Print

[Nora_Lenderbee]

Is anyone disputing the fact that had this not been made public,that Prosper would have continued to lie to the court?

that isn't a fact

Sounds like they are admitting that as a fact right here:

Specifically, there was understandable confusion about a statement in one of Prosper’s court documents that incorrectly described the legal relationship among Prosper, the borrower and the lenders. Although the incorrect statement is not germane to the central issue in the case, we are currently in the process of correcting this in an amended filing with the court. We want to apologize for any confusion this mistake on our part may have caused for Prosper lenders.

Now, I guess you could argue that they would have changed this w/o the "understandable confusion" but I think you'd be kidding yourself

Re-read carefully. Bama said that this was a fact: "Had this not been made public,that Prosper would have continued to lie to the court." That is a counterfactual statement. The statement WAS made public. It's certainly possible that they wouldn't have changed it w/o publicity, but you can't say it's a fact.

Prosper has done enough real blameworthy things. Let's not also accuse them of things we invent.

[ira01]

In response to mothandrust and cardinalflyer’s comments:
There is a “rule of thumb” in debt buying that you know you didn’t pay too much for a portfolio if you receive back you purchase price in the first year. In the case of the accounts that comprised the “cancelled” debt sale bid file, they have already collected more than 2/3 of the total amount of the best bid. We remain confident that NOT selling the file was/is in the best interests of the lenders.

I am having a very hard time believeing that this is anything but a complete fabrication.  IIRC, the JDB offer was for about $200K.  Two thirds of that would be $167K.  Have we seen ANY indication at all that Prosper has collected anywhere even remotely close to $167K from 4+month lates in the last 4.5 months?  Fred93, you keep an eye on collections -- do you have any data on this?

I have only 1 source, which is the Prosper collection agency web page.  What I have accomplished so far is to get Doug Fuller to say that the data shown there is wrong since the switch to Amsher.  If the data is wrong, then I don't know that there's anything I can do with it!  I look forward to correct data.

Even if we had correct numbers on that page, I don't see how we could come up with an estimate on the set of 4+ loans that should have been sold in the JDB sale that didn't happen.  They don't break those out for us!  I will apply some more thought to this question.

Doesn't LS or Eric's track each late loan's status change (i.e., current to late to 1-month, etc., and back)?  I wonder if there's some way to use ProProsper to get a list of all the loans that were 4+months late as of mid-April (the loans that should have been sold off) and then compile how those loans have performed.  Or to get a list of all loans 4+month late as of mid-April that have moved to 3-month or better status?  I don't know.

Where do you get the $200k number?

Doug Fuller wrote a comment to his blog post that the best JDB offer was one-third the December 2007 prices.  From that, HO prepared a spreadsheet showing the December 2007 prices, the amount of 4+lates in the various categories that received different prices in 12/07 (homeowners, non-homeowner AA/A, etc.), and how much one-third would be.  The actual April JDB sales price would have been $232,761 (at one-third the 12/07 prices).  See http://www.prospers.org/forum/prosper_debt_sale_crashes_and_burns-t7527.0.html;msg117585#msg117585.

[Xenon481]

I am having a very hard time believeing that this is anything but a complete fabrication.  IIRC, the JDB offer was for about $200K.  Two thirds of that would be $167K.

2/3rds of $200K is ~$134K, not $167K.

[HollowOak]

LOL, I just started a thread about some of this in the Lobby.

[xraider]

Nora, I think what Bama meant was that if it wasn't publicly aired Prosper wouldn't have done anything about it.  (Bama, not that I want to speak for you but...)

Nora, I have to think he's right.....

[ira01]

I am having a very hard time believeing that this is anything but a complete fabrication.  IIRC, the JDB offer was for about $200K.  Two thirds of that would be $167K.

2/3rds of $200K is ~$134K, not $167K.

Yeah, I just corrected that.  But it turns out the JDB offer was actually $232K, so two-thirds is about $155K.

[onthefence]

Having said that, one of the challenges in working with Prosper collections is the fact that while there is interest in how the whole portfolio is performing, lenders quite rightfully only really care about what is happening on their loans. A lender that is on one of the loans that came current is probably very happy with the decision — a lender on a loan that declared bankruptcy or does not pay anything, would obviously rather had the debt sale price.

This is one of the key reasons for diversification in the loans you own.

Let me get this straight.  Lender better diversify, because they never know when Proser might change the rules of the game & not live up to their agreements.  Niiiiiiiiice.

Hey Lenders.  It's all your fault for trusting prosper you bitch!

[ira01]

Nora, I think what Bama meant was that if it wasn't publicly aired Prosper wouldn't have done anything about it.  (Bama, not that I want to speak for you but...)

Nora, I have to think he's right.....

I think it is pretty much indisputable that he's right.  You posted your Gaerke thread on July 9, and Doug Fuller spent a significant amount of time reading that thread on July 10.  So almost two months has elapsed since Prosper knew about its misrepesentation to the Court, yet it did NOTHING to correct that "error" until the TMF article created a major shitload of bad PR in the last few days.

[ira01]

In response to mothandrust and cardinalflyer’s comments:
There is a “rule of thumb” in debt buying that you know you didn’t pay too much for a portfolio if you receive back you purchase price in the first year. In the case of the accounts that comprised the “cancelled” debt sale bid file, they have already collected more than 2/3 of the total amount of the best bid. We remain confident that NOT selling the file was/is in the best interests of the lenders.

I am having a very hard time believeing that this is anything but a complete fabrication.  IIRC, the JDB offer was for about $200K.  Two thirds of that would be $167K.  Have we seen ANY indication at all that Prosper has collected anywhere even remotely close to $167K from 4+month lates in the last 4.5 months?  Fred93, you keep an eye on collections -- do you have any data on this?

I have only 1 source, which is the Prosper collection agency web page.  What I have accomplished so far is to get Doug Fuller to say that the data shown there is wrong since the switch to Amsher.  If the data is wrong, then I don't know that there's anything I can do with it!  I look forward to correct data.

Fred, I see (as might be expected of Prosper's 4th largest lender) that you have 53 4+month lates yourself (according to LS, which is only current through 8/19).  Have you received any fruits of Prosper's "post-charge off collections techniques"?

[Fred93]

Fred, I see (as might be expected of Prosper's 4th largest lender) that you have 53 4+month lates yourself (according to LS, which is only current through 8/19).  Have you received any fruits of Prosper's "post-charge off collections techniques"?

I'd have to look up about 48 loans (excluding the ones in bankruptcy), and then see if they had a payment after some cutoff date?  But we'd expect some payments even with no collection activity, so what exactly would I test for?

Is Doug seriously proposing a criteria where we should celebrate if we get 1% of our money back?

[Nora_Lenderbee]

Nora, I think what Bama meant was that if it wasn't publicly aired Prosper wouldn't have done anything about it.  (Bama, not that I want to speak for you but...)

Nora, I have to think he's right.....

I know that's what he meant. It's his opinion. It isn't a fact, as he said it was. I'm tired of people being sloppy with language. They say things that aren't quite right and then other people misinterpret and off we go on a wild ride of speculation and misunderstanding.

I'm an editor having a bad day.

[Mtnchick]

I'm an editor having a bad day.

We still love you Nora - we just disagree with you on this one

[lenderguy]

I'm an editor having a bad day.

We still love you Nora - we just disagree with you on this one

Nora's right... a fact is something that can be proven or disproven. 

[Nora_Lenderbee]

[stamps foot] You CAN'T disagree with me because what I said is a FACT! Not an opinion! What bama said is an opinion! Dammit, why doesn't anyone listen to me?!

<gaga>

[Mtnchick]

[stamps foot] You CAN'T disagree with me because what I said is a FACT! Not an opinion! What bama said is an opinion! Dammit, why doesn't anyone listen to me?!

<gaga>

OK, I don't disagree with you - I agree with Bama - is that OK? Keep in mind I never got through 2 years of that college stuff AND I'm from the south. The fact that I can put semi-readable sentences together is a miracle. Getting into fact semantics is way above my pointed little head