|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Oct 29, 2014 10:52:33 GMT
Well, having got round to setting a target here, I did get a bit (£10.10) at 02:31 this morning. Seems to be dribbling out from somewhere, as if someone's account has sprung a leak  I thought it might be people, as niceguy37 says, re-rigging or making sure their London Law actually amortizes. Here are my purchases; £ 29th 2.31
|
| 10.42
| 28th 15.32
|
| 15.15
| 27th 16.19
|
| 1.38
| 27th 16.19
|
| 20.98
| 24th 17.43
|
| 4.15
|
So, is this four different people DIY amortizing before the payment on the 1st of Nov. If so can anyone work out the size of their holdings? If they're in London Law T2 that repays on the 17th that would still have been under the old system when it repaid and wouldn't have needed self-amortizing. I think chris said a fix for the non-amortization was coming this week or did he just say soon?
|
|
Neil
Posts: 40 
Likes: 70
|
Post by Neil on Oct 29, 2014 10:53:22 GMT
Well, having got round to setting a target here, I did get a bit (£10.10) at 02:31 this morning. Seems to be dribbling out from somewhere, as if someone's account has sprung a leak I set a target for this loan yesterday and received £9.11 at exactly the same time as you (02:31) last night. I don't think I'm clever enough to understand why we would receive different amounts and pepperpot completely misses out?
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Oct 29, 2014 11:01:50 GMT
£9.84 at 02:31
They move in a mysterious way
Their wonders to perform
We set out targets in the day
They're topped up by the morn.
(by Bill Cowpatt in 1800)
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,808
Likes: 3,241
|
Post by jonno on Oct 29, 2014 11:17:37 GMT
£9.84 at 02:31 They move in a mysterious way Their wonders to perform We set out targets in the day They're topped up by the morn. (by Bill Cowpatt in 1800) Perhaps "Cowpatt" should be the widely accepted code for the non-amortising algorythm 
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 29, 2014 12:01:18 GMT
Well, having got round to setting a target here, I did get a bit (£10.10) at 02:31 this morning. Seems to be dribbling out from somewhere, as if someone's account has sprung a leak I thought it might be people, as niceguy37 says, re-rigging or making sure their London Law actually amortizes. Here are my purchases; £ 29th 2.31
|
| 10.42
| 28th 15.32
|
| 15.15
| 27th 16.19
|
| 1.38
| 27th 16.19
|
| 20.98
| 24th 17.43
|
| 4.15
|
So, is this four different people DIY amortizing before the payment on the 1st of Nov. If so can anyone work out the size of their holdings? My purchases were... | 29/Oct | 02:31 | | £ 10.11 | | 28/Oct | 15:32 | | £ Nil
| | 27/Oct | 16:19 | | £ 1.38 | 27/Oct
| 16:19 | | £ 15.01 | | 24/Oct | 17:43
| | £ 4.63 |
I think my MLIA might have been devoid of spare cash at 1532 on the 28th. On the other occasions, I'm pretty sure the cash available in the account was in excess of the amount of the purchases, so cash availability shouldn't have restricted the amount purchased. Based on what we've been told about how the new system decides how any parts offered for sale are distributed among those wanting to buy, I'm a bit puzzled by why our amounts purchased on a particular occasion don't match more closely. For instance, in the most recent sale, ramblin rose and I both purchased effectively the same amount but Ton ⓉⓞⓃ received a bit more. Can we deduce anything about the seller's holdings? I don't think so. Firstly, we'd have to know how many buyers participated in each transaction in order to know the total sold, and we don't have that info. And secondly, we'd have to know what proportion of their total holding that the seller offloaded, and we don't know that either. The only way we'll get that data is if the seller reads this and decides to tell us! PS. One of the shortcomings of the MLIA statement is the lack of a column showing the balance after each transaction. If I had that, I would have known whether or not I had cash available at any particular time, and whether the lack of enough free cash might have affected any of my purchases. Do others think that would be a useful enhancement of the statement? Should we ask chris to consider adding that?
