arbster
Member of DD Central
Posts: 810 
Likes: 426
|
Post by arbster on Sept 18, 2016 11:09:34 GMT
Regarding the criticism of the OP, it felt rather light-hearted to me, but there was a discernable serious undertone.
If it were my business I might have taken the opportunity to remind people that INPL requires people to make up the shortfall within 24 hours of pre-funding and that SS are planning to enforce this strictly in this instance. While, as SS says, this might be an "interesting conundrum" worthy of wider discussion, it does only apply to SS, as the sole P2P lender offering INPL. And, as others have pointed out, only a proportion of the SS user community reads this forum, so some explicit reminders on the website might also be prudent, unless of course the majority of those who routinely game the INPL system happen also to be forum members...
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisuk on Sept 18, 2016 12:32:37 GMT
Seems to me this is just point scoring a la primary school playground. Can anyone take seriously posts by SS on a forum late Saturday night? They really ought to grow up and post this thing on their own website so everyone can see it, and perhaps at least in daylight hours not the exact middle of the weekend. Not the sort of mature approach one would expect from a business handling more than £100 million of other people's money, Dualinvestor - you couldn't be more wrong. We launched a loan on Saturday, and undertake business often on a Sunday. Leaving a message on the forum on a Saturday night just means that we are thinking of the business and our investors and that ' there is no time like the present' which has been our mantra from day 1. Deliberation often leads to Procrastination so better to take action and move forward. It also gives our investors as much time as possible to get their personal affairs in order so that they do not miss out on an opportunity that will happen early on in the week. We phrased the post rather cryptically as it is a rather ' interesting conundrum' and was an opportunity to think on a macro P2P scale rather than having a specific loan in mind. Would you rather we don't engage at all with the forum? Reactions like yours might push platforms to take that stance. Dear SavingStream, Please don't develop a 'bunker mentality'. We should all work together in making your business a continuing success. It is in your interest as well as ours. Most of us are not financial experts, in fact I am a pensioner just trying to make some interest on my savings. I rely heavily on the forum members for help and advice before I invest in a loan. This is not because I doubt your professionalism, it's just a means of gathering different opinions before I hand over my precious life savings. I did not understand a word of your cryptic message posted last night and so I did not find it helpful. But I would be grateful if you would continue posting on this forum, just keep it simple for thickos like me!! Thank you.
|
|
ben
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 589
|
Post by ben on Sept 18, 2016 14:46:58 GMT
I am not quite sure why people expected to be able to use the funds form one site to another. As SS raises the funds usually before drawndown, so it is all there when the loan goes live. Even if they send the live loan out today the loan might not change hands till towards the end of the week.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Sept 18, 2016 15:49:39 GMT
Im not quite sure why people expected to be able to use the funds form one site to another. As SS raises the funds usually before drawndown so is all ther when the loan goes live. Even if they send the live loan out today the loan might not change hands till towards the end of the week. I expect people were misled by MT's suggestion (AIUI) that the loan would be repaid on Monday. If that did happen, and MT acted on withdrawal requests with their usual speed, then any MT investors would be able to get those proceeds into their SS accounts by Tuesday and that would be within the INPL rules. Since SS haven't opened the loan for funding yet, and haven't even sent out the usual 'Advance go-live notice', the only way MT could be repaid on Monday would be if SS underwrote/bridged the loan themselves. Inasmuch as they've effectively said (in the OP) that they're not going to do that, I have to conclude that there's been a failure to communicate somewhere between SS and MT. What I expect to happen is that SS will wait until all the legals are done and then set the loan live. But they won't be in a position for the borrower to draw down until the new loan is fully funded AND there have been enough new funds deposited on the platform to reduce SS investors' combined negative balances down to a level SS feel comfortable bridging. It isn't enough that all investments in the new loan are paid for. If they all are paid for by SS investors selling other loan parts to cover their negative balances, all that does is move the negative balances from the Cardiff investors' accounts over to the accounts of the SS investors who have bought the £4M of parts sold on the SM by the Cardiff investors. In that situation, a lot of parts will have changed hands but SS still won't have the £4M they need for drawdown. And as those SM purchases prompt more investors to sell more parts on the SM to cover their negative balances, those negative balances could bounce around within SS for some time. It is only the arrival of new money onto the platform that will solve the problem -- or the arrival of some of those repayments expected imminently.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Sept 18, 2016 16:01:04 GMT
