|
|
Post by Butch Cassidy on Aug 11, 2017 11:34:52 GMT
Well, there's a 12% one today, to an ex-pat, security 2nd charge on a flat in London, but Assetz have taken the decision to list it as drawing down today, but provide no documents for us to decide what risks we will be taking. SHHHHH if we tell no one perhaps we can split it between us 
Document details are up now £70k 2nd charge behind AC loan #173 @ 6.75% - looks good but I bet the MLIA allocation is <£50 so champagne back on ice!
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087 
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Aug 11, 2017 12:22:24 GMT
My guess is £18.29 allocation.  |
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Aug 11, 2017 15:01:42 GMT
the back of the sofa is bust, can anybody buy some of my 8% ers on offer so i can even get that 18 pence allocation  . |
|
|
|
Post by stuartassetzcapital on Aug 11, 2017 15:33:14 GMT
We are at a stage in the credit cycle where high coupon loans are likely to be very risky if they aren't being wanted and funded for less by the rest of the market and will not be ideal portfolio holds if the economy turns. AC is focussing upon high quality credits where possible for now and this necessitates a competitive interest coupon. Nothing is perfect of course but our average rate is down somewhat and average credit quality up which is the right place to be at this time. So 10% + loans will still be seen from time to time from us but this isn't time to be throwing money out of the door to otherwise unfundable property developers or businesses with very high LTVs in our view.
Returns are not the headline interest rate on a platform but instead the net long term interest rate you achieve net of losses and fees etc and indeed dead-time during loan recoveries. That is where we are intending to be upper quartile at least and there is soon to be public analysis of our loan book performance that will compare us with the other best in class platforms and that fully factors in default and loss performance.
|
|
m2btj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 631
Likes: 772
|
Post by m2btj on Aug 12, 2017 9:22:07 GMT
We are at a stage in the credit cycle where high coupon loans are likely to be very risky if they aren't being wanted and funded for less by the rest of the market and will not be ideal portfolio holds if the economy turns. AC is focussing upon high quality credits where possible for now and this necessitates a competitive interest coupon. Nothing is perfect of course but our average rate is down somewhat and average credit quality up which is the right place to be at this time. So 10% + loans will still be seen from time to time from us but this isn't time to be throwing money out of the door to otherwise unfundable property developers or businesses with very high LTVs in our view. Returns are not the headline interest rate on a platform but instead the net long term interest rate you achieve net of losses and fees etc and indeed dead-time during loan recoveries. That is where we are intending to be upper quartile at least and there is soon to be public analysis of our loan book performance that will compare us with the other best in class platforms and that fully factors in default and loss performance. I've invested with AC for this very reason....good, steady, if unspectacular returns. I'd rather see a good quality loan book with realistic valuations, low LTV's, considered exit strategy, transparency & recoverable assets. There are plenty of platforms out there offering 10% to 13% loans which may prove to be fragile when stress tested. I have seen these loans default on the first or second payment & this raises huge questions regarding the process of DD & transparency. These loans will ultimately lead to the undoing of the entire platform at the first sign of an economic downturn. Give me credit quality over unrealistic headline interest rates any day!
|
|
|
|
Post by Butch Cassidy on Aug 16, 2017 17:45:33 GMT
the back of the sofa is bust, can anybody buy some of my 8% ers on offer so i can even get that 18 pence allocation . From latest Q&A "This loan is currently eligible for inclusion in the GBBA" which could also be read as MLIA allocation will be F*** All - I did ask whether MLIA investors still got a ring fenced allocation but my Q was deleted without answer 
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Aug 16, 2017 19:58:34 GMT
the back of the sofa is bust, can anybody buy some of my 8% ers on offer so i can even get that 18 pence allocation . From latest Q&A "This loan is currently eligible for inclusion in the GBBA" which could also be read as MLIA allocation will be F*** All - I did ask whether MLIA investors still got a ring fenced allocation but my Q was deleted without answer There's no priority given to any account by the marketplace any more, they're all equal for both buying and selling. Technically the ability to ring fence certain portions of loans for specific accounts still exists but I don't think it's being used any more.
|
|
wysiati
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 86
|
Post by wysiati on Aug 17, 2017 14:10:47 GMT
MLIA allocation £0.00
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Aug 17, 2017 14:28:04 GMT
From latest Q&A "This loan is currently eligible for inclusion in the GBBA" which could also be read as MLIA allocation will be F*** All - I did ask whether MLIA investors still got a ring fenced allocation but my Q was deleted without answer There's no priority given to any account by the marketplace any more, they're all equal for both buying and selling. Technically the ability to ring fence certain portions of loans for specific accounts still exists but I don't think it's being used any more. So, as QAA and GBBA are included, it is quite clear that MLIA lenders are at a distinct disadvantage, because AC makes the decision that every QAA and GBBA investor will be allocated a portion, (they're all equal) and the count of those investors and their holdings is enormous. Thus very small (often two figure) allocations are available for MLIA investors who are forced into other loans, or exit from the platform. Which makes me wonder how and why, sometimes, I get a £1000 allocation in quite moderate loans (e.g #522). Perhaps those are ineligible for QAA/GBBA.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Aug 17, 2017 14:32:26 GMT
There's no priority given to any account by the marketplace any more, they're all equal for both buying and selling. Technically the ability to ring fence certain portions of loans for specific accounts still exists but I don't think it's being used any more. So, as QAA and GBBA are included, it is quite clear that MLIA lenders are at a distinct disadvantage, because AC makes the decision that every QAA and GBBA investor will be allocated a portion, (they're all equal) and the count of those investors and their holdings is enormous. Thus very small (often two figure) allocations are available for MLIA investors who are forced into other loans, or exit from the platform. Which makes me wonder how and why, sometimes, I get a £1000 allocation in quite moderate loans. Perhaps those are ineligible for QAA/GBBA. That's not how it works, in particular the GBBA. The way the GBBA works is the same as the MLIA but with buy / sell orders worked out by an algorithm for each lender individually. Those orders are processed with equal priority as the MLIA.
