rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354 
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Oct 21, 2016 16:38:09 GMT
Hi,
New to this independent forum but been with FC (for my sins) for some three years now. I posted on FC today after a long spell of absence - specifically in response to the Times journalist, James Hurley, who was looking for input into an article regarding lender dissatisfaction with FC (no shortage of that it seems).
However, on logging back on again (at about 1725 hours today) I find either the forum is down, been taken down or I am unable to access it. I find this something of a coincidence (and I don't believe in them) - so I'm somewhat suspicious.
Is the forum down, been taken down - or are those who suggest contacting this journalist (as I did, and have) deemed a danger too far??
Any thoughts ??
Regards,
rxdav
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087 
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Oct 21, 2016 16:52:44 GMT
Looks OK to me. Village idiot has just replied to a photo of tins of Spam uploaded by Lancashire Bill.  Rachel has reinstated JamesH's post (deleted this morning) she apologizes. Your followup is not there. |
|
rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Oct 21, 2016 16:58:44 GMT
Thanks Old Grumpy - it seems I too can now access the forum. However, as the saying goes, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you!!
On a slightly less frivolous note - has anyone else emailed James Hurley - I have and already received a reply?
Given the utter intransigence demonstrated by FC management lately I suspect a good kicking in the mainstream national press is something that might bring them out of their current coma? It would certainly be well deserved in my humble opinion.
Regards,
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Oct 21, 2016 17:10:29 GMT
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,015
Likes: 5,144
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 21, 2016 17:38:37 GMT
Thanks Old Grumpy - it seems I too can now access the forum. However, as the saying goes, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you!!
On a slightly less frivolous note - has anyone else emailed James Hurley - I have and already received a reply?
Given the utter intransigence demonstrated by FC management lately I suspect a good kicking in the mainstream national press is something that might bring them out of their current coma? It would certainly be well deserved in my humble opinion. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it. He does seem to have a bit of an... agenda... going by the SS article from a little while ago, which purely coincidentally was printed a day or two after he registered on this forum.
|
|
rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Oct 21, 2016 18:34:21 GMT
Hi adrianc, I actively welcome the potential opportunity to redress the current imbalance of power between the FC P2P platform and its retail lenders. It was a whole different story a few years ago when we retail lenders were welcomed with open arms. However, whilst I accept that all things change (and in this case most definitely not for the better), I do find it leaves a very bitter taste to have a latter day metaphorical Lord Lucan (AKA: Samir - they seek him here, they seek him there...), that previous self appointed saviour of the small investor oppressed by the nasty big Banks (allegedly), becoming just another source of the same old, same old.
I'm aware there are some serial forum pacifists on the FC forum (and here too maybe?), just as there are some serial forum antagonists - but I have enough history with FC and more than enough evidence to demonstrate that FC really no longer give a toss about the small retail lender. I don't know why they actually try to keep up the all too transparent pretence that they do?
The decay started when they accepted UK Government money and this initial rot was sealed when the Institutional Investors rode into town - at that point the circle was complete.
I wish Lord Lucan well - and I'm sure his new yacht (or whatever) will be a source of joy to him - but I don't ever want to see him on TV again doing his false evangelical act - I'd actually rather like to see Paxman or Humphries do a surgically incisive interview on him - not that I'm vindictive!?!
So, adrianc, as you can see, I really am hoping to get what I wish for.
But apart from that - it's Friday night, my health and that of my family is good, we have food aplenty and a roof over our heads - so I guess it's rant over - until James Hurley calls me that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icarus Unleashed on Oct 22, 2016 4:36:54 GMT
I'm aware there are some serial forum pacifists of the FC forum (and here too maybe?), just as there are some serial forum antagonists - but I have enough history with FC and more than enough evidence to demonstrate that FC really no longer give a toss about the small retail lender. I don't know why they actually try to keep up the all too transparent pretence that they do?
I'm probably one of these 'pacifists' you speak of . I also get the sense that retail investors are not a priority for FC. Am I surprised by this? Not very. They're a business and they will try to maximise profit however they can (with our without placing us retail investors on a pedastal).
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,015
Likes: 5,144
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 22, 2016 7:10:25 GMT
Hi adrianc, I actively welcome the potential opportunity to redress the current imbalance of power between the FC P2P platform and its retail lenders. It was a whole different story a few years ago when we retail lenders were welcomed with open arms. However, whilst I accept that all things change (and in this case most definitely not for the better), I do find it leaves a very bitter taste to have a latter day metaphorical Lord Lucan (AKA: Samir - they seek him here, they seek him there...), that previous self appointed saviour of the small investor oppressed by the nasty big Banks (allegedly), becoming just another source of the same old, same old.
I'm aware there are some serial forum pacifists on the FC forum (and here too maybe?), just as there are some serial forum antagonists - but I have enough history with FC and more than enough evidence to demonstrate that FC really no longer give a toss about the small retail lender. I don't know why they actually try to keep up the all too transparent pretence that they do?
The decay started when they accepted UK Government money and this initial rot was sealed when the Institutional Investors rode into town - at that point the circle was complete.