For those planning to use invest now, pay later (INPL) the most important part of the first post is probably "Platform A cannot be expected to bridge that shortfall". Saving Stream's own money would have to be used to fund INPL and repay the MoneyThing charge if money wasn't deposited by prospective lenders and that's in effect a warning that Saving Stream won't be able to use (enough? any?) real money to pay off the loans at MoneyThing based on a promise of future INPL money. So you'll need to raise real depositable money somehow to get the deal done. If you don't deposit then Saving Stream may have to cancel your loan part bid to make it available to someone else who might be able to fund so that the deal can get done. Best to be sure you only INPL when you're sure you really do have actual funds available to deposit else you might delay the deal. If a loan part has sold that'll probably work because MoneyThing is fast at paying out but if you're just trying to sell, not so good. Aren't we being offered 12% on both platforms, why has the borrower switched platforms? £521k at 12% and £1700k at 13% at MoneyThing, one of the reasons lenders might not prefer 12% at SavingStream. The anticipated borrowing need to complete the project is £7-8 million. Given that the borrower has other loans that would have created an unacceptable concentration of risk with one borrower, so MoneyThing asked the borrower to refinance away from MoneyThing to avoid the issue, which would presumably have resulted in MoneyThing refusing to offer finance later in the project at a greater inconvenience for the borrower. The MoneyThing loan is in multiple tranches (links only work when logged in to a MoneyThing account): 1. MTAG277 12% £521k, initially second charge 22/10/2015 bidding start, land with PP 2. MTAG328 13% £500k, initially third charge 29/1/2016, land with PP 2. MTAG433 13% £300k, initially third charge 20/6/16, dev finance tr 1 3. MTAG434 13% £300k, ", 23/6/16, dev finance tr 2 4. MTAG435 13% £300k, ", 18/7/16, dev finance tr 3 5. MTAG436 13% £300k, ", 29/7/16, dev finance tr 4 The charge structure changed due to the development refinancing with the development tranches repaying the first charge, leaving all of the MoneyThing loans as a first charge but the 12% initial one given priority over the others.The charge structure was due to change with five tranches of £300k used to repay the first charge holder then the others becoming all first charge with MTAG277 having precedence but only four tranches so far, all to go directly to first charge holder, so the first charge holder presumably still remains but at much reduced amount. |
|
|
|
Post by meledor on Sept 18, 2016 16:21:27 GMT
Dualinvestor - you couldn't be more wrong. We launched a loan on Saturday, and undertake business often on a Sunday. Leaving a message on the forum on a Saturday night just means that we are thinking of the business and our investors and that ' there is no time like the present' which has been our mantra from day 1. Deliberation often leads to Procrastination so better to take action and move forward. It also gives our investors as much time as possible to get their personal affairs in order so that they do not miss out on an opportunity that will happen early on in the week. We phrased the post rather cryptically as it is a rather ' interesting conundrum' and was an opportunity to think on a macro P2P scale rather than having a specific loan in mind. Would you rather we don't engage at all with the forum? Reactions like yours might push platforms to take that stance. Dear SavingStream, Please don't develop a 'bunker mentality'.... I think it is unlikely that SS will devlop a 'bunker mentality'. However, rather wild comments about a 'primary school playground' and a lack of 'mature approach' together with a wish to restrict SS communication to the 'daylight hours' were just begging for a response and I'm glad one was made.
|
|
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 Sept 18, 2016 17:24:17 GMT
For those planning to use invest now, pay later (INPL) the most important part of the first post is probably "Platform A cannot be expected to bridge that shortfall". Saving Stream's own money would have to be used to fund INPL and repay the MoneyThing charge if money wasn't deposited by prospective lenders and that's in effect a warning that Saving Stream won't be able to use (enough? any?) real money to pay off the loans at MoneyThing based on a promise of future INPL money. So you'll need to raise real depositable money somehow to get the deal done. If you don't deposit then Saving Stream may have to cancel your loan part bid to make it available to someone else who might be able to fund so that the deal can get done. Best to be sure you only INPL when you're sure you really do have actual funds available to deposit else you might delay the deal. If a loan part has sold that'll probably work because MoneyThing is fast at paying out but if you're just trying to sell, not so good. Aren't we being offered 12% on both platforms, why has the borrower switched platforms? £521k at 12% and £1700k at 13% at MoneyThing, one of the reasons lenders might not prefer 12% at SavingStream. The anticipated borrowing need to complete the project is £7-8 million. Given that the borrower has other loans that would have created an unacceptable concentration of risk with one borrower, so MoneyThing asked the borrower to refinance away from MoneyThing to avoid the issue, which would presumably have resulted in MoneyThing refusing to offer finance later in the project at a greater inconvenience for the borrower. The MoneyThing loan is in multiple tranches (links only work when logged in to a MoneyThing account): 1. MTAG277 12% £521k, initially second charge 22/10/2015 bidding start, land with PP 2. MTAG328 13% £500k, initially third charge 29/1/2016, land with PP 2. MTAG433 13% £300k, initially third charge 20/6/16, dev finance tr 1 3. MTAG434 13% £300k, ", 23/6/16, dev finance tr 2 4. MTAG435 13% £300k, ", 18/7/16, dev finance tr 3 5. MTAG436 13% £300k, ", 29/7/16, dev finance tr 4 The charge structure changed due to the development refinancing with the development tranches repaying the first charge, leaving all of the MoneyThing loans as a first charge but the 12% initial one given priority over the others. Probably irrelevant but I dont think that is correct. The original first charge is still £282k, MTAG277 is a 2nd charge still, all other loans are 3rd Charge. So the 1st charge still needs to be released as well as MTs charges before SS can take over the security. MT loans arent dev finance tranches they are just to take out the 1st charge holder but I havent seen anything to indicate that that charge isnt still in place in part. Still outstanding on CH fixed & floating. I would say on that basis SS are right to caution that they may not be able to be an speedy movement of funds from MT to SS as the deal isnt as straightforward as is being assumed ISTM
