mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 666
Likes: 641
|
Post by mason on Mar 25, 2017 9:46:41 GMT
I have read it but I don't interpret it like that. I interpret along the lines of how I actually think:- I would rather have £2.5k in one loan than £25 in 100 loans. It doesn't mean I don't diversify by having £2.5k in lots of loans because I do. I think this on the basis that I just don't see the point (other than when you are first testing a platform) in manually putting £25 in a loan. I understand people are investing variable sums (depending on how much you have to invest) but if you invest £25 you are looking at making around a quid of interest in the 6 month period (less if you sell early). For me I do not think it is worth logging in to invest, the reading of the details, along with the monitoring updates over a 6 month period - it probably works out as a return of about 50p per hour. Fair enough, but the loans being discussed in this thread were for around the £30k mark, so a suitable limit would have been around £300. Even a relatively high limit is better than no limit at all. My main concern is that this is going to become the norm. I wasn't interested in any of the recent loans, but there are plenty of loans I would have missed out on in the past if they did not have a limit. Rearranging my work schedule so that I can be at a computer at 11:00 on the dot is not always practical, so I (and others) would effectively be excluded from smaller loans without limits. As I rarely invest in the property loans here, smaller loans make up the vast majority of my investments. I've been going by the emails I've received. The park homes loan was a renewal, so I don't know how much was available. If very little, perhaps even a £25 restriction wouldn't have done much good. Many of those 89 investors would have simply been rollovers. The race car loans were new loans at the £30k mark, so it seems reasonable that some limit should have applied to those.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 666
Likes: 641
|
Post by mason on Mar 25, 2017 10:07:14 GMT
I think active investors refers to due diligence, so will be more than happy to hold loans that pass it. If it comes to pass that a sale is either needed or preferable to holding who in their right mind would refuse a premium sale? The list of loans I hold (happy to hold under normal market conditions) shortens when the sm spikes to become attractive for selling, as it is currently. Also not knowing which loans I'm likely to get a decent amount into, the dd has to take place after the purchase otherwise I'd spend all my time dd'ing for no reason. Sure, although I don't think that diversification and due diligence are mutually exclusive. There are lots of loans here that I turn my nose up at, yet I try to diversify among those I am more comfortable with. I appreciate that others may wish to have highly concentrated holdings in loans they have put a lot of time into researching, but that seems quite impractical for the smaller loans when, as you say, you don't know which loans you'll get a decent amount into and you could end up with nothing if you are not quick enough. Doing the DD after purchase seems risky, since without the DD the potential to offload on the SM is difficult to judge. Perhaps that's where the virtue of using smaller loans comes in - if very few people get a bite, more people are likely to want to buy it on the SM, and perhaps will pay more for the pleasure?
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 25, 2017 10:14:28 GMT
I'll admit I was a bit slow off the mark, but I did pick up on the term "active investment" and edited my post just moments before you made this one. So, essentially what you are saying is that "active" investors - presumably those who do not just "buy and hold" - want to be able to hoover up large portions of small loans because they can profit from selling them on the secondary market. A bit like ticket touts, right? I'll refrain from sharing my views on that with you. I think active investors refers to due diligence, so will be more than happy to hold loans that pass it. If it comes to pass that a sale is either needed or preferable to holding who in their right mind would refuse a premium sale? The list of loans I hold (happy to hold under normal market conditions) shortens when the sm spikes to become attractive for selling, as it is currently. Also not knowing which loans I'm likely to get a decent amount into, the dd has to take place after the purchase otherwise I'd spend all my time dd'ing for no reason. Yes, agree. My preference for holding parts of smaller loans is one of liquidity. I know that in a few months chances are that I will be able to exit quite easily, even if the SM is flooded. In a large loan I could easily be stuck or have to sell at a significant loss. I am not buying with the purpose of selling at a premium although I probably would if I could (i usually sell at a small discount to get a fast sale). Smaller loans I know I can sell at a smaller discount than larger ones. I have never sold at a premium on FS and do not agree with the analogy to ticket touts. If I buy something to earn interest and then sell at a premium then I do not see a moral problem. If I have to take the risk (and hit) of selling at a discount then why isn't there the chance of making profit? After all this is a market - everyone is in it to make personal profit from someone else in the market.
