Print

[Urbi_et_Orbi]

Now that the quiet period is over, perhaps they would be so kind as to provide one of their regular NAT updates?

[xraider]

They just did.   



(*another "regular update" not provided)

[ira01]

Now that the quiet period is over, perhaps they would be so kind as to provide one of their regular NAT updates?

Good point -- maybe Yankeefan could follow up on Prosper's previous non-responsive response.

[NewHorizon]

I asked via comment in their blog.
I wouldn't be surprised if nothing comes of it.

[yankeefan]

Now that the quiet period is over, perhaps they would be so kind as to provide one of their regular NAT updates?

Good point -- maybe Yankeefan could follow up on Prosper's previous non-responsive response.

Question sent

On July 9, I asked about updates on the loans Prosper began testing Collection techniques inGebruary, 2008.  We were promised monthly accounting, but have received only a single "blog" entry about a year ago from Mr. Fuller. 

You responded that an update would be provided after the "quiet period".

Although I do not see any connection between the SEC requriements and Prosper's fulfilling its promises to customers, that is now moot, as you have emerged from said quiet period.

Do you have an expected date for an update on the collection efforts and results?

THank you

[Beerbud1]

I opted in on the NAT loans. Should I ask the Attorney  to ask Prosper for an update?

[yankeefan]

New Horizon's comment was posted on .com blog

Yay!

OK, so back to work. 

February 2008, Doug Fuller wrote, “For those lender’s that “opted in” and chose to participate in the legal test, accounting will be provided in a monthly supplementary statement.”

I don’t think those supplementary statements ever showed up?

no response yet, but he didn't actually ask a question...

[NewHorizon]

Hey, feel free to post a comment too.    

[Fred93]

Not "update" (words and hand waving), we want the "statments" we were promised, containing the numerical details, results of suits, etc. 

[yankeefan]

Not "update" (words and hand waving), we want the "statments" we were promised, containing the numerical details, results of suits, etc. 

Here we go...

Statement for [Yankeefan]

Total Collected to Date=              $0.00

[JammingJAY]

Sad thing is WTF can you do? Prosper bought the loans from you for $0.

F'ers

[ira01]

Sad thing is WTF can you do? Prosper bought the loans from you for $0.

F'ers

Not exactly -- Prosper bought the loans from lenders for $0 up front, and a firm promise to provide a pro rata portion of the recoveries less certain expenses, and monthly statements.  So far, Prosper has breached its contractual and fiduciary duties to provide the monthly statements, and it may well have breached its duties to pursue the legal cases competently.

[nonattender]

Sad thing is WTF can you do? Prosper bought the loans from you for $0.

F'ers

Not exactly -- Prosper bought the loans from lenders for $0 up front, and a firm promise to provide a pro rata portion of the recoveries less certain expenses, and monthly statements.

If you think about it, this describes the SEC-proscribed P2P lending business model rather succinctly.
I must say, though I think the bluster gets in the way of the point, I'm with Larsen on SEC absurdity.

At the very least, SEC should realize that the notes should be "platform independent" for tradeability.
There are many ways to structure that - the current route just makes room for another intermediary.

(I'll note here that Steel Partners took WebBank private, not long ago - FolioFN might be tasty, also.)

-t

[xraider]

NA. bluster aside, since p2p lending isn't regulated, and Prosper hasn't been transparent about collections or the NAT lawsuits, I have to think that SEC involvement is better than nothing.

If Prosper had conducted itself in accordance with the original TOS, and had been transparent ("hey, we're trying, and here's what we've done") I don't think there would be the same anger and disgust there is here now.

I think people here (myself included) would have been much more forgiving of this new platform if we had the sense that we were all in this together.  Prosper, IMO, turned this into an us vs. lenders scenario.

[Urbi_et_Orbi]

Nominate for lobby?