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,014
Likes: 5,143
|
Post by adrianc on Sept 18, 2016 17:53:58 GMT
For those planning to use invest now, pay later (INPL) the most important part of the first post is probably "Platform A cannot be expected to bridge that shortfall". Saving Stream's own money would have to be used to fund INPL and repay the MoneyThing charge if money wasn't deposited by prospective lenders and that's in effect a warning that Saving Stream won't be able to use (enough? any?) real money to pay off the loans at MoneyThing based on a promise of future INPL money. So you'll need to raise real depositable money somehow to get the deal done. Of course, there's also the minor detail that SS have no way of knowing if somebody has been invested in this loan at MT or if they're just some random numpty who's IN with no intent to PL. Now there's surprise a platform supporting comment from one of the usual suspects "liked" by others OK, we get the idea. You don't like SS as a platform. <waves goodbye>
|
|
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 Sept 18, 2016 18:24:36 GMT
I think SS need to assume that most of the Cardiff loan needs to be funded with new money. MT have a healthy pipeline and will try to coincide the launch of some new loans with the repayment of Cardiff.
|
|
ablender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,204
Likes: 555
|
Post by ablender on Sept 18, 2016 18:30:49 GMT
One thing I have noted, judging from the activity on this forum, Sunday is business as usual. And, if there is nothing substantial to discuss, we quickly invent something.
This is Sunday. Did I hear someone complaining about a Saturday, albeit an evening?
|
|
treeman
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 557
|
Post by treeman on Sept 18, 2016 18:45:30 GMT
<SNIP> might want to consider paying in new funds or selling other loan parts to maintain possession of these loan parts come Monday as Platform A cannot be expected to bridge that shortfall. Monday's coming ...... not had any email re going live / timelines. Am I missing something ?
|
|
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 Sept 18, 2016 18:51:42 GMT
<SNIP> might want to consider paying in new funds or selling other loan parts to maintain possession of these loan parts come Monday as Platform A cannot be expected to bridge that shortfall. Monday's coming ...... not had any email re going live / timelines. Am I missing something ? Yes, that SS were speaking on a macro level & not about a specific loan ... and in tongues 
|
|
treeman
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 557
|
Post by treeman on Sept 18, 2016 19:02:55 GMT
Monday's coming ...... not had any email re going live / timelines. Am I missing something ? Yes, that SS were speaking on a macro level & not about a specific loan ... and in tongues Ahhhh .... yes ...... late night hypothetical ponderings ...... Well that's alright then. Unless we're about to get a really short (or no) notice event ...... one way or another this is one scrum I don't want to miss
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Sept 18, 2016 19:30:32 GMT
Probably irrelevant but I dont think that is correct. ... The original first charge is still £282k, MTAG277 is a 2nd charge still, all other loans are 3rd Charge. So the 1st charge still needs to be released as well as MTs charges before SS can take over the security. MT loans arent dev finance tranches they are just to take out the 1st charge holder but I havent seen anything to indicate that that charge isnt still in place in part. Still outstanding on CH fixed & floating. I think you're right on that, though dev finance is how MoneyThing titled them, as in "Development (tranche 4 of 5)" while saying it was refinancing in the details, I just used the title because it would be more readily recognisable in the list of loans. From the description of MTAG436: " REFINANCE OF EXISTING 1st CHARGE LENDER ... MoneyThing is refinancing the existing 1st charge holder on this site totalling £1.482m. ... This will be undertaken in five tranches of £300,000, at a rate of one tranche per week. During this period and until all tranches have been 100% filled, the tranches will be secured against our existing 3rd charge on the site. These advances will be paid directly to the 1st charge holder to refinance their loan ..." Only 4 of the planned 5 tranches to fully pay off the first charge holder. That could leave Saving Stream the option of repaying MoneyThing to release its third and then second charges then doing the same with the first charge holder after the freed and anticipated money has been paid into Saving Stream. If the saving Stream loan is described in such a way that this is permissible or if Saving Stream offers one or more other loans to get it done in chunks. Meanwhile I just bought all outstanding amounts of two of the presumably still third charge tranches on the MoneyThing secondary market and almost all of another. Will undoubtedly change later of course.
|
|
stevio
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 894
|
Post by stevio on Sept 18, 2016 20:08:26 GMT
Have to face fact not going be able simply transfer funds from MT to SS via this loan
New money will unfortunately be needed in the interim. Those without deep pockets or sale able loans will unfortunately miss out....
|
|