I wish Lord Lucan well - and I'm sure his new yacht (or whatever) will be a source of joy to him - but I don't ever want to see him on TV again doing his false evangelical act - I'd actually rather like to see Paxman or Humphries do a surgically incisive interview on him - not that I'm vindictive!?!
So, adrianc, as you can see, I really am hoping to get what I wish for.
But apart from that - it's Friday night, my health and that of my family is good, we have food aplenty and a roof over our heads - so I guess it's rant over - until James Hurley calls me that is. There's a difference between responsible journalism highlighting actual problems, and tabloid-esque sensationalism.
|
|
rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Oct 22, 2016 7:31:28 GMT
Hi Icarus,
I don't think anyone who has been around FC for a few years and who has even a modicum of intellect is under any illusions about where the retail investor now sits in their scheme of things (walk to the end of the queue, then walk some more). What I find galling is the on-going hypocrisy - the way they continue the pretence that they value us. This is increasingly highlighted in the manner in which legitimate questions by lenders go largely unanswered (I'm talking principally property loans here). There are multiple pages on the FC forum of lenders trying to ascertain what's happening to their money - mostly without success.
This lack of willingness to interact with lenders in a transparent and honest manner can only breed suspicion and degrade trust. From my personal perspective, if FC told me the sun was shining I would look out of the window to check!! What kind of relationship is this to develop with your clients? Well, funnily enough it seems all too familiar to the supposed negative relationship many had/have with the big bad Banks - that FC was going to save us from?!?!
I continue with FC but they are very much a minority holding for me now, primarily used to spread my risk - and using a number of other P2P platforms really brings into focus just how abysmal they have become in respect their client relationships and general business attitude.
|
|
rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Oct 22, 2016 8:01:12 GMT
Hi adrianc,
The Times in my humble experience is not renowned for it's tabloid tendencies (albeit now available in tabloid dimensions). Furthermore, I suggest there are no shortage of 'actual problems' that need addressing to mitigate the growing mistrust and dissent felt by many FC lenders - five minutes on the FC forum gives a flavour of the myriad issues involved.
If FC won't address the issues directly with their lenders then they are simply inviting them to take their dissent elsewhere for resolution.
Retail lenders may now constitute only a small portion of the FC fund subsequent to Corporate money arriving - but I suggest they can do a disproportionate amount of damage if terms of public perception of the company if their legitimate issues remain unaddressed. Who knows, maybe FC intend to follow the big Banks down that dark alley too? Extrapolating that idea, I hear Fred Goodwin is currently looking for a job and might be available to help ?!?!
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,015
Likes: 5,144
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 22, 2016 8:11:55 GMT
The Times in my humble experience is not renowned for it's tabloid tendencies (albeit now available in tabloid dimensions). <cough>Murdoch... But perhaps you missed his SS hatchet job?
|
|
rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Oct 22, 2016 8:44:16 GMT
Hi adrianc,
Let me guess - you'll be a Guardian reader ??
|
|
rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Oct 22, 2016 8:49:58 GMT
Interestingly, I started this thread as I found myself temporarily denied access to the FC forum yesterday. I read in the news today (no - not in The Times!!) a large cyber attack took place yesterday - and I think the FC forum is hosted by a third party - maybe that was the source of my temporary denial of access?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 22, 2016 8:56:35 GMT
The Times in my humble experience is not renowned for it's tabloid tendencies (albeit now available in tabloid dimensions). <cough>Murdoch... But perhaps you missed his SS hatchet job? Indeed. If I had had more time a complaint to the IPSO (Independent Press Standards Organisation) was fully justified as he seemed to break several clauses in the Editor's Code of Practise (section 1 accuracy) i) The press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information ....
iii) A fair opportunity to reply to significant inaccuracies should be given ...
iv) The press, while free to editorilse and campaign, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.The whole premise of his reporting that story was flawed because of the need to create a sensationlist story. There was an underlying story that would have been fascinating to read if only he had bothered to write it - how ethics does and should influence investment decisions. Plenty has been written in relation to investment ethics with respect to equity finance, but nothing on investment ethics and debt finance. To write a story that confuses investment risk with investment ethics was not the standard of journalism that The Times once aspired to. At no point did he discuss any of the 3 parameters which relate to investment risk on that loan, LTV / £ per square foot / 8% investment yield. The crux of the issue with that loan is the 8% investment yield used to calculate the valuation - is that the right number ? A serious journalist would have done what many lenders on that loan have done, compare that with other investment opprtunities surrounding Bristol, and concluded that it is probably the correct number. The story was clearly comment dressed up as fact (breaking point iv) was misleading as it was confusing investment risk with investment ethics (breaking point i) and the valid, sensible response given by SS that the background of the borrower does not affect investment risk was ridiculed (breaking point iii as it was not a fair opportunity given it was ridiculed).
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 22, 2016 9:00:17 GMT
Hi adrianc,
Let me guess - you'll be a Guardian reader ?? And before you ask the same question of me, I read any/all attempts at serious journalism be it in the (in alphabetical order) BBC, Financial Times, Guardian, Telegraph, Times, Wall Street Journal etc etc I also subscribe to Moneyweek, and have done so for 15 years.
|
|
