As a self-respecting risk officer I don't take 1 single variable into consideration when making any judgements. I don't hand-pick the bad indicators and find ways to discredit the good indicators.
What are the considerations that I use to make my judgement?
1. The nature of APT's business and it's customer's repayment profile
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/objective-analysis-bnpl-bad-debt-explained.5388454/#.XtBckGgzaUk
2. Detailed surveys into the APT users
https://www.afterpay.com/en-AU/how-millennials-manage-money-research
I encourage reading the actual report.
3. Company financial and media reports.
4. Peers - The fact that they are not identical doesn't matter, they are just one piece of the puzzle. You dismissing Z1P default rates as something that shouldn't be considered is laughable. How do you think investment bankers value companies for M&A purposes? How do you think stock analysts find the growth rates for their valuation models?
How does your analysis compare to these 4 points?
1. Completely ignored.
2. You conveniently don't trust surveys.
3. You think management twist the truth so very dismissive of what they report.
4. You don't like APT being compared to Z1P because they are different companies but you repeatedly compare APT to banks (how convenient).
What is your analysis based on?
1. Australian Financial Review (you referenced an article earlier today).
2. Peer analysis (Banks-only, no BNPL peer analysis allowed).
3. Hotcopper posters (You repeatedly reference hotcopper posters as admitting the company is a credit provider).
So.... What were you saying about self-respecting Risk Officer?
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?