blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on May 17, 2017 19:26:49 GMT
OK, I have only two platforms, only tens of loans, and time to manage them. Your needs are different bg.
|
|
stevio
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 894
|
Post by stevio on May 17, 2017 20:42:50 GMT
That's rather harsh BG. It is greatly improved. It does take a while to learn your way round it, but when you do it's very comprehensive and flexible. I like it, but I like detail and control. I disagree. I currently use 9 platforms and have a substantial 7 figure sum invested. I don't know how you can say its improved because I can't notice any changes. I like detail but a simple summary when you are managing hundreds of loans would not be amiss. The layout of the SM could be improved significantly. AB loans are not atypical, a 'simple summary' is not easy to provide and stay within FCA requirements. However I note there is a summary on the loan page, although due to the loans complexity, this may not be simplified enough for you to manage your largish portfolio with minimal effort. AB go for variety and quality over quantity. If you want to diversify by investing in hundreds of loans, AB is probably not for you. If you want to diversify in different asset classes but over a small number of loans, then it might be.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on May 19, 2017 0:48:29 GMT
Quite a few BH seem keen to offload the 12% interest only one. Several large chunks of £10-£20k on offer, as low as 96%. Brings the effective AER to over 14% in line with the other loan. AER for the 14% loan is currently 14.9% at par vs 13.6% for the 12% loan at 97.5%, a premium of nearly 10% (assumes monthly payments re-invested at same rate) which can be reduced by buying with 14% sales at a premium. The 12% loan has better security although the 14% loan will amortise and probably hold better SM liquidity - currently 100.7/102% bid/offer on 14% vs 97.5% offer on 12% (distorted by BHs exiting early although liquidity premiums typically follow the headline rate with a couple of exceptions like the highly sought after plane loans). I missed the 96% but weighing up if I want anymore 97.5%. 🤔 Edit - swapped 30% of combined holding into 12% loan but main limiting arbitrage factor was potential liquidity so held some 14% for future premium exit (assuming ebitda surges in the next year or two to pay the loans but given the dearth of existing loan updates that may not surface for a while ).
|
|
nw99
Posts: 340
Likes: 114
|
Post by nw99 on May 19, 2017 7:07:29 GMT
Good summary I am switching into the 97.5 one as well
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on May 19, 2017 7:34:50 GMT
So why is there so much of the 12% loan on sale at a loss? I will hold on to my excess 14% for a while, and see what other loans are brought forward.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on May 19, 2017 10:38:03 GMT
So why is there so much of the 12% loan on sale at a loss? I will hold on to my excess 14% for a while, and see what other loans are brought forward. Underwriter exits? Abl seemed to know the reason.
|
|
kermie
Member of DD Central
Posts: 689
Likes: 462
|
Post by kermie on Aug 16, 2017 22:42:36 GMT
I notice that 1000068 has paid up today (16th Aug), but that 1000067 has not (but is also due today, 16th Aug), ablrate. A little odd?
|
|
|
Post by ablrate on Aug 16, 2017 23:06:39 GMT
As per Admin Notes on two loans.. there was a technical issue when we made the payment. Funds have been received from borrower but we believe there has been a conflict on the latest update for unique display names that caused two loans to give technical errors. It will be fixed first thing.
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Oct 2, 2018 20:30:59 GMT
Ablrate registered a charge over the borrowing company on 20 Sep 2018. This is in addition to the two (one for each loan) outstanding charges registered when the loan went live in May 2017. Link available on DD Central.
Perhaps others would like to interpret the charges but from my amateur knowledge it appears the recent floating charge is a debenture over the borrowing company. Does this mean the existing charges did not provide for the debenture or were not watertight or does it imply a change to the structure of the borrowing company or relationship with BN group?
The timing is interesting given the difficulties with BN group. Would I be right to surmise that BN group entered administration on or around 20 Sep 2018?
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Oct 3, 2018 3:27:06 GMT
I can't see appointment of administrators yet (closest I get is Vxxxx |Burns, Night| club manager ) Edit - Nor Ctrack, strange.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 3, 2018 8:29:19 GMT
A first ranking debenture over the borrower company was part of the original security offered. At least it is in place. It feels strange to be concerned about a loan I sold long ago.
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Oct 3, 2018 8:46:19 GMT
A first ranking debenture over the borrower company was part of the original security offered. At least it is in place. It feels strange to be concerned about a loan I sold long ago. Similar here but my interest relates to how the platform manage loans and security of such, and sustainability which may be impacted by events such as these.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,870
Likes: 11,097
|
Post by ilmoro on Oct 3, 2018 8:47:31 GMT
A first ranking debenture over the borrower company was part of the original security offered. At least it is in place. It feels strange to be concerned about a loan I sold long ago. Or a second ranking on the amortising loan. Both existing charges included floating charges but perhaps they weren't specific enough in the light of events & Ablrate decided to strengthen the position with a specific debenture.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 3, 2018 9:21:07 GMT
A first ranking debenture over the borrower company was part of the original security offered. At least it is in place. It feels strange to be concerned about a loan I sold long ago. Or a second ranking on the amortising loan. Both existing charges included floating charges but perhaps they weren't specific enough in the light of events & Ablrate decided to strengthen the position with a specific debenture. Yes, correct on the ranking. I like to think that Ablrate strengthened the position of lenders in the current circumstances. A concern that Ablrate should need to is perhaps balanced by a comfort that Ablrate was in a position to do so.
|
|
grumpsimus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 141
Likes: 122
|
Post by grumpsimus on Mar 9, 2024 18:28:19 GMT
The Administrator (appointed on 20 July 2022) issued a progress report on 21 Feb 2024 I can't help but wonder if it might be a taste of what is to come, if and when some of the other delinquent loans on the ablrate loan book wash through: " Anticipated Exit RouteI intend to exit the Administration shortly as there is no further justification for the Company to remain in the administration process. As mentioned in my previous report, the anticipated exit route is the dissolution of the Company pursuant to the filing of Paragraph 84 of Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986. Estimated Return for Creditors There will be insufficient funds to pay a dividend to any class of creditors." You might recall that ablrate paid £15k + VAT to Griffins to fund some of the administration costs. That is all it has been able to draw, even though its bill would have been £73,792.65 were there sufficient funds available. I am not sure what will happen to the buildings that are the security for the ablrate loans now. Ablrate Assets Ltd still has six outstanding charges registered, with the security being a freehold property and a leasehold property. The sum owed to ablrate is something over £1.5m. What are the properties worth and what sort of bid might ablrate's administrator accept (were one to be made)? I suspect that your are right and this is a foretaste of what is likely to happen with a lot of the other defaulted loans.
I am not familiar with these loans, but where a property is involved it is normal for the administrators to appoint a Law of Property Act Receiver (LPA Receiver), assuming that the charges are valid. The LPA Receiver is normally a local firm of surveyors who deal with the sale of the properties to in order to recover the charges.
From past experience it is usual for property not to worth what it was said to worth and not all the charges will be fully recovered. Then the LPA Receivers fees are deducted, followed by the administrators fees, the balance, if any, is distributed to the lenders.
|
|