The market always prevails, demand will ensure that it does.
Fintechs like Hashching cash in on bank lending limits to curb property boom
As regulators weigh new limits on bank lending to cool the housing boom, their impact may be muted as tech-savvy borrowers turn to fintechs to access cheaper rates offered by non-bank lenders.
Hashching is raising $6 million of fresh equity on the Neu Capital fundraising platform in a deal valuing the Sydney-based start-up – which gives borrowers access to the best interest rates negotiated by mortgage brokers – at $40 million.
Since it was set up in August 2015, Hashching has received applications for $5 billion of home loans, which has doubled in the last five months. Around 20 per cent of loans are made to property investors.
On the platform, borrowers are increasingly turning to loans from non-bank lenders who are undercutting the big banks on price, said Hashching co-founder Mandeep Sodhi.
Last year, 65 per cent of borrowers were choosing products from one of the big four banks, but over the past six months, the share of the big four has dropped 38 per cent, he said.
The market always prevails, demand will ensure that it does.
Fintechs like Hashching cash in on bank lending limits to curb property boom
As regulators weigh new limits on bank lending to cool the housing boom, their impact may be muted as tech-savvy borrowers turn to fintechs to access cheaper rates offered by non-bank lenders.
Hashching is raising $6 million of fresh equity on the Neu Capital fundraising platform in a deal valuing the Sydney-based start-up – which gives borrowers access to the best interest rates negotiated by mortgage brokers – at $40 million.
Since it was set up in August 2015, Hashching has received applications for $5 billion of home loans, which has doubled in the last five months. Around 20 per cent of loans are made to property investors.
On the platform, borrowers are increasingly turning to loans from non-bank lenders who are undercutting the big banks on price, said Hashching co-founder Mandeep Sodhi.
Last year, 65 per cent of borrowers were choosing products from one of the big four banks, but over the past six months, the share of the big four has dropped 38 per cent, he said.
I think that when the dust settles investors will be paying about 0.50% more than owner occupiers, that shouldn't worry most investors, the added cost is tax deductible after all.
I do have concerns though that over a period of time less investors will come into the market which will means a shortage of housing in the future.
Take risks - if you win you will become wealthy, if you lose you will become wise
I think that when the dust settles investors will be paying about 0.50% more than owner occupiers, that shouldn't worry most investors, the added cost is tax deductible after all.
I do have concerns though that over a period of time less investors will come into the market which will means a shortage of housing in the future.
At this stage of the cycle:
1 - new innovative ways to lend that get around red tape; and
2 - new innovative ways to supply this new innovative finance to buyers;
was always bound to happen.
Its demand that is driving it and the size of the market going to this new sector is a definite milestone of a step change occurring.
Quote:
AFG, the country's largest mortgage aggregator, has also pointed to growing market share from smaller lenders undercutting the big four.
"AFG's data today shows flows to the non-majors are increasing quarter on quarter and are up to 35 per cent of our flows," said AFG interim CEO David Bailey this week.
I think that when the dust settles investors will be paying about 0.50% more than owner occupiers, that shouldn't worry most investors, the added cost is tax deductible after all.
I do have concerns though that over a period of time less investors will come into the market which will means a shortage of housing in the future.
God you talk absolute dribble sometimes.
How do investors add to housing stock currently? Seeming though in the last qrt they funnelled 13.8billion into existing properties and a pissy 1.2billion into new stock it's hard to grasp the idea that less investors would even a poultry impact on new house builds and stock. Or are you suggesting that if IR rise they prissy 8/9% of investors who currently buy new stock will stop buying altogether?
You are such a charlatan it's sickening. Lies and misinformation, you specialise in this stuff
How do investors add to housing stock currently? Seeming though in the last qrt they funnelled 13.8billion into existing properties and a pissy 1.2billion into new stock it's hard to grasp the idea that less investors would even a poultry impact on new house builds and stock. Or are you suggesting that if IR rise they prissy 8/9% of investors who currently buy new stock will stop buying altogether?
You are such a charlatan it's sickening. Lies and misinformation, you specialise in this stuff
You assume that the home owner who sells his/her existing house to an investor then buys an existing house so no new stock is added. That's not what happens, a proportion of the owner occupiers who sell their house then go on to build a house. The investor buying their house enables them to do that.
