|
Post by chielamangus on Oct 4, 2016 13:31:59 GMT
What arrogance. You just want to waste everyone's time, with everyone doubling up on searches. Now "moderate" this! No-one is forcing you to use this forum. The forum rules exist to protect members (including the volunteer Mod team), platforms and borrowers alike from potentially costly and time-consuming legal headaches. Either accept them (as you confirmed you would when you joined the forum) and take advantage of what the forum affords, or else go somewhere else. Entirely your choice. A non-sequitur. What's this about no one forcing me to use the forum? You have your opinion, which you voice frequently; I have mine. No doubt you'd like me to leave. I was here before you and I'll be be here long after you've gone.
|
|
dermot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 862
Likes: 517
|
Post by dermot on Oct 4, 2016 15:10:39 GMT
well this hasn't flown off the shelves in the way of normal MT loans. Will be interesting to see what happens after the 24 hour embargo. Clearly not to everyone's taste. Looks like every sparkling drop has gone in the last ten minutes ....
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Oct 4, 2016 15:40:32 GMT
No-one is forcing you to use this forum. The forum rules exist to protect members (including the volunteer Mod team), platforms and borrowers alike from potentially costly and time-consuming legal headaches. Either accept them (as you confirmed you would when you joined the forum) and take advantage of what the forum affords, or else go somewhere else. Entirely your choice. A non-sequitur. What's this about no one forcing me to use the forum? You have your opinion, which you voice frequently; I have mine. No doubt you'd like me to leave. I was here before you and I'll be be here long after you've gone. /mod hat off I thought it was perfectly "sequitorious" .. you complained about the forum policy, and it was pointed out that you are welcome to use some other place (or set one up) with some other policy, as long as your neck is in the noose and not ours. As to whether you'll be here long after SteveT, or anyone else, is gone, I guess it depends on how often, and in what tone, you throw rocks at the admin team and their policies.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Oct 4, 2016 17:11:18 GMT
well this hasn't flown off the shelves in the way of normal MT loans. Will be interesting to see what happens after the 24 hour embargo. Clearly not to everyone's taste. Looks like every sparkling drop has gone in the last ten minutes .... Which is pretty much a vindication of the reduced bid limits used by MoneyThing. Having the lower limits made sure it lasted 24 hours but did not prevent it from completing in a timely fashion. Interesting that it looked like within the first 24 hours it was the shorter duration tranches that were quaffed the most.
|
|
|
Post by ydobon on Oct 4, 2016 19:11:46 GMT
Looks like every sparkling drop has gone in the last ten minutes .... Which is pretty much a vindication of the reduced bid limits used by MoneyThing . Having the lower limits made sure it lasted 24 hours but did not prevent it from completing in a timely fashion. Interesting that it looked like within the first 24 hours it was the shorter duration tranches that were quaffed the most. Perhaps just a little nervousness around a different sort of asset to what people are used to on MT?
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Oct 5, 2016 6:05:10 GMT
I thought it was perfectly "sequitorious" .. you complained about the forum policy, and it was pointed out that you are welcome to use some other place (or set one up) with some other policy, as long as your neck is in the noose and not ours. As to whether you'll be here long after SteveT , or anyone else, is gone, I guess it depends on how often, and in what tone, you throw rocks at the admin team and their policies. Out of interest, how did you manage to end up with your neck in this "noose"? Do mods have to agree to be personally libel for any legal action taken against anything posted by another member (no matter how far fetched that may be?). Seems like a crazy thing to sign up for if that's the case.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,873
Likes: 7,918
|
Post by SteveT on Oct 5, 2016 7:12:32 GMT
I thought it was perfectly "sequitorious" .. you complained about the forum policy, and it was pointed out that you are welcome to use some other place (or set one up) with some other policy, as long as your neck is in the noose and not ours. As to whether you'll be here long after SteveT , or anyone else, is gone, I guess it depends on how often, and in what tone, you throw rocks at the admin team and their policies. Out of interest, how did you manage to end up with your neck in this "noose"? Do mods have to agree to be personally libel for any legal action taken against anything posted by another member (no matter how far fetched that may be?). Seems like a crazy thing to sign up for if that's the case. {Mod hat on} AIUI, the relevant legislation is the Defamation Act 2013 (see www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/contents/enacted ). Section 5 describes how "operators of a website" MAY these days be able to deflect legal liability for posts by others that are alleged to cause serious harm back to the original poster. However it remains a grey area and one that could be very expensive and time consuming for us to be dragged into. Given that we volunteer our time for no payment and the forum generates no revenue that might pay for legal representation, the Mod team is understandably keen to avoid potential action against us. That's why the forum rules exist and why we enforce them daily. Others may take a different view on the potential legal implications of identifying borrowers and discussing their financial affairs openly, in which case they should set up a forum / discussion board of their own elsewhere rather than stepping over the boundaries here. ps. A typical riposte when this comes up is "But we're allowed to name borrowers on Money Saving Expert", to which our response is: a) that MSE is a hugely profitable business, doubtless with in-house lawyers as well as retained counsel, and b) that sounds like a good place to carry on your discussion then.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Oct 5, 2016 12:23:17 GMT
