Chip-X is very similar to other P2P platforms mentioned above in many ways. The main difference, however, is that it has access to account history (only available to chip savers) and can be more selective of applications based on that data.
In addition, the money lent to users will come from chip savings accounts, with the majority of any interest going back to the lenders (with a small fee for chip obviously)!
Letâs hope that chip and Monzo users can soon be at one (promised Q1 2019)!
Weâre being drawn in by a trailer for an interview with TomâŚ
When is the full thing dropping?
Hopefully a response from @anon91821566 in the morning or even tonight
Are they saying a bank can dictate what you can and canât use an overdraft for? That seems bizarre
I guess all the other crowd funding for different businesses checked who was using an overdraft⌠I doubt it ?
This seems to be the angle the Times are going with
But itâs not a âhereâs a share buying overdraftâ itâs an overdraft. I canât recall Monzo saying we are crowdfunding so make sure you use your overdraft. And as Danny points out, if it had been on crowdcube itâs the same result
What the hell? This is ridiculous! As @Dannytc points out, anyone paying with a debit card on crowdcube etc could effectively be using their overdraft.
I can see why the paper is taking this angle, because I personally agree that people shouldnât be using the overdraft (borrowed money) to buy shares. Monzo havenât been telling people to do it though! A few people on the forum have mentioned it as a joke I think, but no staff.
Disagree. If the overdraft facility has been agreed then it is not up to the bank to dictate where you can and canât spend it (unless itâs for legal reasons). Logically of course you shouldnât but if you are due paid the next day it seems harsh to say itâs a terrible idea to enter your overdraft for 1 day
I thought that it was a joke/mock up thing
This is hardly shocking reporting - Itâs headline grabbing (at a push), and itâs accurate reporting.
The only âgreyâ area is the fact itâs a bank doing the crowdfunding, and therefore the potential investors could indeed borrow money from said bank, to invest back into said bankâŚ
If you have to go into your overdraft to invest in Monzo, Iâd suggest itâs probably not the right time to be investing.
Regardless of if you get paid the following day, the fact you are that close to your overdraft in the first place, there will be many more things that take priority over buying Monzo shares.
I donât think thatâs the point. I think the main point is in the 5th paragraph
Companies are banned from making loans to investors to buy their own shares, but the use of overdrafts does not appear to be covered by the rules.
I donât get it. Theyâre a bank though.
Or are Monzo going to have to prevent people going into their overdraft to buy the shares - which would probably result in a reverse opinion of ânannyingâ and controlling as itâs not legally required.
Thatâs an absolute hatchet job of an article. Itâs neither accurate nor fair. It takes facts and misrepresents them in order to push the line the writer wants.
Look at the Gewolb quote. He says that itâs not a good idea to borrow money to buy shares and such behaviour is beyond the pale. The writer of the article then uses this to accuse Monzo of going beyond the pale. The accusation is not there in the source, the connection is made by the writer.
Note also, emotive phrasing, where âMonzo emphasisesâ the share price rise, rather than âas part of helping people make an informed investment Monzo have provided the necessary informationâ, say. Also rather buries the fact that equity groups have already invested at that level, so itâs a fair rate.
Other example of emotive phrasing, saying Monzo is in a âscrambleâ to offer banking services rather than a less emotive and more accurate phrase like âworking onâ, or something similar.
Cherry-picked quotes from the Monzo forum also. He couldâve just as easily quoted me or others advising people not to put themselves into debt to make an investment.
Iâm not sure why Hosking has an axe to grind against Monzo, but thatâs all heâs doing here. Fair and unbiased reporting it ainât.
Excuse my tiredness (new baby⌠lack of sleep).
But ignoring the dislike for the article, and the âclick baitâ headlines/quotes⌠what part is inaccurate?
We are a bunch of novices apparently!
I was editing my original post to add some examples while you replied, so if you have a look youâll see some now.
I mean, itâs an angled approach, sure.
But Iâm not sure itâs specifically inaccurate?
People on this forum will see it as misleading (and as followers of Monzo, looking at everything that has been and gone, you can understand why).
But I donât see any out and out inaccuracies there.
Not saying I think itâs a brilliant piece (the standard of journalism in general is at an all time low).
But it is what it is.
I also donât like the assumption that people are sleepwalking into this without a clue what theyâre doing. The information is all there and lots of questions were answered. All potential investors are grown ups and capable of making informed decisions