Try to think outside the square and the simple meme that has been fed to you.
Take risks - if you win you will become wealthy, if you lose you will become wise
You assume that the home owner who sells his/her existing house to an investor then buys an existing house so no new stock is added. That's not what happens, a proportion of the owner occupiers who sell their house then go on to build a house. The investor buying their house enables them to do that.
Try to think outside the square and the simple meme that has been fed to you.
The national treasures thoughts on ATO hard data is a meme?
You are now stating that I have been drawn into what you allege amounts to fake/comical news?
You get more and more outrageous every post Rufus, you truly do.
You assume that the home owner who sells his/her existing house to an investor then buys an existing house so no new stock is added. That's not what happens, a proportion of the owner occupiers who sell their house then go on to build a house. The investor buying their house enables them to do that.
Try to think outside the square and the simple meme that has been fed to you.
That assumption is not dissimilar from the one that many people make where large numbers of investors are increasing housing stock significantly. In truth, the large percentage of investors who buy old stock simply churn property instead of being directed towards increasing supply. Perhaps more motivation towards investors towards new supply, or for a more cost effective way, less motivation towards old stock is required to help with this supply issue.
That assumption is not dissimilar from the one that many people make where large numbers of investors are increasing housing stock significantly. In truth, the large percentage of investors who buy old stock simply churn property instead of being directed towards increasing supply. Perhaps more motivation towards investors towards new supply, or for a more cost effective way, less motivation towards old stock is required to help with this supply issue.
An ordinary family with a basic house in the suburbs wants to upgrade, they sell their house and now need a better house - multiply that by many thousand and where do you think some of those better houses come from if not from new builds. By the nature of the upgrade a proportion have to be built because there isn't enough houses in the higher categories available to buy. In fact it's better for upgraders to build than first time buyers.
I know it's not politically correct to discuss this on some sites, but reality is reality.
You assume that the home owner who sells his/her existing house to an investor then buys an existing house so no new stock is added. That's not what happens, a proportion of the owner occupiers who sell their house then go on to build a house. The investor buying their house enables them to do that.
Try to think outside the square and the simple meme that has been fed to you.
That's a rational but not obvious way to look at it. Then there are people who build, live in, then rent out when they build again a few (or more) years later. 'Matey' is an example. I think Blondie may be too.
My parents have built 4 houses to live in that they have sold in their 45 years in Australia. They've created 3 extra homes. Has the population tripled in 45 years?
HashChing receives more than $9bn of loan applications
Online mortgage marketplace HashChing has celebrated its second birthday and revealed that it has received more than $9 billion worth of home loan applications since its inception.
The fintech, which was officially launched by friends Atul Narang and Mandeep Sodhi in 2015, is an online platform that has pre-negotiated home loan deals that a consumer can access via a mortgage broker.
Since starting 24 months ago, the platform has reportedly received more than $9 billion in home loan applications and helped 18,000 borrowers with their mortgages.
According to the founders, HashChing aims to process more than $50 billion of home loans by the end of 2020.
The company aims to enable this process by adopting leading-edge technology and “the best and brightest” brokers. It has already pioneered a virtual verification of identity (VOI) platform, geo-targeting for automated “matchmaking” of users, and added machine learning to its broker rating system to “dynamically rank” its network of 600-plus brokers on “key metrics”.
Speaking of its second birthday, HashChing CEO and co-founder Mandeep Sodhi, said: “Who would have thought that the chance conversation I had with Atul one day about home loan interest rates would have eventuated into the thriving business we have today.
“I’m incredibly proud of everything HashChing has achieved up until now, and we couldn’t have done it without the staunch dedication and hard work of the team and advisers. Thanks to everyone who believed we could pull this thing off. I’m humbled by our success.”
Chief information officer and co-founder Atul Narang added: “These two years have come and gone remarkably quickly. We’re proud to have built such a robust business with enormous growth potential, but what we’ve accomplished so far is really just the tip of the iceberg. There’s plenty more in the pipeline.”
The company is reportedly looking to expand internationally in the near future and launch other financial verticals.
Chief operating officer Siobhan Hayden said that she was “looking forward to working with team and helping it realise its further expansion and growth as [it] conquer other verticals and markets”.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy