Print

[Fred93]

I think that the 6 month quiet period gave everyone, not just .org members, time to evaluate and re-think putting money into Prosper. ...we all saw the portfolios age.......and no new loans to offset the defaults.  Reality set in.............

That's a cerebral analysis.  Assumes people observe and think.  Existing lenders can do that, but new folks will be just like new folks of the past.  Prosper's experience during their first run was that new lenders kept arriving, therefore the old ones didn't matter.  They are, I believe, therefore assuming new lenders will arrive.  Maybe they will, and maybe they won't.  Prosper had the advantage of a wonderful media storm the first time around.  I doubt that will happen again.  The dynamics of the 2nd startup may be quite different.

[Mtnchick]

It will be interesting to see if anyone "new" ever passes up the top 20 bidders. I vote no.

[Tokyo Joe]

It will be interesting to see if anyone "new" ever passes up the top 20 bidders. I vote no.

Oh I don't know about that... There's probably another reguyincali-type who figures they know the secret that the rest of us are too dumb to see...  Becoming a "used car mogul" might be too much of a temptation for some... "I hold the paper on 100 used cars across the country" they'll brag to their friends...  Without, of course, producing any of said papers. 

[Mtnchick]

It will be interesting to see if anyone "new" ever passes up the top 20 bidders. I vote no.

Oh I don't know about that... There's probably another reguyincali-type who figures they know the secret that the rest of us are too dumb to see...  Becoming a "used car mogul" might be too much of a temptation for some... "I hold the paper on 100 used cars across the country" they'll brag to their friends...  Without, of course, producing any of said papers. 

I dunno - the Top 10 were the Top 10 for what, a year after they quit bidding and before Prosper went quiet? Seems someone would have taken over after they quit bidding - but no one did. I think Prosper burned too many bridges.

[ira01]

I think that the 6 month quiet period gave everyone, not just .org members, time to evaluate and re-think putting money into Prosper. ...we all saw the portfolios age.......and no new loans to offset the defaults.  Reality set in.............

That's a cerebral analysis.  Assumes people observe and think.  Existing lenders can do that, but new folks will be just like new folks of the past.  Prosper's experience during their first run was that new lenders kept arriving, therefore the old ones didn't matter.  They are, I believe, therefore assuming new lenders will arrive.  Maybe they will, and maybe they won't.  Prosper had the advantage of a wonderful media storm the first time around.  I doubt that will happen again.  The dynamics of the 2nd startup may be quite different.

Not only will Prosper probably not be the recipient of fawning media stories this time around, there are more honest sources of information more readily available to lenders now that weren't before -- the Motley Fool article, the Wikipedia entry, etc.  And the SEC will probably now restrain some of Propser's more egregious behaviors from the past.  And -- hopefully -- there is now a more generalized skepticism of lending given what has happened in the broader lending markets than there was in years past.

[MsTabbyKats]

I would hope that anyone planning a major "investment" should at least glance over the prospectus.  Reading "Risk Factors"....starting on p 20....would make even the most aggressive investor run. (p 24 of the pdf)

Also, page ii (3 of the pdf) states that there are now "financial suitability requirements".  Although they aren't that high, I'm wondering if they need to be verified, or it's the "honesty" system.

 

[ccat]

Putting money in Prosper at this point would be like continuing to invest with Bernie Madoff.

[Urbi_et_Orbi]

Some who were inclined to lend the first time around may now also find themselves a bit less liquid or less confident in their near-term sources of income.

[112233]

annapolis82 begging and offering to pay prosper to give him customer service is all any large lender needs to know about prosper

[ira01]

annapolis82 begging and offering to pay prosper to give him customer service is all any large lender needs to know about prosper

Hey, no "back channels" as Wichtel told Leporello (a six-figure lender) once.   

[onthefence]

Right now, with only California in investors available, now would be a good time to bid on some prime loans if it wasn't for one big fat (maybe not so obvious) issue.  Prosper owns the notes and Prosper is not financially stable. 

The risk of Prosper going south is too large to be properly compensated for by the interest rates offered on the notes.  The only financially worth while risk would be either to invest in Prosper directly, or not at all.

[PPT]

Excellent summary Ira.

[bankomatic]

How many prosper lenders are able to get above say 5% return on investment? I would bet not very many. I am guessing the big boys just went and put their money in something much safer with a bigger yield.

[ira01]

How many prosper lenders are able to get above say 5% return on investment? I would bet not very many.

There are 14,443 lenders on Prosper with > 20 loans and an average loan age >12 months.  Of those lenders, 2,574 have a LendingStats projected ROI >5.0% -- that is less than 18% of such lenders.  The median (i.e., half do better, half do worse) projected ROI is a paltry 1.03%.

If you look at the "big boys" (those with >500 loans) and an average loan age >12 months, there are 283 of them.  Only 31 have a projected ROI >5.0% -- less than 11% of them.

[HollowOak]

Some who were inclined to lend the first time around may now also find themselves a bit less liquid or less confident in their near-term sources of income.

Yes, those California home values (that allowed pensioner to take out a HELOC) has gone South for the depression.

How many prosper lenders are able to get above say 5% return on investment? I would bet not very many.

There are 14,443 lenders on Prosper with > 20 loans and an average loan age >12 months.  Of those lenders, 2,574 have a LendingStats projected ROI >5.0% -- that is less than 18% of such lenders.  The median (i.e., half do better, half do worse) projected ROI is a paltry 1.03%.

If you look at the "big boys" (those with >500 loans) and an average loan age >12 months, there are 283 of them.  Only 31 have a projected ROI >5.0% -- less than 11% of them.

I'm not a big fish, only 11K at the high-water mark, but reaching my 3-year anniversary, I'll tell you that Erics' has my ROI much closer to reality than Lendingstats.