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 25, 2017 10:27:19 GMT
I have read it but I don't interpret it like that. I interpret along the lines of how I actually think:- I would rather have £2.5k in one loan than £25 in 100 loans. It doesn't mean I don't diversify by having £2.5k in lots of loans because I do. I think this on the basis that I just don't see the point (other than when you are first testing a platform) in manually putting £25 in a loan. I understand people are investing variable sums (depending on how much you have to invest) but if you invest £25 you are looking at making around a quid of interest in the 6 month period (less if you sell early). For me I do not think it is worth logging in to invest, the reading of the details, along with the monitoring updates over a 6 month period - it probably works out as a return of about 50p per hour. Fair enough, but the loans being discussed in this thread were for around the £30k mark, so a suitable limit would have been around £300. Even a relatively high limit is better than no limit at all. My main concern is that this is going to become the norm. I wasn't interested in any of the recent loans, but there are plenty of loans I would have missed out on in the past if they did not have a limit. Rearranging my work schedule so that I can be at a computer at 11:00 on the dot is not always practical, so I (and others) would effectively be excluded from smaller loans without limits. As I rarely invest in the property loans here, smaller loans make up the vast majority of my investments. I've been going by the emails I've received. The park homes loan was a renewal, so I don't know how much was available. If very little, perhaps even a £25 restriction wouldn't have done much good. Many of those 89 investors would have simply been rollovers. The race car loans were new loans at the £30k mark, so it seems reasonable that some limit should have applied to those. But again, if there was a £300 limit I wouldn't invest. I don't think its worth it. I don't think it's going to be the norm. They have always let a few loans go through without a bidding restriction. You say it's not always practical to be at a computer at 11am everyday but it's never practical for me to invest £300 in a loan. As FS say they are trying to keep all parts of their investor base happy. The 89 investors were all new new investments. I invested manually and was the 4th investment.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 666
Likes: 641
|
Post by mason on Mar 25, 2017 10:32:39 GMT
I am not buying with the purpose of selling at a premium although I probably would if I could (i usually sell at a small discount to get a fast sale). Smaller loans I know I can sell at a smaller discount than larger ones. I have never sold at a premium on FS and do not agree with the analogy to ticket touts. If I buy something to earn interest and then sell at a premium then I do not see a moral problem. If I have to take the risk (and hit) of selling at a discount then why isn't there the chance of making profit? After all this is a market - everyone is in it to make personal profit from someone else in the market. For the sake of clarity, my use of the ticket tout analogy was in reference to those who would buy up as much as they possibly can - more than they would be comfortable holding - so as to exacerbate lack of supply and would allow for a quick sale on the SM so that effectively they absorb the difference in rate between what FS is offering and what buyers are willing to pay. I know this will be unpopular, but in that situation, I think I'd rather FS was more conservative with the rate and amended later with a bonus if required. I generally sell loans before the end of their term, almost always at a discount, but I'm always willing to hold what I buy to term if necessary.
|
|
r1200gs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 1,883
|
Post by r1200gs on Mar 25, 2017 10:38:54 GMT
I am not buying with the purpose of selling at a premium although I probably would if I could (i usually sell at a small discount to get a fast sale). Smaller loans I know I can sell at a smaller discount than larger ones. I have never sold at a premium on FS and do not agree with the analogy to ticket touts. If I buy something to earn interest and then sell at a premium then I do not see a moral problem. If I have to take the risk (and hit) of selling at a discount then why isn't there the chance of making profit? After all this is a market - everyone is in it to make personal profit from someone else in the market. For the sake of clarity, my use of the ticket tout analogy was in reference to those who would buy up as much as they possibly can - more than they would be comfortable holding - so as to exacerbate lack of supply and would allow for a quick sale on the SM so that effectively they absorb the difference in rate between what FS is offering and what buyers are willing to pay. I know this will be unpopular, but in that situation, I think I'd rather FS was more conservative with the rate and amended later with a bonus if required. I generally sell loans before the end of their term, almost always at a discount, but I'm always willing to hold what I buy to term if necessary. I get your touts analogy, I do. I don't like the FS SM market because it is open to gaming, and I don't like playing games. Like many other investors though, I'm also not interested in small loan parts as they just create noise and divert from watching the bigger loans. FS have a difficult balancing act here.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 666
Likes: 641
|
Post by mason on Mar 25, 2017 10:41:33 GMT
But again, if there was a £300 limit I wouldn't invest. I don't think its worth it. I don't think it's going to be the norm. They have always let a few loans go through without a bidding restriction. You say it's not always practical to be at a computer at 11am everyday but it's never practical for me to invest £300 in a loan. As FS say they are trying to keep all parts of their investor base happy. The 89 investors were all new new investments. I invested manually and was the 4th investment. Ok, well I've never before considered it would be important to those investing four figure sums to have the opportunity to invest those amounts in five figure loans. Sorry to labour this, but there are a total of 89 investors in the park homes loan. It was clearly stated in FS's email that this was a renewal and investors in 5879894274 could roll over their capital into the new loan. There were 130 investors in the old loan - are you saying not one of them renewed? Edit: Looks like the renewals were added to the other end of the list. There were 30 renewers cross referencing details from the previous loan, so 59 new investments. That's not actually so bad for a renewal.
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 25, 2017 10:49:38 GMT
But again, if there was a £300 limit I wouldn't invest. I don't think its worth it. I don't think it's going to be the norm. They have always let a few loans go through without a bidding restriction. You say it's not always practical to be at a computer at 11am everyday but it's never practical for me to invest £300 in a loan. As FS say they are trying to keep all parts of their investor base happy. The 89 investors were all new new investments. I invested manually and was the 4th investment. Ok, well I've never before considered it would be important to those investing four figure sums to have the opportunity to invest those amounts in five figure loans. Sorry to labour this, but there are a total of 89 investors in the park homes loan. It was clearly stated in FS's email that this was a renewal and investors in 5879894274 could roll over their capital into the new loan. There were 130 investors in the old loan - are you saying not one of them renewed? I'm not sure at all....all I know is I bid manually (at about 11.00.03) and was the 4th investor on the list and the loan hung around for over a minute after then until it was filled. Maybe I am getting my wires crossed but I took that to mean at most 3 people opted to roll over.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 666
Likes: 641
|
Post by mason on Mar 25, 2017 10:52:23 GMT
Maybe I am getting my wires crossed but I took that to mean at most 3 people opted to roll over. See edit above, it looks like they are added at the end.
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 25, 2017 10:56:58 GMT
Maybe I am getting my wires crossed but I took that to mean at most 3 people opted to roll over. See edit above, it looks like they are added at the end. well spotted!
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 666
Likes: 641
|
Post by mason on Mar 27, 2017 10:03:01 GMT
I think someone at FS is taking the p***. Now we have a £50,000 loan with a £25 limit, although it was announced that no limit would apply.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Mar 27, 2017 10:04:38 GMT
I think someone at FS is taking the p***. Now we have a £50,000 loan with a £25 limit, although it was announced that no limit would apply. fundingsecure my e-mail says restriction:none. Another admin error?
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 27, 2017 10:05:08 GMT
I think someone at FS is taking the p***. Now we have a £50,000 loan with a £25 limit, although it was announced that no limit would apply. Yes I am really annoyed about this. I don't care if a loan has a limit but I don't want them to send out an email saying no limit and then put one on. I transferred money in this morning and have been sitting here waiting for it. A complete waste of my time.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 666
Likes: 641
|
Post by mason on Mar 27, 2017 10:08:15 GMT
I think someone at FS is taking the p***. Now we have a £50,000 loan with a £25 limit, although it was announced that no limit would apply. Yes I am really annoyed about this. I don't care if a loan has a limit but I don't want them to send out an email saying no limit and then put one on. I transferred money in this morning and have been sitting here waiting for it. A complete waste of my time. Indeed. Well I've grabbed my 0.05% share quickly. Can't see this one lasting 24 hours.
|
|
markdirac
Member of DD Central
Posts: 128
Likes: 51
|
Post by markdirac on Mar 27, 2017 10:09:12 GMT
Yes, FS are giving us a smug rap on the wrist with this nonsense. Or is it carelessness? The degree of sloppiness in the P2P world is concerning. Note that the announcement email also carelessly stated the loan as going live on Monday 28th March.
|
|