Get Rid of Banks and Replace Them With P2P Lending?

That’s a bid radical for me – and I would never demand that. But that’s the tenor of the paper ‘Get rid of banks and build a modern financial world!‘ by Richard Lenz.

He argues:

… This trend must now be continued in regulatory and economic politics: The web-based transferal of capital over Internet platforms will replace conventional banks step-by-step as an intermediary. That the web-based “peer-to-peer lending (P2P)” works successfully is documented by credit-platforms like “smava” in Germany, “Prosper” in the US, and “Zopa” in the UK.
Peer-to-peer lending over a web-based transfer-platform has vital advantages for the “players”:
+ P2P-lending is attractive for the investors (creditor) as well as for the credit user (debtor), because they can share the bank margin, meaning the difference between deposit and loan rates. The platform receives merely a transferal commission. These charges are much lower than the bank margin, because they do not have to finance fancy skyscrap-ers at great locations or bonus payments for investment bankers.
+ The platform only takes over the transferal and does not enter into a contractual posi-tion. Hence, there is no systemic risk, because risks are now peripherally distributed throughout the users.
+ In turn, investors can diversify the default risk by getting involved in various financing projects with small sums or by joining investor groups via the Internet.
+ Money’s undefeatable homogeneity makes it into a product, which is ideally suited for web-based transferals. The advances of information technologies can fully realize its economic benefits here. On the transaction platform, the application of information technologies will clearly increase the transparency, the competition and also the mobility of capital, in comparison to the oligopolistic bank market. Better transparency, increased competition and last but not least, the cessation of bank margins, reduce capital costs and simultaneously simplify accessing capital. From an economic standpoint, these advantages have the potential for a quantum leap within the economic growth of participating market economies.
+ Increased transparency, central processing, and documentation within the transaction platform considerably simplify controlling and supervising finance market transactions. The extensive public resources that have been used for controlling banks so far can now alternately be used to protect investors.

Germany – Do Borrowers on Smava Differ From the Average Population?

A new study of the DIW Berlin (see page 3-9) (authors: Nataliya Barasinska, Nicola Jentzsch und Dorothea Schäfer) has analysed Smava loan data from the years 2007 to 2011 and found out that people who use p2p lending Smava for borrowing resemble the average population using conventional bank loans. Against expectations there was no major difference in age structure:

Regarding gender there is a gap, 28% of Smava borrowers are female; whereis in the comparison group 40% of borrowers are female. Regional distribution of borrower residence did not differ from average population. Continue reading

New Study on P2P Microfinance and Zidisha

Sander van Damme has written the master thesis ‘Peer to peer Microfinance: the case of Zidisha.org‘ at the Louvain School of Management (Belgium). The 70 page study dives deep into analysis of Zidisha‘s complete loan portfolio (Q4 2009 – Q1 2011). It offers a very comprehensive overview on the p2p microfinance operations of Zidisha, the motivations of lenders and borrowers and developments of the interest rates on the marketplace.

Excerpt from the conclusion:

When looking at the trends in social media, the propagation of the internet and the innovations in mobile banking, we believe this website offers us a glimpse of what the future of aid and banking will look like. Although not necessarily a mainstream tool for everyone on this planet, it will surely become part of many a person’s portfolio. Rather than donating anonymously to some big NGOs who will use the money for projects we do not know about; people want to see their impact and be able to connect with each other across the globe.
Whereas we set out to discover whether peer to peer microfinance was a viable solution in the first place, we came across a business model that in the long run could allow both investors and entrepreneurs to profit from their exchange.

Funding Circle Allows Multiple Loans and Higher Risk Loans

Funding Circle will allow multiple loans by the same borrower and also open up to “C” rated borrowers which were so far excluded from loan funding. These changes will be enacted on Sept. 19th. In the blog Funding Circle explains the reasoning for allowing multiple loans:

Businesses typically have multiple finance needs throughout the year, for example they may need finance to purchase new assets or to fund new projects. Previously at Funding Circle, businesses were restricted to one outstanding loan. Many of our borrowers have come back to us with new finance needs and until now we have not been able to help them. In addition, a number of very creditworthy businesses have previously borrowed up to 50,000 GBP with Funding Circle when our maximum loan limits were lower, but which would have always passed our underwriting models for larger loan amounts (our current maximum is 100,000 GBP). …

and for introducing “C” band loans: Continue reading