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 29, 2014 12:03:56 GMT
PS. One of the shortcomings of the MLIA statement is the lack of a column showing the balance after each transaction. If I had that, I would have known whether or not I had cash available at any particular time, and whether the lack of enough free cash might have affected any of my purchases. Do others think that would be a useful enhancement of the statement? Should we ask chris to consider adding that? It's on my radar as something to do in the short term.
|
|
niceguy37
Member of DD Central
Posts: 504
Likes: 254
|
Post by niceguy37 on Oct 29, 2014 12:28:49 GMT
PS. One of the shortcomings of the MLIA statement is the lack of a column showing the balance after each transaction. If I had that, I would have known whether or not I had cash available at any particular time, and whether the lack of enough free cash might have affected any of my purchases. Do others think that would be a useful enhancement of the statement? Should we ask chris to consider adding that? It's on my radar as something to do in the short term. A longer term "nice to have" would be to be able to see, for a particular the transaction history for that loan. I know this can be acquired by merging the main statement and the MLIA transaction listing, and some fancy Excel filtering, but it would be nice to have as an additional tab on the loan. Also I think there really needs to be an indicator of loan type please: Repayment, Interest Only, Repayment (amortising over x years), Interest Only with Interest Rolled Up, Capital holiday etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Oct 29, 2014 12:46:32 GMT
I thought it might be people, as niceguy37 says, re-rigging or making sure their London Law actually amortizes. Here are my purchases; £ 29th 2.31
|
| 10.42
| 28th 15.32
|
| 15.15
| 27th 16.19
|
| 1.38
| 27th 16.19
|
| 20.98
| 24th 17.43
|
| 4.15
|
So, is this four different people DIY amortizing before the payment on the 1st of Nov. If so can anyone work out the size of their holdings? My purchases were... | 29/Oct | 02:31 | | £ 10.11 | | 28/Oct | 15:32 | | £ Nil
| | 27/Oct | 16:19 | | £ 1.38 | 27/Oct
| 16:19 | | £ 15.01 | | 24/Oct | 17:43
| | £ 4.63 |
<snip> Based on what we've been told about how the new system decides how any parts offered for sale are distributed among those wanting to buy, I'm a bit puzzled by why our amounts purchased on a particular occasion don't match more closely. For instance, in the most recent sale, ramblin rose and I both purchased effectively the same amount but Ton ⓉⓞⓃ received a bit more. <snip> To start with I only had £20 in T3 (i.e. the minimum bid) I now have a target of £200 and a holding, when I checked this morn, of £70. So does it also give a little more if you're holding is zero or quite low as I am. I've not picked up any T2 either. I'm self-amortizing this one but haven't actually sold any to do that. My target is £1050
|
|
alison
Member of DD Central
Sanctuary!!
Posts: 356 
Likes: 99
|
Post by alison on Oct 29, 2014 13:09:08 GMT
My purchases were... | 29/Oct | 02:31 | | £ 10.11 | | 28/Oct | 15:32 | | £ Nil
| | 27/Oct | 16:19 | | £ 1.38 | 27/Oct
| 16:19 | | £ 15.01 | | 24/Oct | 17:43
| | £ 4.63 |
<snip> Based on what we've been told about how the new system decides how any parts offered for sale are distributed among those wanting to buy, I'm a bit puzzled by why our amounts purchased on a particular occasion don't match more closely. For instance, in the most recent sale, ramblin rose and I both purchased effectively the same amount but Ton ⓉⓞⓃ received a bit more. <snip> To start with I only had £20 in T3 (i.e. the minimum bid) I now have a target of £200 and a holding, when I checked this morn, of £70. So does it also give a little more if you're holding is zero or quite low as I am. I've not picked up any T2 either. I'm self-amortizing this one but haven't actually sold any to do that. My target is £1050 Well I just flogged of £12.72 of T2 a little while ago to see what would happen. 11 of you got £1 and someone got £1.72. Enjoy!!
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 29, 2014 13:30:42 GMT
To start with I only had £20 in T3 (i.e. the minimum bid) I now have a target of £200 and a holding, when I checked this morn, of £70. So does it also give a little more if you're holding is zero or quite low as I am. I've not picked up any T2 either. I'm self-amortizing this one but haven't actually sold any to do that. My target is £1050 There's no bias for buyers based on your current holdings.
