Slashdot Mirror


Can Peer-To-Peer Finance Work?

Dotnaught writes "Two companies, Prosper and Zopa, appear to be convinced that social networking can be combined with borrowing and lending. They're intent on using eBay as a model for listing and bidding on loans without the involvement of a bank. Call it peer-to-peer finance. There are already some 800 groups on Prosper ready to loan money to specific causes, such as the Apple User Group, 'a lending group for those wishing to purchase either a Macintosh or Apple iPod.'"

261 comments

  1. Existing Finance by foundme · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't imagine how this is able to compete with existing financial providers.

    First of all, how many bad debts can these peers handle? Large corporations have enough cash to handle bad or delayed debts.

    Unlike other successful P2P services, this model is entering a market where existing businesses are making a living out of it.

    --
    Please stop entering code 2,2,7,6,6,4
    1. Re:Existing Finance by rvw14 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Peer to Peer financing has been around for decades. It is called a Credit Union.

    2. Re:Existing Finance by mrvan · · Score: 1

      Right... so e-bay has nothing to do with retail now does it?

    3. Re:Existing Finance by Damathon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      These businesses may be entering a market that's already full of competition but I think the main idea is that regular people can loan small amounts of money, together effectively becoming as large a business as the existing businesses -- although the profits may be smaller, people aren't doing it for a living. Each person is giving a little, but they can effectively compete with large companies. (And losing $100 or so won't hurt the types of people who will invest money into P2P loans).

      Although it might not be as large a benefit to investors, it could increase competition in an already competitive market and help borrowers to secure better loan terms. Hopefully, this could also help out people with poor credit ratings as there are more potential businesses to loan them money.

    4. Re:Existing Finance by cinnamoninja · · Score: 3, Funny
      I can't imagine how this is able to compete with existing financial providers.

      Yay, venture capitalists!

      First of all, how many bad debts can these peers handle? Large corporations have enough cash to handle bad or delayed debts.

      They are trying to spread risks around. They also are assuming a 4% default rate. I don't know if that is a feasible goal, but they are claiming that the "community" they are building, combined with off-line credit inquiries, will get them to that number.

      Unlike other successful P2P services, this model is entering a market where existing businesses are making a living out of it.

      In theory, they could take away a lot of bureaucracry, and do it cheaper. In practice, it looks like they are attracting crazy investors, who don't trust banks. (I suppose this is better than putting money under the mattress?) Here's a fun quote from the article:

      "I am fascinated by the concept, [and] hate big corporate banks..." writes one user. Such sentiment baffles the more commerce-minded forum participants, who have posted complaints about Zopa's "uncompetitive" returns to lenders.

      Hey, if you can find the people who prefer more risk for less return, why not take advantage of them?
    5. Re:Existing Finance by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I can't imagine how this is able to compete with existing financial providers.


      If you aren't completely risk-intolerant, it looks far better a place to put money than a bank for a small investor.

      For a borrower, I don't see much advantage, though the terms may be slightly better. I think the lenders are what will drive its success, since having the money to lend will, itself, make it attractive to borrowers.

      First of all, how many bad debts can these peers handle?


      Zopa lets you limit your exposure to any given borrower to as little as 10 pounds, Prosper does something similar with a a minimum of US$50. Automated aggregation allows spreading the risk.

      Unlike other successful P2P services, this model is entering a market where existing businesses are making a living out of it.


      Successful P2P services have done that, too. "Buying and selling goods" is, after all, something business were making a living at (even using auction models) long before eBay.

      In a sense this is an eBay system for buying and selling money, which actually can work far better since its a uniform, fungible commodity that allows spreading the risk. (Its a little bit different, since the auction service here also covers fulfillment, which isn't necessarily the case with eBay, but that's better for users, since it offloads much of the risk of dealing with a difficult person at the other end.)
    6. Re:Existing Finance by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Also unlike other successful P2P services, this model is trading in scarce resources from an economics point of view.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    7. Re:Existing Finance by LionKimbro · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hmm...

      Speaking as someone who is committing money to a community bank with roughly $2,000 in it, I think the thing is that people trust their own culture, and are more willing to accept risks and lend money within their own culture. People tell each other things amongst themselves, that they do not necessarily tell the banks.

      If you lose, it was "for the cause," anyways. If you win, you've aided the cause.

      The bank might not even be willing to talk with you.

      I know a girl, she's going to college. She needs $50,000 for 4 years of loans. The banks aren't talking with her, and her parents are opposed to her going to college out-of-state. (Read: The parents want to keep her near, to better control her.)

      If my culture were just a wee bit more organized, I'm sure we'd have her in her preferred college. (UCSD, I believe.) As it is, we only have $2,000 amongst ourselves.

      If only she were going to college in 4 years...

      You may also want to check out the concept of Internet Bonding. Basically, if you can look at all the things a person does online, says online, follow the ups & downs in their life, and so on: You can do interesting things with that. You can better evaluate risk. So, if you're operating within your culture, things get a lot easier on you.

      In the case of this girl, she has an easy time explaining to us who she is, where she's coming from, and so on: You can see her last few years of work online. "Trustworthy!" we say, "Get that woman her CS degree!"

    8. Re:Existing Finance by iminplaya · · Score: 2, Funny

      But it's a credit union using a computer (patent pending).

      --
      What?
    9. Re:Existing Finance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the stuff I say online is barely a reflection of my ability to repay While it may help to find borrowers whom you relate to, it has no bearing on credit worthiness.

    10. Re:Existing Finance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      >I know a girl

      You lost me there.

    11. Re:Existing Finance by daigu · · Score: 1

      For one, it doesn't have to compete with existing providers. But the main thing is that peer-to-peer finance has been around for centuries - perhaps you have heard of mutual aid/benefit societies? Guilds to credit unions to microloans - some concept different implementation.

    12. Re:Existing Finance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This will never work in a corrupt society like the west, but it does work pretty well in third world in communities where people know each other pretty well. What helps is people still have pride and integrity and very serious about preseving them. This is totaly gone in the "civilized world".

          The world "Check" came from the Arabic word "Saque" which was nothing more than a little IOU. People used to give it in Spain (Andalus back then) and cash it in the Middle East many month later. That was in the 11 century I believe. We sure came a long way, didn't we.

    13. Re:Existing Finance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, federal loans alone will cover up to 47,000 of an independent undergraduate's student loans over the course of four years. The remainder is quite doable with some other kinds of aid and a part time job.

      http://studentaid.ed.gov/students/publications/stu dent_guide/2004_2005/english/types-stafford.htm

      Anybody who can get in can afford to go to college. If she has kids it'd be tougher, she'd probably have to spread it way out over the course of more years so she could work nearly full time too, but it's still doable for anyone.

    14. Re:Existing Finance by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      > For a borrower, I don't see much advantage, though the terms may be slightly better.
      3 words, "Line of Credit" once upon a time many (more) credit cards gave interest on positive balances. I would be very interested in a single account that I could get close to the same rate for money to loan and borrow. But also directly building credibility for borrowing from my loaning history (ok you build credit history allowing Credit Cards.)

      Because I have a house, I do have a line of credit NOW that lets me get money from it. but before that line of credit was available to me, I would have a large purchase (vehicle), and want to borrow 5 grand while having built a balance of over 10 grand over the last 6 months (I don't like car loans, because I hate cost of full coverage insurance, and feal I am a below average risk of claim. Also I don't make claims, because car insurance is more like a paying for a guranteed loan if your car is destroyed, than insurance.)

    15. Re:Existing Finance by ciggieposeur · · Score: 1

      Dude, federal loans alone will cover up to 47,000 of an independent undergraduate's student loans over the course of four years. The remainder is quite doable with some other kinds of aid and a part time job.

      Well, sort of. See, the first year is capped aroun $3k, the second around $4k, then you can max out near $6k per year until about 180 semester hours (after which ALL federal financial aid, including grants, is gone until you graduate). (These numbers are for a state school, perhaps the ceilings go up for a private school.)

      So the first two years she'll need to either work full-time, go to community college, find a very lucrative housing situation, or be creative in other ways.

      Ironically enough, if she ever does graduate and decide to go on to graduate school, she can get $20k for every year. That plus research salary is a frugal but comfortable living.

      In other words, the system provides greatest support (largest loans) to the people who need it less: freshman will generally be unhirable for anything but McDonald's wages, yet as they get further along they can co-op/intern to make real money and the federal loans open up to better support them in school.

      Yes, it's doable. But still quite difficult if your family can't do much (like mine was) even with maximum federal support.

    16. Re:Existing Finance by harshayb · · Score: 1

      thought the idea behind p2p financing was to avoid any middle man/firm in the lending process.

    17. Re:Existing Finance by batkiwi · · Score: 1

      The system provides the largest loans to students of the least risk, as they should. The reason there is a federal loan program is because it is investing in the country's future. Many freshmen don't go on to finish school. By the time you're a Junior, it's likely you're going to finish unless you run into financial difficulty...

    18. Re:Existing Finance by danboarder · · Score: 1

      "Peer to Peer financing has been around for decades. It is called a Credit Union."

      Existing Credit unions are in fact quite different than these new P2P efforts; credit unions generally:
          1. require membership (member of a trade union, church, etc),
          2. are geograpically regional, and
          3. don't require or enable any relationship between the lender and the borrower. (the credit union institution is the middleman.)

      These new P2P internet internet lending ventures differ on all of these points. Have a look at http://www.kiva.org/ for an example of a startup that is already doing P2P direct lending across the globe. (of note: See their interesting dev blog as they scale up their site at http://kivachronicles.blogspot.com/ )

      There are many organizations with roots in the Microfinance and Microcredit space ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcredit for a lot more info ) that have done similar things ( example: http://www.oikocredit.org/ ), with new ventures like Kiva and Prosper taking things to a whole new level on the web.

    19. Re:Existing Finance by julesh · · Score: 1

      Existing Credit unions are in fact quite different than these new P2P efforts; credit unions generally:
              1. require membership (member of a trade union, church, etc),
              2. are geograpically regional, and
              3. don't require or enable any relationship between the lender and the borrower. (the credit union institution is the middleman.)


      Perhaps in the US, but the UK equivalent (the Building Society) generally has none of these restrictions (although most started out as regional societies, they won't generally refuse someone credit on the basis of their address, and many operate nationally).

    20. Re:Existing Finance by julesh · · Score: 1

      Peer to Peer financing has been around for decades. It is called a Credit Union.

      That's a good start, but I'd look more at the shared-ownership mortgage for a model -- this is where a broker puts a house buyer in touch with an investor who's willing to finance (usually) half of the cost of the house, in exchange for the ability to collect rent from him on half its value for some period of time afterwards. There are some brokers who will arrange this kind of scheme with individual investors, matching investors and house buyers in the same kind of way these sites do.

    21. Re:Existing Finance by danboarder · · Score: 1

      To point 3. - are you saying that UK depositors or savers (in a Building Society) are actively aware of the borrowers their money is lent out to? I doubt that. The idea with P2P is that it "cuts out the middleman".

      Credit unions (and banks) pay interest to depositors or savers, but then usually charge a nice "middleman's" premium over that deposited money when they lend it out again.

    22. Re:Existing Finance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "I know a girl, she's going to college. She needs $50,000 for 4 years of loans. The banks aren't talking with her, and her parents are opposed to her going to college out-of-state. (Read: The parents want to keep her near, to better control her.)"

      Well, if she's a sparkling piece of crumpet then maybe you could see your way to funding her studies in exchange for something? If not, install Linux on her computer and urinate on her cat.

    23. Re:Existing Finance by ostehaps · · Score: 2, Insightful
      In a sense this is an eBay system for buying and selling money, which actually can work far better since its a uniform, fungible commodity that allows spreading the risk.
      While money itself is a uniform commodity, that's not actually what's being bought and sold here. What's really being traded is risk, and that's nothing near a commodity. Essentially with this kind of system it seems it would be exceedingly difficult to assess the risk profile. To the extent that interest rates would be lower here (not sure why that would be the case), it just means that these individual lenders are exposing themselves to the same risk at a lower premium than the bank. In fact, for reasons of adverse selection and moral hazard they're quite likely going to expose themselves to more risk for a lower premium.

      I'm really not sure about the intuition that individual lenders should be better or even equally able to assess such deals as compared to bankers, who do it for a living.
    24. Re:Existing Finance by feronti · · Score: 1

      Technically, credit unions are non-profit, so that "middleman's" premium covers operating expenses. The rest of the interest charged on the loan is plowed back into dividends for the members. Most of those operating expenses are wages for the credit union workers and rent on facilities.

      As far as membership is concerned, many modern credit unions have such broad fields of membership that the membership requirement is fairly easy to fill... the credit union I worked for could accept members from anyone who worked for a company that was a member of one of three chambers of commerce, plus several specific employers. So, in the three locations where they had branches, pretty much anyone with a job who walked in could open an account. There are many other credit unions with even broader charters. Also, if their charter covers a large, multinational company, then they're often large and multinational themselves.

    25. Re:Existing Finance by indifferent+children · · Score: 1
      Peer to Peer financing has been around for decades. It is called a Credit Union.

      Peer-to-peer financing has been around longer than that; it's called a 'loan shark'. Your kneecaps are collateral. (adds new meaning to the term 'collateral damage')

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    26. Re:Existing Finance by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1
      Many freshmen don't go on to finish school.

      Perhaps in many cases that's because they can't afford it?

    27. Re:Existing Finance by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1
      All the freshmen who washed out at my school couldn't afford it.

      Because they started failing classes and their grants/loans/parent's money dried up. I never saw it happen in any other order.

      Of course, school is more expensive now. I don't think human nature has changed, though.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  2. If only you can book those loans as revenue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    that's how Enron worked.
    • CEO makes new subsidiary -
    • parent and subsidiary loan each other a couple billion - book them as revenue
    • profit
    • go to jail
    1. Re:If only you can book those loans as revenue... by AuMatar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unfortunately, step 4 seems to have been skipped.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    2. Re:If only you can book those loans as revenue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CFO is going to jail and he is the one that made the subsidiary, his wife also went to jail for being involved.

    3. Re:If only you can book those loans as revenue... by ostehaps · · Score: 1

      Actually, Enron by the looks of it did nothing illegal, only the CFO did. The creation of SPEs (Special Purpose Entities) is perfectly legal, the only thing that was out of order in the case was that the CFO put his own name down for him. Of course, by now there's also a large demand for scapegoating, so what will happen remains to be seen.

    4. Re:If only you can book those loans as revenue... by jgold03 · · Score: 1

      Go to Jail
      Do Not Collect $200

  3. I for one,, by SauroNlord · · Score: 0, Funny

    I, for one welcome our p2p lending overlords.

  4. Amazing! by Toby+The+Economist · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sounds amazing!

    One of the drawbacks with banks et al is the insertion of the thick layer of bureaucracy between the lender and the lendee; its expensive, time consuming and impersonal.

    If you have direct contact mechanisms like this, people find information far more accessable and that gives them a chance to take advantage of opportunities they wouldn't even have known about before.

    It also gives people a chance to browse speculatively (bit like you do on Ebay).

    My fear is that the State will barge in and regulate this to its death, since it's to do with money and lending and there's a LOT of State regulation of such industries, to the harm of everyone who wants to borrow and to the benefit of the banks, since it greatly reduces the competition they have to face.

