Completely agree with you. I think people are making some judgement without understanding the details how this work.
Everyone has got unique selling point like FT is giving free share trade when HL is charging is £12 per trade…all.the starts up burning their shareholders money to attract new customer so if FT can offer free trading why can’t Dozens offer 5% bonds???
Didn’t say they were doing anything wrong… It has just caused a temporary minor facial tick which could be either positive or negative.
At least I didn’t say “We all know that things like mini bonds are safe as houses, unless you are a former TV presenter for Grand Designs”
The question for an investor is whether 5% is a sufficient risk premium. This isn’t risk free and so an investor should be compensated for taking this additional risk.
Nationwide offer 5% without risk, which is different.
A bond product was marketed as virtually risk free at LCF when in fact it wasn’t. There was no FSCS protection and investors unknowingly lost -80%. This isn’t a direct comparison of course and there’s no reason to think Dozens is a bad actor. However, I do think Dozens understate the risks involved when marketing this product to savers or new investors.
Can you elaborate on how exactly they understate the “risks” in your view?
Worth noting, this no longer exists:
I believe they were advertising it as risk free during their last crowdfunding, as some kind of clever new way of getting more interest than banks offer (if I remember correctly)
I’m unsure whether this has changed recently, but it wasn’t long ago…
Is Dozens FCSC protected?
Are they FCA regulated?
Is there potential for capital loss?
I don’t think you fully understand the product.
It’s your money + 5%, put in a partner institution, dressed up as bonds because they don’t have a current account license and can’t offer interest.
Literally a marketing gimmick, hence why the issuances are so low.
So with all due respect, basically you’re commenting on risk without doing any diligent research, scrolling up in this thread nor even reading actual dozens marketing docs nor terms & conditions which would answer all those basic questions within mins. Baffling.
For the trust bonds there is protection, of a sort. But as Steve says, it’s a marketing gimmick to draw people in to use them for investing
This was meant to be more of an open question (is 5% sufficient for this type of offering?) rather than something overly specific or hostile against Dozens
Happy to be convinced otherwise but in my mind, however small someone may interpret the risks, there is a level of risk associated this type of product
Sorry, I meant it was risky to be an investor in the company, not a customer. 5% that they have to fund as part of a marketing budget is not sustainable.
I’m not here to convince as I’m not a shareholder, but as far as the risk-return spectrum goes, there are few red flags here for me to suggest that 5% isn’t commensurate reward for the practically low short term risk. This is effectively easy-access, fully 1-2-1 backed saving. There’s no FSCS protection aka deposit insurance because it isn’t a necessity to quell a bank run because dozens isn’t a bank and thus is unable to lend out your money (it’s ringfenced).
At worst, this is a marketing gimmick.
At best, this is a genuine attempt to reward consumers with inflation beating returns for saving rather than spending.
In between, it’s just a customer acquisition cost.
I made a small investment in Dozens during their last round in June this year. I’ve not heard any mention of a new funding round yet.
Tbh, banks offer 5% regular savers as a promotion to get new customers - surely this is along the same lines?
I put in a bid for several hundred pounds for their latest bond issue. But the total issuance is only £100,000 I’d be surprised if it’s accepted.
The next issuance should be £1,000,000.
In the event of default, order of payments:
Some selective takes, but one should trust the going concern, capitalisation, integrity of the security package and brand of Project Imagine/dozens savings before bidding for these bonds. Personally I do (i’d rank this 1 risk tier below P2P e.g. al la Ratesetter & their Provision Fund), but I’d equally understand an informed decision not to.
My £500 bid for the October issuance bond was accepted. I’ll treat it and future issuances as a monthly saver. Will put in a bigger big next time.
I admit that I only read the first paragraph. But it sounds like a pyramid scheme to me.
Does the Freetrade Incentivised Freeshare Referral programme also sound like a pyramid scheme to you?
It should do as they’re both fully financed exactly the same way: marketing budget!
In this latest AskAC vid, he literally hints that the bond programme almost borders on charity as they’re giving money away. The reason it’s not is that there’s a commercial aspect to the programme: