Print

[Xenon481]

Gimein responds to prosper's objections.  Holds his ground.  Good job. 

http://www.thebigmoney.com/blogs/sausage/2010/01/22/exchange-prospercom

Very nice!

[nonattender]

"On the other hand, the annual loss of 10 percent—that's a total of 30 percent over three years—on the subset of those loans (those that charged 18 percent or more) with higher interest rates is somewhat worse than I'd have guessed."  -TBM Staff / Gimein

Don't know what that means, but assume he showed up here touting a lending strategy that was based
solely upon the interest rate of a loan being above a certain threshold, without regards to credit quality.

The functional equivalent of the standing order/portfolio plan that results:  IF Rate >= 18% THEN Invest.
How many of you think that one is a money-maker either on Prosper or for any other type of investment?

Either they do not understand selection or they have selected to highlight a totally meaningless measure.
Just saying... If they showed up here and used the positive form of this argument, they'd get laughed at.

Eh...

-t

[cowdog]

By contrast, Lending Club (scarcely mentioned in these articles) launched with SEC approval, institutes stringent borrower requirements, and has a happy lender community (no hate blogs that I've found yet). Gartner predicts that p2p lending will increase by 66% over the next three years.

-- http://www.transcapitalist.com/transcapitalist/2010/1/21/continued-criticisms-of-p2p-lending.html

Looks like the company that bought a couch for the waiting room attracted more customers.

Imagine.

 

[Urbi_et_Orbi]

Ooh, Prosper has a new blog entry his evening.   

[xraider]

"On the other hand, the annual loss of 10 percent—that's a total of 30 percent over three years—on the subset of those loans (those that charged 18 percent or more) with higher interest rates is somewhat worse than I'd have guessed."  -TBM Staff / Gimein

Don't know what that means, but assume he showed up here touting a lending strategy that was based
solely upon the interest rate of a loan being above a certain threshold, without regards to credit quality.

The functional equivalent of the standing order/portfolio plan that results:  IF Rate >= 18% THEN Invest.
How many of you think that one is a money-maker either on Prosper or for any other type of investment?

Either they do not understand selection or they have selected to highlight a totally meaningless measure.
Just saying... If they showed up here and used the positive form of this argument, they'd get laughed at.

Eh...

-t

This is your only comment on this whole thing?

[NewHorizon]

Ooh, Prosper has a new blog entry his evening.   

It reads like somebody at Prosper hit the wrong button.  Like maybe they were replying to an Email but posted to the blog instead.

[Xenon481]

Ooh, Prosper has a new blog entry his evening.   

It reads like somebody at Prosper hit the wrong button.  Like maybe they were replying to an Email but posted to the blog instead.

Click the "Read More" and it takes you to an actual 3rd party article. Prosper just quoted a paragraph out of the middle of it.

[nonattender]

"On the other hand, the annual loss of 10 percent—that's a total of 30 percent over three years—on the subset of those loans (those that charged 18 percent or more) with higher interest rates is somewhat worse than I'd have guessed."  -TBM Staff / Gimein

Don't know what that means, but assume he showed up here touting a lending strategy that was based
solely upon the interest rate of a loan being above a certain threshold, without regards to credit quality.

The functional equivalent of the standing order/portfolio plan that results:  IF Rate >= 18% THEN Invest.
How many of you think that one is a money-maker either on Prosper or for any other type of investment?

Either they do not understand selection or they have selected to highlight a totally meaningless measure.
Just saying... If they showed up here and used the positive form of this argument, they'd get laughed at.

Eh...

-t

This is your only comment on this whole thing?

"thing" = some dude I've never heard of wrote a negative piece on a blog I've never read before...

You're just happy that your anti-Prosper agenda got air time since, until now, the meme-repeating
was primarily pro-Prosper press release paraphrasing.  Pro-spin/anti-spin...but truth's in the middle.

I think the TBM article is pretty dopey and betrays a lack of understanding of the dynamics of the
Prosper model, as well as a lack of understanding of the peer to peer lending space, but, so what?  

I'm used to reading periodicals that deal in nuance and can handle complexity with a great aplomb.
This one, like 99.999% of other online digesty-cliffs-notes-meme-repeating "journals", just doesn't.

That's as much expired-horse-beating as I can muster energy for - I'm sure you'll pick up my slack.

-t

[nonattender]

"On the other hand, the annual loss of 10 percent—that's a total of 30 percent over three years—on the subset of those loans (those that charged 18 percent or more) with higher interest rates is somewhat worse than I'd have guessed."  -TBM Staff / Gimein

This is your only comment on this whole thing?

Ok, I lied.  One more punch to the horse.  I was going to wait and let someone else find it, but, I find it
incredibly humorous that the "editorial staff", or whoever, of TBM managed to lose count of around 10%
of their claimed total loss over three years by claiming that an annual loss of 10 percent x 3 totals 30%.

Very hard for me to take them seriously anyway - this was just icing...

-t

[Mtnchick]

Ooh, Prosper has a new blog entry his evening.   

It reads like somebody at Prosper hit the wrong button.  Like maybe they were replying to an Email but posted to the blog instead.

Click the "Read More" and it takes you to an actual 3rd party article. Prosper just quoted a paragraph out of the middle of it.

And the 3rd comment on the 3rd party article is a link to the Prosper blog...which links to the 3rd party article...which links to the Prosper blog....

Blogging Under the Influence on a Friday night?

[bamalucky]

Na,still holding on to hoping those options will be worth something aren't ya?

[xraider]

Remind me, NA, why I (and most on this board) now have an anti-Prosper agenda?

Oh yeah, blatant violations of the TOS, returns much, much poorer than advertised, non-existent collections, utter disregard of legitimate lender concerns and so on. 

I can't see any reason ANYONE would invest in this company in light of its history, and of its efforts to stifle dissent. 

Please tell me where "in the middle" you believe the truth lies.... and why you're not "investing" in Prosper 3.0.  Waiting for 4.0?

[bamalucky]

A good read about nonattender  http://www.prospers.org/forum/empty-t8020.0.html

[JammingJAY]

Bankruptcy is good.

I hate to quote this person but hey options won't be worth much and I do enjoy a good drunken wine(pun).

Thanks NA.

[Tokyo Joe]

NA is so much better than you guys.  Can't you see he's an intellect, while you are just dimwits?