    1. Re:Amazing! by ornil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's good reason why there's so much regulation of banking & finance. It used to be a free-for-all, with rampant fraud on both sides: borrowers and lenders. Do you really feel confident enough not to be fooled by fraudsters of various sorts? It's sort of like phishing, only imagine you are computer-incompetent, because I doubt your (and my, and most people's) understanding of finance is good enough to detect the more sophisticated financial fraud out there. This is like a honeypot for thieves of the worst sort, because there's no tangible goods involved anywhere, it's just money - numbers in people's accounts.

    2. Re:Amazing! by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My fear is that the State will barge in and regulate this to its death

      That's no fear. It's a FACT! Through the IRS, they will get their cut at gunpoint.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    3. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, there already IS a peer-to-peer money system, which has exiscted for centuries, and it is called Hawala

      Hawala involves person-to-person transfer of money, with no tokens or receipts given, the entire process apparently based on the "honor" system, and is hence entirely untracable.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawala
      http://www.interpol.int/Public/FinancialCrime/Mone yLaundering/hawala/default.asp (use non-US proxy for second link)

        Because HAWALA is untracable, it is a favorite of terrorists and certain neo-con republicans. Considering Dubai is the de-facto capital of hawala, one cannot help but wonder if Rove/Bush's transfer of US Ports to Dubai (netted to give Dubai circa $2 Bln immediate net profit) is a deposit of sorts...

      Remembering how nicely neo-cons benifited from the last 9/11 (a blank check for privacy violation/wiretaps/PATRIOT/Ira(q)n etc.), any "weak and unpatriotic" democrat MUST inquire what exactly such a deposit could buy W the second time around.

    4. Re:Amazing! by Toby+The+Economist · · Score: 1

      The thing is, who is to decide if I'm competent?

      Me or someone else? and if it's someone else, and they get to decide whether or not I can borrow money from another person, isn't my personal freedom being reduced? "for my own good", of course!

      To be honest, I know well I can trust the main banks, and I am aware I take an increasing risk if I go elsewhere. If I've got half a brain, I'll turn to independent specialists for advice, just as for example I recently had to buy a fridge-freezer and bought a group review from Which? magazine, so I made a well-informed choice.

      It's not hard for me to take steps to protect myself - but nevertheless, instead, we do in fact have that third person, the State, deciding we're not competent and telling us who we can and cannot borrow from. We lose a lot - a part of our freedom - for a gain which we could just as well obtain by our own actions, and in doing so, liberate the entire banking market, making it cheaper, far more innovative, reducing the cost of State (less bureaucracy) *and* returning our freedom to us.

      As ever, though, there are no pressure groups pushing for the general public interest; there are only pressure groups pushing for specific, narrow vested interests.

      I suspect the banking groups, when all is said and done, are fully in favour of regulation, because it consoladates and ensures their position in the market. They have passed the enourmous barrier to entry caused by regulation, so they're very happy to see that regulation continue; they do very well out of it indeed.

    5. Re:Amazing! by spike2131 · · Score: 1

      My fear is that the State will barge in and regulate this to its death, since it's to do with money and lending and there's a LOT of State regulation of such industries, to the harm of everyone who wants to borrow and to the benefit of the banks, since it greatly reduces the competition they have to face.

      Right, because not regulating the banking industry back in the 1980s worked out so well for the all the Savings and Loans...

      --
      SpyDock: Scientific Python in a Docker container
    6. Re:Amazing! by AuMatar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To be honest, I know well I can trust the main banks

      Study history. The ONLY reason you can ay that is because of regulations. Look back at the 30s- respected banks went out of buisness as much as anyone else.

      I'm not competent to tell what banks are trustworthy. I'm not competent to tell what food won't give me botulism. I'm not competent to tell what products will do what they're supposed to and what won't. I'm not competent to understand cutting edge medicine. I may be able to pick up 1 of these, but there's a limited number of hours in the day- I need to keep up on my primary profession as well. And I'm at the high end of the intelligence curve, I'm far more capable than the average person. The average man would be completely and utterly fucked.

      The government regulations are the only thing that enables me to go down to the store and have faith in my purchases. Without that, the economy falls apart. Government regulations are a good thing. Regulations on banks are a damn good thing, they ensure my life savings are safe. There's a reason why prior to regulation most people kept their money under their mattress or someplace similar- they couldn't trust banks. The world is a better place for these changes.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    7. Re:Amazing! by geekpowa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Totally Agree. I am currently living in a country where the banks are not strictly regulated. There are over 70 banks operating here some of them are practically mum and dad affairs. Even one of the telcos is permitted to act as a bank - you can store money with them and shift it around using SMS. Whenever I need to move money into the country the heart-rate quickens. Burned nearly over a grand in dodgy 'fees' and outright errors with little avenue for recourse over the past 12 months.

    8. Re:Amazing! by Boronx · · Score: 1

      What's depressing is that in 2006 your observations are insightful and not embarrasingly obvious to everyone.

    9. Re:Amazing! by stuce · · Score: 1

      Not true. You may not be competent enough to tell what product will or won't work for you, but a bureaucrat is even less qualified to make those decisions for you. Government regulation in markets gives the illusion of safety but opens the door for corporate rent seeking and blocking competition in business more than it offers safety. The truth is isthat USA has grown the be a wealthy and safe place IN SPITE OF all the regulations we throw on business.

      The smallest set of components you need to insure that food won't give you botulism is (1) you having the ability to sue a store that harms you by selling tainted food and (2) business being forced to show up front how much liability insurance they carry. That's it. The price of insurance, the cost of a lawsuit, and the sense of fairness of a jury will keep business honest and safe and responsible to a standard that will morph over time as business changes and people change and technology changes. Nothing more is needed to insure reasonable safety in any market and anything more gives businesses to game the rules seek rent.

      Even with the growing quagmire of regulations in our country we still have fewer than most countries out there, and there by have grown economically faster than our peers but still far slower than we could have. Google "economic freedom index" for more.

    10. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In all likelihood you will die from botulinum toxin. So your relatives (if you have any) being able to sue someone (if there were any negligence) is of little consequence to you. Botulism is an anaerobic bacteria that grows in a way that frankly has nothing to do with the store you shop at. You can obtain the bacteria simply by eating honey, and whether it'll be harmless or whether it'll produce toxin that kills you is completely dependent on the state of your digestive and immune system. It's due to regulated sanitation standards that industrial poisoning from botulinum toxin isn't common.

      The problem is twofold. One is that you don't know what you're talking about, and the chances are pretty good that I can point out several specialized areas you have no expertise in that could easily kill you if it weren't for government regulation. And the other is that you're more obsessed with your idealized fictional universe than the real world.

    11. Re:Amazing! by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Not true. You may not be competent enough to tell what product will or won't work for you, but a bureaucrat is even less qualified to make those decisions for you.

      Not at all. The beauracrats consult with biologists, economists, etc. They are far MORE qualified. WHen it comes to the FDA, most decisions are made by actual scientists. They're one hell of a lot more qualified.

      The smallest set of components you need to insure that food won't give you botulism is (1) you having the ability to sue a store that harms you by selling tainted food and (2) business being forced to show up front how much liability insurance they carry.

      If I get botulism from a store, I don't care how much liability, if any, they have. Why not? BECAUSE I'M FUCKING DEAD. Whether they're held accountable afterwards or not doesn't mean jack shit. Enforced quality controls work- I can buy a pound of ground beef and be sure its safe. No quality controls but the ability to sue doesn't do me one whit of good.

      Even with the growing quagmire of regulations in our country we still have fewer than most countries out there, and there by have grown economically faster than our peers but still far slower than we could have. Google "economic freedom index" for more.

      Gee, it couldn't be because we were the only first world nation who's infrastructure wasn'tdecimated by not one but two world wars, could it? If you want to argue growth- both Russia and China had economic growth that put ours to shame. Especially Russia, which went from agrarian serfdom to an industrial nation in under 30 years. Your arguments show the usual libertarian faults- lack of knowledge of history, lack of understanding of economics, and lack of common sense. Oh, and to top it off you throw in sheer pseudoscience. Please, take some courses in economics, and actually read Wealth of Nations. It may give you the basis of a true understanding of economics, instead of this "the market is always right" crap that not even Adam Smith advocated.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    12. Re:Amazing! by roodrallec · · Score: 1

      I think that many lenders instinctively penalize pics from borrowers that seem fake, sexed-up, or pimp out borrowers' teenage daughters (figuratively, anyway: http://www.prosper.com/public/lend/listing.aspx?li stingID=13608 ). Many lenders realize that manipulation of this sort is a bad signal. If anything, a fair-sized chunk (though by no means majority) of the Prosper lender population is composed of technological and financial early adopters, who tend to possess a certain degree of internet-tempered cynicism about listings, and resort to various forms of vetting of borrowers' stories. They also tend to be most vocal about their discoveries on forums and informal lenders' groups. In essence, every lender gets to free ride the efforts of the obssessive crusaders. of Prosper In fact, stronger social grouping seems to be forming among various lenders than borrowers. Frequently, dishonest borrowers get ripped apart as lies are exposed on Prosper forums-- examples: http://prosper.spreebb.com/index.php?showtopic=134 2 Borrower's securities fraud record dug up by lenders: http://prosper.spreebb.com/index.php?showtopic=784 The borrower who was a guy/girl/puppy... http://prosper.spreebb.com/index.php?showtopic=578 &hl= Lenders rip on each other as they argue about vetting the vetters: http://prosper.spreebb.com/index.php?showtopic=604 If nothing else, I suspect that even the shrewder investors spend inordinate amounts of time vetting, interacting, and bidding, and if they instead spent their marginal chunks of time on their day jobs or other forms of investing, they'd undoubtedly get superior returns. Nonetheless, investing in Prosper has an engagement level and addictivity similar to online poker, only w/better odds, and as such, the concept will prosper, even if true economic returns are lower than accounting returns.

      --
      Non-insider/non-friends-and-family Prosper.com early adopter
    13. Re:Amazing! by DocLandolt · · Score: 1

      Government regulations are a good thing. Regulations on banks are a damn good thing, they ensure my life savings are safe.

      Agreed. Sort of...

      In an effort to avoid goin' anarchocapitalist on you, I'll just say it like this -- government regulations can be a good thing. Regulations on banks can be a damn good thing. Does that mean they should be above scrutiny?

      Even well crafted regs are sure to find their language out of date as their loopholes become the norms. As it stands today, the language of regulation is bought and sold anyway, in a not-so-free political market. If regulation were truly a Good Thing(tm), the Gucci Gulch would have been regulated out of existence years ago...

    14. Re:Amazing! by cerberusss · · Score: 1
      Look back at the 30s- respected banks went out of buisness as much as anyone else

      In the Netherlands, you don't have to look back that far. December 2005, a bank went bust and lots of people lost money. See also this article on Wikipedia.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    15. Re:Amazing! by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1
      Burned nearly over a grand in dodgy 'fees' and outright errors with little avenue for recourse over the past 12 months. [Emphasis added]

      Well, there's your problem. Someone has apparently stolen your money from you, and your defense agency (government in this case) isn't doing anything about it? What are you paying them for, then (in taxes)? It would seem that your country is having trouble, not with a lack of regulation, but with a failure to enforce fundamental property rights. What makes you think they would be any better at enforcing these regulations if you had them?

      On the other hand, perhaps your government isn't at fault at all here. Did you agree to a contract with these telcos that gave them the right to confiscate the balance in your account, and/or the ability to levy arbitrary usage fees? Maybe you just want the government to step in and save you from your own mistakes; that seems to be a common enough disease these days. Either way, additional, redundant regulations are not the answer.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    16. Re:Amazing! by mjh · · Score: 1
      I'm not competent to tell what banks are trustworthy. I'm not competent to tell what food won't give me botulism. I'm not competent to tell what products will do what they're supposed to and what won't. I'm not competent to understand cutting edge medicine.
      Right. Neither am I. So when I encounter problems of this nature, I pay someone who is competent in those areas. For example, I'm not competent at keeping my grass green. I've tried. But I really suck at it. So I pay someone. The first company I used was pretty good, but their rates kept going up. So I tried someone else. They sucked. I'm now with a guy who is *really* good at this and he's cheap!

      The problem with the above services that you mention is that there is one and only one provider of competency and they force you to pay them: the federal government. I'd really much rather if I'm going to pay someone to protect me from my ignorance that I had the ability to fire them when they do a bad job. And what happens if I try to withhold funds from Uncle Sam because he's doing a bad job? *I* go to jail!

      My point: there are other ways to solve the competency problem other than government oversite.

      --
      Key to financial independence: Spend less than you earn. Save and invest the difference. Do it for a long time.
    17. Re:Amazing! by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Agreed- not all regulation is good. There's sweet spots, and they have to be reviewed every so often to make sure they accomplish their goals, and fixed if not. I'm not aware of every banking regulation and some of them may be outdated or in need of repair. But I'll take the system we have now over one with no regulations any day of the week.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    18. Re:Amazing! by servognome · · Score: 1

      So I pay someone. The first company I used was pretty good, but their rates kept going up. So I tried someone else. They sucked. I'm now with a guy who is *really* good at this and he's cheap!

      The problem with some areas such as medicine, is you may not get a second chance. Can always go back to the days of the snake oil salesman, or where "doctors" just prescribe heroin for whatever ails ya.

      The problem with the above services that you mention is that there is one and only one provider of competency and they force you to pay them: the federal government.

      Nothing is stopping you from hiring a second person to review your food, medicine, etc.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    19. Re:Amazing! by mjh · · Score: 1
      The problem with some areas such as medicine, is you may not get a second chance. Can always go back to the days of the snake oil salesman, or where "doctors" just prescribe heroin for whatever ails ya.
      It's not obvious to me that those are the only two choices. That you either have private hustlers and swindlers or the government (IMHO, public hustlers and swinders). When these services are provided by a market - a real market, not the bastardized thing we have in healthcare today - there's market discipline. That discipline gets applied every single time that a customer decides whether or not to purchase. What kind of discipline is there in the government? I might vote them out in 4 years? Take one look at the current administration. Do you honestly feel like you have any ability to ensure proper use of your funds? That's not the case with (for example) the local grocery store. If I don't like the way they're spending money, I simply don't go there. They can spend their own money however they like, but they don't have my money to waste.

      FWIW, snake oil salesmen would have a much more difficult time surviving today. On their way out of Dodge, a simple phone call would make it difficult for them to do much damage in the next town down the road. In other words, Snake Oil salesmen might last for a short time, but eventually their market would dry up. Because news of their incompetence will travel faster than they can.

      Nothing is stopping you from hiring a second person to review your food, medicine, etc.
      True. But, I don't get to stop paying the first person (gov't). AND the first person can demand rate increases to dry up any cash flow that I might want to use on a more effective provider. Call that whatever you want, but it's not market discipline. Personally, when someone extracts money from me and uses it for something that I don't want, I tend to call it theft. There is nothing economically productive about theft.
      --
      Key to financial independence: Spend less than you earn. Save and invest the difference. Do it for a long time.
    20. Re:Amazing! by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1
      You're making some assumptions here. There are places on this planet with little to no effective government right now. Do you think Iraqi customers have recourse if they get socked with excessive bank fees? Or Somalians?

