|
|
Post by andrewholgate on Jun 20, 2016 14:24:32 GMT
Assetz Property possibly, but not AC. Whilst there are links between the businesses if the Property team aren't aware their customer needs funding, then they won't send us a lead. I am asking questions though.andrewholgate whilst you are on here perhaps you could also answer a couple;
Why was #166/#292 distributed in such a way to alienate MLIA investors? Previously rollovers were offered to existing holders - has this policy now ceased? To reinvest just the repaid capital from #166 , at the allocation rate given, I need approx. 200 loans &/or £100M of drawdowns - how long is that likely to take? Could you give any positive signals to MLIA holders who have supported AC from the early days?
Many thanks
I will find out. Yes and no - We perhaps could have acted sooner rather than rolling. We could offer a rolled loan out to new lenders as a new policy. Yet to decide. £100m - 6mths or so, just depends on summer holiday effect and also Xmas period. Yes, the more loans we do, the more will be available. To get to £25m a month we need to be doing 50 loans, this will give more availability to MLIA users.
|
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Jun 20, 2016 17:52:49 GMT
Ok my view of AC history and present position is they used a underwriting panel to ensure funding of new loans but the panel demanded and got rates that made AC uncompetitive in the new loan market. Perversely this led to a situation of restricted supply to to retail market which ensured a easy high demand market for the loan units at little risk to the underwriters.
Enter the qaa a new look low cost underwriting facility, but it needs loan units to pay interest and it needs to grow fast very fast so as to grow the site and underwrite bigger loans while maintaining diversity. This again chokes off supply to the retail market restricts growth in new investors as nothing much to invest in.
Answer and i am not sure this will work, make the underwriting panel again the first port of call for funds but use the qaa to force down rates if the offers from the panel dont make sence use the qaa in part or full to fund, the demand from the retail market still gives a low risk fast turn over offer to the underwriters but premium rates are over. This takes pressure off the qaa to grow so fast enables more units to the retail market to grow happy investor levels ,win win well except maybe the underwriters but its called the market.
In a different life i was involved in a contracts management divisision and we set up a internal contract direct labour section that looked and was treated like an external contractor to make a compeditor to force down costs it was brutal at times and we broke one supplier and pushed others to the edge but cost fell 10 to 15% on a £60m budget and that is what we were payed to do life is tough.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087 
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jun 20, 2016 18:02:53 GMT
Funny ole world innit? Kick out the underwriters money because they want to make too high a rate, then create an alternative source of funds with the result that my money is kicked out too, even at a much lower rate (e.g. F-Caps repays me about £1500 at 15% and I'm only allowed to reinvest £84 at 9%!).  |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jun 20, 2016 18:11:23 GMT
Isn't that putting a bit of a spin on the situation, as looking at the underlying investments the QAA will optimally hold fewer loan units per £1 invested than any of the other accounts because of the cash component. So for the same influx of lender funds there is less demand on drawn loan units leaving more for other investors.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jun 20, 2016 18:15:22 GMT
Ok my view of AC history and present position is they used a underwriting panel to ensure funding of new loans but the panel demanded and got rates that made AC uncompetitive in the new loan market. Perversely this led to a situation of restricted supply to to retail market which ensured a easy high demand market for the loan units at little risk to the underwriters. Enter the qaa a new look low cost underwriting facility, but it needs loan units to pay interest and it needs to grow fast very fast so as to grow the site and underwrite bigger loans while maintaining diversity. This again chokes off supply to the retail market restricts growth in new investors as nothing much to invest in. Answer and i am not sure this will work, make the underwriting panel again the first port of call for funds but use the qaa to force down rates if the offers from the panel dont make sence use the qaa in part or full to fund, the demand from the retail market still gives a low risk fast turn over offer to the underwriters but premium rates are over. This takes pressure off the qaa to grow so fast enables more units to the retail market to grow happy investor levels ,win win well except maybe the underwriters but its called the market. In a different life i was involved in a contracts management divisision and we set up a internal contract direct labour section that looked and was treated like an external contractor to make a compeditor to force down costs it was brutal at times and we broke one supplier and pushed others to the edge but cost fell 10 to 15% on a £60m budget and that is what we were payed to do life is tough. The QAA only needs to grow if it is to hold loan units in the long term. If it holds for a while and then sells out to MLIA / GBBA / GEIA etc., effectively providing a warehousing facility until retail demand from those sources catches up with supply, then the QAA can operate on quite a small amount. Indeed the original plan was for the QAA to grow to around £3-4m if I remember correctly. The account growth has instead been driven by lender demand to the extent that over the last couple of months we haven't been able to increase the cap fast enough. Our strategy has evolved with that rise in demand.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jun 20, 2016 18:26:06 GMT