ivorf41 I like this loan, & share a similar view to am as to the risks, would welcome clarity on the following please Ivor for the next tranche. 1. How will our security be valued going forwards? (eg simple straight line appreciation over time to a final expected sales value in year 3 or 4, or is this event-driven eg x% uplifts at pressing/blending/bottling/labelling & if so are these uplifts granted automatically or are there qualitative/other discretionary considerations that apply?) Will the final expected sales value be adjusted (eg for altered retail price positioning, distributor/reseller discounts, forex fluctuations etc) as & when necessary, ie reflecting a realistic updated view of value over the 5Y loan term? Who will make the valuations (an independent party eg Moore Stephens or the borrower/winemaker?) 2. what % of our security’s sales are D**** forecasting to make in non GBP currency, & is there any hedging in place for this? What other currencies will be relevant, I imagine USD will be important for sales to US/Asia, any others? Our security won’t be sold for 3-4Y’s at least, a long time for currency fluctuations.. 3. There is £315k debt scheduled for 2018 – is MT an option the borrower is considering for this? With no other debt planned does this mean the balance of future grape purchases (which I estimate to be c. £3m for sales planned to be made by 2024 ie next 3-4 Y’s purchasing) will be funded entirely from sales proceeds? 4. My biggest concern is the uncertainties related to the wine made under contract. No issues as to the winemaker’s capability, but does the contract tie him & F***** P**** F****’s facilities for the duration of our loan? What happens/redress is envisaged if for whatever reason the quality of the wine is not deemed to be up to scratch by the borrower? The winemaker makes wine for suppliers under a number of contracts, other than the fees earnt from our borrower (over which he have no visibility as to terms eg flat or percentage of sales value / some other incentive), & although he is presented as a member of the team AFAICS he has no equity stake or performance-based remuneration. What’s to say he won’t have any conflicts of interest, & is there anything stopping him being poached / hired on contract / distracted by competitors during the 5Y loan term? 5. Any references available for likely distressed sales values (I would imagine Moore Stephens should be able to help with this)? The Investment Memorandum mentions there are brokers/others that may provide an avenue in a distress scenario, but we have no idea if recoverable values could be 10, 20, 40% in such cases. One would guess they are likely to be lower the earlier the wine is in the process, & perhaps involve retransporting to new facilities under a new additional winemaking contract (on top of fees already paid to F***** P*** F***) if for whatever reason the contract with F***** P*** F*** or the winemaker fell through? That said I am happy to see this loan being offered on MT, a platform I trust, & hope there will be more opportunities in future with this borrower. Thanks
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Oct 5, 2016 12:55:33 GMT
Having looked at the LTV figs quoted on the MT Lending Analysis it seems stock values fluctuate (increasing in Jan, Jul & Nov but strangely falling in other months). Ivor can you confirm the values quoted (starting £727k in 7/16) are for our security only? Ed MoneyThing, can you confirm the stock takes & explanation as to the valuations will be made available to lenders. I see this in some ways as similar to a property development loan, the asset gradually increasing in value over time, would be nice for lenders to be able to watch this progress, & could add some fizz to the SM (pardon the pun) :-)
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,561
Likes: 1,170
|
Post by shimself on Oct 5, 2016 13:24:13 GMT
Not sure why but forum Users seem to keep id-ing the Borrower in the loan, it's happened three times now I can only think it's an effect of the W***. So put your glasses on and please just double check if your post names the Borrower or links to them. Undoubtedly accidental but this discussion is providing an excellent example of how the policies here are preventing lenders from doing proper cooperative due diligence checks by removing references to key information needed to properly understand the situation of the borrower. YES - but not the forum's fault, they hve explained their reasoning multiple times; the solution is for MT to install a q&a on their site. Please MT
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Oct 5, 2016 13:51:25 GMT
ivorf41 1. How will our security be valued going forwards? (eg simple straight line appreciation over time to a final expected sales value in year 3 or 4, or is this event-driven eg x% uplifts at pressing/blending/bottling/labelling & if so are these uplifts granted automatically or are there qualitative/other discretionary considerations that apply?) Will the final expected sales value be adjusted (eg for altered retail price positioning, distributor/reseller discounts, forex fluctuations etc) as & when necessary, ie reflecting a realistic updated view of value over the 5Y loan term? Who will make the valuations (an independent party eg Moore Stephens or the borrower/winemaker?) We're told that our security is valued at cost. The only continuous uplift that I would expect to see would correspond to storage fees to the bonded warehouse, but I might have overlooked something. There would be event driven uplifts as the winery is paid for various stages. If our security was the stuff in the bonded warehouse some stages would occur before the product entered our security, and some (labelling) might occur after it entered out security. But I think that legally we have a debenture over the whole of the company's assets, and the emphasis on the bonded warehouse in the marketing of the loan is because it's something tangible that lenders can focus on (and because it's the biggest tangible asset of the company). Corrections from ivorf41 and MoneyThing welcomed.