      My company does business in countries where bribery is the only way to get government action. It's a cultural thing. They keep refining and changing corporate policy on this because there really is no way to avoid bribery.

      Those Nigerian fraudsters pay 30-70% of their "winnings" to Western Union, with nobody to complain to. Sometimes they are robbed of their entire take, with governmental/Western Union complicity (not that I cry for the poor scammers)

      Just because you live in a country with rules, courts, etc. doesn't mean everyone does.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    21. Re:Amazing! by servognome · · Score: 1

      It's not obvious to me that those are the only two choices. That you either have private hustlers and swindlers or the government (IMHO, public hustlers and swinders). When these services are provided by a market - a real market, not the bastardized thing we have in healthcare today - there's market discipline. That discipline gets applied every single time that a customer decides whether or not to purchase.

      We in fact had this market, when you could order heroin with syringe and all from the Sears catalog. In a free market, you'll have people flock to those who will relieve symptoms rather than treating disease.

      FWIW, snake oil salesmen would have a much more difficult time surviving today. On their way out of Dodge, a simple phone call would make it difficult for them to do much damage in the next town down the road. In other words, Snake Oil salesmen might last for a short time, but eventually their market would dry up. Because news of their incompetence will travel faster than they can.

      You overestimate the masses, just look at the booming unregulated herbal remedy market.

      True. But, I don't get to stop paying the first person (gov't). AND the first person can demand rate increases to dry up any cash flow that I might want to use on a more effective provider. Call that whatever you want, but it's not market discipline. Personally, when someone extracts money from me and uses it for something that I don't want, I tend to call it theft. There is nothing economically productive about theft

      Its called the price for organized society. I don't want to pay for the war in Iraq, but I can't withhold my taxes. I can however affect the underlying goverment structure that lead to the decision through protest, and voting.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    22. Re:Amazing! by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      I'm not assuming that he lives in a country with effective property protection, or for that matter any form of government at all. However, it seems rather backwards to complain about a lack of regulation on lenders when the supposed defender of his rights is incapable of (or unwilling to) protecting him against outright robbery. What reason is there to suppose that the lending regulations would be any more effective than his existing, and more fundamental, property rights?

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    23. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It existed. It failed. That's why classical liberalism died as a philosophy. It failed. Repeatedly. People died. The institutions you have now are to prevent mass deaths, manipulation of markets, and of course the civil chaos that ensues when large numbers of people are screwed over by the "rules of the game" that classical liberals masturbate to nightly. If you want to see violence, have a bunch of people die from poisoning because there aren't any safety regulations, their relatives are try to sue, and the company responsible simply goes under because it doesn't have the money for the Libertarian lawsuit wankfest to run its course. Meanwhile all of those people are dead, the actions that killed them aren't criminal, and the population rises up and kills people as backlash because there's no other means of releasing their outrage.

      Comparing having your savings disappear or having people pie to having your lawn die is fucking retarded. In all seriousness, you should have your head examined.

  5. Welcome Back by Camel+Racer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With this announcement, we are now officially in an economic bubble.

    --
    Anybody can work under ideal circumstances. -- Jeff K. (January 4, 2001)
    1. Re:Welcome Back by zuluechopapa · · Score: 1

      ooo.. and just in time for the pop.

      --
      even the magic 8 ball has an opinion on email clients: Outlook not so good.
    2. Re:Welcome Back by tidokoro · · Score: 1

      What I gotta know is how Trailer Mama from Yuba City was off and running with this before I, a regular /. troll, ever even heard of it:

      https://www.prosper.com/public/lend/listing.aspx?l istingID=13608

      I guess desperation is a mother of early adoption.

      --
      tidokoro
      what turns a man's karma neutral? lust for gold? power? or just a heart born full of neutrality?
  6. I wouldn't want by rsilvergun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    to just jump into the lending business. It only works if you've got the legal muscle to force people to pay out. What goods it do to have a million dollars in assets if it's all money owed to you by deadbeats who know you can't take them to court. Then again, if you could lend the money out at high interest and then sell the notes to debt collection agencys who _did_ have the legal muscle, that might work.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I wouldn't want by foundme · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think this P2P Finance will only work if P2P Muscle is also implemented at the same time.

      Imagine if you can log on to BeatTorrent, hook up with a few peers living near your debtor, and get them to show your debtor some muscles.

      --
      Please stop entering code 2,2,7,6,6,4
    2. Re:I wouldn't want by bobbuck · · Score: 1

      Using a credit rating system like the buyer/seller ratings on eBay could give the lenders as much leverage as collection agencies.

  7. Heck with work, gone phishing! by rts008 · · Score: 1

    Yes, your loan will be approved as soon as you log on at www.BankuvAmerica.com or www.AmericanExpresso.com with all of your info, and our Nigerian Banker-trained associates will take REAL good care of you!

    Yeah, sounds like a real good way of doing finances to me, hehehe.

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  8. credit checks? by chicken_tonight · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless there are credit checks people will use this borrow money when they're desperate. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

    1. Re:credit checks? by BridgeBum · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can't speak for Zopa, but I've been looking into Prosper. It's quite interesting actually.

      There are indeed credit checks. Users have their credit scores checked, and their 'ebay applications' show their rating, broken down into AA, A, B, C, etc. Users also attach checking/savings account when they create their accounts, and monthly collections are automatic. Obviously that doesn't preclude the possibility of defaulting on the loans, but it helps.

      Also, there are affiliated collection agencies for defaulted loans. Just as banks outsource collections to agencies, so can you. I've actually recently signed up as a lender, and will be trying things out with a small amount of money in the next week or so.

      --
      My UID is the product of 2 primes.
    2. Re:credit checks? by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Both sites have credit checks. Prosper lets you specified credit levels as a lender in your offers, Zopa from a quick look through the cite doesn't seem to.

    3. Re:credit checks? by shabble · · Score: 1
      Unless there are credit checks people will use this borrow money when they're desperate. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.


      Credit checks are made.

      http://blog.zopa.com/archives/2005/10/18/an-intro- to-zopa-and-credit-scoring/

      http://blog.zopa.com/archives/2006/01/24/more-on-c redit/
    4. Re:credit checks? by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      Unless there are credit checks people will use this borrow money when they're desperate.

      Despereate! Hell! I'm going to borrow money now. Papa needs a new Porsche!

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

  9. It's not new, just a different slant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ... a bank, but without the legal security, This is exactly how a bank works, but in a different source. A bank can affoard to lend you money because it indemnifies those loans with invested money from other companies.

    Not new, but different. Interesting idea nonetheless.

  10. Trustworthiness on the internet by cinnamoninja · · Score: 1

    The article discusses two different lending assocations. Only one of them actually claim to use credit reports!

    From the article:

    Prosper says it conducts anti-fraud and identity checks using data from credit reporting agencies and other sources. Users must provide their name, date of birth, Social Security number, address, telephone number, and a U.S. bank account number.

    Both are aiming to hit default rates of 3%, which seems low to me given that, well, this is the internet. They think they can make a real community on the internet, and are using as an analogy the way villages once functioned. Let us ignore the fact that people are much nicer in person than on the internet (you can't be cruel to a person you can't see, right?). Having a community relies on repeat transactions! If you need your consumer debts financed multiple times by strangers, I gotta think you're doing something wrong.

    But the online communities growing at both Prosper and Zopa, at least in theory, should function as a sort of immune system against such risks. Because the personal identifying information required for financial transactions isn't infinitely changeable like an E-mail address, scammers can't conceal themselves as easily as they can elsewhere.

    Because, you know, it's really hard for those scammers to use other people's identities.

    1. Re:Trustworthiness on the internet by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      Both are aiming to hit default rates of 3%, which seems low to me given that, well, this is the internet. They think they can make a real community on the internet, and are using as an analogy the way villages once functioned. Let us ignore the fact that people are much nicer in person than on the internet (you can't be cruel to a person you can't see, right?). Having a community relies on repeat transactions! If you need your consumer debts financed multiple times by strangers, I gotta think you're doing something wrong.
      Why? Do you know the people at MBNA or Citibank? Do they make lending decisions based on anything but objective factors, anyway? Most Americans (and I'd expect the British are no different) need their "consumer debts financed multiple times by strangers". Whether they are doing something wrong or not is somewhat beside the point, its a fact of life.
    2. Re:Trustworthiness on the internet by cinnamoninja · · Score: 1

      Why? Do you know the people at MBNA or Citibank? Do they make lending decisions based on anything but objective factors, anyway? Most Americans (and I'd expect the British are no different) need their "consumer debts financed multiple times by strangers". Whether they are doing something wrong or not is somewhat beside the point, its a fact of life.

      Well, no, I suppose I don't. I try to only borrow money for 30 days, but I get your point. Hmm.

      It still feels different. Like, all credit card debt combined is just one giant loan. The example they used was borrowing money from a neighbor to start a business. That is a reasonable use of credit, which a person on the internet will help you out with. But, if you ask to borrow money from a neighbor to buy a laptop (as one of these groups was financing), the neighbor would certainly turn you down if you asked for yet more money to buy an iPod next month.

      A village could built that community, by having repeated transactions of all different varieties. Sure, a guy would lend you money, because he ate dinner at your house last week, and he talks to you as pick up your mail, and his kids play with yours. In that case, trust is earned on small transactions, not necessarily economic. I don't know how these companies can build that.

    3. Re:Trustworthiness on the internet by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      The article discusses two different lending assocations. Only one of them actually claim to use credit reports!


      More correctly, the article only refers to one of them using credit reports. But both Prosper and Zopa expressly claim on their own websites to use credit scores (from Experian and Equifax, respectively), though Zopa claims to assign their ratings considering additional factors in some cases.

  11. Similar to Angel investors vs VCs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting
    There are plenty of rich guys willing to study "small" deals that existing financial providers won't deal with.
    Two obvious examples are
    • Angel Investors that fund many companies that VCs and Investment Banks don't. They make their money because they're willing to study complex opportunities that may be close to their area of expertise, and
    • the other obvious example is the mob, who gets higher interest rates and can afford to take on riskier loans because they have a more effective collection agency.

    And it's hard to underestimate the stupidity of some lenders. I imagine there are plenty of people with a lot of money who will seriously consider lending to a high-school kid to get an XBox in the same way that they consider lending to former Nigerian Royalty to help them get millions out of there.

    1. Re:Similar to Angel investors vs VCs by bobbuck · · Score: 1
      "And it's hard to underestimate the stupidity of some lenders."

      Lenders can be very aggressive in the sub-prime (bad credit) market. There's little profit margin on the 800 beacon types. They know they have good credit and they shop for the best rate. The credit criminals are just happy to get a loan and don't care if they get a 20% rate. If the lenders get 30% charge-offs, they still made more on sub-prime.

      As the retail loan rates go higher, they get closer the the various states' usury limits. The reduced spread will dry up the lenders for those with the worst credit. Hopefully this peer to peer model can bypass some of the "consumer protections" that keep high risk customer from finding loans.

    2. Re:Similar to Angel investors vs VCs by ThreeE · · Score: 0
      Hopefully this peer to peer model can bypass some of the "consumer protections" that keep high risk customer from finding loans.

      Right -- because these people need another loan. These people just don't grok the concept of responsibility. In the past, this forced them to go to a loan shark who, in addition to a high rate loan, was happy to provide a lesson in responsibility directly to the kneecaps.

    3. Re:Similar to Angel investors vs VCs by tomjen · · Score: 1

      They need a loan, they need to collect all their debt (sans maybe the house) at one place, and if they are lucky, they can get a better interest and therefor get out of their debt pit.

      --
      Freedom or George Bush
    4. Re:Similar to Angel investors vs VCs by narcolepticjim · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Car title loans and payday loan places often get higher interest rates than loan sharks. And while I certainly don't want to hang a smiley face on loan sharks, it isn't unusual for a shark to have a regular, reliable customer for whom a lower rate is given.

      The difference: our governments say it's okay for the payday/car title people to fleece people, while loan sharks (rightly) operate illegally.

      Oh, and most payday loan shops won't break your hip.

  12. Okay... right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So... on a scale of 1 to 10... how legal is this?

    1. Re:Okay... right by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Informative

      Initially, I thought "not very", but reading through Prospers agreements (Zopa is based in the UK where my limited knowledge of law is even less applicable), I think its probably competently set up. You aren't legally lending money to the borrowers, you are agreeing to purchase loans Prosper makes, and then having Prosper continue to do the work involved in getting payment, which offloads a lot of the compliance burden, as I understand it, to them. I can't say its for-sure legal, but it passes the sniff test.

    2. Re:Okay... right by syousef · · Score: 1

      Let me hand you a tissue and suggest you might have a blocked nose.

      First test this fails is credibility. Mostly due to jumping on a hyped up technical term from one industry (P2P, IT) and attempting to use it out of context in a different industry (Finance). I smell snake oil.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    3. Re:Okay... right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I sme..wait no I don't. I see a crap metaphor.

      But anyway, the grandparent post read the terms and conditions and figured out based on his knowledge of the law that things appear to be done correctly.

      You tell him that it's probably a scam because the word "P2P" appears.

      Something definitely smells around here ;)

    4. Re:Okay... right by syousef · · Score: 1

      Fee fie foe fum. I smell a rude coward and a troll that gets his thrills anonymously abusing people he doesn't know. Thanks for the laugh.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    5. Re:Okay... right by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      As you might see I am not anonymous and I agree with your PP. I am sceptical as well but I also want to see a real reason why this should not work. P2P being mentioned does not qualify here, sorry.

    6. Re:Okay... right by syousef · · Score: 1

      Replying as anon, then posting to back yourself up as non-anon is well....childish.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    7. Re:Okay... right by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      First test this fails is credibility. Mostly due to jumping on a hyped up technical term from one industry (P2P, IT) and attempting to use it out of context in a different industry (Finance). I smell snake oil.
      That marketing strategy is so frequently used (for good or ill) as to be of little use in distinguishing good from bad. Not, of course, that the objection really applies all that well, even if it were useful: Prosper, for instance, doesn't seem to use "Peer-to-peer" in their own material, they do use "People-to-people lending: an old idea that's new again", which fairly reasonably describes both what they are doing, and the fact that the basic idea isn't novel though the implementation is.
    8. Re:Okay... right by syousef · · Score: 1

      Yep that's what I like to see in my financial planner's strategy: Novelty. *rolls eyes* It's amazing what people are willing to believe and put up with - the same people who wonder why it happened when they get taken for all they've got.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    9. Re:Okay... right by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      Yep that's what I like to see in my financial planner's strategy: Novelty. *rolls eyes*
      Yeah, whatever. No doubt plenty of people said that about novel investment mechanism like "joint stock companies", too.
      It's amazing what people are willing to believe and put up with.
      The investment criteria are a lot less opaque doing automated bids through Prosper or Zopa than investing with a mutual fund company; the latter seems to require quite a bit more faith (and, giving the proven poor returns of most stock-based mutual funds compared to simple, objective, deterministic strategies operating in the same markets, demonstrably unjustified faith) than the former.
  13. Adverse Selection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My wife and I get credit card offers daily. Many have all sorts of low initial interest rates or other incentives. If we wanted to borrow a couple thousand dollars, we'd be crazy not to just apply for an additional card. So, those who are willing to pay "market" (based on Prosper's market) rates for a small loan must not have the best credit. In fact, they probably have pretty bad credit. If they applied for a credit card, they'd probably end up getting charged 10%+ in interest. So, why on earth would I throw my good money at one of these loans? And, since I wouldn't hold the paper directly, I would have to rely on the loan middleman to attempt to collect on a debt. I couldn't hire a collections agent, sell off the debt for pennies on the dollar, or anything of the sort. This is nuts.

