Clicky

  • Welcome to P2P Lending / NFT Lending Forum.
 

ETH.LOAN

News:

This was the original Lend Academy peer-to-peer lending forum, since forensically restored by deBanked and now reintroduced to eth.loan.

To restore access to your user account, email [email protected]. We apologize for errors you may experience during the recovery.

Main Menu
NEW LOANS:   | 804.eth 2.500 Ξ | remoraid.eth 0.299 Ξ | remoraid.eth 0.299 Ξ | ALL

Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - bdonovan

#2
FolioFN - Prosper / Prosper FolioFN platform is junk
August 30, 2016, 11:00:00 PM
Is it just me or can you not click the back button after going from their Folio search page to an actual note for sale.  When you click back it gives you a form submission error.  I couldn't see any way to go back to the screen to preserve my search and search results.
#3
Lending Robot has a very simple way to sell.  You set filters on Note Selection (ie: grade).  You then specify what the markup/discount would be to the bond value (principal, accrued interest).  Done.  For some reason, I can't figure out how to do this basic thing on PeerCube.  It has the Note Selection part down.  But to sell, I need to pick from 3 strategies, all of which are interesting, but are more involved than simply setting a discount/markup on the bond value.  You can discount/markup from the Average Listed Price and the Lowest Listed Price.  Or you can sell at discount/markup to Total Amount Due (which I figure is total Remaining Payments).  What if you just want to sell at the price of the bond value or a discount/markup related to it??

It seems I can do more sophisticated sales strategies, but not the most basic one.  Help appreciated. 
#4
Investors - LC /
August 12, 2016, 11:00:00 PM
Long story short, Lending Robot misinterpreted my "aggressive" strategy and 1/3rd of the notes it bought were A-Grade notes.  Under status, many of these are "In Review" and "In Funding".  Am I able to cancel these purchases?  I've made changes on LR to make sure that doesn't happen again, but want to know if I can prevent this from going through and make sure I get the notes in the range I'm seeking (C-E). 
#5
LendingRobot / Aggressive strategy - and 33% A notes?
August 11, 2016, 11:00:00 PM
Set LendingRobot (using Automated mode) to fairly aggressive, the most aggressive 8.0% (4/5th of the way over to the right on the slider).  And LR buys 1/3rd of my notes with Grade A (expected return of 3.78%).   I contemplated earlier using the Advanced mode to filter out top-grade notes but assumed the slider would properly interpret my request for an aggressive portfolio with high return notes.  I didn't want to get into Advanced because I thought it would be more complicated to specify my risk threshold across multiple variables.  But I'm a little disappointed LR went so conservative with Automated mode aggressive setting.
#6
Investors - LC / Lending Club 2Q 2016 Results
August 07, 2016, 11:00:00 PM
http://ir.lendingclub.com/Cache/1001212877.PDF?Y=&O=PDF&D=&fid=1001212877&T=&iid=4213397" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">http://ir.lendingclub.com/Cache/1001212877.PDF?Y=&O=PDF&D=&fid=1001212877&T=&iid=4213397

Lending Club Reports Second Quarter 2016 Results
Investors Re-engage in June
Total Originations Reach $2 Billion in the Second Quarter

SAN FRANCISCO – August 8, 2016 – Lending Club (NYSE:LC), the world's largest online marketplace
connecting borrowers and investors, today announced financial results for the second quarter ended
June 30, 2016 and re-established guidance for the third quarter.

Quarter Ended June 30, Six Months Ended June 30,
($ in millions) 2016 2015 % Change 2016 2015 % Change
Originations $ 1,955.4 $ 1,911.8 2% $ 4,705.4 $ 3,546.8 33%
Operating Revenue $ 102.4 $ 96.1 7% $ 253.7 $ 177.2 43%
Net Loss(1 ) $ (81.4) $ (4.1) N/M $ (77.3) $ (10.5) N/M
Adjusted EBITDA(2) $ (30.1) $ 13.4 N/M $ (4.9) $ 24.0 N/M
N/M Not Meaningful

(1)
Includes $35.4 million of goodwill impairment in the quarter ended June 30, 2016
(2) Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. Please see the discussion below under the heading "Non-GAAP
Measures" and the reconciliation at the end of this release.
"Our efforts to reengage investors are working, with fifteen of our top twenty largest investors back
on the platform today," said Lending Club's CEO and President, Scott Sanborn. "Despite the unusual
disruption to our supply of capital in May, we facilitated nearly $2 billion of loans to nearly 170,000
borrowers. While we still have a lot of work ahead, the value that we bring to borrowers and
investors is stronger than ever, and we believe we have the resources and resolve to execute on our
mission."

Second Quarter 2016 Financial Highlights

Originations – Loan originations in the second quarter of 2016 were $1.96 billion, compared to
$1.91 billion in the same period last year, an increase of 2% year-over-year. The Lending Club
platform has now facilitated loans totaling nearly $21 billion since inception.
Operating Revenue – Operating revenue in the second quarter of 2016 was $102.4 million,
compared to $96.1 million in the same period last year, an increase of 7% year-over-year. Operating
revenue as a percent of originations, or revenue yield, was 5.24% in the second quarter, up from
5.03% in the same period last year.

Net Loss – GAAP net loss was $81.4 million for the second quarter of 2016, compared to a net loss
of $4.1 million in the same period last year. The results for the second quarter of 2016 were
negatively affected by a Goodwill impairment charge of $35.4 million related to the 2014 acquisition
of Springstone, an increase in professional service fees of $14.9 million primarily due to matters
identified in the board review previously announced, approximately $14.0 million in incentives paid
to investors, and an increase in compensation related costs of $6.5 million associated with severance
costs and a retention program.

