Prosper

Prosper Reopens for California Lenders, Nationwide Borrowers

wiseclerk 2 Comments

Prosper.com has restarted offering p2p lending to customers after an SEC imposed 6 months stop (quiet period).

Prosper chief executive Chris Larsen said the California Department of Corporations has authorized the company to resume raising money in California and then lending it out under a system that lets borrowers and lenders use bids to set the interest rates on loans. “I hope this leads to wider acceptance of peer-to-peer lending,” said Commissioner of Corporations Preston DuFauchard. He said the state’s experience with Prosper, prior to the SEC intervention, made it “comfortable” that its bidding system gives lenders the information they need to invest in loans wisely.

Prosper hopes to reopen for lenders from other states but it remains uncertain when Prosper will be allowed to do so.

Prosper raises the minimum credit score required to 640 (Grade C under the old rating). This applies only to new borrowers. Borrowers registered before the quiet period that have lower credit grades can still apply for second loans (example: loan listing of a HR borrower).

Besides “direct” p2p loan listings, Prosper offers “Open Market Listings“, which are described as following:

Open Market loans are existing loans that were underwritten by financial institutions that are credit experts in areas such as auto loans, small business loans or social impact loans. The loan seller describes the loan in an Open Market listing, and then sells and assigns the loan to Prosper.

Open Market loans may include existing consumer loans or retail installment sale contracts. They can be secured or unsecured loans, and may include small business loans, where the borrower is a business entity, not an individual.

Open Market listings describe the existing Open Market loan, owned by the loan seller, which is offered for sale on the Prosper marketplace. Each listing displays information to assist the lender in making an informed bidding decision. Lenders can review the sale price for the Open Market loan, the yield percentage that corresponds to the sales price, the remaining principal balance of the loan and the interest rate the borrower is obligated to pay on the loan.

In some instances on auto loans, you can even see the factory where the car was built. This is all part of the transparency Prosper brings to the marketplace so that you can make informed decisions on how to invest your money.

Prosper plans a secondary market which in future will allow lenders to trade notes.

(Sources: Prosper, San Francisco Chronicle)

Prosper Plans Open Market Loans

wiseclerk 1 Comment

Prosper.com, which is still in quiet period and not allowing new loans, made a new SEC filing yesterday. In this third amendment to the S-1 filing makes several amendments, most notably introducing securitization for initial offerings of loans.

Prosper plans “Open market loans”, which apparently are loans issued by traditional lenders which being securitized and resold to Prosper lenders. I am somewhat sceptical how many Prosper lenders will like the “open market loans” offer. To me this seems a far excursion from the peer to peer lending idea.

In the filing Prosper states that FolioFn will be the operator of the Prosper secondary market (named “Folio Investing Note Trader Platform”). FolioFn already operates the Note Trading Platform of Lending Club.

More changes in the new filing are in a review in this blog post at P2PLendingNews.

P2P lending companies by loan volume – Jan 09

wiseclerk 1 Comment

P2P lending is spreading internationally. While the biggest loan volumes are generated in the US market, many p2p lending websites have been established in other international markets.

P2P-Banking.com has created the following overview table listing services that are in operation and ranked them by loan volume. The loan volumes are not directly comparable for they are cumulative since launch of each service and represent different time spans.

In total approx. 740 million US$ have been funded through peer to peer lending/social lending services so far worldwide.


This image may be reprinted on other internet sites, provided it is not altered or resized and the following text (including the direct link to this article) is given as source directly below the image:
Source: P2P-Banking.com

Since the previous version of this table especially Zopa (UK), Lending Club and Kiva thrived. With Prosper, Loanio and Fynanz halted, Lending Club profits from the situation.


This image may be reprinted under the same conditions as the first one.

Prosper files amended S1-registration statement with the SEC

wiseclerk

Prosper.com yesterday announced it’s new registration filing.

The SEC filing follows an earlier one from last year that apparently did not succeed. Some speculation on the reasons Prosper’s first filing was ill-fated are on Fred93’s blog.

According to the filing, the class action lawsuit against Prosper reported previously on this blog, is currently the only class action lawsuit by lenders stated in the filing.

The sections on ‘Government regulation’ (page 73) and ‘Risks Relating to Compliance and Regulation’ (page 32) state numerous other legal risks the Prosper business model might face in the future.

For the year 2007 the filing reports that Prosper marketplace incurred a net loss of 11.8 million US$ – but still had more than 20 million US$ in cash or cash equivalents on Dec. 31st, 2007.

The following quote shows that in many attempted listings Prosper was not able to verify the income of the borrowers:

For example between September 1, 2007 and August 31, 2008, we verified employment and income for only approximately 22.6% of borrowers. …

Of the borrowers undergoing income verification for the period from September 1, 2007 to August 31, 2008:

+ approximately 56.7% provided us with satisfactory responses and received a borrower loan;
+ approximately 37.7% did not provide satisfactory responses, or did not respond, and their listings were cancelled; and
+ approximately 5.9% either withdrew their listings, or failed to receive bids totaling the amount of their requested loan.

On a side note: The document also discloses that Prosper bought the Prosper.com domain in 2006 for a price of 603,659 US$ (page F-14), of which 320,000 was payed in cash.

Prosper faces class action lawsuit; pays 1M US$ in fines to states

wiseclerk 6 Comments

The SEC cease and desist order against Prosper offered the legal arguments on a plate, now the first class action lawsuit filed against Prosper Marketplace Inc. uses the SEC filing as exhibit A to state it’s case. Regarding numbers and affected lenders the lawsuit by The Rosen Law Firm, New York, states

“…As of October, 2008 approx. $21.7 million of loan notes purchased by Class Action members have become worthless because the borrowers did not pay the loans to Prosper. Additional loan notes will become worthless as more loans are charged off as uncollectible.
…
there are tens of thousands, and perhaps hundreds of thousands of, loan note purchasers that are class action members…”

Prosper is required to file a written response within 30 days. The first court date is set for May 1st, 2009.

On the same issue – selling unregistered securities – but in an otherwise unrelated case Prosper agreed to pay a 1 million US$ fine in a settlement to the states to avoid individual states suing against Prosper. More information on that in the press release of the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA).
This is somewhat surprising to me as Prosper did obtain licenses in over 25 states and conducted lending under those, before it switched to the model using the WebBank. (see ‘Prosper riding the state-by-state roller coaster‘ and ‘Prosper goes national with 36 percent max interest rate‘). The same states that granted the licenses now wanting to sue Prosper?

Last week Zopa’s CEO Giles Andrews commented that regulation issue were the reason why Zopa did not use it’s UK model when it entered the US market.

While Lending Club has completed SEC registration and therefore is in compliance with the rules of the SEC, it might still face some risks. An article of the Oregonian on the NASAA settlement states:

“Oregon regulators also are investigating 40billion.com, owned by Atlanta-based 3 Guys in a Garage, and is currently reviewing a registration request by Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Lending Club, Anselm said.”