    1. Re:Adverse Selection by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The fine print on those credit card offers allows the lender to change the terms for various reasons:

      • you're late on a payment with a different lender
      • your credit score decreases even if you've made no late payments
      • you look at funny
      • they just feel like it

      So while prosper.com is devoid of teaser rates, I can see why someone with good credit would choose a fixed-rate, fixed-term installment loan from there over a teaser 0% offer that could become 30+% for the cost of a lost piece of mail or one two many credit pulls when shopping for a car loan.

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    2. Re:Adverse Selection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (Anonmyous because I don't want to appear bragging - my middle FICO score is > 800. You get 3 different scores from different agencies. Lenders usually throw out the high and low and look at your middle.) Absolutely right.

      Or, more to the point, only take a teaser rate on a credit card only if you have the means the wipe the entire thing out at anytime you feel like doing so.

      Once you carry enough debt in credit cards, and you don't have the option of doing so (home equity LOC, cash, liquidate CDs, 401k etc.) then they smell blood and will repeatedly rape you. Whoops, 30% interest! Universal default! And believe me, they know whether you can, perhaps better than you do.

      If they tried that on me they know I won't tolerate it, and would find themselves making $0 off me instantly. That's the only leverage you have. Give it up, and you're screwed.

      Note: transferring to another credit-card doesn't count, they can tell if you're doing that. You can only get away with that when you have the cash to back it up.

    3. Re:Adverse Selection by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 1
      If they tried that on me they know I won't tolerate it, and would find themselves making $0 off me instantly. That's the only leverage you have. Give it up, and you're screwed.

      I 100% agree. I nearly found myself in that situation--the shot fired over my bow was a credit line decrease from American Express. However, I was more liquid than they realized and closed three accounts with them (after nearly 20 years as a customer) and aggressively paid off the balances. Fortunately, I wasn't rate-jacked and the credit line decrease didn't impact my score.

      I use credit cards for rewards now, and pay in full each month. And Amex will never see another dime of merchant fee from me :). My scores have jumped from the mid 600s to the mid 700s since that change. Don't know if I will ever see 800, though--congrats!

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
  14. End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Check out the loan requests at prosper.com -- lots of them include the borrower's age, ethnicity, gender, etc. either outright stated or inferable from the accompanying photographs. While Prosper as the lender of record only provides a credit grade based on an objective score from an Equifax report, the individual lenders are no doubt going to make (or not make) loans according to their own personal prejudices. The very fact that this information is available to prospective "loan buyers" (who are the actual lenders in all but name) will very quickly attract the attention of regulators.

    --
    I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    1. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by patio11 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If (and this is a *very big if*) this idea were actually doable, then you wouldn't have to worry about discrimination because peers who were non-discriminatory would be able to make boatloads of cash lending to clients who were not risky but being discriminated against by the marketplace. In the real world, if there are only 3 banks in your neighborhood and you need a home loan, but all 3 lending officers don't like you for whatever reason, you're sort of screwed. If, however, you have zillions of banking providers competing for your business then even if zillion - 1 say "We care more about discrimination than making a profit, neener neener" you only need one profit-maximizer to give you a loan.

      In the real world, by the way, you see banks adopting the same strategy -- Bank of America invests boatloads of cash in getting its name out in the various Hispanic communities, which are typically underserved when it comes to banking services.

    2. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 1

      That's a good point--discrimination for characteristics that have no real bearing on creditworthiness creates an opportunity for someone to cherry-pick those borrowers.

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    3. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by artifex2004 · · Score: 1
      In the real world, by the way, you see banks adopting the same strategy -- Bank of America invests boatloads of cash in getting its name out in the various Hispanic communities, which are typically underserved when it comes to banking services.

      Nice. Do you have details or references for this?
    4. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Interesting
      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    5. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by rgoldste · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the data don't agree [PDF alert]. Studies show that racial minorities pay, on average, substantially more interest on loans than whites do. Racism is one of the most persistent market failures of the 20th and 21st centuries; we need government regulation to mitigate or erase it.

    6. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by patio11 · · Score: 1

      Sure. Rather than a news account I'd direct you straight to the horse's mouth, as they have more details: http://www.bankofamerica.com/newsroom/presskits/vi ew.cfm?page=hispanic

    7. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by LionKimbro · · Score: 1

      I think you are basically right, (that this is discriminatory, that regulators attention will be caught,) but I think there's nothing that can be done about it.

      It's like the requirement that alternative currencies be pegged to the US dollar: "Good luck." Just imagine World of Warcraft struggling to peg Gold to the dollar. And every other virtual world, every other virtual currency. (Is World of Warcraft Gold taxable income? Are Lindens?)

      Or it's like trying to tax trades on Warcraft.

      It'll attract the attention of regulators, but... ... where will the regulators go, from there?

      Personally, I see Organized Culture as our likely destination.

    8. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it turns out that other races aren't good at managing money. That's why they keep leaving their own crappy countries, and invading White nations. It's not a market failure. It's a market success.

    9. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lots of them include the borrower's age, ethnicity, gender, etc. either outright stated or inferable from the accompanying photographs.

      How is this different from applying for a loan at the bank? The loan officer can see your face, and infer your age, ethnicity, gender, etc.

    10. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee...banks don't want to make cheap loans for houses in ghettos. what a fucking surprise! People who loan money usually want it back and the higher the chance that they won't be repaid, the higher the interest rate. Maybe if they spent as much money on their house/neighborhood as they do their donk rims and/or teaching their kids to not be thugs that riot at the drop of a hat, financial institutions wouldn't be so leary. Of course, de-segregation & the civil rights era killed the black owned banks (and insurance companies, etc) that used to help these areas out. They are now gone and nearly all the businesses are either a huge multinationals or owned by whites/asians. Except for funeral homes.

    11. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by swillden · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the data don't agree [PDF alert]. Studies show that racial minorities pay, on average, substantially more interest on loans than whites do.

      Umm, there *is* no data for the scenario the other poster described, because the market for lending is heavily constrained. At present, it's constrained by regulation. In the past, it was constrained by the difficulty of bringing large numbers of small lenders and borrowers together with enough information for them to make smart choices.

      I don't know if this idea will work -- there are a lot of obvious risks, and probably lots more non-obvious risks -- but it is reasonable to expect that spreading the lending decisionmaking across a wider spectrum of society may create a more competitive marketplace which will naturally tend to become more colorblind. There's no evidence either for or against this reasonable supposition, though, because the situation is new.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    12. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by rgoldste · · Score: 1

      Actually, there is data: lending behaviors from a time before gov't regulation. Or, you could infer what would happen in the lending marketplace from what happens in other sectors of the market. I just finished a course on race relations law in law school, where I learned the following: blacks are discriminated against in buying cars (they pay a premium); minorities are discriminated against in obtaining housing (though the Fair Housing Act helps); blacks are discriminated against in the workforce, with an employer less likely to respond to a job applicant with a "black" name (e.g., Tyrone) than a "white" one (e.g., Robert); minority cab drivers get tipped less than white cab drivers; whether or not one gets the death penalty correlates strongly with the victim's race (you're better off killing a minority than a white guy); minorities are disproportionately excluded from juries.

      Given the history and current reality of racism in the U.S., I don't think it's reasonable to expect the market to overcome racism in the P2P lending market.

    13. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 1

      You can apply for loans online or with a paper application (particularly for loans up to Prosper's $25K limit) with a loan officer never seeing your face. For loans of that size, the approval decision is probably often made by a computer except for marginal cases.

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    14. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by swillden · · Score: 1

      Actually, there is data: lending behaviors from a time before gov't regulation.

      No, as I said in my post, that data isn't useful. Prior to regulation, the technology didn't exist to bring large numbers of lenders and borrowers together, nor the system of objective, fact-based credit ratings. It's the democratization provided by the possible scale of the system that may have the effect, and there has been no previous test.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    15. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by artifex2004 · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I really need to renew that subscription :)

    16. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by artifex2004 · · Score: 1

      Cool, thanks. Useful to know when I quit my current bank, even though I'm not Hispanic. It shows some forward thinking :)

    17. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      Given the history and current reality of racism in the U.S., I don't think it's reasonable to expect the market to overcome racism in the P2P lending market.
      True, then again, it doesn't really end-run around the laws (which is one reason I'd never make any but automated bids if I started investing through one of these). The laws apply, and the Prosper "lender" agreement makes you explicitly agree not to violate the terms of those laws. People making manual bids ought to be very careful; automated bids are fairly safe unless they use very dumb criteria (like explicitly putting racial, ethnic, etc. terms into the criteria) in which case they are even more asking for trouble.
    18. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by jp10558 · · Score: 1

      I wonder from a lending POV, how much is causation and how much is correlation? Looking at your follow up post down the thread (or up from here?) and based on imperfect news reports and such, due to all sorts of factors including *others* racism, minorities may not objectively be as safe a borrower.

      I.E. I really don't care about someone's "race". But if I was looking at lending money, I'd be just as unlikely to lend to a minimum wage innercity single black mom as I would be to a white trailer trash single mom. Now if there are more of the former than the latter, the statistics would show higher interest rates on average for the former catagory.

      But it doesn't mean the banks are racist, just that the average financial situation for a black mom is worse than for a white mom. Hence higher interest rates to guard against defaults.

      This isn't to say that there isn't a lot of racism or unfairness causing bad financial situations for the average black mom vs white mom, but that expecting a company to be reverse racist (or stupid - give better interest rates to one group than equivelent members of other groups because of their race) is naive.

      --
      Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
    19. Re:End-run around anti-discrimination statutes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So then that means there's easy money to be made by loaning to minorities on Prosper, since the other lenders will be avoiding them.

  15. Not as good as it sounds for lenders... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happens if there is a large-scale disaster like hurricaine Katrina? Or an economic crash? Suddenly the number of people defaulting could skyrocket. When you take such risks into consideration, your expected rate of return could actually be less than what you'd get from a savings account.

    1. Re:Not as good as it sounds for lenders... by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Interesting
      What happens if there is a large-scale disaster like hurricaine Katrina? Or an economic crash? Suddenly the number of people defaulting could skyrocket.
      This is no different than the risks you are exposed to in a non-insured (money market, etc.) investment account (though the variability in those accounts is probably greater; they face the same catastrophic risks), or even a regular insured bank account once you are beyond the FDIC insurance amount (though there you face only the catastrophic risk, with the variability day-to-day only where the account has a variable rate).
  16. OMG! by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 3, Insightful
    There are already some 800 groups on Prosper ready to loan money to specific causes, such as the Apple User Group, 'a lending group for those wishing to purchase either a Macintosh or Apple iPod.'"

    Yes, this is exactly the group I'd lend to -- a bunch of status-seeking wanna-be yuppies who want the cachet of conspicuously consuming an Apple product but need to borrow the money to pay for it. Uh-huh. I'm all over that.

    --
    I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    1. Re:OMG! by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      Hey, it might be worth it to take over the credit card's role in these idiot's lives. Except, the CC has nifty legal ways of circumventing things like defaults and bankruptcies.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    2. Re:OMG! by Topherbyte · · Score: 0


      Except, the CC has nifty legal ways of circumventing things like defaults and bankruptcies.

      Heh. YANABL, I take it.

  17. Finally They Can Cash In by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This seems like it could have a potential for a LOT of abuse. Will the traditional fraud protection methods employed by people whose identities have been compromised by Data Theft of a large corporate database still work to protect them from this?

    I can see 2 very bad things happening here.
    1) All those stolen identities will be used to cash in, with a bubble effect of baby boomers trying to make a quick buck on speculative lending, meaning lots of people lose a lot of money like when the tech bubble burst.
    2) Another large segment of the population will have their credit ruined by scammers who manage to offshore the money before anyone realizing this has occurred.
    3) No Banks to eat the loss are involved so when these P2P Lending Places go bankrupt, the people who invested are left with nothing.

    But hey, I'm cynical. This may work really well, Banks manage to make boatloads of money from this.

    If this works will we see P2P Insurance next?

  18. look at numbers... by Sean5033 · · Score: 3, Informative

    look at the numbers before you decide to invest your money into something like this... You won't be making as much money as you might think.

    If $1000 loan is granted at prosper with a 10% interest rate, it'll make about $153 over three years if everyone pays up. That includes the 0.5% that prosper takes for fees and stuff. It's still lower than I expected. $1000 at 10% over 3 years, and I instantly think $300. I looked into why and it's because the principle is paid off so quickly. The $1000 number is getting smaller every month and there's not much left to earn interest by the start of the 3rd year.

    If that same $1000 sits in a 3 year CD paying 4.75% (ING's current rate on a 3 year cd) it can expect to make about $149 without any of the risk associated with the prosper loans. Interest penalties might apply if it's cashed out early.

    If the $1000 stays in an ING account that has 3.8% interest, you'll stand to make about $120.

    I really like the idea of it, and it has the potential to make some extra $$ if you have some cash laying around not doing anything. But the Risk Factor is huge compared to the alternatives I came up with. The fact the money is still accessible at ING is worth the 33$ IMHO. Even if the money isn't needed for three years, a CD returns a few bucks less, and can still be cashed out in an emergency situation.

    1. Re:look at numbers... by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Insightful



      That's kind of an apples-and-oranges comparison. Since you get the money in your account as soon as the payments come in, unless you re-issue new loans, its equivalent to withdrawing part of the interest from a bank savings account every month and letting it sit around as cash.

      Yes, CDs feature automatic reinvestment, and with Prosper you have to manually reinvest. But comparing the two without comparing them at full reinvestment is not especially useful.

    2. Re:look at numbers... by atlantageek · · Score: 1

      Why not do both. As the money is paid back every month put it in a money market account. Corus bank and GMAC is paying 4.74 that will get you $1250. Of course the best option would be to just reinvest the proceeds back into another 10% prosper loan. That way at the end of 3 years you will have $1300.

    3. Re:look at numbers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If $1000 loan is granted at prosper with a 10% interest rate, it'll make about $153 over three years if everyone pays up.

      Bzzzt, wrong answer. Banks earn $3060 - not $153 - from $1000.

      If you start with $1000 in capital you limit your earnings to $153 only if you limit your loans to $1000. Through the magic of Fractional Reserve Banking however, a bank with a reserve ratio of 5% and $1000 in deposits can issue loans of $1000/0.05=$20,000 which loaned out at 10% yields $3060. Banks are literally in the business of creating money (which is not the same as wealth).

      Fractional reserve banking and Bank-debt money began with gold. Merchants used gold as a currency to exchange services and goods (wealth). But carrying gold was inconvenient and dangerous, so merchants gave their gold to goldsmiths to safely store in their vaults; the goldsmiths in turn gave the merchants notes indicating how much gold was on deposit. The merchants then began to exchange the notes among themselves, and the notes became currency.

