Blackmore Bond

dunstonh

hgdriver wrote: »

Hi I have been with Blackmore bonds for 2 years and they are consistent with all reviews they have paid interest on my investment every time yes it is a risk but so far so good

They could be using new investors money to fund your income. They could be legit with funding but only breaching FCA rules on marketing.

However, your comment they are consistent is totally irrelevant.

It is not just "a risk". It is a very high-risk investment unsuitable for 95% of the population. They are also breaking FCA rules on marketing to get business. So, what other rules are they breaking?

They are not allowed to market to retail consumers. This is not a retail financial product. Yet we see it retailed just the same as the recently collapsed LC&F bond.

Malthusian

masonic wrote: »

Bernie Madoff's clients have so far recovered 76% of their money: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-madoff-payout/madoff-customer-payout-tops-12-billion-idUSKCN1QB1VA
I don't think those investing in these bonds will fare as well when they start to unravel.

When a major-league Ponzi scheme collapses in the US the authorities are often proactive in attempting to gather all remaining funds, claw back funds from those who came out with a profit, and redistribute them to those who lost money.

In the UK we just send in some insolvency practitioners, they sell anything left to be sold, send a report on the directors' conduct to the Secretary of State for Business, take whatever is left as their fee, and thank everyone for playing.

So you are entirely right to emphasise that investors in a UK Ponzi scheme should not hope for the same level of recovery as in the Madoff case. Total losses should be expected if any unregulated investment scheme collapses.

Another factor: The Madoff scheme was so successful that it was pretty much impossible for Madoff to spend it all. Not on stuff that couldn't be recovered, anyway. You can't spend $30 billion on supercars, yachts and horses. I mean you can give it a really good go, but realistically, a lot of that is going to end up in property (which can generally be recovered if someone is willing to put in the legal legwork) or just sit in the scheme's bank account. By contrast if someone raises £10 million or even £50 million in a Ponzi scheme you can virtually guarantee that within a few years most of it will be a fart on the wind.

So that is another major factor which explains the exceptionally high recovery rate in the Madoff fraud.

Reaper

dunstonh wrote: »

They could be using new investors money to fund your income.

Funny you should say that. I was just looking in their most recent accounts where the auditors say:

We draw attention to note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, which indicates the dependency of the group and parent company on new investor subscriptions to pay its contractually committed fees. This condition, along with the other matters as set forth in note 1, indicate that a material uncertainty exists that may cast doubt over the group and parent company's ability to continue as a going concern.

I could add the target return on investments of 20% they say they aim to make even if achieved would only pay the fees to Surge, with nothing left to pay investors.

Anyone else get a feeling of impending doom?

sully1311

Pretty sure their website keeps changing to highlight the risks with investing.

Brown_Bear

Who do Blackmore actually lend to?

The LCF problems have not helped IOG - (even though I notice the IOG share price slightly higher today.)

I would be cautious about any of the companies who are borrowing money (via some kind of chain) from Blackmore bond holders.

Brown_Bear

sully1311 wrote: »

Pretty sure their website keeps changing to highlight the risks with investing.

To be fair to Blackmore - their website does make it very clear that investing with them is high risk.

masonic

Brown_Bear wrote: »

To be fair to Blackmore - their website does make it very clear that investing with them is high risk.

The "comparison sites" advertising the bonds like savings accounts don't though, and based on what we know of Surge Financial, probably neither do the call centre staff.

dunstonh

Brown_Bear wrote: »

To be fair to Blackmore - their website does make it very clear that investing with them is high risk.

You may say "to be fair". However, Blackmore also pay referral fees for those that click to them from links in sites saying "best interest rates" and "guaranteed". etc.

They may not be the ones actually breaking the rules but they are complicit in doing so because they are paying the ones that break the rules to market their mini bond.

Brown_Bear

dunstonh wrote: »

You may say "to be fair". However, Blackmore also pay referral fees for those that click to them from links in sites saying "best interest rates" and "guaranteed". etc.

They may not be the ones actually breaking the rules but they are complicit in doing so because they are paying the ones that break the rules to market their mini bond.

But doesn't clicking such a link lead you to the main Blackmore website - where the warnings are clear?

masonic

Brown_Bear wrote: »

But doesn't clicking such a link lead you to the main Blackmore website - where the warnings are clear?

Some of the sites I've seen just ask for your contact details so one of their specialists can get in touch.