Adjusted EBITDA(2)

 – Adjusted EBITDA was $(30.1) million in the second quarter of 2016,
compared to $13.4 million in the same period last year. As a percent of operating revenue, Adjusted
EBITDA margin decreased to (29.4)% in the second quarter of 2016, down from 13.9% in the same
period last year.

Earnings Per Share (EPS) - Basic and diluted EPS was $(0.21) for the second quarter of 2016,
compared to basic and diluted EPS of $(0.01) in the same period last year.

Adjusted EPS(2)– Adjusted EPS was $(0.09) for the second quarter of 2016 compared to $0.03 in
the same period last year.

Cash, Cash Equivalents and Securities Available for Sale - As of June 30, 2016, cash, cash
equivalents and securities available for sale totaled $832 million, with no outstanding debt.
#7
https://forum.lendacademy.com/index.php?topic=4021.msg36919#msg36919">Quote"> from: rawraw on July 29, 2016, 01:03:11 PM
#8
Investors - LC / Moved into my new Office today
August 02, 2016, 11:00:00 PM
I moved into my new office today.  Cool new office space- excited about it.   Stepped outside for lunch after settling in the new digs.  And who is right across the road- I mean a few steps away?  None other than Lending Club!!  Yes, I now work right next to the LC office.   Having just got into LendingClub investing and now this - life sure works in funny ways https://forum.lendacademy.com/Smileys/default/smiley.gif" alt=":)" title="Smiley" class="smiley" />
#9
https://www.lendingclub.com/info/demand-and-credit-profile.action"" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">According to the average returns showed by LC, there is a delta between the interest rate for the borrower and the actual return.  Wide Delta.  Instead of receiving 17% on D's, we get 8%.  Half the return is lost to defaults.  What if you could marketplace consumer loans, but in this case, compel the borrower to provide proof ownership of a vehicle, home ownership, or partial ownership.  If you look at the detailed borrower stats, they show if they own home (Own) or mortgage (partially own).  This may work because at the outset of the loan, everything thinks it will work; the borrower is not thinking about defaulting so it may not seem significant to use his assets as collateral (because he doe snot think they will beneeded to repay the principal anyhow).  But now, consider, that many of the marketplace loans are backed either fully or partially by these assets.  A $3.5K loan request can be backed by a $7K used car.  A $40K loan for a large purchase may be backed by a mortgage in which he's bough 50% of 400K house. 

Could such a model improve yields?  The overall interest rate would have to be lower (but perhaps not by much).  But most importantly, the Surrender $ from Default will go down.  I mean look at how ominous the numbers look like the MINUTE a loan payment is late.  That won't be the same if we knew there's real collateral.  One may ask- well if they have a car and wanted to consolidate debt, why wouldn't they just sell the car if it was that important.  But that's not how debtos think.  They are optimists assuming both. 

I think it might be interesting for a closer look.
#10
Investors - LC / Returns on 3rd party Automation
July 25, 2016, 11:00:00 PM
Can anyone share what lift you're seeing by using 3rd party automation for investing (such as NSR, Lending Robots, etc.).   I'm having a few challenges with this.  One is finding a side-by-side comparison of the tools. The best I've found is this: http://www.lendacademy.com/overview-p2p-automation-analytics-sites-part-2/" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">http://www.lendacademy.com/overview-p2p-automation-analytics-sites-part-2/ , but hard to gauge from it.  Second, don't know if the fee is worth it- what kind of improve performance people are seeing.  Third, it seems you have to link your LC account to the robot to see how it works- and rt. now just have one account.  For most of the bots, it seems they don't play well together and can't section off one part of your account for them to use (that easily). 

My preference is for an automated service, but one that gives me some visibility into what it's doing.  I just started using Lending Robot- but I do find it's automated service a bit opaque. 

Thanks again - I know I'm asking a bunch of questions as I try to figure it out.
#11
Hey all,

I have a few questions thought you may be able to help me with.

1. Retirement Account: I want to investing in Lending Club notes as part of my retirement account.  I recently left my job and created a consulting company.  So I am planning on creating an Individual 401k (also called solo 401K) retirement account.  It has a much higher contribution limit (~50K; 18K self; and about 30K from profit distributions from the company).  However, I'm not clear how this works with LC.  LC offers different retirement accounts including SEP IRA, but not Individual 401K.   I plan to create my Individual 401K with Fidelity.  At that point, how do I invest in Lending Club from it?

2. Robots: I set up LendingRobot to invest my initial LC account.  However, it seems to want to manage ALL of it.  Am I able to tell the bot to only invest part of it?  NSR seems to be the same way when you link an account; though not 100% sure as I didn't link yet.  You can link and just do the analytics, but I'm asking is there any way to get a bot to invest only a portion of my LC account or just one portfolio within it.  Do any of the bots allow this? 
#12
Investors - LC / Ready to Begin: but no C-E notes
July 24, 2016, 11:00:00 PM
So I read through a fair amount of information on this forum and blogs about Lending Club note selection.  Was about to begin with some basic filters but there seem to be basically no notes of grade C, D, or E.   It's all A, B, F.   Is this common?  Or a temporary thing?   I understand good notes go quickly- is it that investors know historically the returns of these notes have performed so they get grabbed quickly?   Thanks- I'm new to marketplace lending and Lending Club.