      Funny thing though, the goldsmiths noticed that when people used the notes as currency, they never came back to get claim their actual gold. And as long as not everyone claimed their gold, the goldsmiths could issue more notes than they had gold. The goldsmiths also charged interest for borrowing the notes - and here is the really clever part - that could only be paid with other notes, which could only be acquired by borrowing more notes, which required interested paid in notes, ad infinitum.

    4. Re:look at numbers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're doing the math wrong on this.

      Because you're getting principal paid back each month, this money needs to be reinvested to really have the math work out right.

      In other words, during the three year loan duration, the money you get back would need to be invested in some way (back into Prosper, or elsewhere) to yield a true return. Once this makes sense to you, you'll see that you actually do get the 10% less the 0.5% loan servicing fee.

      Now, that's certainly better than the CD at ING or whatever - but you've got very little control over liquidity - the money won't all come back to you for as much as three years. So, it only works with a long term strategy.

      -DJ

    5. Re:look at numbers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong, fractional reserve means they can lend out desposits and only keep a fraction of them on hand. So at 5% reserve for every $100 in deposists they can loan out $95.

    6. Re:look at numbers... by mjh · · Score: 1

      Assuming the amount of effort in the initial investment is the same between propser and a CD, you get better returns and better security with the CD. Making the same assumption, you get better returns, better security, and better liquidity with ING or EmigrantDirect.

      And it looks like the assumption is really quite false. To get those low returns, you have to spend more time diversifying with prosper. To invest $1000 into a CD you simply purchase it. To invest $1000 into either of the above banks, you simply send in a deposit. To invest $1000 into prosper, you have to diversify to spread your risk. So, maybe you break it up into $100 chunks. Now you have to find 10 people who you want to lend the money to.

      Typically, I expect higher risk items to produce greater returns, and lower returns come with much lower risk. But with prosper, it looks like high risk and low returns. Doesn't look intersting to me. Is there something that I'm missing?

      --
      Key to financial independence: Spend less than you earn. Save and invest the difference. Do it for a long time.
    7. Re:look at numbers... by Peldor · · Score: 1
      You're assuming that you don't earn anything on the principle after it comes back to you. If you dump your principle back into ING and let it sit, you have earned a total of $216 at the end of 3 years. Still not the $300 you 'instantly think', but at lot better.

      If you want to earn a constant 10% (or whatever) you have to keep your principle invested. So as you receive each payment, you would loan some of it back to another party.

      BTW, forget ING, EmigrantDirect and HSBC (among others) are paying 4.5%

    8. Re:look at numbers... by hacksoncode · · Score: 1
      Ummm. Roll over your principle?

      Seriously, this is one case where you really could just continuously make more loans with the returned principle and get your $300.

      That's what you do with CDs, right? It's just more automatic...

    9. Re:look at numbers... by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Assuming the amount of effort in the initial investment is the same between propser and a CD, you get better returns and better security with the CD.
      I dunno. Zopa, maybe, given the rates some people have quoted from their. There seems to be little on prosper below 10% and lots up to 20%+. Even adjusting for the expected default rates in the various credit categories and the fees, Prosper allows you to realize far better returns than any CD rates I've seen quoted recently, though your personal risk tolerance may affect whether the risk is worth it. Since you can diversify automatically with no additional effort using the standing order system on Prosper, I don't see much justification for the claim that "you have to spend more time diversifying with prosper" to get "low returns".
      To invest $1000 into either of the above banks, you simply send in a deposit. To invest $1000 into prosper, you have to diversify to spread your risk. So, maybe you break it up into $100 chunks. Now you have to find 10 people who you want to lend the money to.
      Or you have to set up a standing order based on credit grade and other criteria, splitting it into as small as $50 chunks without about the same amount of work as making one manual bid. Nothing restricts you to making only manual bids on Prosper.
  19. Spam/Scam by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
    I don't know how exactly because I'm not that well-versed in financial matters...but rest assured, this service WILL be spammed/scammed by the same people pushing worthless services and trying to scam you out of your hard earned money.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    1. Re:Spam/Scam by Alfred,+Lord+Tennyso · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Depressing, I'm afraid, but probably true. Identity theft makes it easy to apply for a loan and then skip town. Except if you've stolen the identity of somebody already out of town, you don't even have to rent a moving van.

      And it takes relatively few people to poison that well. If an investor charges 6% and could get 5% elsewhere, there's only a 1% margin keeping him in the game at all. If only 1% of the applications are scams, the entire enterprise falls to the ground.

      It may be working today for the same reason that email used to work: until there is a critical mass of people involved, the scammers have better ways to spend their time. These are comparatively small loans. So past success is not necessarily an indication of future performance.

      If we're very lucky we'll find that throwing many minds at the problem will solve it. Perhaps a network of trust would work; say, cheaper loan rates to people recommended by others who have paid back their loans, or even co-signing. The scammers would then escalate (form into clumps to take loans, pay them back, recommend each other, take another loan, and all default at once) and maybe the collective minds would solve that problem (the way Google tries to weed out search engine cheaters).

      Or a wholly different tack, where lenders pay money directly to merchants (say, the owner of a house being sold, or a car dealer) so that the customer has goods rather than money, which are harder to simply pack up and move with. There are ways for scammers and counter-scammers to escalate that game, too.

      It would be interesting to find out if an open-source/P2P type hive mind can keep ahead of the scammers.

    2. Re:Spam/Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that didn't take long.
      http://www.prosper.com/public/lend/listing.aspx?li stingID=13833

      Description includes:
      single father
      three sons
      wife left us

      Profile image contains: Two males, one female
      Titled: me and my sons

      Back in my day, scammers at least previewed the family photos that came in their wallets.

    3. Re:Spam/Scam by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      "The scammers would then escalate (form into clumps to take loans, pay them back, recommend each other, take another loan, and all default at once)"

      Personally what I'd love to see is a bunch of scammers try that, and then one tries to screw the rest out of all the money and then they ALL get busted.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  20. Clueless about what drives p2p by redelm · · Score: 5, Informative
    P2P financing is called "disintermediation" and actually has been going on in the finance world for 20+ years as borrowers approach lenders directly, rather than through banks. The commercial paper market. There are problems, mostly around collections and default. Not economically solvable for small loans.

    But the very idea ignores what drives P2P: very low costs to the provider of service. Lending money is nothing of the kind -- there's a big default risk. You'd find P2P s3x to be easier!

    1. Re:Clueless about what drives p2p by MrAnnoyanceToYou · · Score: 1

      Funny how people have been managing P2P sex for quite a while without all that paperwork and oversight, though.

    2. Re:Clueless about what drives p2p by errordactyl · · Score: 1

      I'm far, far, far from an economist.

      In this scheme, if I understand correctly, a large group of people get together and lend money. Any loss is the same but spread out over a large group. It's like financial leverage. Think about what happens to the force needed to lift a tonne supported by a hundred pulleys (neglect friction). Same thing, different physics.

      For example, this guy intends to build a sportscar and is raising $16,000. There are currently 65 bids mostly between $100-200. He defaults, these people lose $100 each while if he doesn't they make a little cash.

      --
      $_.=["a".."z"," "]->[rand 27] while !/just another perl hacker$/;
    3. Re:Clueless about what drives p2p by redelm · · Score: 1
      Still horribly risk skewed. How much "little cach" would you demand for success?

      Human risk preferences have been found to be profoundly asymmetric. That's what makes pooling risks (insurance) so attractive in spite of heavy overheads.

      They need to find a way to bundle 1000 of these guys together os it becomes a sure loss of ~3% vs 97% zero loss and 3% total loss.

  21. Ugh..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 0
    Great... Now there are more records the Ucle Sam can stick his big nose into.

    ----- Politicians prefer unarmed peasants. So I'm armed.

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
  22. Natural evolution of loan sharks by i+am+kman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seems pretty obvious this will rapidly devolve into supporting primarily folks with bad credit (or can't get loans from banks) who desparately need money FAST. Well, that and look for major identity theft rings.

    Banks are highly regulated for a reason and offer strong protection to folks on both sides of the fence (investors and borrowers). New, completely unregulated financing options are really recipes for disaster and abuse - particularly in this day and age.

    And, even though pieces of it will be very legitimate and well-intentioned, a few bad apples will bring down the whole scheme. Stay away (unless you want your kneecaps broken).

    1. Re:Natural evolution of loan sharks by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Seems pretty obvious this will rapidly devolve into supporting primarily folks with bad credit (or can't get loans from banks) who desparately need money FAST.
      I don't see why you claim this is obvious; since there is credit rating information available to the "lenders", I don't see why bad credit would be favored (this presumes that the "lenders" will have a preference for return that makes them more risk tolerant, or that good credit borrowers will avoid the site for some reason. Neither assumption seems justified.)
      New, completely unregulated financing options are really recipes for disaster and abuse - particularly in this day and age.
      This isn't completely unregulated. All of the usual lending regulations apply to lending here (the lender being, in Prosper's case, Prosper).
  23. Ok so about leechers... by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

    I think this is great! So, how do I start leeching money from the torrents? ;)

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  24. members have to make at least £25,000 by BadassJesus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    $40,000 a year ? that is huge amount of money, so you on the west actually earn this much? we earn about $3,500 a year on average, this world is wierdly unbalanced

    1. Re:members have to make at least £25,000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes that is a typical professional salary

    2. Re:members have to make at least £25,000 by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Informative

      As of 2003, the median income for a 4-person family in the United States was $65,093 (source. Median household income in the United States was $43,318 (source).

      I'm failing to quickly find comparable figures for the UK.

    3. Re:members have to make at least £25,000 by atlantageek · · Score: 1

      Maybe your country should have given up your communist ways earlier.

    4. Re:members have to make at least £25,000 by soliptic · · Score: 1

      the world is indeed imbalanced -- although I'm more tempted to say "grossly" than "weirdly".

      just out of interest, where are you from?

      you should remember though that the imbalance isn't just in wages, but also in costs. For example, I recently went to India. At the time, there was a scandal where government ministers were renting out their official properties -- ie, some of the nicest houses in the nicest areas of Delhi, complete with service staff and armed guard. Less than one day's wages for me represented three months worth of rent for those places. That's insane! Another example, one evening we rented a car plus driver for about 6 hours to drive us all over Delhi to see the tourist sites. Cost less than 10 UK pounds, which in a London taxi, would barely get you a mile down the road. So although wages are vastly lower, the cost of consumer goods, rent and so forth tend to be proportionately lower.

      Of course this isn't to say the world isn't well out of whack, just that it's not like you have to buy stuff at the same prices as $40,000-earning Westerners with your $3500 annual wage.

    5. Re:members have to make at least £25,000 by soliptic · · Score: 1
      This is as close as I can find within 2 minutes: National Statistics: household income

      Annoyingly doesn't seem to give you a proper figure, but by reading off the graph, it seems to be about £26,000 in 2004/2005.

    6. Re:members have to make at least £25,000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to Capitalism!

      On the plus side though, we have a negative savings rate, and we're selling our productive resources overseas because we love buying shit at Wal-Mart.

  25. The only reason banks can afford to lend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... is because they can lend out 10x the amount of money they actually have. Hence the term "fractional reserve banking system".

    So the bank might be lending to you at a 10% APR, but they are lending out the same money 10 times, in effect getting a 100% APR return on their investment. Even with this kind of profit, they are very picky about who they lend money out to - a single bad loan cancels out the profit from 9 other similar loans.

  26. Why Do You Even Believe This To Be True? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is lawless lending in UNKNOWN territory. Why would anyone believe people would sink money into this when the Internet is full of scams, and also full of clever hackers and organized influences whose only motive is to extort money?

    1. Re:Why Do You Even Believe This To Be True? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Why on earth do you think it is "lawless" lending? There is this whole myth that the the internet is some kind of "law free zone". Its not. These companies are real companies, existing in the real world, and bound by the regular laws governing lending in the countries where they operate. This is no more "lawless" than conventional lending engaged in by banks.

    2. Re:Why Do You Even Believe This To Be True? by roodrallec · · Score: 1

      In fact, Prosper is CEO'd by the founder of ELOAN, funded by Benchmark Capital (a major funder of eBay), Pierre Omidyar (eBay's founder)'s foundation, Accel Partners, etc, among others. Pedigree may not translate into startup success, but it usually does translate into hiring expensive lawyers w/VC money, etc.

      --
      Non-insider/non-friends-and-family Prosper.com early adopter
    3. Re:Why Do You Even Believe This To Be True? by roodrallec · · Score: 1

      Additionally, in order to surmount state-set interest rate limits, they've already snagged tons and tons of special lender licenses (not that they are lending illegally in other states) on a state by state basis: http://www.prosper.com/public/legal/states_and_lic enses.aspx

      --
      Non-insider/non-friends-and-family Prosper.com early adopter
  27. New oppertunities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if this will open some new doors for me as a loan enforcer? Now to get a loan on guns and ammunition.

  28. GlobalGiving.com by daigu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hey, why lend when you can give?

    Global Giving is the charitable expression of the same idea. Instead of giving at the office to some anonymous organization, why not fund: Renewable Energy to 20 Peruvian Communities, Improving Computer Literacy in Afghanistan, Information Technology for Uganda Medical Students, or whatever else floats your boat.

    1. Re:GlobalGiving.com by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Instead of giving at the office to some anonymous organization...

      Uh...the Democratic Party isn't THAT anonymous.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:GlobalGiving.com by JumperCable · · Score: 1

      Hey, why lend when you can give?

      I would hate to be in your shoes when you retire.
      "Ahh... time to break open the nest egg... these thank you notes must be worth something by now."

    3. Re:GlobalGiving.com by daigu · · Score: 1

      By this logic:

      We wouldn't have children. All they are is a cost, right?
      Or have pets. Less cost than children, but why do it at all?
      Or volunteer. Why work for free?

      I could go on. But the bottom line is that I happen to have $19 dollars for an expansion card for some medical students in Uganda, and I'd rather spend it in this way than going out to dinner or adding it to my retirement accounts.

      I am sure that that $19 dollars could compound into something if you waited 40 years. Then again, you might get hit by a bus tomorrow. Either way, the sums we are talking about here aren't going to make or break your retirement - and maybe they are a way to diversify your "portfolio".

    4. Re:GlobalGiving.com by FleaPlus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hey, why lend when you can give?

      For a solution which is somewhat in-between, there's organizations which provide low-interest microfinance loans to entrepreneurs in developing countries, helping them towards econmic independence. One neat-looking organization is Kiva.org, which enables individuals to make such loans. Worldchanging has a neat article on organizations like Kiva and how they're helping things in the developing world.

      A relevant item from Kiva's FAQ:

      Why loans and not (just) donations?
      Over the last three decades, microfinance has proven to be an effective tool in raising the standard of living in impoverished communities. Up to now, there has not existed a way for individuals in developed countries to participate directly in this exciting movement. Kiva believes individuals in developed countries will find loaning to be a more rewarding and sustainable form of involvement in international development than traditional giving. In other words, when you receive your original loan amount back, you are more likely to loan again than if you simply made a donation.

    5. Re:GlobalGiving.com by allanc · · Score: 1

      > Hey, why lend when you can give?

      Um. Because I like money? Money can be exchanged for goods and services.

      (Thanks for the link, and I'm definitely thinking of throwing some spare cash at Good Causes through it, but "Why lend when you can give" is a pretty stupid question)

  29. can it work? Works in my home-town.. by doowy · · Score: 1

    Not sure if credit unions are popular in other regions or not, but in my area (Saskatchewan, Canada) credit unions are very popular and quite successful. We have general credit unkons, teacher's credit unions, etc.

    I see this as an extension of the same concept - only giving everyone involved more control as the technology (web) permits it. Letting everyone control every nickel and dime within a traditional credit union just isn't feasible.

    Seems to work here.. can't see many reasons why it wouldn't work on the scale these sites envision.

    --
    ..mork
  30. So whats wrong with this picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would love to give a logical and detailed attack against such a loan service.
    But I'm not going to bother. I'll just say this is just stupid.
    All the hell people gave paypal for letting people getting paid without using a check, credit card or bank.
    That was a good idea.
    Here we are 5 years later and someone thinks letting a company do unregulated cash loans is a good Idea.
    This is a bad Idea.
    omfg.

    zbeast

  31. It's a great idea! by Marsmensch · · Score: 3, Funny

    I have personally invested a hefty sum in a Nigerian financial institution run by the daughter of the country's former minister of finance. She contacted me personally (what banks can match that kind of personalized service?) and personally arranged for my account. I sent her my retirement savings and she will soon start sending me my massive returns. I will soon be rolling in obsene amounts of money!

    Nigeria is the future of finance I tell you!

    --
    Slashdot: news from nerds.
  32. isn't this Nigerian 419 by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

    It also gives people a chance to browse speculatively (bit like you do on Ebay)

    seems like this will lead to loan-sharking on the lender's side and Nigerian 419 scams on the other end. I just need a small loan to get started on big $$$. Either way, they break your knee-caps.

    --
    There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
  33. What about a P2P currency exchange? by zestymonkey · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't this be the next logical step? Trade cash for money used online by services like iTunes. Neither Apple nor the user need to deal with a bank.

    --

    return;
  34. Lock down your mailboxes by JumperCable · · Score: 1

    Because identity theft is going to SKYROCKET if this catches on.

    Some of this stuff is insane. There are loan requests out there that read like a nigerian 419 scam. But who knows maybe calls to God will give other people better rates.

    And I look at all the poor idiots with credit card debt up they are trying to pay off, locking themselves into loans at high interest rates when they would be much better off either calling up their own credit card company & brokering a deal for payment & a reduced rate or even getting into a credit counseling program.

    1. Re:Lock down your mailboxes by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Because identity theft is going to SKYROCKET if this catches on.
      Er, why? Its certainly no easier to scam money with identity theft from this system than traditional lenders working through the mail or the net; you might convince people to give you better rates this way, but that doesn't matter if you are using identity theft to skip out on payments. I can't see any way this is more vulnerable to identity theft then traditional lending. Its certainly more vulnerable to exploiting gullibility in other ways, though the information providing by the various ratings limits the prospect of that.
    2. Re:Lock down your mailboxes by roodrallec · · Score: 1

      In fact, many lenders on Prosper are far smarter and more flexible than banks and bank reviewers can ever be, and they're vocal about their findings. I suspect that this more than outweighs the disadvantages that they start out with (no fancy models, etc)

      See prosper self-policing of loans by lenders (and one guy who loves posting on forums about illegit loans, even though he seems to have lent no money on Prosper...) -- there's something addictive about exposing scams...

      Borrower's securities fraud record dug up by lenders:
      http://prosper.spreebb.com/index.php?showtopic=784

      The borrower who was a guy/girl/puppy...
      http://prosper.spreebb.com/index.php?showtopic=578

      Lenders rip on each other as they argue about vetting the vetters:
      http://prosper.spreebb.com/index.php?showtopic=604

      http://prosper.spreebb.com/index.php?showtopic=134 2can ever be

      --
      Non-insider/non-friends-and-family Prosper.com early adopter
  35. headline in 2 years by moochfish · · Score: 1

    Founding 800 Lenders Ask to Borrow Money

  36. Say buddy spot me a 20? by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
    Naaah! It would never work.

    Just because we use email, or IRC or the phone to communicate does not really change anything.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Say buddy spot me a 20? by LionKimbro · · Score: 1

      Hm,..

      Would it make any difference if you could see the person's last 5 years of activity online, as well as place of residence and information about where they work, can see all the forums they post too, know that you can hound them on said forums, and have given them a lengthy legal contract to sign?

      Would that make a difference?

    2. Re:Say buddy spot me a 20? by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
      Why should there be any reason to trust such an organisation? How do I know it is not just a big phishing scheme? Assuming it is genuine, it would only work until people start abusing it.

      Think about it this way: what do eBay and Paypal sell? Nope they don't sell product, they sell trust (a trusted environment in which people can transact). Yet there are plenty people with very good ratings who have been phished. Then two things happen: 1) The good trust is abused to screw over some buyer. (2) The person who had a good rating loses their good rating and gets a black mark against them.

      --
      Engineering is the art of compromise.
    3. Re:Say buddy spot me a 20? by LionKimbro · · Score: 1

      People certify themselves through their communities, and through the general public.

      You trust that they are who they say they are, because you trust the communities, or because you trust the general public.

      I can certify for you that I am the person who's website is at http://www.speakeasy.org/~lion/. Would you like me to do so, as a point of demonstration?

      If people start abusing "the organization" (and I'm really not sure what organization you are talking about,) that simply means that you need better research methods. People abuse the banks through forging signatures. But we still use signatures.

      There are several very promising technologies, in the works, that will largely automate many of these checks. They will, of course, be attacked and comprimised. But nobody every claimed to have a flawless, perfect, security system. There is always substrate, there is always context, there is always an attackable outside.

  37. One risk not added in by JumperCable · · Score: 1

    What happens if prosper goes under?

  38. risk attitude by AtomicBomb · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have just got some fun logged in to Zopa as a "potential" lender. The agreed lending rate is unrealistically low. Lending to the "A" grade borrowers for 6 months gives you only 4.5% AER (annual equivalent rate) and lending to the "B" grade ones will only give you 5.0%. And you are responsible for all the tax.

    I would rather lend my money to HSBC. For one of the first standard online saving
    account, you can earn 4.75% AER (and it is not even fixed for 6 months).

    The interest rate setting mechanism is kind of a double auction market. You, as either lender or borrower, can set your offer rate. The "market" rate is the one when both meeting somewhere in the middle. I mean most lenders are not really serious at this moment. They are likely to throw £10 in order to test how the system work. But, causually, you can see how people evaluate risk. For this type of unsecured loan via a potentially run-away-overnight "bank", my risk premium is way higher than 10%. Even if I trust the whole system, given a default rate of 3% quoted somewhere in their website, a risk-neutral lender will at least demand an interest rate of the "risk-less" rate (the return that you deposit in a reputable regular bank) + the default rate + their annual handling fee, which means at least 4.5+3+0.5=8%.

    1. Re:risk attitude by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the borrows have the upper hand at the moment. You could borrow some money, deposit it with a bank, repay the loan at the end of the deposit term and turn a tiny profit that gets eaten up by tax.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:risk attitude by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      Ironically,short term Treasury securities are paying around those rates recently. And if you want to get something a bit longer than a year, it's there. And the risk is much lower than a 3 percent default rate. You can purchase these as well online from TreasuryDirect. For free. Don't even have to participate in competitive bidding if you have less than like 5 million to invest. Sounds like a crappy deal indeed.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

  39. OK, Sell me. by istartedi · · Score: 1

    I have a credit union where I can deposit into an FDIC insured money market at 4.32%. If I like, I can purchase CDs for upwards of 5% if I'm willing to lock in (which I'm not given the historicly low rates, but that's beside the point). If I'm willing to undertake more risk, I know some funds that deal in mortgage-backed securities. No FDIC insurance, but returns more than 6%. Nevermind those, though. Let's just think about how the credit union works.

    The CU borrows money from me at 4.32% and loans it out at high 5s to low 6 percent, depending on the type of loan. They make money on the spread. Until the P2P plan can provide me with a comparable rate of return, and loan people money at comparable rates, they ain't gettin deposits from me, and I'm not borrowing from them. Worse yet, for consumer devices like an iPod, retailers often provide the loans as loss-leaders at 0%. There doesn't seem to be much room for an upstart here, but I'm willing to be persuaded, if you've got hard figures.

    So. Sell me.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:OK, Sell me. by Zaphod2016 · · Score: 1

      Nope, you sold ME.

      I only get 4.15% at ING. Who pays 4.32%?

    2. Re:OK, Sell me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CU borrows money from me at 4.32% and loans it out at high 5s to low 6 percent, depending on the type of loan.

      Uh, a bank borrows $1 from you but then issues loans for $20 - not $1 - through the magic of Fractional Reserve Banking. A bank with a reserve ratio of 5% and $1 in deposits can issue loans of $1/0.05=$20 which loaned out at 5% yields at a gross profit of 96.68% after paying you 4.32%. Banks are literally in the business of creating money (which is not the same as wealth).

      Fractional reserve banking and Bank-debt money began with gold. Merchants used gold as a currency to exchange services and goods (wealth). But carrying gold was inconvenient and dangerous, so merchants gave their gold to goldsmiths to safely store in their vaults; the goldsmiths in turn gave the merchants notes indicating how much gold was on deposit. The merchants then began to exchange the notes among themselves, and the notes became currency.

      Funny thing though, the goldsmiths noticed that when people used the notes as currency, they never came back to get claim their actual gold. And as long as not everyone claimed their gold, the goldsmiths could issue more notes than they had gold. The goldsmiths also charged interest for borrowing the notes - and here is the really clever part - that could only be paid with other notes, which could only be acquired by borrowing more notes, which required interest paid in notes, ad infinitum.

    3. Re:OK, Sell me. by roodrallec · · Score: 1

      Subprime lending -- a risk, return and correlation profile that are very distinct from money market + small enhancement lending. There are different tranches that you can choose from, ranging from AA to E or HR.

      P2P lending may have differing relevance levels for people of different risk aversion classes, but modern portfolio theory (much of which is admittedly a crock) would argue that any asset w/some diversification value should make up some (perhaps small) part of people's portfolio.

      I wouldn;t replace my USAA Performance First account w/ Prosper or Zopa lending, but I would put a chunk of my money in Prosper's sub sub prime borrowers.

      --
      Non-insider/non-friends-and-family Prosper.com early adopter
    4. Re:OK, Sell me. by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Navy Federal Credit Union, but don't despair. Bankrate.com lists several that pay higher rates. Bankrate is pretty good at weeding out the intro rates from the ones that pay high rates more consistantly. Of course, all of them are adjustable. I'm also getting 4.5% from Emigrant Direct. No minimum deposit, open to everybody. IIRC, I deposited there when they were at 3.5, and they've been keeping up with the Fed pretty well.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    5. Re:OK, Sell me. by Fargmania · · Score: 1

      I have been lending at Prosper for a couple months. I've invested $1600 over 32 loans at $50 each. I have been choosing my loans carefully based on specific risk criteria I set up for myself. My average interest rate is 16.67%, and my default rate is estimated to be 1-2% (based on years of accumulated data from credit agencies). This means that I am very likely to have one of my loans default. At the end of 3 years, I'll walk away with $1980 after taking out the defaults and the fees.

      That's equivalent to a 7.9% annual interest rate at a bank, and doesn't even take into account any additional money that would be made if I reinvested the interest into new loans. Which I do.

      Plus I like the fact that my money is helping other people - it's not just sitting in an account making banks richer. That's added value you can't tag with an interest rate.

  40. new fraud model? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Has anyone patented the concept of a Peeramid-to-Peeramid scheme yet?

  41. Re:Uh, not really... by rah1420 · · Score: 1
    most of the "loans" are for at least 15%! I don't know who this is helping...


    People who have subpar credit scores. If they were to go to a regular creditor for a LOC they could easily approach 30%.

    Geez, my Sears card is drifting up, on average a quarter point a month. Of course with a zero balance on it (I pay in full every month) they're not making any money off of me. I did have a balance on Sears at one point and it pissed me off to be paying 26.24% one month, 26.49% the month after that.

    And go ahead and call them and ask for a rate reduction. No matter how high you go in the food chain, the answer is always "No."

    But back on topic; if people align themselves with an affitity group in Prosper, they have a fighting chance at maybe swapping some 29% money for some 15% money. That can save them some cash. At least more of a fighting chance than going to a regular banker...
    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
  42. Weird Math, but roughly the right answer by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
    Even if I trust the whole system, given a default rate of 3% quoted somewhere in their website, a risk-neutral lender will at least demand an interest rate of the "risk-less" rate (the return that you deposit in a reputable regular bank) + the default rate + their annual handling fee, which means at least 4.5+3+0.5=8%.


    Why add the default rate -- is that some kind of conventional "rule of thumb" (intuitively, it seems like it works as a rough approximation so long as both the default rate and the risk-free rate are small)? A risk-neutral lender, by definition, is looking only at expected return, so wants an expected return to match or exceed the risk free return. That seems to mean that the rate should be found by:

    (risk-free rate) = (target rate - handling fee) * [1 - (default rate)]

    which reduces to:

    (target rate) = ((risk-free rate)/[1 - (default rate)])+(handling fee)

    or, with your assumptions:

    (target rate) = ((1.0475)/[1 - (0.03)])+0.005 or
    (target rate) = (approx) 8.49%

    FYI: Its worth noting that the rates on Prosper seem to be a lot higher; it might reflect the relative maturity of the sites (or it might reflect something completely different.)
  43. A great IDEA!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately the gov't doesn't like the idea of citizens syndicating and trading debt as a commodity on an exchange without regulation.

  44. Or a Bond by HighOrbit · · Score: 1

    Your right, Credit Unions are a good example of individuals aggregating. But isn't a bond a form of "peer-to-peer" financing without a bank as well? The company issues a bond, you buy the bond from them thereby loaning them money directly. Ofcourse, with a bond (in modern financial system) you get a credit rating for the company from S&P, Moody, et al.

    How about some C or D rated bonds? We'll just add a 21st century buzzword "Peer-to-Peer" to make it sound cool and catchy. I also have a bridge in brooklyn if you are interested. Hmm... what could I call it? How about bidirectional high bandwidth geo-bus? Anybody interested in a geo-bus in brooklyn?

  45. Canada by errordactyl · · Score: 1

    Anyone know of a Canadian service?

    --
    $_.=["a".."z"," "]->[rand 27] while !/just another perl hacker$/;
    1. Re:Canada by Kilka · · Score: 1

      I did some looking around and wasn't able to find one..

      --
      If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. -Chomsky
    2. Re:Canada by errordactyl · · Score: 1

      As well, the response from Prosper is no plans to expand to Canada.

      --
      $_.=["a".."z"," "]->[rand 27] while !/just another perl hacker$/;
  46. Re:Uh, not really... by ThreeE · · Score: 0

    If you owe a significant amount of money at 29%, and feel you need more, the last thing you need is another loan. What you need is either 1) credit counselling, 2) a budget, and/or 3) a bankruptcy lawyer.

  47. Prosper wants your SSN for authentication by SecurityGuy · · Score: 1

    And that's where they lost me. First, I don't want to give out my SSN. Or my bank account #. Let me put it on a credit card (which I'd pay off immediately) and I'm interested. Tell me I have to give you everything you need to steal my identity so I can lend money and I'm a lot let interested. Tell me you need it for authentication, of all things, because after all, the only people who know my SSN are everyone I've ever had a loan, bank account, credit card, every school I've ever attended, the U.S. government (who employs millions of people), the HR department of every company I've ever worked for, and you lost me.

    SSNs are NOT authenicators, and never will be.

    1. Re:Prosper wants your SSN for authentication by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure your SSN is linked to your Credit Report from the big 3. That said, an authentication it is not. More like a numerical name.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    2. Re:Prosper wants your SSN for authentication by Buradorii · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's no way you will be able to do a credit-based and/or incoming-generating transaction like the ones Prosper does without giving your SSN. The interest earned on the loans you make is fully taxable, and they need your SSN so the IRS knows to come after you.

      From the borrower side, SSN is what links you to your credit report and credit rating, like it or not. For the credit reporting agencies, your SSN is an authenticator.

      --
      You can live your life in a thousand ways, but it call comes down to that single day...
    3. Re:Prosper wants your SSN for authentication by swillden · · Score: 1

      And that's where they lost me. First, I don't want to give out my SSN.

      Without your SSN, Prosper can't look up your credit rating, and can't issue 1099 statements reporting your tax liability for money that you make by lending.

      Prosper isn't using your SSN to authenticate you, they're requesting it because they can't do business with you, practically or legally, without it.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Prosper wants your SSN for authentication by SecurityGuy · · Score: 1

      First, I'm not sure that's true. I can sell things (generating income) and not have to give my SSN. Now, there might well be a regulation somewhere confirming what you say, I just don't know it and haven't seen it.

      Second, I did wonder as I filled out their forms (before cancelling when they asked for my SSN) if the scenario you describe might be true--but that's not what they said. They didn't say "We're required by USC Foo.bar.baz to get your SSN and report stuff to the IRS." They said we use your SSN to prove you are who you say you are, which IMO, is indefensible. As I said, the number of people who know my SSN is in the thousands. The number of people who can get it if they really want to is certainly many, many thousands if not more.

  48. I've made about $14 so far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, it does have some problems with identity, but Prosper has done a pretty good job of rooting out the scammers. I've made about $1,000 in loans (in $50 increments to spread out the risk), and not one has been late. Will people default? Yes, you can read about the defaults on their discussion boards. But if you're looking to make more than just 4.75% at Amboy Direct, then Prosper deserves a look (if you're willing to accept some risk ;-).

  49. I'm a lender on Prosper.com by atlantageek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm in for $2500 so far and I've had very positive experience. I've already had one loan paid back in full and all but one of 29 (15 of which has had a payment due) loans has not paid. I'm getting an average 14% return.
    Prosper does a lot of the credit checks for each loan. Beyond the credit score they track current lates and 90 day lates in the last 7 years on people's credit report.
    If the loan does turn out to be a deadbeat the loan gets turned over to a collection agency and Prosper handles the paperwork involved to ding the person's credit.
    Prosper also allows you to spread your risk by investing small amounts(no less than $50) into lots of loans.
    Why should banks be the only ones getting 10-15% returns on loans.
    Lenders are also starting to form informal groups (some are invitation only) where they research the borrowers and score them for the high risk high return loans.
    I'm also collecting stats at http://www.savagenumber.com./

    1. Re:I'm a lender on Prosper.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your site's pretty nice--thanks. I will probably enter the fray with a few hundred dollars for now, just signed up and am awaiting the test deposits.

  50. Money in action by sielwolf · · Score: 1

    Hmmm... rates between 7.32% and 24.04%. Of course the 1% off the closing cost and 0.5% annual fee eat into that return on giving the lien. And I just how much the money is in action and being utilized... and that's why I don't trust the 7% gross return (and by gross do they mean before their fees are calculated in? And are there fees for lender as well?)

    This as an investment strategy just seems to be like trying to beat the system. Big banks have all dollars share equally in gains and losses. Basically it is like a diversified portfolio of an indexed fund of all the liens they had out there. While the rates of 24.04% sounds sexy that's still probably a very rare rate and it is at the high risk threshold for max dollars.

    Also wonder how the amortization schedules are set up.

    Bah. I'm happy just putting my money into REITs.

    --
    What is music when you despise all sound?
    1. Re:Money in action by atlantageek · · Score: 1

      I'm collecting Statistics on Prosper.com by web scraping the data. Check out http://www.savagenumber.com/ for stats.

      7.32-.5 is still 6.82% return. Better most money market accounts and this rate is usually reserver for AA borrowers who tend to have a 0.2% default rate. So if you have say $25000 and invest $50 in $1000 AA loans at 7.32% (again the lowest common rate) you are looking at an expected return of 6.62%

      Of course the loans with the best payoff appear to Be 'D' rated loans. They're rate is about 20% with a default rate of 6.2% giving you a 15.3% return (16.2-.5-6.2 = 15.3%) Now go to your financial advisor and ask what are the chances of having a return of 15.3% return after fees with a potential upside of 19.5%.

  51. This is a disaster by XMilkProject · · Score: 1

    People are worried these sites will be used for scamming, but the real scam is being run by the site itself. They are taking advantage of those people that really don't understand finances and think they can make money but lending here.

    You can make an equal or greater amount of money in a CD or even savings account with the same money, and have zero risk, AND have access to your money if you need it.

    Why the HELL would anyone give their money out to a stranger at fairly high risk, and have no way to get that money back early in an emergency, for zero benefit? There is no ROI.

    Go put your money in an ordinary savings account or CD, or if you want some more risk look into some funds where you'll likely recieve an even higher rate of return.

    --
    Big ones, small ones, some as big as yer 'ead!
    Give 'em a twist, a flick o' the wrist...
    1. Re:This is a disaster by noknownpurpose · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So I assume you never invest in stocks or corporate bonds then, because they have risk and you don't know the people you're giving money to?

      There is a clear risk/reward relationship here. The highest 3 year CD rate I can find is 5.4% APY. I have $1000 into Prosper at an average rate of 16%. That is far higher than any bank or CD rate (because the risk is greater). Is it a good investment? Depends on whether or not all my loans get paid back in full. At $50 a loan I can afford for a couple to default and still come out ahead of the CD option (once I've scaled to a large enough number of loans).

      Additionally, I get monthly cash flow (albeit not a lot of money on $1000 investment). I can either reinvest it or take the cash. Should I need the cash immediately (which I doubt, I have other, more liquid reserves for that) I could always take out a loan (on Prosper) at a lower interest rate than my average (because I have good credit). The loan could then be paid off from the proceeds of loans I've made.

      In truth, the larger risk of Prosper is in the amount of time needed to discover and research new loans on a regular basis.

      I've written up a longer post on my experience with Prosper on my personal finance blog.

    2. Re:This is a disaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      . I have $1000 into Prosper at an average rate of 16%. That is far higher than any bank or CD rate (because the risk is greater). Is it a good investment?

      No, it is not a good investment. You have no meaningful way to gauge your risk exposure. You're lending to proven deadbeats with poor credit histories. It may be great fun to toy around with a $1000 investment, but it's just playing around. Your testimonial might carry some weight if you invested some real money. If you had any real money, though, I bet you wouldn't risk it on this crap shoot.

    3. Re:This is a disaster by Thing+1 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Sounds like, with good credit to start with, you could snowball your way into some serious earning power.

      Start with $1,000. Loan it out at 16%. Start getting monthly checks.

      Take a loan for $1,000, at 8%. Loan it out at 16%. Get more monthly checks.

      Repeat.

      The limit is when your credit rating goes so low because of the outstanding loans that you cannot qualify for another loan to reinvest. Or, when scammers take the whole system down through massive defaulting.

      Still, seems like a good business model at this moment...

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    4. Re:This is a disaster by vidarh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, it's a good business model. It's called being a bank.

  52. Only the market is making money by bazily · · Score: 1

    With no real collateral for the loan from the borrower, and the lack of a need to sell the loan to Wall St., you'll likely see a lot of defaults on questionable credit and no recourse.

    Great!
    The borrower takes on even more debt they can't afford.
    The lender loses their "small" investment.
    The market makes 1-3% on every loan with no risk.

    --
    Why cut IT when your office space costs $3/sf? gibso
  53. it already does by penguin-collective · · Score: 1

    Lots of crooks are using buggy P2P software or Trojan horses to "borrow" money from their "friends", all 500 million of them.

  54. Uh, really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Honestly, you are a twat.

  55. Question: by Zaphod2016 · · Score: 1

    Peer-to-peer finance provides an opportunity to lend money with an expectation of lower profits. In other words, if effective, P2P$ would be a source of cheaper money for America.

    Is a new source of cheaper money good for America's economy right now?

  56. Re:Uh, not really... by daft_one · · Score: 1

    Umm... You may well have caught this since posting your comment, but... I'm pretty sure the idea is to move the existing 30%-rate debt to new 15%-rate debt which'll be easier to pay off. Not so much to add more debt.

  57. clueless about community by tilminator · · Score: 1

    ... They think they can make a real community on the internet, and are using as an analogy the way villages once functioned. Let us ignore the fact that people are much nicer in person than on the internet ...

    A separate online community as incentive to pay back - That's not how it works:

    If all your co-workers and clients (or co-students) will know if you bust your loan, you do care. The same thing goes for a village you are born into and will never leave, or for your relatives. In general, any encompassing group you will depend on and stay in touch with in person.

    However, you can always pull out of designated community, even more easily if it exists only behind your screen.

    If this buisness model might work, it definitely is not community-secured. Side note: community-based lending really does work, just think of the stereotype Chinese immigrant clan, village microcredit projects in developement aid or how our grandparents got by.

    --
    -- up-modding policy: make a good point, write self-contained.
  58. RTFA! by nead · · Score: 1

    First of all, how many bad debts can these peers handle? Large corporations have enough cash to handle bad or delayed debts.

    From the Article The charge-off rate--the percentage of loans written off as uncollectible--for consumer loans, including credit cards, hovered between 2.3% and 3.2% in 2005, according to the Federal Reserve. Though Zopa assumes a bad debt rate of 3.4% for its higher risk borrowers and a 1.3% rate on average, its actual bad debt rate to date is 0.05%.

    Unlike other successful P2P services, this model is entering a market where existing businesses are making a living out of it.

    Exactly

  59. Sounds like the Bond Market to me by davidwr · · Score: 1

    If I'm a company and want to borrow money and avoid the banks, I issue bonds.

    If I want to loan money to a particular company, I buy their newly-issued bonds.

    Personally, I don't see small-scale loans being of interest to most small-scale lenders. The risk of default is just too unknowable. It's a lot less risky to take the already-mentioned credit-union approach, where "lenders" pool their money and borrowers borrow from the common pool.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Sounds like the Bond Market to me by vidarh · · Score: 1
      That is more or less how Zopa work: A loan is split into a number of contracts, typically between 20 and 100 GBP, and and each lender will only participate up to a certain predefined amount per loan. If you invest only a small amount you'd probably leave that at 20 pounds per borrower. If you want to lend your money out quicker, at higher risk, you might up that amount.

      The risk to default in a scenario like that is very well knowable, and it's very low with proper credit assessment upfront. Zopa rejects something like 70% of all loan applications, from what I remember.

      The only downside of that is that it means that it can take a fair while before your money has been lent out, because the processing takes a few days, during which your money is off the market, with a 70% chance that it'll be back in the pool at the end of it, so in my experience getting a large amount lent out at a decent interest rate will take some time.

    2. Re:Sounds like the Bond Market to me by noknownpurpose · · Score: 1

      Statistically speaking, the risk of default *is* knowable. For a given credit grade there is a historical default rate. Therefore if I make one loan (or 5 or 10) you are correct, I don't know whether those are going to default. If I make 100+ loans however, I should start to see default rates approaching market norms for that credit grade. This really is the credit-union approach, only with more direct benefit to the lenders. Several lenders pool their money and make a loan to the same borrower. Because you're not (typically, some lenders are) lending to 1000s of borrowers it is indeed more risky than simply putting your money into a credit union, but the reward (interest rate) is much higher as well. Atlantageek has a graph of risk adjusted interest rates on his site. ---- See my personal finance blog for more...

  60. This is better because it's more democratic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm a little disappointed in the universally negative reception I see in the comments.

    This system is a better way to invest not just because the rates of return are probably higher. (I note a lot of people pointing out interest bearing bank accounts and CDs, but the average prosper loan is three times those interest rates. The default rate will only be known with time, of course.) This way of investing is better because your money is less likely to be the tool of some manipulation of society or even direct attack against you.

    The centrally controlled and big-institution finance industry had been defined by three massively costly disasters in decent decades:

    1) Greenspan's decision to use the Federal Reserve to back W politically, by encouraging deficit spending and manipulating interest rates to make it -- for a short time -- affordable. By now it is clear even to knee-jerk conservatives like myself that the result will be the impovishment of our government, the loss of our influence overseas, and heavy damage to our military institutions.

    2) China's decision to extend massive credit to the rest of the work to buy their low-quality manufactured goods, through manipulation of their exchange rate. (This would not have been possible if there wasn't so much US debt for them to buy, see 1 above)

    3) The big US Financial Institutions' decision to massively expend the availability of consumer credit, resulting in the current sad fact that more people know their "credit score" than know how much they paid in taxes last year.

    If the next president is unpopular with the Federal Reserve chairman, I can counteract his politically motivated money-tightening by extending more $100 loans to small businesses on prosper.

    Experian can punish you for shopping around for a good rate on your mortgage by reducing your credit score. They can reward you for missing occasional payments and thus generating late fees, and raise your credit score, thus rewarding bad and punishing good and poisoning society. However, I can treat shopping as a sign of a thrifty, careful individual and raise your estimation on prosper, and look at late payments as sign of poor organization and lower it.

    These big guys just haven't worked out that well as gaurdians of the financial system. They've been fucking shit up pretty badly for a while now. It's about time we quit letting them use our money to do it.

    1. Re:This is better because it's more democratic by Zaphod2016 · · Score: 1

      Rothbard? Is that you Murray?

      Mod parent up. And read it. Twice.

    2. Re:This is better because it's more democratic by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 1

      Good post!

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
  61. Zopa.... where's your money :) by Vr99878 · · Score: 1

    I don't think there would be any russian clients at Zopa...

  62. WTF??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully, this could also help out people with poor credit ratings as there are more potential businesses to loan them money. (Emphasis mine)

    Why, why, why do people with poor credit ratings need loans for money in the first place? I don't get it. US economy will go down the shitter with this kind of behaviour: just take more loans to pay your debts to get more loans to pay your debts.

    1. Re:WTF??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You're assuming all people with poor credit ratings are broke. Personally I think our credit rating system stinks. Right out of college, I couldn't get a job and defaulted on my student loans. Six years later, with no outstanding debt and a 150k/year salary it was still impossible to get a home loan, or a car loan (actually they offered one to me at 24.7%) even though my debts had been paid for _years_.

      So I was an example of someone with a poor credit rating that needed (or at least strongly and reasonably desired) a loan for money.

  63. You're forgetting one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the place where you make $3500 a year, your costs of living are way, way below that place where you get paid $40k. For example, let's say the person who gets $40k has to pay $25 for a barber. You, in the place where you make $3500, might get it for $3.

    I'd like my barber to cost $3 too. In that sense, the world is weirdly unbalanced.

  64. Pyramid Sceme.. by giorgosts · · Score: 1

    If the authorities approve of such a plan I guess we can trust them with our money, cant'we..

