling). Thre would be short periods when funds queued to get in the QAA but that happens already. That could be one point of MLIA loans at 7%. Third cup of tea . * Grumpy's Medium Quick Access Account. I see the following problem with this approach: there may be nobody wanting to buy them. Currently 85+% people say they won't buy it on PM so not sure they will fly on SM. So you may get locked in those loans till maturity. Unless rates in future loans will be even less then 7% then they will sell. But not sure there will be many people left at AC then. Going sub 7% on 5y with MLIA loans is not so tempting comparing to RS 6.0-6.5% RS with provision fund.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jun 2, 2016 12:37:57 GMT
Hence my qualification about just doing it on the smaller loans. There should never be too much waiting for the c15% who do take the loans on the PM to grab a bit more so hopefully not too long to wait. The fact that most of these loans do eventually fill up, albeit slowly, means that there are enough people who are likely to take up my eventual cast-off skins. Ever the optimist well occasionally anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jun 2, 2016 13:34:31 GMT
Unless rates in future loans will be even less then 7% then they will sell. But not sure there will be many people left at AC then. Going sub 7% on 5y with MLIA loans is not so tempting comparing to RS 6.0-6.5% RS with provision fund. I'm not following this bit. RS's provision fund comes instead of asset security. A downturn as severe as 2008 is enough to cause a resolution event according to their own website. We also have an aftermarket where RS do not unless you pay a financial penalty for changing the length of your term. The size of that penalty will vary depending on how long you've had your funds lent out but can be considerable. Either way deposits, despite the current lull in loans, are higher than they've ever been and we expect that to continue as our origination volume increases over the coming weeks. ISAs and a growing marketing budget are only going to accelerate that, and alongside other platforms we have a number of unique aspects to our offering that remain market competitive - including offering higher rates than platforms like RS and Zopa who have no issue attracting lenders. Plus we will still offer higher rate loans where we can find them. It's not like we've said we won't do so. There simply isn't the origination available for high quality deals that are willing and able to pay those rates in what is a competitive marketplace. Why would you pay 18+% to SS as a borrower if you can get a loan at half that rate from RS or if it's a smaller deal an unsecured loan from FC? That's ignoring the challenger banks and even the banks themselves. We have a very smart credit team and where we come across deals which warrant those higher rates but where we feel we can sufficiently mitigate the risks to make it a loan we can place on the platform, such as with the D***field loan, then we will do them. We were credited on this forum for the huge amount of work that went into that loan and the comparative quality of our documentation, so where we can add that value and make a loan work we will do so. But we aren't in the business of churning those out and hoping they all just work out okay.
|
|
|
|
Post by msa on Jun 3, 2016 11:48:39 GMT
I have moved some of my holdings to the wiseAlpha platform which offers secured loans in blue chip names.
Currently you get 7.7% YTM for a secured loan by Eddie Stobart or 6.0% YTM from Virgin Media.
Those companies have been around for a while so much more attractive risk/return than MLIA at 7-8% for some unknown borrower.
There is also a secondary market.
|
|
Steerpike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,977
Likes: 1,687
|
Post by Steerpike on Jun 3, 2016 12:11:41 GMT
I have moved some of my holdings to the wiseAlpha platform which offers secured loans in blue chip names. Currently you get 7.7% YTM for a secured loan by Eddie Stobart or 6.0% YTM from Virgin Media. Those companies have been around for a while so much more attractive risk/return than MLIA at 7-8% for some unknown borrower. There is also a secondary market. Are WA and AC MLIA directly comparable? The last time I looked at WA I thought that there was no proper SM and that yields could be quite a bit lower if the "notes" are not held to maturity (2023 for VM).
|
|
|
|
Post by msa on Jun 3, 2016 18:12:17 GMT
I have moved some of my holdings to the wiseAlpha platform which offers secured loans in blue chip names. Currently you get 7.7% YTM for a secured loan by Eddie Stobart or 6.0% YTM from Virgin Media. Those companies have been around for a while so much more attractive risk/return than MLIA at 7-8% for some unknown borrower. There is also a secondary market. Are WA and AC MLIA directly comparable? The last time I looked at WA I thought that there was no proper SM and that yields could be quite a bit lower if the "notes" are not held to maturity (2023 for VM). I have traded out of some of my holdings in the WA secondary market to test it. Another nice feature of WA loans is that they come with a Libor component (which does not contribute much at the moment because of low rates), i.e. if rates eventually rise your WA investments benefit from higher coupons whereas most other platforms' investments are stuck with the fixed rates originally locked in.
|
|
