Print

I regularly transfer funds in to Prosper and bid on listings

8 (7.9%)

I sometimes transfer funds into Prosper to bid on specific listings

10 (9.9%)

I reinvest repayments in new listings but don't transfer any new funds into Prosper

16 (15.8%)

I mostly withdraw funds from Prosper but bid on occasional listings

11 (10.9%)

I am withdrawing all funds from Prosper

56 (55.4%)

Total Members Voted: 98

[HollowOak]

This is the February 2008 (post Prosper Days 2008) version of my regular poll. The January version is here.

Now that Prosper Days 2008 has come and gone, has your sentiment (and resulting investment) regarding Prosper changed any?

[ks6328]

 
No change to my "no bids" policy or my recurring transfers out.

I'm majorly bummed that not only did they not implement a secondary market, they apparently didn't even give any kind of idea when it will be available.
 

[MoneyDog]

Still withdrawing whenever $25 or more is available.

[Mtnchick]

No change to my "no bids" policy or my recurring transfers out.

I'm majorly bummed that not only did they not implement a secondary market, they apparently didn't even give any kind of idea when it will be available.
 

+1 on both statements.

[Rancidbeef]

I just started investing in Prosper.  In fact, my first $200 cleared yesterday and I bid on a few loans.  I Googled "Prosper" when I was considering investing and discovered this site.  I noticed a lot of the old-timers were bailing out and that gave me pause, but I decided to give it a try anyway.  (Heck, I blew $3000 when I experimented with option trading, so $200 is nothing -- just don't tell my wife I said that!)  But I discovered the thread last night where people had their profiles deleted back in December.  I found that disturbing to the point that this may be the last $200 I invest in Prosper.   I hate that because I found this whole P2P lending thing such a cool concept.

That leads me to a question... are any of the other P2P lending sites I've heard about any good?  Better?  Worse?  Anyone tried them?

One thought occurred to me when I read the reports that indicated Prosper was strongly discouraging borrowers and lenders from communicating.  Is it possible they are afraid of some lender asking questions that may violate fair lending laws?  'Course, if they are they should just come out and say that....

[HollowOak]

That leads me to another question... are any of the other P2P lending sites I've heard about any good?  Better?  Worse?  Anyone tried them?

I have $500 in Xopa as a CD. Boring, but earning 5.1% and insured through the Credit Union equivalent of the FDIC.

I also have $500 in Lendingclub in an automated portfolio since August. Earning 11.x% and no defaults or lates yet (touch wood).

One thought occurred to me when I read the reports that indicated Prosper was strongly discouraging borrowers and lenders from communicating.  Is it possible they are afraid of some lender asking questions that may violate fair lending laws?  'Course, if they are they should just come out and say that....

The basic problem is that the lender/borrower interaction often gets unpleasant and up-close, in-your-face. Many lenders have a distinct tone when they dispense advice and often dispense advice which is contrary to what the borrower wants to hear.

Another problem has to do with lenders delving into the personal details of borrowers and dicovering and divulging "sensitive", yet often pertinent information about the borrower that probably should not be disclosed in public forums. It might be argued that Prosper might have felt threatened by the potential liability by hosting such disclosed information.

For many, it was just an off-putting experience to observe the interaction on the "old" forums.  These are a few of the reasons for  Prosper's strict moderation of the new "fauxrums." There are others, but you'll eventually figure them out.

[ira01]

Another problem has to do with lenders delving into the personal details of borrowers and dicovering and divulging "sensitive", yet often pertinent information about the borrower that probably should not be disclosed in public forums. It might be argued that Prosper might have felt threatened by the potential liability by hosting such disclosed information.

Anything "might be argued."  But I explained long ago in lengthy posts on .com that any such "feeling" would have been completely baseless.  The Communications Decency Act would have completely immunized Prosper from liability for posts made by third-parties on its old forums.

[HollowOak]

Another problem has to do with lenders delving into the personal details of borrowers and dicovering and divulging "sensitive", yet often pertinent information about the borrower that probably should not be disclosed in public forums. It might be argued that Prosper might have felt threatened by the potential liability by hosting such disclosed information.

Anything "might be argued."  But I explained long ago in lengthy posts on .com that any such "feeling" would have been completely baseless.  The Communications Decency Act would have completely immunized Prosper from liability for posts made by third-parties on its old forums.

We well know your lengthy posts.

Fact of the matter was that Prosper didn't like the interaction and was uncomfortable with the amount of PII disclosed. Whether their discomfort was based on legal fact or not is not the issue. They owned the forum, they closed it down for that reason (amongst others).

Most phobias are ""baseless," yet people still suffer from them.

[ira01]

Another problem has to do with lenders delving into the personal details of borrowers and dicovering and divulging "sensitive", yet often pertinent information about the borrower that probably should not be disclosed in public forums. It might be argued that Prosper might have felt threatened by the potential liability by hosting such disclosed information.

Anything "might be argued."  But I explained long ago in lengthy posts on .com that any such "feeling" would have been completely baseless.  The Communications Decency Act would have completely immunized Prosper from liability for posts made by third-parties on its old forums.