  65. Whos first to loan me 40 million by bxbaser · · Score: 1

    Ill pay it back
    really i will

  66. the debt society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The entire US monetary system (or racket as I prefer) is based on perpetual debt, with the monetary units themselves being debt instruments called "notes". Even when you RECEIVE a so-called dollar, you are ASSUMING a debt from someone else, and said debt perpetuates up the food chain until it disappears into the coffers of some pretty powerful and wealthy concerns, well beyond normal elected politics and definetly mostly out of the public spotlight..

        Even when you THINK you "bought" something, later on some authority figure, based on some of the racket's "laws" which you may run afoul of if they determine you have, can "arrest" that property back, or commonly reposess it, because it is already theirs, because 100% of whatever you paid is in the form of a DEBT to basically them. For example, you do not "own" you car,even if you are assuming it is "paid off", if you did you would have title, what the state gives you is a certificate of title, THEY retain the real title, and those are two different things.

    It is more complex than that obviously, but that is an example of how this game is rigged, totally and completely against you.

    1. Re:the debt society by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      Back TO barter then IF we ABOLISH the concept OF a monetary SYSTEM?

      DEBT is necessary AND you make IT sound LIKE a government is GOING to simply come along and take your posessions and land away for no good reason. In theory the Queen of England can negotiate foreign treaties without consulting the elected government. In practice though the Queen is unlikely to jump on a plane and sign a mutual defence agreement with Myanmar.

      Regards certificates, I don't know if what you say is true about cars but I suspect it isn't. A car is property and surely subject to the same ownership laws as things like a television or a bag of skittles. Land is handled differently though and you have a point there. The government often retains ultimate ownership of the land with a title being given to the person who 'buys' the land

      You sir are paranoid. Have you seen substantial evidence of what you describe happening and how do some many people survive and prosper with these odds stacked so heavily against them"

      I got bored writing words periodically in capital letters so I stopped.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
  67. Islamic Rules Against Usury: It Already Does Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Check Wikipedia on the topics of Zakat and Riba and Islamic Economics, as well as on alternative currencies (e.g., the HOURS currency). Usury is against Sharia law, and Islam finds excellent and workable ways around it. In short, peer-to-peer finance has been in place for a long, long time already, and it works. Further reading in peer-reviewed economics journals might also prove instructive.

  68. Asymmetric information by Rexico · · Score: 1

    Any economist knows that financial markets are special because they suffer from more severe problems of asymmetric information that goods markets. The financial markets have come up with ways of dealing with these information asymmetries (for example intermediation in the form of banks, and the legal and accounting systems). This sort of loan market will fall down due to the joint effects of moral hazard and averse selection.

    1. Re:Asymmetric information by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that's true. Sure, that's why unregulated, anonymous person-to-person loans with no intermediary won't work, but that's not what these are. There is an intermediary doing transparent credit scoring using objective criteria, the "legal and accounting systems" (particularly, legal) are still involved, and the "one-strike" policy at Prosper limits the capacity for bad actors to game the system, as there is no forgiveness. The community elements present a potential additional field of useful information and filtering, though they will need some time to mature.

  69. Jaws by jandersen · · Score: 1

    This sounds like prime feeding grounds for loan sharks. We already have more than enough of that, thank you.

    1. Re:Jaws by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      This sounds like prime feeding grounds for loan sharks.
      Why? Its bound by all the usual lending laws, eminently traceable, and, well, essentially all the things "loan sharks" try to avoid.
  70. We're doing this by hcgpragt · · Score: 2, Informative
    Our company http://www.capitool.com/ is doing this. We've started the company 4 years ago to finance accounts receivables for companies as a marketplace.

    To answer the question of bad debt: We calculate the risk on every receivable so the borrower knows exactly what he is getting into.

    On one side accounts receivables go into our system, on the other side anonymized loans (with precise risk assesements) come out. Let the bidding commence...
    Hugo
    ps. maiden speech
  71. a phenomenon otherwise known as by Ivan+Matveitch · · Score: 1

    capitalism

  72. don't feel too bad by Ivan+Matveitch · · Score: 1

    it does not make them happy

  73. The Redcoats are Coming!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Interesting that Benchmark capital is funding both Prosper and Zopa (UK's Zopa appears headed for our shores soon). Perhaps Benchmark is trying to hedge their bets?

  74. Re:Islamic Rules Against Usury: It Already Does Wo by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Usury is against Sharia law, and Islam finds excellent and workable ways around it.

    Ways around it is a good way to put it--"Islamic banking" charges interest but figures out a way to not call it that. For example, instead of buying a car for $10,000 at 5% interest over three years with a payment of $299.71 including principal and intrest, an "Islamic bank" will buy the car for $10,000, sell it to a borrower for $10,800 with fixed payments over three years of $300.00 with "no interest." The effect is the same. Seems like an awful lot of trouble to go to in order to pretend to comply with Sharia.

    --
    I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
  75. Sure, but a beer costs $35 here. by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    Ok, not so much, actually about $4.50 in a bar but you get the point. Eventually the exchange rates will even it all out as the money flows round the world.

    --
    Deleted
  76. Voting Aggregation by BobMD · · Score: 1

    Another way of looking at this , from a competitive standpoint, is as a vote aggregation market (think "Wisdom of Crowds" or Google's internal voting market), one of the problems with lending and borrowing (in fact the biggest problem) is assessing the creditworthiness of the borrower, in some sense what Zopa and Prosper are both doing is disaggregating the voting, no longer is it one banker on a credit committee or a single FICO model, it has the chance of being a startling efficient way of aggregating individual opinions on a borrowers credit risk, at a minimum it is a very interesting experiment to determine which model is the smarter one.

  77. Nice, but... by krunchyfrog · · Score: 0

    Does that exist in Canada? I sure would like to lend a few bucks to a canadian junkie.

    --
    printf($randomline(sigs.txt) \n "-- "$randomline(authors.txt));
    -- myself
  78. Please be careful! by lorcha · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I checked out the site, and these were my reactions to it:

    The borrowers post what they need the money for, and their stories are identical to the stories I hear every day about why a tenant's rent money is unavaiable/late/whatever. There are some people out there who actually will come up with the rent money. There are some who really intend to come up with it, and believe that they can come up with it, but are unable. There are some who never intend to pay for what they consume and are just good at making up stories. Please, please be careful!

    Be sure to spread your risk across many borrowers. When (not "if") one defaults, you won't lose your entire investment.

    Be careful of people who, within the last few months, just had a major financial hardship (divorce, medical problem, job loss, etc.) I'm not talking about someone who had the problem 2 years ago and has his/her life more or less back on track... but the FICO score isn't up to where it should be yet. I'm talking people who are in he midst of financial turmoil. It's very tempting to take pity on those people because they are in trouble. Just make sure you are playing with money you can afford to lose. Their FICO and D:I may look ok now, but it's possible that their defaults on their obligations haven't caught up with them yet.

    Before you lend any money, please become extra familiar with what the various FICO scores mean and what the debt to income ratio means. Those are the only verified pieces of financial info that you're going to get from the site. A good credit score but high D:I is a very risky loan. Be careful.

    Make sure you're getting a good rate on your loans! You can get a 10% average return with an S&P 500 Index investment. What return are you getting on your money that you're lending out, when you factor in the default rate? Remember, these loans are not FDIC insured. Credit cards are charging these folks a minimum of 18%, and credit cards are not stupid. Make sure you're getting a huge return.

    Good luck! I hope it goes well for you!

    --
    "Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
  79. Credit Unions... by Je-Tze · · Score: 0

    Credit Unions are not p2p financing.
    CU's are essentially banks which are cooperatively owned by their customers, at least in the USA. They are CO-OP's --cooperative businesses-- with special federally mandated rules, because they are banks. Like most co-ops: Each member is a share holder. Each member can only hold one share. Share's can only be held by members.
    LINKS:
    http://www.creditunionsonline.com/
    http://www.ncua.gov/
    and these Wikipedia entries are pretty nice and accurate:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_Union
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-operative

    --
    jz (Je-Tze)
  80. A great way to help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a great way to help your fellow man or bypass the hassles of a bank.

    http://www.greateratlfin.com/

  81. right..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My brother seems to think this peer-to-peer financing thing is working out well. Sure wish he would get a job.

    #%%#%%#

  82. What's so new about this?Ever heard of chit funds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's so new about this except for the internet part? We've had this kind of self-help group financing for ages in South Asia.

    It's a reaallly big industry out there. It's most commonly called a "chit fund" (a "kurie" in parts of South India) This is how it works -

    A group of people with x members (a "chit group") agree to contribute "y" rupees every month for x months. So, each month, the chit group collects xy rupees.
    Now, the chit members begin to bid for this xy rupees.Let the winning bid be "z" rupees. The winner takes xy-z rupees as a loan. The remaining z rupees is distributed among the others as a "bonus".

    So, every month, one person gets a loan from the group and the others get "bonus" as a return for thier investment.

    Generally, the group is arranged by a finance company which takes a commission on the "bonus" amount each month. The finance company also offers some protection from default on part of the borrowers.

    If this is not peer to peer financing, what else is it?

  83. too much uninformed criticism by noodlez84 · · Score: 1
    There seems to be way too much uninformed criticism about Prosper and the like. Here's a few points I would like to make:

    • You get to see the credit score from Experian ScoreX (SM) credit score if you register through Prosper (you don't need to loan any money to register). And lending isn't mandatory: you get to decide how much risk you are willing to take on.
    • Some people are saying, "How can you trust people to pay you back??" Well, for the same reasons that a bank would lend to those people. If you are a borrower, your Prosper loan shows up on your credit report. Late payments become part of your credit report, just like any form of credit.
    • Just like any investment, there's a certain element of risk, and the amount of risk depends on the investment. There's people on Prosper who have PERFECT credit history, and have not missed a payment for 25 years. What's a safer investment: General Motors stock or that individual?
    • The beauty of this system is that you, as a lender, decide how much you are willing to loan your money for. You pick the lowest interest rate you are willing to loan your money for. And the borrower decides the maximum interest rate they are willing to take this loan for.
    • If you don't like banks, this is perfect for you! It lets you loan money to and from other human beings.
    • Please keep in mind that there are many different kinds of people asking for money for many different kinds of reasons. There's professional real estate managers with perfect credit history who want a $25,000 loan to spruce up a house and then sell it back. There's also single mothers with horrible credit history who want a measly $1,000 to pay rent for themselves and their daughter (who happens to have leukemia) and avoid getting evicted; to make matters worse, no bank is willing to loan them any money.


    Being able to loan money to and from people you don't even know is not that much different from buying and selling anything from people you don't know (see eBay). It's a sign of healthy financial markets, and at the very least it may force banks to lower their interest rates: applaud it!
  84. I love the progression of our World by Justifiable_Delusion · · Score: 1

    This is a shining example of the beauty of the internet. We are able to pool the resources of the intelligent masses and are allowing them to benefit financially to help others. The concept of taking cash out of peoples bank accounts and making it available to other random private folks I find amazing. This idea will work...whether or not in this incantation I think has no relevance. This is an amazing idea simply.

    People have been attacking it due to the potential losses by private people and how cna they handle these losses...well the intelligent ones will properly build a portfolio which takes advantage of the strong credit ratings to get consistent low grade interest payments and then compliment that package with payments from high risk but also high gain payments. And since there is a peer to peer system going on here I have a feeling the rates of default will be lesser than those of the traditional institutions...of course that has to be back by real data over a long time frame.

    I am going to take out a loan simply so I can continue to build my credit (I was going to buy a few things anyways) and so I can support this community. And I am going to stick a few thousand of my own money in there just to watch what happens with it.

    The group intelligence of the world will come back to re-route all things we consider traditional and make them efficient and clean.

    Wow....sorry for my foolish fanboyism...but I really love this concept.

    --
    Mad, adj : Affected with a high degree of intellectual independence. Ambrose Bierce - The Deveil's Dictionsary
  85. I actually saw this happen! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a newspaper reporter in the midwest, I covered a semi-governmental organization (chartered by a group of cities and counties to handle issues such as running a landfill, etc) Most of the organization's funding was state and federal grants; the director's bonus plan was based on the organization's annual revenue. One year, the organization issued something like $20 million in bonds (debt), and the director was able to convince his board of directors that that borrowed money was revenue -- his bonus that year was HUGE!

  86. I think that the Chinese Loan System by cylcyl · · Score: 1

    is more of a true peer to peer loan system than this is.

  87. This is perfect for me. by AdamThirteenth · · Score: 1

    I'm in my early 20's, have 0 credit because I buy everything in cash. Until recently I haven't ever needed to go into debt and have, for fundamental reasons, avoided it like the plauge. Now, however, I need more reliable and safer means of transportation which on my income is unaffordable to pay for in cash and unaffordable to lease or finance because insurance is just to much for full coverage for a male my age. I consider myself very thrifty, and good about saving money and don't have the appetitie for spending most american's do. Now, if I want to up my credit, I don't have to wait a year for bank of america to report my secured visa. If I want to find a 3 year 6000 dollar loan to cover what I can't on a new car, I can and won't get stuck paying for full coverage (insurance is a scam). Since I'm dealing with people, they may be more likely to listen when they see "No Credit" as opposed to a bank who will automaticly shut me down.

  88. Diversification by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
    They need to find a way to bundle 1000 of these guys together os it becomes a sure loss of ~3% vs 97% zero loss and 3% total loss.


    Both Prosper and Zopa (with USD 50 and GBP 10, respectively, quantum increments) seem to allow this automatically with automated bids ("standing orders" on Prosper, with Zopa it seems from a quick read through of their docs to be the main [only?] way of lending), so they don't seem to need anything new for this. Also, you don't need to spread to 1,000 to get reasonably close to risk free. While people selling investment products with hundreds of different investments in one general area (like, say, many mutual funds) like to pretend that such wide diversification is necessary to manage risk, usually you'll have essentially eliminated specific risk with a couple dozen holdings of one type, and then be exposed almost exclusively to market risk that affects the entire category, and cannot be affected by diversification within the category.
  89. Trusting the Banks by Acer500 · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately here in South America people have "learned better" than to trust a bank.

    In Argentina and Uruguay, banks defaulted as recently as 2002, leaving lots of people without their savings, pensions and paychecks, in a recession we're just getting out of.

    I hope your government's regulations are good enough, in Argentina the government was the first to jump ship - of course all the corrupt politicians took their money out, even the current Argentinean president's province moved its money to Switzerland all the time asking people to trust the local banking system.

    --
    There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
  90. Re:Islamic Rules Against Usury: It Already Does Wo by Hentai · · Score: 1

    Ah, but there is a difference! In the interest-based case, if you miss a payment, you end up owing an additional $100 or so because of the extra interest. In the Sharia case, you are ONLY ever obligated for the $10,800. That's why Sharia condemns loaning-at-interest - because it's theoretically possible to cause someone to be infinitely indebted to you, if their capacity to pay ever falls below the interest rate.

    --
    -Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
  91. No more offers from Nigeria !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now they will simply borrow money through the system !!!

  92. Re:Islamic Rules Against Usury: It Already Does Wo by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 1

    Took me a bit to see your point--but that would mean, then, that these contracts would have to have no penalty for late payment as well.

    --
    I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.