Wonga profits leap 35% as demand for loans increases

whatmichaelsays

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Looks like their TV adverts are quite expensive as well.

There was a persistent rumour around Shoreditch roundabout that Wonga's ad agency actually had to return some its budget because it physically could not spend it all.

If true, it's bloody frightening.

michaels

^^ What he says ^^

John1993_2

MacMickster wrote: »

I suspect that if all of the riches of UK residents were gathered in and then redistributed equally throughout the population, within a very few years most of those who are currently wealthy would be wealthy once more, whilst many of those who currently use Wonga would be using them once again.

I used to pass a Yes Car showroom when heading out of town, and always thought "that's why trickle-down can only go so far".

You put structures in place such as progressive taxes and benefits (and despite what some on here believe, the tax burden is massively higher on high earners than on low earners), but there are a good portion of the population who'll just rush out and leverage anything they can get, at whatever rates, to have something shiny right now, no matter how overpriced.

ILW

michaels wrote: »

I love the way in this country many people seem to think adults should not be allowed to make their own decisions but that some 'cleverer people' should be able to decide what other people do...do you have no conception of where that slippery little slope leads to?

People waste money on things they don't really need every day - clothes, iphones whatever, if they want to waste money on buying things now via a wonga loan rather than waiting till they can afford it then I for one and not going to tell them that they are not 'clever' enough to make that decison.

Nothing wrong with calling people stupid if they are.

dryhat

whatmichaelsays wrote: »

There was a persistent rumour around Shoreditch roundabout that Wonga's ad agency actually had to return some its budget because it physically could not spend it all.

If true, it's bloody frightening.

I was in Shoreditch last week.

Had a drink in the old station cafe and paid in Bitcoin.

Loughton_Monkey

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

As is your right, I suppose.

But I never understand this particular dislike of the perfectly ordinary word in the dictionary. The word is derived from a middle English Scottish word (meaning 'effect') with the '-less' suffix.

Next time, I guess I'll use the term 'financially reckless' and pretend that it's rhyming slang.

antrobus

kabayiri wrote: »

It's definitely not a black and white situation. I agree there is truth in some of the statistics. Any statistic can be used I guess.

It's interesting. ...

That's why I tend to throw 'facts' into discussions; it makes them more interesting.:)

kabayiri wrote: »

...I wish people were able to use Credit Unions to build up a local borrowing history, but these have never really established themselves here.

I suspect the typical Wonga customer wouldn't touch a credit union with a bargepole due to the widespread perception that credit unions are for 'poor people'.

wotsthat wrote: »

I agree to an extent but PDL companies make their customers poorer not richer.....

Generally speaking, most companies are involved in the process of making their "customers poorer not richer". Extracting money from people is rather the point of the exercise.

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

As is your right, I suppose.

But I never understand this particular dislike of the perfectly ordinary word in the dictionary. The word is derived from a middle English Scottish word (meaning 'effect') with the '-less' suffix.

Next time, I guess I'll use the term 'financially reckless' and pretend that it's rhyming slang.

Is that what all that was about?!? You can't use the f word that has an 'e' in it as well as the f word that has a 'u' in it? Isn't that a bit fracking silly?

michaels

antrobus wrote: »

That's why I tend to throw 'facts' into discussions; it makes them more interesting.:)

I always read your posts as they do contain facts often ones that require more than a quick google. However I find that they are more likely to then kill a thread rather than furthering the 'discussion' such is the nature and level of debate here :rotfl:

wotsthat

antrobus wrote: »

Generally speaking, most companies are involved in the process of making their "customers poorer not richer". Extracting money from people is rather the point of the exercise.

Well quite.

At least if I had over money to Tesco, EDF et al I've received some goods or services in return. PDL customers get nothing but another step closer to being impoverished. PDL companies are preying on the gullible and feeble minded - I view this as a different sort of cash extraction - one that isn't to the benefit of society.

antrobus

michaels wrote: »

I always read your posts as they do contain facts often ones that require more than a quick google. However I find that they are more likely to then kill a thread rather than furthering the 'discussion' such is the nature and level of debate here :rotfl:

In my defence I would say that the kind of discussion threads I kill with a barrage of factual information are the kind of discussion threads that need to put out of their misery.:)

wotsthat wrote: »

Well quite.

At least if I had over money to Tesco, EDF et al I've received some goods or services in return. PDL customers get nothing but another step closer to being impoverished. PDL companies are preying on the gullible and feeble minded - I view this as a different sort of cash extraction - one that isn't to the benefit of society.

No doubt Wonga (or any other kind of lender for that matter) would argue that the service you receive in return is the ability to pay for (and get) what you want today, rather than tomorrow. Of course, the counter argument would be that the price being extracted for this service by Wonga is excessive.

I tend to take the view that the price being extracted is not that unreasonable given the service that is being provided (offering small value loans to all and sundry on an almost instantaneous basis is always going to be a risky and therefore pricey business) and that in reality the counter argument is that the service shouldn't be provided at all.