Print

[AndyAtlanta]

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/prosper-releases-market-survey-results-for-july-2008,503214.shtml

[cubbiesnextyr]

Shouldn't it be People-to-Person lending?

[DakotahFury]

The "Prosper Select Index" makes me gag a little every time I read it...

[AndyAtlanta]

Cue Barbara Streisand:

"People,
People who need people
Are the luckiest people in the world."

[BrassKnuckles]

Thanks Tiffany!

Prosper Communications Director
Tiffany Fox, 415-593-5416
tiffany@prosper.com

[Staneslav]

a

[112233]

WHOA! They've changed how they're hiding defaults.

Prosper Select Index   7.21%
Prime Select Index   7.37%
Near Prime Select Index   7.01%
Sub Prime Select Index   8.42%

....

Prosper Select Index: The Prosper Select Index return is the estimated average annual return on principal, based on actual delinquency performance to date. The Prosper Select Index includes AA - E credit grade loans for borrowers whose credit reports at the time of application indicated zero current delinquencies, three or fewer credit inquiries, and a debt-to-income ratio of 40 percent or less. The annual return period reflects loans originated in the twelve month period ending one month prior to the observation date of July 31, 2008. Prime Select includes AA and A credit grade loans (credit scores of 720+). Near Prime Select includes B, C, D credit grade loans (credit scores between 600 and 719). Sub Prime Select includes E credit grade loans (credit scores between 560 and 599).

If I'm reading this correctly, they're only counting loans originated from June 07- June 08, which means the loans are, of course, younger and have fewer defaults. Hell, that time period barely has any, and I doubt they are counting 4+ month lates as defaults.

Evil, evil, evil.

so how do we turn around these horrible numbers? change the formula !

ETA adding context for the public crowd

http://seekingalpha.com/article/89684-the-great-american-economy-take-a-closer-look

[MsTabbyKats]

Shouldn't it be People-to-Person lending?

No.  It should be People-to-Deadbeat lending 

[Capital_Finance_Group]

Shouldn't it be People-to-Person lending?

I take issue with the work "lending" - our collective experience dictates that a 33% gifting factor should be included.

[Texaswatchdog]

Shouldn't it be People-to-Person lending?

No.  It should be People-to-Deadbeat lending 

From what I read on this site it sounds like it should be called: "Sucker-to-Deadbeat Charity"

NOTE: Please see my explanation three posts down.

[MsTabbyKats]

Shouldn't it be People-to-Person lending?

No.  It should be People-to-Deadbeat lending 

From what I read on this site it sounds like it should be called: "Sucker-to-Deadbeat Charity"

A quote from your .com post:

Most of the lenders I have seen on here who lose money do so out of greed and ignorance. They see a borrower offering a 30-35% interest rate on a $25,000 loan and they lose all common sense and start thinking about getting rich.


So, in your opinion we are greedy ignorant suckers?
I don't think you're going to be very popular around here.
In any case....we're going to love seeing your portfolio in 6 months. 

[ira01]

Shouldn't it be People-to-Person lending?

No.  It should be People-to-Deadbeat lending 

From what I read on this site it sounds like it should be called: "Sucker-to-Deadbeat Charity"

A quote from your .com post:

Most of the lenders I have seen on here who lose money do so out of greed and ignorance. They see a borrower offering a 30-35% interest rate on a $25,000 loan and they lose all common sense and start thinking about getting rich.

I'm sorry to see that, as it just shows your (Texaswatchdog) ignorance.  Certainly greed is the downfall of some lenders, as is ignorance (and Prosper works very hard to keep new lenders ignorant, by heavily censoring its own forum, by strictly preventing anyone from mentioning or linking to .org, by using misleading advertisements, erroneous testimonials, etc.).  But the problems with Prosper run MUCH deeper than that, as I would hope you are beginning to see from your reading here.

[Texaswatchdog]

Shouldn't it be People-to-Person lending?

No.  It should be People-to-Deadbeat lending 

From what I read on this site it sounds like it should be called: "Sucker-to-Deadbeat Charity"

A quote from your .com post:

Most of the lenders I have seen on here who lose money do so out of greed and ignorance. They see a borrower offering a 30-35% interest rate on a $25,000 loan and they lose all common sense and start thinking about getting rich.


So, in your opinion we are greedy ignorant suckers?
I don't think you're going to be very popular around here.
In any case....we're going to love seeing your portfolio in 6 months. 

Whoo Whoo, cowboys and cowgirls! Let's all take a deep breath, take a step back and drop the rope! I'm not calling anyone here on Prospers.org greedy or ignorant. Most of the posts on this site talk about how ANYONE who loans money on Prosper is foolish and about all the deadbeat borrowers. Then I come along and join the crowd and start agreeing with everyone and adding to the funny comments about how they should not call it people-to-people lending and now I'm the bad guy? When I said Sucker-to-Deadbeat Lending, I was including myself as a potential sucker.

My earlier words you quoted above need to be taken in the right context. That was my initial opinion as a brand new lender about the reason for most bad loans from Prosper which was based on my readings of the current defaulted loans. I want to learn from past lenders, like you all, so I don't make some of the same mistakes.  I know that I may very well lose some money in this endeavor.  For me this is cheaper than a trip to Las Vegas. I apologize if my above comments offended anyone. I'm not the enemy here.

[bamalucky]

Greed was my downfall.I tried to lend at a small profit.

[112233]

I think prosper suckered the lenders more than borrowers did. fred's new post about what happened to the blender issue is a fine example of that