izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Jan 23, 2017 17:54:10 GMT
Hi,
Does anyone have an idea on whether Saving Stream are on course to offer IFISA this year?
Thanks.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Oct 25, 2016 13:45:38 GMT
The interest rate for investors have been cut by 25%, are saving stream also taking a 25% cut in fee's and interest? That is a good question. What is the deal here, Is SS trying to close demand with supply or are they being greedy? I'd prefer it's the latter because then I can hope there are or will be competition I can move or diversify with. If its the former, then it could be more work to find better places to move money to.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Oct 25, 2016 12:26:25 GMT
I am disappointed by what has been offered for 9% - actually I'm shocked that this was not contained closer to say around 11%. This is the door for similar risks to be priced at 9% for other borrowers since there's now a precedent. It means a lot of what we have for 12% now will probably be under 9% in the future. SS was my favourite p2p platform and I'm worried that the times are changing.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 8, 2016 20:17:10 GMT
Some very clued up people here, thanks for the info, thoughts and discussions everyone. I followed the logic put by others here and followed up my own research. I didn't really find out anything newer than what has already been reported and discussed to the bone. However from the modest amount I know, I decided to sell all my parts because there is an element of risk here. I wouldn't call the situation a disaster though, far from it. It appears to me that the situation is perfectly manageable .. Yes, the present circumstances is far from ideal and well deviated from what Lendy Ltd had us believe. So, understandably there's currently a crisis management but even conservative estimates seem to bring the valuation at a decent amount to what has been loaned. If you have some good managers behind the wheels here and some good decision makers, this should be easily sorted out and everyone's loans plus any extended interests should be repayable. This is just my opinion and not a fact of course. For me, I believe, the element of risk is whether they do indeed have these good managers and good decision makers? Unfortunately, it seems there's some evidence this hasn't been the case recently and this is the reason I've decided to get out.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 4, 2016 16:18:15 GMT
Hi everyone, thanks treeman, dualinvestor and martin44 for your answers to my question. Also thanks to others for the insightful thoughts. I have managed to find the application and as you warned, there is quite a bit to go through yet. While it does sound dire on the surface, there are also perhaps some understated advantage to this? please correct me if this sounds naive to you. The original valuation were made on the premise of the original planning application. The one being built and now approved is more than the original premise and should therefore attract a higher valuation? I understand the current buyer may or may not pay the same monies for the reduced part (due to the conditions) but its not sounding anywhere as bad as it did before the new approval (?). Keen to get the forum's thoughts on this.
The frustrating thing I suppose is the lack of official update from SS. However, I suppose they don't just want to give an update on the planning application but the other implicated aspects of the loan and perhaps how the borrower and buyer want to proceed.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 2, 2016 12:16:54 GMT
Hi Martin44, I'm slightly confused by one small part of what you said here: "part of the retrospective application was for the retention of some of the unapproved works and demolition of some of the more inappropriate works."
Are you saying that the retrospective application itself include a request to demolish "the more inappropriate works"?
Also can you (and/or anyone else here) advise on the source of this document and where (if) I can get it to read myself?
Thanks in advance,
Izi.
|
|