Isn't that putting a bit of a spin on the situation, as looking at the underlying investments the QAA will optimally hold fewer loan units per £1 invested than any of the other accounts because of the cash component. So for the same influx of lender funds there is less demand on drawn loan units leaving more for other investors. Yes, probably, but then again, AC is also brilliant at spin - always has been - the boss is a master  . Give me a bell when AC wants the other £1416 of my £1500 (hypothetical figures, but quite close to reality) and I may fetch it back. (That's selective spin, too. Have a nice evening - or watch the football. )
|
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Jun 20, 2016 19:59:38 GMT
Yes i agree if the qaa was as prob intended a short holding fund on the whole it could be smallish but AC has found it appears a market that just wants 3 1/2% instant access long term savings big time. I cant blame AC for taking the trade i would .But the demand from this market appears to be crushing out other parts of the platform at some levels of investment, i dont know the rate of growth if there was no cap, i wonder, but it seems lack of of loan units to pay interest is a limit to its growth.It seems a bit of a closed loop just more money , more loans would solve but each is interlinked and dependant on the next in the loop.I cant believe other sites are not having issues different maybe but they are just not as open about them.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewholgate on Jun 20, 2016 20:36:46 GMT
We've never been able to please everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Jun 20, 2016 21:32:25 GMT
Ok my view of AC history and present position is they used a underwriting panel to ensure funding of new loans but the panel demanded and got rates that made AC uncompetitive in the new loan market. Perversely this led to a situation of restricted supply to to retail market which ensured a easy high demand market for the loan units at little risk to the underwriters. Enter the qaa a new look low cost underwriting facility, but it needs loan units to pay interest and it needs to grow fast very fast so as to grow the site and underwrite bigger loans while maintaining diversity. This again chokes off supply to the retail market restricts growth in new investors as nothing much to invest in. Answer and i am not sure this will work, make the underwriting panel again the first port of call for funds but use the qaa to force down rates if the offers from the panel dont make sence use the qaa in part or full to fund, the demand from the retail market still gives a low risk fast turn over offer to the underwriters but premium rates are over. This takes pressure off the qaa to grow so fast enables more units to the retail market to grow happy investor levels ,win win well except maybe the underwriters but its called the market. In a different life i was involved in a contracts management divisision and we set up a internal contract direct labour section that looked and was treated like an external contractor to make a compeditor to force down costs it was brutal at times and we broke one supplier and pushed others to the edge but cost fell 10 to 15% on a £60m budget and that is what we were payed to do life is tough. Jeez, mate, you couldn't use a full stop periodically, could you? It'd make reading easier.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jun 20, 2016 23:39:07 GMT
We've never been able to please everyone. So, no doubt, you (AC) choose very carefully who you want to please. OK. C'est la vie.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 21, 2016 5:51:08 GMT
Jeez, mate, you couldn't use a full stop periodically, could you? Is there any other way to use a full stop ?
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Jun 21, 2016 7:44:23 GMT
Jeez, mate, you couldn't use a full stop periodically, could you? Is there any other way to use a full stop ? I wondered whether there would be anyone who would mention the wordplay! Or even notice it.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Jun 21, 2016 7:57:19 GMT
Is there any other way to use a full stop ? I wondered whether there would be anyone who would mention the wordplay! Or even notice it. Nope, I completely missed the point.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewholgate on Jun 21, 2016 8:42:03 GMT
I wondered whether there would be anyone who would mention the wordplay! Or even notice it. Nope, I completely missed the point. All seems a bit dotty to me.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jun 21, 2016 8:47:07 GMT
Nope, I completely missed the point. All seems a bit dotty to me. You're spot on there!
|
|
. Give me a bell when AC wants the other £1416 of my £1500 (hypothetical figures, but quite close to reality) and I may fetch it back. 
