Print

[mhs505]

Further ETA: Who is posting on fool as opinion1956? 

I already made the suggestion that it is either NA or MHS and neither has rebutted.

Not me, I didn't even see your suggestion until just now.

[mhs505]

With all respect to both NA and MHS, I'd have to go with MHS on this one because of the grammatical choices and sentence structure.

Thank you, you are so kind.

[mhs505]

Did you do any research for this article? Most of these people who groan on all day on the forum you quote are better off with their money in Prosper than in the DJIA. Out of thousands of investors, these same 5 or 10 people complain all day long about Prosper. I really think they need something better to do with their time.

LOL. That's why P-----r's loan originations aren't going up as they planned them to, because of 5 or 10 people. 

I replied to that comment which I suspect was put up there by either NA or MHS.

BTW, nice tie.  Sorry, but everything that is said that doesn't agree with your point of  view isn't me.  You need to get over it.  I come right out and say what I am thinking, or 99.9% of the time, I don't even bother to post anymore.

[xraider]

MHS, are you Heavins2Murgatroyd?

BTW, I didn't mean anything offensive with my comment about sentence structure.  Your writing style differs from NA's. 

[ira01]

Well, don't get your hopes up.  Prosper is just sunshine and puppy dogs.  As you know. 

That's why I tried to not say anything negative in the text and hid the URL inside of the link. 

Good try!  Unfortunately, I would be very surprised if every Prosper employee is not already quite familiar with the Motley Fool article, so I doubt it will work.  But maybe the moderator will be asleep at the switch when he/she gets to your post.

[ira01]

Look at this as good news.  Articles on the fool site are seen by a much larger audience than our little forum and blogs.  This guys reaction is evidence that a wider set of folks are seeing the story.

I certainly hope so.  Look at all the past puff-pieces that seem to get picked up by every news service around. 

[ira01]

This article just needs a few more recommendations to keep it always on the front page.

It's up to #2 now.

[cowdog]

Recommendation #26, comment #49:

On August 31, 2008, at 5:20 AM, TsarBovidae wrote:

There are emotions on both sides, but the simple and absolute bottom line for potential investors: Prosper is not a viable investment; the risk outweighs even the maximum possible profit.

 

[christoofar215]

Well, don't get your hopes up.  Prosper is just sunshine and puppy dogs.  As you know. 

That's why I tried to not say anything negative in the text and hid the URL inside of the link. 

Good try!  Unfortunately, I would be very surprised if every Prosper employee is not already quite familiar with the Motley Fool article, so I doubt it will work.  But maybe the moderator will be asleep at the switch when he/she gets to your post.

The article was released Friday, so I'm not sure how much of the Prosper employee population has seen it yet.   

Friday, on a 3 day weekend... most of the folks in San Francisco were probably asleep at the wheel when the article came out.    The drama, if there is any to be had, will unfold Tuesday.

[idf]

As damage goes, this is pretty bad.  People who read fool are exactly the types they want to attract as lenders.  I have defended the company here before when I felt it was necessary, but not this time.  The filing in that court seems like no more than an attempt to evade a payout on the ID theft guarantee.

Even if there is some clever word parsing taking place to make their statements technically true enough to not be an outright lie in a BK court, I think everyone reads between the lines.

If there has ever been a case of shooting yourself in the foot this is it.  It could cost them millions in lender deposits and people searching for loans.  The only way they have to get a hold of this is to fix it immediately.

Steps:

• payout the ID theft regardless of whether it is or is not
• Post a correction on the company blog
• Amend the court documents
• Try and get Motley Fool to post an update
• Cut these shenanigans out for good

[beerbud1]

As damage goes, this is pretty bad.  People who read fool are exactly the types they want to attract as lenders.  I have defended the company here before when I felt it was necessary, but not this time.  The filing in that court seems like no more than an attempt to evade a payout on the ID theft guarantee.

Even if there is some clever word parsing taking place to make their statements technically true enough to not be an outright lie in a BK court, I think everyone reads between the lines.