|
|
|
|
Post by Butch Cassidy on Aug 17, 2017 14:47:06 GMT
From latest Q&A "This loan is currently eligible for inclusion in the GBBA" which could also be read as MLIA allocation will be F*** All - I did ask whether MLIA investors still got a ring fenced allocation but my Q was deleted without answer There's no priority given to any account by the marketplace any more, they're all equal for both buying and selling. Technically the ability to ring fence certain portions of loans for specific accounts still exists but I don't think it's being used any more. Well that really will kill the MLIA for good then; with the QAA/30Day accounts holding approx £75m + GBBA/GEIA/PSIA all able to claim their equal share in future loans what will be left for MLIA - perhaps 5% or 2% or less of every loan to be split between the several thousand remaining MLIA accounts. I never thought I would say that it's a good job AC deal with loans to 30 decimal places but that's probably all the MLIA allocation that will be left in anything worth having.
The last loan that I actually applied for at drawdown was #237 which was for £350k but had 50% ring fenced for MLIA investors, how times change! Looks like wysiati has had a right result with that £0.00 allocation. Sorry stuartassetzcapital but your reassurances that MLIA investors were a valued & important part of the platforms future going forward are seeming a little bit hollow right now; I simply can't see how any meaningful investments of say over £1000/loan can be achieved without some form of preferential or ring fenced allocations.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Aug 17, 2017 14:50:51 GMT
If I'm understanding this correctly, the MLIA allocation was £0.00 (I've got a buy order for several thousand on it, ever the optimist  ) so if GBBA ranks equally the allocation there must also be £0.00 Which implies the whole loan has, at least for now, been allocated to the QAA pool. |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Aug 17, 2017 14:52:03 GMT
There's no priority given to any account by the marketplace any more, they're all equal for both buying and selling. Technically the ability to ring fence certain portions of loans for specific accounts still exists but I don't think it's being used any more. Well that really will kill the MLIA for good then; with the QAA/30Day accounts holding approx £75m + GBBA/GEIA/PSIA all able to claim their equal share in future loans what will be left for MLIA - perhaps 5% or 2% or less of every loan to be split between the several thousand remaining MLIA accounts. I never thought I would say that it's a good job AC deal with loans to 30 decimal places but that's probably all the MLIA allocation that will be left in anything worth having.
The last loan that I actually applied for at drawdown was #237 which was for £350k but had 50% ring fenced for MLIA investors, how times change! Looks like wysiati has had a right result with that £0.00 allocation. Sorry stuartassetzcapital but your reassurances that MLIA investors were a valued & important part of the platforms future going forward are seeming a little bit hollow right now; I simply can't see how any meaningful investments of say over £1000/loan can be achieved without some form of preferential or ring fenced allocations.
Not following your logic at all. If we have 1000 investors interested in a loan and 250 of those are interested via the MLIA and 750 via the GBBA then the allocation is simply split between the 1000 investors. The current implementation is completely agnostic as to where and how lenders are investing. Are you asking for the MLIA to be given priority over other investment routes and saying that not doing so will kill it?
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Aug 17, 2017 14:56:22 GMT
If I'm understanding this correctly, the MLIA allocation was £0.00 (I've got a buy order for several thousand on it, ever the optimist ) so if GBBA ranks equally the allocation there must also be £0.00 Which implies the whole loan has, at least for now, been allocated to the QAA pool. Not sure which loan we're talking about but if the MLIA allocation is £0 then I'd expect the GBBA allocation to be £0 and that the loan simply hasn't been released to the wider market yet, something that will no doubt happen soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by slumberingaccountant on Aug 17, 2017 16:23:58 GMT
From latest Q&A "This loan is currently eligible for inclusion in the GBBA" which could also be read as MLIA allocation will be F*** All - I did ask whether MLIA investors still got a ring fenced allocation but my Q was deleted without answer There's no priority given to any account by the marketplace any more, they're all equal for both buying and selling. Technically the ability to ring fence certain portions of loans for specific accounts still exists but I don't think it's being used any more. I got £1 allocation in MLIA on 509 recently. so if i follow this thread correctly thats 269,000 investors got £1 each ? I guess some people would have got £2 if they had cash spare in GBBA. But even so the maths isn't working here.
|
|
.
) so if GBBA ranks equally the allocation there must also be £0.00