Print

Yes

12 (24.5%)

No

32 (65.3%)

WGAF

5 (10.2%)

Total Members Voted: 48

[HollowOak]

Prosper announced a bidding API.

On eBay, sniping is an accepted practice and many buyers (me included) are registered with a sniping service (eSnipe, AuctionSniper, etc.) to place our bids at the very last second.

Prosper has just made available a bidding API, that will potentially allow lenders to place last-minute bids on desirable listings. (Of course, that generates the whole debate of whether sniping is viable on prosper.com or not.)

However, Prosper is also dead set against people providing their Prosper id and password to third-party sites, which is a bit of a conundrum. How are 3rd parties supposed to implement bid systems (sniping or otherwise) without requesting authentication credentials from the lender(s) placing the bids?

Leaving all that aside for the moment, provided that a 3rd party site provides strong security (at least as strong as Prosper's security) for the protection of lender credentials, would you be interested in using a 3rd party site to place your bids on Prosper listings with more flexibility than is currently available under Prosper's Standing Order  and Portfolio Plan schemes?

Flexibility issues could include add-ons such as leaving a certain amount of cash in your account, setting up a wish-list of listings and bidding on them sequentially, etc.

[Oak_Hill_Fire]

Nope, And never used one on eBay either (and I've been buying and sometimes selling on there since 11/98). I have sniped there but prefer to push the button myself. If I don't care to do that myself I don't have that much interest in buying. In addition there is 1 major difference between the 2 sites. Usually there's just 1 buyer on eBay while there are generally dozens on Prosper (and the products are all pretty similar). I have bis within the last 2 hours or so on Prosper but there is nothing similar to the 2 windows open at the same time sniping on Prosper. If I lose one then there's another similar loan right around the corner. 

[Mtnchick]

I used to use sniping on Ebay also and stopped BECAUSE of not wanting my info at the hands of a 3rd party. And having access to my Ebay bidding is a LOT less sensitive to me than someone having access to my BANKING INFORMATION!! 

My guess: P------r plans on having a buddy open a 3rd party service that they magically approve of.

[gelt4u]

ebay uses tokens for 3rd party services: the 3rd party never has access to your id or password.

[Mtnchick]

ebay uses tokens for 3rd party services: the 3rd party never has access to your id or password.

There are hundreds of other sniping services for ebay - most I've seen (checking in Google now) want your Ebay user/pass

[nonattender]

I'd just want a standalone program that worked from my end...  not interested in having a hosted solution - unless there are some serious value-adds beyond just sniping.

-t

[gelt4u]

ebay uses tokens for 3rd party services: the 3rd party never has access to your id or password.

There are hundreds of other sniping services for ebay - most I've seen (checking in Google now) want your Ebay user/pass

yes.  but for ebay approved 3rd party apps, only the token is acceptable.

[Loan_shark_74]

Why would you want to snipe a loan? Just determine your minimum bid and bid it. If you get outbid, oh well. Once a loan gets below my minimum bid, the rate is to low for the risk, IMO. Why would I want to snipe that?

[Mtnchick]

Why would you want to snipe a loan? Just determine your minimum bid and bid it. If you get outbid, oh well. Once a loan gets below my minimum bid, the rate is to low for the risk, IMO. Why would I want to snipe that?

I don't get it either. 

[traveler505]

WGAF, since I'm not bidding at all these days.

But, to engage in a bit of braindrizzling ...

After Prosper eliminated GL compensation, one of the ideas that was floating around was that GLs could be compensated for their vetting work by selling their recommendations to lenders on a subscription basis.  I didn't think the idea was workable, mainly because there was no way to control second-hand dissemination of the recommendations by the subscribers, and it would be too easy for non-subscribers to simply mimic a known subscriber's bidding activity and get the benefits of the service without paying for it.  The ability to freeload would limit the market for paid subscriptions.

In theory (though I doubt the TOS would allow it, and there are likely major regulatory/licensing obstacles for anyone wanting to try this), lenders could authorize a third-party (the vetter) to not only place their bids  using the API, but to also select the loans and interest rates, for a fee.  That way, the vetter's recommendations would remain secret until the bids are placed, eliminating the risk of second-hand dissemination, and the sniping function could be used (as on eBay) to thwart copycat bidding.  Obviously, such a system would require a high level of blind trust in the vetter by the participating lenders, and/or some form of credible guarantee from the vetter.  

Issues with the TOS and legal/licensing issues are not the only obstacles to this sort of arrangement.  Prosper's decision to stop sharing members' PII with GLs remains an impediment to effective vetting.  Assuming that the recommended loans are those which lenders would overlook in the absence of vetting, the vetter would need to have enough commitments from subscribers to fully fund the loan on the first try (and would still be at risk of failing if the lender's account had insufficient funds to cover the authorized bid amount); otherwise, the borrower would be identified, and copycats could jump in on the second attempt.  Blabbermouth borrowers might reveal that they had been vetted, in hopes of drumming up early bids from non-subscribers.  And, finally, there is no effective mechanism to market such a service to borrowers, unless Prosper itself were to promote the service (as a suggestion to subprime borrowers during the listing process, perhaps) or grant on-site spamming privileges to the vetter.

All of which brings me back to WGAF.

[112233]

security aside, I might use sniping to tie my money up less and bid on more loans rather than as a tool to get the highest rate. For example, If I had $50 in my account I could set up snipes for 10 loans, and the first loan that funds wins my $50.

This sounds like the wish-list HO mentioned which would be a more useful tool IMHO.

[ks6328]

Why would you want to snipe a loan? Just determine your minimum bid and bid it. If you get outbid, oh well. Once a loan gets below my minimum bid, the rate is to low for the risk, IMO. Why would I want to snipe that?

I'm no longer bidding, but I voted No because when I was bidding, I made my bids early on.

Sure, that tied up my cash longer, but it also help the loans fund by having some bidding activity early on.

Also, I wouldn't give my Prosper login information to some third-party site anyway.
 

[mothandrust]

The bus is late, lenders ask for a sofa, and Prosper spends its time cooking up fried okra on a stick.

[lenderguy]

Sniping is an odditiy here.  If *everybody* sniped, I'm not sure a loan would ever fund... afterall, who would snipe a loan with no bids?

[traveler505]

Sniping is an odditiy here.  If *everybody* sniped, I'm not sure a loan would ever fund... afterall, who would snipe a loan with no bids?

On loans that will get funded based on the portfolio plans, it doesn't matter so much when lenders bid, assuming adequate lender liquidity.