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Oct 29, 2014 15:07:18 GMT
There's no bias for buyers based on your current holdings. It would greatly increase the transparency of the buying process if we knew EXACTLY what the steps and criteria were in determining who gets what and how much. And is there a random element and, if so, at what stage does it kick in? I like the automated process but I don't like the black box nature of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 29, 2014 16:11:52 GMT
There's no bias for buyers based on your current holdings. It would greatly increase the transparency of the buying process if we knew EXACTLY what the steps and criteria were in determining who gets what and how much. And is there a random element and, if so, at what stage does it kick in? I like the automated process but I don't like the black box nature of it. Think I've already posted this, but I'll detail it again. Each loan is considered as a mini-auction amongst all potential buyers with funds, rather than lender x wants amount y. So there's no concept of individual's having their specific request considered in isolation, buyers are always assessed as a group. The criteria for being included in the group of buyers is that your loan target is greater than your holding and you have funds available in your manual investment account and you do not have a withdraw target set. If the total amount available for sale is less than £1 per lender (regardless of their request size) then the list of buyers is randomised and £1 allocated to each until there's no more left with the final person taking whatever is left over on top of their £1 (e.g. £1.52). If the amount available for sale is greater than £1 per lender then the sale amount is distributed equally amongst all lenders. If that amount is greater than a lender's target then the excess is truncated and distributed equally amongst the other lenders whose target has not been reached (or discarded should there be no willing buyer). Those sales are then matched randomly against the sellers, which does include a weighting to bias it towards those lenders selling the most in much the same way the old site used to. However the new site does force wider distribution amongst sellers - if there are five buyers and ten sellers, those buyers will be distributed across at least five of those sellers (up to however many are needed to match the buyers targets).
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Oct 29, 2014 16:36:03 GMT
Thanks, Chris. I wasn't aware of any of this. I think this explanation should be on the AC site as forumites are a minority. Umm, forumites - what a ghastly word. But I suppose it gives us forumitis for those addicted to these pages.
|
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Oct 29, 2014 16:48:50 GMT
To start with I only had £20 in T3 (i.e. the minimum bid) I now have a target of £200 and a holding, when I checked this morn, of £70. So does it also give a little more if you're holding is zero or quite low as I am. I've not picked up any T2 either. I'm self-amortizing this one but haven't actually sold any to do that. My target is £1050 Well I just flogged of £12.72 of T2 a little while ago to see what would happen. 11 of you got £1 and someone got £1.72. Enjoy!! (Still not me though  )
|
|
niceguy37
Member of DD Central
Posts: 504
Likes: 254
|
Post by niceguy37 on Oct 29, 2014 16:56:19 GMT
It would greatly increase the transparency of the buying process if we knew EXACTLY what the steps and criteria were in determining who gets what and how much. And is there a random element and, if so, at what stage does it kick in? I like the automated process but I don't like the black box nature of it. Think I've already posted this, but I'll detail it again. Each loan is considered as a mini-auction amongst all potential buyers with funds, rather than lender x wants amount y. So there's no concept of individual's having their specific request considered in isolation, buyers are always assessed as a group. The criteria for being included in the group of buyers is that your loan target is greater than your holding and you have funds available in your manual investment account and you do not have a withdraw target set. If the total amount available for sale is less than £1 per lender (regardless of their request size) then the list of buyers is randomised and £1 allocated to each until there's no more left with the final person taking whatever is left over on top of their £1 (e.g. £1.52). If the amount available for sale is greater than £1 per lender then the sale amount is distributed equally amongst all lenders. If that amount is greater than a lender's target then the excess is truncated and distributed equally amongst the other lenders whose target has not been reached (or discarded should there be no willing buyer). Those sales are then matched randomly against the sellers, which does include a weighting to bias it towards those lenders selling the most in much the same way the old site used to. However the new site does force wider distribution amongst sellers - if there are five buyers and ten sellers, those buyers will be distributed across at least five of those sellers (up to however many are needed to match the buyers targets). Thanks Chris. I think that's an excellent algorithm, and is certainly working well for me in generating a flow of trading. Well done. (I do think you might change from £1 to £10 sales chunks to reduce the transactional volume that needs to be processed, checked by buyers and lenders, etc, but the principles are fair and well thought out.) Once the system settles down perhaps some of your explanations can go into an FAQ.
|
|
)