Fact of the matter was that Prosper didn't like the interaction and was uncomfortable with the amount of PII disclosed. Whether their discomfort was based on legal fact or not is not the issue. They owned the forum, they closed it down for that reason (amongst others).

I call bullshit.  PII was just an excuse for Prosper to shit-can its forum.  Prosper simply didn't want people to learn about listings that were fraudulent, that were by borrowers convicted of a federal crime (and shortly to begin a multi-year federal prison sentence with a restitution order "coincidentally" in the amount of the loan request), that were by borrowers already under indictment for loan fraud, etc.  Put simply, the forums (and the work of the dilligent forum detectives) made Prosper look bad -- it made Prosper look like a place where scammers came to defraud lenders out of their money, and it made Prosper's "crack team of fraud investigators" (or whatever similar nomenclature Shira used) look incompetent.  And the many forum posts detailing Prosper's false advertising and other ethical transgressions also gave Prosper a black eye.  So Prosper shut down the forums. 

It seems crystal clear to me that Prosper main purpose in shutting down the forums was to keep new lenders in the dark about Prosper's shortcommings for as long as possible.  Since most of the old-timer lenders (and Prosper's largest lenders) had stopped lending, it was crucial to Prosper to be able to attract new lenders who would invest serious cash into Prosper loans before learning of the problems.  This is exactly the same reason Prosper went ape-shit and banned me for simply alerting new lenders to the existence of Prosper's own forums, it is exactly the same reason that Prosper had its lawyers send the nasty-gram to 112233 making all sorts of baseless threats in an effort to steal his domain that hosts the public archive of the old forums, and it is exactly the same reason Prosper has gone to such lengths to keep lenders from learning about .org.  What do all these things have in common?  Keep new (and potential) lenders in the dark about Prosper for as long as possible.

[LoanChimp]

It seems crystal clear to me that Prosper main purpose in shutting down the forums was to keep new lenders in the dark about Prosper's shortcommings for as long as possible.

I call bullshit. 

While I may have thought this at the time, I am now leaning more toward HO's explanation above as the more plausible theory.

I happened to talk to several people at PD this year (not forum regulars, but still lenders) that were turned off by the old forums. How many more people were turned off by the old forums because of the general atmosphere?

I also happened to talk with several other lurkers to these forums, who still occasionally read, but are becoming more and more turned off to .org because of the general atmosphere here. I found it very difficult to recommend this place to those unaware of it (and/or new to lending) because in my mind .org has lost a lot of what it once had.

Blame the kool-aide if you wish...

[Nora_Lenderbee]

The old forums had changed over time, and by the time Prosper shut them down, there was a growing number of posters who were nasty and rude. (I am not referring to people who were simply blunt about a listing's chances, or frank about their poor lending experiences, but to posters who just plain insulted and flamed other posters, particularly newbies.)

I basically agree with HO's assessment. Ira, you have tunnel vision about this issue.

[112233]

I can vouch that Prosper was absolutely horrified that people would leave in droves when I called mtnchick a porn freak.

[weiszguy]

I also happened to talk with several other lurkers to these forums, who still occasionally read, but are becoming more and more turned off to .org because of the general atmosphere here. I found it very difficult to recommend this place to those unaware of it (and/or new to lending) because in my mind .org has lost a lot of what it once had.

Blame the kool-aide if you wish...

This is exactly why I don't point new (or prospective) lenders to the .org forums.  Whether justified or not, the mood here is decidedly negative.  New lenders who come here looking to learn are usually just turned off on the whole P2P lending idea.

It's true that I enjoy hanging out here.  Some posts make me laugh, some posts make me shake my head, but very few posts help me learn anything useful about lending.

[BigGulp]

The old forums had changed over time, and by the time Prosper shut them down, there was a growing number of posters who were nasty and rude. (I am not referring to people who were simply blunt about a listing's chances, or frank about their poor lending experiences, but to posters who just plain insulted and flamed other posters, particularly newbies.)

I basically agree with HO's assessment. Ira, you have tunnel vision about this issue.

Yep, and they didn't want to have to worry about damage control from all the negativity.  I will admit, closing them down was a smart move by them.  I have put that action in the plus column for Prosper (it only has a couple friends there though).

...Gulp

[Mtnchick]

I also happened to talk with several other lurkers to these forums, who still occasionally read, but are becoming more and more turned off to .org because of the general atmosphere here. I found it very difficult to recommend this place to those unaware of it (and/or new to lending) because in my mind .org has lost a lot of what it once had.

Blame the kool-aide if you wish...

This is exactly why I don't point new (or prospective) lenders to the .org forums.  Whether justified or not, the mood here is decidedly negative.  New lenders who come here looking to learn are usually just turned off on the whole P2P lending idea.

It's true that I enjoy hanging out here.  Some posts make me laugh, some posts make me shake my head, but very few posts help me learn anything useful about lending.

Based on this poll, I would say the posts here are pretty factual. Except for rateladder, a paid employee, there are several blogs you can send people to also. I think LoanChimp's might actually have a few nice things to say