|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 18, 2017 15:17:57 GMT
A good platform and a good rate + not a great deal of noise from our DD dig and delve colleagues, so it's a winning combination.
Plenty of things to consider (if you look for them). Perhaps my biggest concern is that this is a big project that, from the little information we have to hand, offers us no visibility as to how it will come to fruition. 2.7m full MT facility + (presumed, if 1.8m purchase price) 420k borrower injection (presumed, might be more borrowed money?) = 3.12m funds available. 1.8m cost to buy site + 610k funding costs (if 18%, T1 for 6M, full facility for further 12M) means just 700k net available to spend, ie not enough for even half the 1.75m infrastructure costs, let alone any lodges (or even their bases). Assuming 13k for base & 75k for lodge there’s a £40m (m not k) at least (exc costs of finance etc) shortfall in what is needed to build out the site. Makes that possibly the biggest p2p project I’ve seen, & no idea how it’s going to get there but seems few have noticed? Plenty of other potential issues, deal’s history, planning, the borrower, the site’s topography & council’s conditions etc won’t bore you with the details, but without even going there you might first ask yourself if the deal stacks up with what you know. For me it doesn’t but don’t let that put you off. Well said
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 18, 2017 14:42:26 GMT
Seems to be quite popular given the current P2P situation in general. Whats wrong with the p2p situation? explain pls.
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 18, 2017 14:34:57 GMT
Holy..... someone is releasing alot of loans on the SM. Liverpool at 13%. Bollington 1st/2nd tranche.
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 18, 2017 13:46:41 GMT
the panic is real
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 18, 2017 7:18:01 GMT
Last night, some big whale dropped over £110k in the SM on MTAS713, still around £106k left today.
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 15, 2017 10:59:30 GMT
This is without doubt the dodgiest loan I can recall seeing offered on MT. I do hope the Things are not losing their grip. Anyone in the Boatyard loan on FS will have seen the difficulties in recovery proceedings in Scotland. I would not be overly surprised if MT pull the loan before launch, but if they don't I will not be participating. I'm so glad l'm not the only one on this forum that isn't so positive on the outlook of this loan.
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 15, 2017 0:31:14 GMT
Due to my inexperience in p2p, l feel that l'm not able to give a good assessment of whether this loan is a good investment or not at 13%. For that reason l think l will not invest which is really unfortunate because l've been waiting weeks for another 13% loan. Anyone else feel the same or is the general outlook on this loan positive?
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 13, 2017 18:10:13 GMT
Well the loan sold out fast anyway, with MT's reputation its to be expected but not with my money this time.
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 12, 2017 19:31:44 GMT
thanks for the pics, this loan.... makes me sad
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 12, 2017 13:31:36 GMT
Before l invest in any further drawdowns, I think clarification is required here.
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 6, 2017 19:07:55 GMT
I have good experience in this department, being a bit OCD l have a thing with keeping my loans in certain numbers lol. So sometimes l withdraw only pennies and deposit very low amounts to make my account neat. Never had any problems .
|
|
|
MoneyThing (MT) in Administration
Lending Terms
Jul 5, 2017 17:55:54 GMT
Post by sannytwist on Jul 5, 2017 17:55:54 GMT
Are the standard terms and conditions on which Moneything makes loans to its borrowers available anywhere? The reason I asked is that I was recently shocked to discover that another P2P site is lending money against assets on a non-recourse basis so that if the security proves insufficient it cannot pursue the borrower for the outstanding balance. I would like to be certain that MT is not engaging in the same practice. Edit: Obviously I understand that it some cases the borrower will be a company with no other assets whatsoever but in that case I'd expect MT to take a guarantee from some related company with more substance. I'm not sure exactly what 'non-recourse basis' means but l think if a loan defaults MT attempts to sell the underlying asset but there is no guarantee that the amount sold will be sufficient to cover the original loan or with interest. It states this in every of its loan at the bottom of the page at 'Worst case scenario' and there is a 'risk statement' .
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 4, 2017 21:26:03 GMT
Under 'Funds' > 'Status Live' Should be under 'Amount'
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 4, 2017 17:16:01 GMT
fundingsecure do seem to be progressing in the right direction. For 1415667110 they have shown the sold items in the repaid 'A' part of the loan, and the list of remaining items is shown in the unredeemed 'non-A' part of the loan. I haven't looked to see whether they've updated the other partially repaid loans in the same way -- I didn't invest in those. And I haven't a clue whether there are other items that have been sold from other loans where the proceeds haven't been distributed yet. ISTM that we should be giving FS a bit of slack here, because their system probably wasn't built with this circumstance in mind, so I expect they have had to do a bit of system development work to enable them to deal with these partially repaid loans. Now that they have the ability, they seem to be using it appropriately, so all we need from them now is an indication whether all the sale proceeds have been distributed now. Or, if not, when they expect to finish the job. mikes1531 yes FS are moving in the right direction by repaying something. Problem is that they started selling in early May, according to updates. We have not been given a list of asset numbers that have been sold and for what value. This means we are in the dark about what is being held and what proportion belongs to lenders and what the borrowers dues pot stands at or how that money will be used. The FS system has the relationship between loan and asset number already assigned. No programming required. Asset sells --》money paid back to loan lenders including interest. As for cutting them some slack, no, imho they gave up that right when they allowed continued renewals for this borrowers multiple loans without doing much, if any, more due dilligence. There continued refusal to furnish lenders with full details, as already stated, will not lead to any slack from this lender. As soon as that list is made available, and is kept up to date, along with a clear definition of disbursement rules then I may become content. Given FS past performance I can not see that happening anytime soon. Totally agree with Stub on the following points made. Very precise and sums up the problems leading to me taking my money/business elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by sannytwist on Jul 3, 2017 20:48:48 GMT
Its no secret that the Car Loan industry is becoming increasingly problematic with many forecasts it to be the reason for the next financial crisis. I've been reading articles on the newspaper since 2015 so nothing new. Just google it.
|
|