|
|
|
Post by ivorf41 on Oct 5, 2016 15:33:35 GMT
WE have a full suite of debentures on parent and subsidiary, with parent company guarantee and there are no other secured loans. We therefore rank first in the event of default . In addition we have charges over the shares of D***y W****s Ltd. There is a small unsecured pension loan which ranks behind us. Overall, I think we are well secured on this.
The stock is valued on a statutory basis i.e "The lower of cost or realisable value". Initially the cost is the grapes and then the cost of pressing and bottling including the cost of the bottles and "degourgement"will be added. Sparkling wine matures in the bottle. No account is taken on the time values , whereby the value increases the nearer one gets to maturity of the wine.
We will be monitoring the figures on a monthly basis with a visit to the winery every other month. We will attend the annual physical stocktaking and may undertake a 3rd party verification from time to time. WE have been professionally advised on the security position and have had confirmation that our 50% LTV is sensible.
I would add that , as the eyes of the lenders, we are impressed with the quality of the management and the degree of control over the business. This is not a start-up and the business has achieved very significant "milestones" already in getting the product into prestige outlets such as Selfridges, Harvey Nichols, Fortnum & Mason and The Dorchester Hotel, to name a few. The export market to USA and Japan should also underpin sales. We think that the company has a bright future.
I am also delighted that the whole amount listed was taken up by lenders within 24 hours, which we take as an endorsement of our due diligence in this.
|
|
|
Post by ivorf41 on Oct 5, 2016 15:44:59 GMT
Having looked at the LTV figs quoted on the MT Lending Analysis it seems stock values fluctuate (increasing in Jan, Jul & Nov but strangely falling in other months). Ivor can you confirm the values quoted (starting £727k in 7/16) are for our security only? Ed MoneyThing , can you confirm the stock takes & explanation as to the valuations will be made available to lenders. I see this in some ways as similar to a property development loan, the asset gradually increasing in value over time, would be nice for lenders to be able to watch this progress, & could add some fizz to the SM (pardon the pun) :-) Values quoted are based on the lower of cost or realisable value ( statutory definition of cost). The client does not apply a higher value to the stock as it gets nearer to maturity although there is no doubt that it does appreciate with time. It is not our intention to publish stock figures. We will however be actively monitoring the whole position and will only report if the loan is in breach of the terms and covenants contained in the loan agreement. WE have to be aware of commercial confidentiality and to take account of the fact that we cannot give inside information to any individual or group of lenders, that might disadvantage other lenders.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Oct 5, 2016 16:18:39 GMT
We will attend the annual physical stocktaking and may undertake a 3rd party verification from time to time. The loan documents at MoneyThing specified these stock taking requirements: " Borrower to undertake quarterly stock takes. At the discretion of the Lender after year 1 stock takes to be on a 6 monthly basis. Lender to be entitled to appoint a third party to carry out the stock takes at the expense of the Borrower." So what is the plan for stock taking to be done at the frequency specified in the loan description? If the plan was annual, was this plan known before the listing on MoneyThing and/or before the listing on MoneyThing resulted in a full loan? Given your plan it appears that a lender might have to appoint a third party just to get the stock taking frequency originally specified.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Oct 5, 2016 16:25:34 GMT
It is not our intention to publish stock figures... . WE have to be aware of commercial confidentiality and to take account of the fact that we cannot give inside information to any individual or group of lenders, that might disadvantage other lenders. As the loan documents at MoneyThing specified: "B orrower to supply the Lender immediately after each stock with a software copy of the stock record of the stock position.
Borrower to notify the Lender of any sales orders over £25,000 prior to despatch of such stock from the W***** E***** Winery*" The position appears to be quite simple: the loan description requires full disclosure of the stock situation as well as disclosure of the transactions to all lenders. The stock positions do not have to be published but they do have to be provided. How does your firm propose to act in accordance with the requirements given in the loan documents? *This is not the borrower
|
|