Messages

Probably if you asked for 100 or less you get your entire fill, max you can get is 250, everyone in the middle is pro-rated accordingly.

where are you guys seeing this?

250 here as well.  Guess they just cut the requested allocation by 30% across the board.

Sucks that this was just a token participation, but still fun:)

 

Yep, does look good, although perhaps some secondary screens using more data might have kicked it out.  Sometimes shit just happens:)

Should be on the DSP site....but having trouble getting to it...anyone else?

Well technically lenders carry the default risk of LC and Prosper SPV:)

This is really excellent news and a very positive development. Makes me able to forgive them a little bit for taking away a lot of useful screening criteria (not forgive completely of course,just a little bit https://forum.lendacademy.com/Smileys/default/smiley.gif" alt=":)" title="Smiley" class="smiley" />

It seems that all notes go to that status, which also incidentally takes them off a selling status on Folio

Tha bank buys most likely whole loans only.

There has been a meaningful decline in total loan volume available (50-100 per feeding now vs normal amounts of 200-400) and the amount of decent loans available as well.

The likely explanation is a combination of seasonal doldrums, as well as LC focusing heavily on IPO and providing a pop after by artficially restricting volume before.

Wanted to see if anyone has a clear idea as to which API field shows the time in months or days since last bankruptcy or major derogatory in Prosper?

There are demostrably fewer loans, and there is a large amount of whole loans among those. In addition lack of better quality loans is continuing, so yep trend is still holding hopefully unitl next marketing campaign or possibly they are holding the volume until IPO so as to generate a string of positive results after it and pop the price.

Yep most definitely last few days there has been a drop off in decent notes, but this happens in waves periodically, so nothing alarming yet.

The notes that were erroneously issued and have now been refunded were not really Cat 2, just made it through due to a glitch, they did not pass any of the underwriting models, older or updated, and as resulte LC reasonably had to remove them from circulation.  It was basically a bug that they fixed, not great but not terribly alarming either.

Can you explain how giving less data and choices to your customers even though the data is clearly available and useful a good thing to do in the long run?

One of the good things about the platforms has been their transparency and data sharing, if they take away half of the data sets there is now way that is good.

This is quite strange, possibly them cleaning their books to be queaky clean going into IPO, or buying back policy code  loans they accidentally released into general population...would be good to get a clear answer.