Funding Circle vs London Capital

dont_use_vistaprint

eskbanker wrote: »

If you drew a Venn diagram where one circle was LC&F investors and the other was MSE forum members, my strong suspicion is that there'd be a gap in the middle!

That's not to say that everyone (or even anyone) on here is an expert and it's hard to avoid a feeling of groupthink sometimes but I know how likely it is that I'd be putting any of my hard-earned into LC&F....

Fair enough. But I have actually spoken to their account managers and they provide the company's annual returns which show how they can guarantee it and have 100% track record, not a single default to date, its very transparent, but fair enough risk is not for everyone, and its is a risk just like any other investment, but at the moment a different kind of risk

fun4everyone

dont_use_vistaprint wrote: »

Really? Less than 8% ? Do you reinvest the interest automatically or turn it off?

I've not had single default yet, but i get the emails each week and there is a lot so I'm planning to lose a bit but still over the 8% guarantee of LC

What is a better p2p than FC?

Yes, really. Everything is reinvested. I suffer an awful lot of defaults there and I am not the only one. Other people have better returns.

I prefer lending on secured assets on sites I trust. Best not ask me for recommendations as one I trusted recently got forced into administration for operating without a licence. FC does have its place in a diversified p2p portfolio imo.

keyboardworrier

I looked into FC but they tend to treat capital losses/defaults as routine and rely on diversification to help get the returns, that's the impression I got anyway. I just took the time to diversify amongst various other platforms paying in the region of 12% and it's working well so far (Apart from the Collateral debacle!)

dont_use_vistaprint

keyboardworrier wrote: »

I looked into FC but they tend to treat capital losses/defaults as routine and rely on diversification to help get the returns, that's the impression I got anyway. I just took the time to diversify amongst various other platforms paying in the region of 12% and it's working well so far (Apart from the Collateral debacle!)

Thats right, stick to no more than 2% exposure & they offer some kind of assurance and track record statement but its no where near as good as LC's 100% track record / no defaults to date

dunstonh

A fool and their money are easily parted.

firestone

am i reading the companies house listing for London Capital & Finance wrong or have they changed their name 5 times since 2012?

Tcquins

Their own account managers said it!!!8217;s 100% guaranteed...but you know the risks...if it!!!8217;s a 100% guaranteed there would be no risk, and they wouldn!!!8217;t be offering out the investment to the general public. They would be invested themselves with all the money they have.

No real track record in times of fiscal tightening, no evidence of a well diversified loan book, no guarantees.

Just steer clear.

ValiantSon

dont_use_vistaprint wrote: »

No not missed them, done my research, spoken to them and checked the data. What planet are those posts on ? Its p2p loans not the bloody post office savings :-)

Was kind of hoping for someone who actually uses both and understands what they are, how defaults on FC impact tax etc

LC&F is not p2p. You read the information, you spoke to them, but you didn't understand that?

dont_use_vistaprint wrote: »

Fair enough. But I have actually spoken to their account managers and they provide the company's annual returns which show how they can guarantee it

They can't. They even say so on their website.

dont_use_vistaprint wrote: »

and have 100% track record, not a single default to date,

The key phrase there is, "to date". Not an impressive claim for a company who have only been operating for a few years in a relatively benign economic climate.

dont_use_vistaprint wrote: »

its very transparent, but fair enough risk is not for everyone, and its is a risk just like any other investment, but at the moment a different kind of risk

But you have accepted that there is no risk because they can "guarantee it", so why are you now talking about risk?

It sounds to me like you have fallen for some dubious sales patter. If you do go ahead with using them then I genuinely wish you well, but I won't be going anywhere near them. As eskbanker said, please do report back on how it all went in three years.

Malthusian

dont_use_vistaprint wrote: »

But I have actually spoken to their account managers and they provide the company's annual returns which show how they can guarantee it

How exactly can they guarantee it?

and have 100% track record

Of course they have a 100% track record. If they had anything less than a 100% track record, they'd be in liquidation. That means they'd be bust. They wouldn't be soliciting new investment.

If they had a 99.99% track record of paying debtors and you were the 0.01% of debtors that hadn't been paid your money, you wouldn't just sit there saying "oh well I'm only 0.01%". You'd call in administrators to wind the company up, to recover as much of your investment as possible. When a company goes into administration, they don't solicit new investment - not from retail investors, anyway.

If a company is solicting investment, to say they have paid all previous investors in full is a statement of the bleeding obvious. An insult to their intelligence.

dont_use_vistaprint

Malthusian wrote: »

If they had a 99.99% track record of paying debtors and you were the 0.01% of debtors that hadn't been paid your money, you wouldn't just sit there saying "oh well I'm only 0.01%". You'd call in administrators to wind the company up, to recover as much of your investment as possible. When a company goes into administration, they don't solicit new investment - not from retail investors, anyway.

So basically, what you saying is that when they they paid 100% of promised interest on time over the last 5 years are lying ?

I understand now, thank you for enlightening me