Setting the record straight on our crowdfunding round


#44

I just find it sad that so much of what people read online/‘in print’/think is believable, is often away from the truth or actual meaning.

I think there’s more of a negative impact on people choices because of the way a paper prints vs giving people chance to find out via there own research.


#45

For the record Times article is by Patrick Hosking, he is Financial Editor.

Richard Fletcher, Business Editor, tweeted this today. Not sure what he is trying to imply by quoting a simple tweet from Monzo.


(Alex) #46

I’m really shocked by this. There is literally no story here!

Plus, this really irked me:

“Monzo, the fastest growing bank in Britain by new current accounts, has been accused of “going beyond the pale” by allowing its customers to get into debt to buy its shares.”

The quote in question (from the chairman of the Campaign for Fair Finance) actually says “It is never a good idea to borrow money to buy shares, unless one is a professional share trader. To do so in order to buy illiquid, unlisted shares in a relatively new company through a crowdfunding platform seems to us somewhat beyond the pale.”

i.e. it’s the person borrowing money to buy shares being accused of going ‘beyond the pale’, not the bank allowing them to do the borrowing!


(Nick) #47

Amazing how in his book, “Business responds to customer asking a question and gives them the answer” == “Business promotes shares to its customers”.


#48

Spot on - reply to the Times with this, maybe spell it out slowly to them so they have a chance to understand.


#49

Thoughts from the Economic editor of the times…

It’s a no win situation at times - If the block was there, then people would accuse Monzo of dictating what their customers can spend money on.


#50

Hahaah next weeks Times article:

“Monzo dictates what customers can spend their money on”

Priceless


(Nick) #51

I made that point early on last night too. I wonder what would happen if Monzo approached him for a comment - would be interesting if he was willing to provide one along the lines of “My quote was never intended to attack Monzo and they’ve not done anything wrong”…


(Nick) #52

For the record, Stephen, you’re still being quoted out of context :grimacing:


(Simon B) #54

The article in general is incredibly misleading.

But I think the part that disappointed me the most, personally, is the remark about potential investors being “novices”, and they justify that “based on comments on their forum”.

It’s incredibly patronising - almost feels like sneering. I think it’s perfectly fine for first time investors to come here and post excitedly about the round. They’ll participate, learn and make an informed choice on what to spend their money on. If they decide that they want to invest in us, the questions and the prospectus will ensure they understand everything about it.

There’s an undertone to the article implying that being a “novice” somehow means you don’t understand what you’re doing and that we’d use that to encourage you to make a choice that’s good for us and irresponsible for you. Neither of those things, however, are true.


(Natalia) #55

Lol turns out I am famous too hahaha!! :slight_smile:
Can’t read the article though. I used to be a subscriber but in the end didn’t like the style of writing, and the constant tailoring of the stories just got on my nerves! As we see the evidence of that here, once again. Sad really :frowning:
I completely agree with whoever said that journalism is dead in this country. Everyone has their own agenda… often putting the stories together from what they’ve read on social media… just pathetic IMHO.


(Phil) #56

I genuinely can’t believe a journalist is using a CLEARLY jokey forum post with the words “reading is for suckers… buy, buy, buy.”

Is he some sort of alien who doesn’t get humour?


( related to Monzo CEO, Investor in Monzo ) #57

I think this is getting a bit out of hand when the Times journalists come up with comments like this “banking scam” somebody must have upset someone at the Times to get this reaction

looks like Monzo haven’t got any friends coming from the Times any time soon :slight_smile:


#58

I knew that was coming haha


(Is Santa here yet?) #59

£15.50 a month for a £20million overdraft sounds quite reasonable


#60

Aren’t we ignoring the most important point here?

Why is the vampire squid green with envy? Or am I missing an “investing” joke…?


(Matt C) #61

How dare Monzo actually respond to someones tweet and ANSWER THE QUESTION. That is so not cool!


(Is Santa here yet?) #63

Goldman Sachs are the vampire squid


(Matt C) #64

It is so unfair that they are allowed to take comments out of context from the forum, but completely ignore all of the discussion around why it is a bad idea to use your overdraft for the purpose of buying shares. They should be made to link to the whole discussion!


#65

Oh, of course they are…

It took some googling of small cephalopod’s to actually find the first reference there…