If there has ever been a case of shooting yourself in the foot this is it.  It could cost them millions in lender deposits and people searching for loans.  The only way they have to get a hold of this is to fix it immediately.

Steps:

• payout the ID theft regardless of whether it is or is not
• Post a correction on the company blog
• Amend the court documents
• Try and get Motley Fool to post an update
• Cut these shenanigans out for good

Thank you!! +200

[DCS]

Well, don't get your hopes up.  Prosper is just sunshine and puppy dogs.  As you know. 

That's why I tried to not say anything negative in the text and hid the URL inside of the link. 

Good try!  Unfortunately, I would be very surprised if every Prosper employee is not already quite familiar with the Motley Fool article, so I doubt it will work.  But maybe the moderator will be asleep at the switch when he/she gets to your post.

The article was released Friday, so I'm not sure how much of the Prosper employee population has seen it yet.   

Friday, on a 3 day weekend... most of the folks in San Francisco were probably asleep at the wheel when the article came out.    The drama, if there is any to be had, will unfold Tuesday.

I'm pretty sure prosper.com forum moderators were aware of it pretty quickly.  About an hour or two before they normally do their last forum update of the day, I posted the link in an on-topic post to this thread related to Fred93's blog post: https://connect.prosper.com/t/4796.aspx

I suspect others may have done this as well.  I think Prosper may have decided to nix the day's final forum update to regroup, discuss whether the MF links should go through moderation, etc.

[AmexFan]

If one goes to Google, click News and search for prosper.com, the Fool article is the first one that comes up:

http://news.google.com/news?q=prosper.com

#4 at MSN.com news search:

http://search.msn.com/news/results.aspx?q=prosper.com

[christoofar215]

I agree with your thesis.

And by extension... Prosper trying to do whatever it takes to avoid repurchases leads me to believe only one thing:   their Cash Requirements Report must be looking pretty dire.   

Every business that has a large A/P usually in their bookkeeping software runs a Cash Requirements report which shows the present outflows of cash that are upcoming and the amount of cash that is necessary to cover those immediate obligations within the accounting period.

When your Cash Requirements report starts to turn up negative or starts heading towards it every month you start running it---then you are in some SERIOUS deep shit.  My guess is that CL and the Prosper Gang are worried that cash flow is still seriously negative, and are now trying to keep outflows from increasing in every way imaginable.

And that means no more "ID Theft Guarantee" repurchases.

As damage goes, this is pretty bad.  People who read fool are exactly the types they want to attract as lenders.  I have defended the company here before when I felt it was necessary, but not this time.  The filing in that court seems like no more than an attempt to evade a payout on the ID theft guarantee.

Even if there is some clever word parsing taking place to make their statements technically true enough to not be an outright lie in a BK court, I think everyone reads between the lines.

If there has ever been a case of shooting yourself in the foot this is it.  It could cost them millions in lender deposits and people searching for loans.  The only way they have to get a hold of this is to fix it immediately.

Steps:

• payout the ID theft regardless of whether it is or is not
• Post a correction on the company blog
• Amend the court documents
• Try and get Motley Fool to post an update
• Cut these shenanigans out for good

[christoofar215]

Here is another hypothesis:


The mass originations that were occurring this summer might have had something to do with JWitchell leaving Prosper.


Prosper realizes its origination fee immediately when the loan is originated---so all those mass originations done over the last few months might have been done solely in the name of boosting cash.   Firing Witchell has also freed up an obligation to pay him his high-flying salary... so that might have eased some pain on Prosper's immediate obligations.


Prosper is serious about not repurchasing anything evidenced from its lie to the bankruptcy court.   



They are showing all the outward signs of being cash-strapped.



The telltale sign that Prosper is in the final death throes will be when Prosper changes all of their ACH policies, such as adding a long delay when you withdraw funds, increasing the floor amount of cash you have to meet before you can initiate a withdrawal, and so on.