Lend Academy Network Forum

Lending Club Discussion => Investors - LC => Topic started by: mo on October 01, 2014, 02:29:59 PM

Title: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: mo on October 01, 2014, 02:29:59 PM
    Got an email from LC today about how they are changing to an issuance model where the Note and the Loan are issued a few days apart.

http://kb.lendingclub.com/siteupdates/articles/Site_Updates/Changes-to-the-way-in-which-Notes-are-Issued

    Does anyone understand what this relationship with WebBank is about?  The explanation given for the change by LC is pretty Opaque, "The change to the Note issuance process was made to ensure our business remains robust in a changing environment."  And it seems to me to amount to LC paying a fee to WebBank for issuing a loan that comes out of the investors pocket in the form of a few days of lost interest.  What benefit do LC or the investors get though by adding a middle man to the whole process?
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: GS on October 01, 2014, 02:37:32 PM
Yeah, that was discussed here a month or so ago.  It appears that for the first month, LC is going to deduct a few days worth of interest from our notes and pay it to WebBank for "holding" the notes.  This pretty much sucks since the notes are fully funded with investor cash, and WebBank is taking no risk, IMO.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Fred93 on October 01, 2014, 04:19:31 PM
I believe that when they say "changing environment" they mean REGULATORY environment.  Of course they don't want to say too much about that.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 01, 2014, 07:14:27 PM
It appears that for the first month, LC is going to deduct a few days worth of interest from our notes and pay it to WebBank for "holding" the notes.  This pretty much sucks since the notes are fully funded with investor cash, and WebBank is taking no risk, IMO.

WebBank does not "hold" the notes.  WebBank provides the capital for, and issues, the borrower member loans.  The loans are what the borrower takes out, and the borrower member receives the cash.  But they are not funded by you nor me.  They never have been.  A "note" (in this context) is a derivative, a "side bet" if you will, on whether the borrower will pay and it is between the "investor" and Lending Club.    Or more precisely it's a loan to Lending Club (not the borrower) and the house can never lose.

When you start mixing up the terms "loan" and "note" (again, in this context, not in general) it only serves to confuse the issue.  Without this basic distinction being clear, one cannot have a meaningful discussion about what these changes do or do not mean.

You are quite correct that WebBank has nothing to lose.  Neither does Lending Club.  That's the whole freaking point of this arrangement, from their perspective.  If it wasn't this way the site would not exist.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 01, 2014, 07:59:21 PM
    Got an email from LC today about how they are changing to an issuance model where the Note and the Loan are issued a few days apart.

http://kb.lendingclub.com/siteupdates/articles/Site_Updates/Changes-to-the-way-in-which-Notes-are-Issued

    Does anyone understand what this relationship with WebBank is about?  The explanation given for the change by LC is pretty Opaque, "The change to the Note issuance process was made to ensure our business remains robust in a changing environment."  And it seems to me to amount to LC paying a fee to WebBank for issuing a loan that comes out of the investors pocket in the form of a few days of lost interest. What benefit do LC or the investors get though by adding a middle man to the whole process?

This has always been the arrangement. LC has no bank license. The only thing that has monetarily changed is that LC is taking some interest that was previously paid to us.................& pay it instead to WebBank. Yes, I know it's only "several" days of interest. But based on current volume we are talking about LC removing $5 million a year from our (lenders) collective pockets & giving it to WebBank. Next year, probably $8-9 million.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 01, 2014, 08:29:22 PM
It appears that for the first month, LC is going to deduct a few days worth of interest from our notes and pay it to WebBank for "holding" the notes.  This pretty much sucks since the notes are fully funded with investor cash, and WebBank is taking no risk, IMO.

WebBank does not "hold" the notes.  WebBank provides the capital for, and issues, the borrower member loans.  The loans are what the borrower takes out, and the borrower member receives the cash.  But they are not funded by you nor me.  They never have been.  A "note" (in this context) is a derivative, a "side bet" if you will, on whether the borrower will pay and it is between the "investor" and Lending Club.    Or more precisely it's a loan to Lending Club (not the borrower) and the house can never lose.

When you start mixing up the terms "loan" and "note" (again, in this context, not in general) it only serves to confuse the issue.  Without this basic distinction being clear, one cannot have a meaningful discussion about what these changes do or do not mean.

You are quite correct that WebBank has nothing to lose.  Neither does Lending Club.  That's the whole freaking point of this arrangement, from their perspective.  If it wasn't this way the site would not exist.

Core's right. We are (& have always been) lending money to Lending Club. The only assurance that we get paid back the money we lent out (to say nothing of interest) is Lending Club's word that they will pay us & our belief in their ability to not screw up the business...............which is the main risk. Consider that in the entire time LC has existed, they've only had a couple of profitable quarters. The secondary risk, which is whether individual borrowers pay or don't pay, impacts us through our ROI, but obviously poses little risk to our portfolio as a whole unless a huge amount defaults occur all together.

Now all of the above has been the reality with p2p since day one. Some of us understood the above risks since day one, others don't really understand even today. Depending on the person in question, above average, way above average or obscenely above average returns are the reasons we've been putting money here. But ask yourself where new lenders money is going to come from tomorrow (or the day after) when interest rates finally go up to more normal levels while average returns, which have already been dropping, continue to do so amid the rate increases of "safe" alternatives. I asked this exact question directly to LC 5 years ago & have yet to receive anything that passes for a thoughtful response.  I could list "several" more questions that have never received adequate answers but I'll not go through that pointless task again. Besides I'm guessing the cheerleaders have heard enough of me for today.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 01, 2014, 08:52:01 PM
The only assurance that we get paid back the money we lent out (to say nothing of interest) is Lending Club's word that they will pay us (...)

Precisely.  Backed by the full faith and credit of a company:


Besides I'm guessing the cheerleaders have heard enough of me for today.

Maybe the cheerleaders have.  All two of them that are left on this planet.  But rest assured that the rest of us appreciate your candid posts Dan.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Lovinglifestyle on October 01, 2014, 09:16:57 PM
Absolutely.  I'll take candid over opaque or sugar coated any day!  Thank you both.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Fred93 on October 01, 2014, 09:19:22 PM
5) Maintains a fake office building just for show

Tell me more about the fake office building.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 01, 2014, 10:03:11 PM
Tell me more about the fake office building.

As I recall, it was one of the first conspiracies I exposed on this very forum.  Original thread here:
Is that really Lending Club's building in the photo? (http://www.lendacademy.com/forum/index.php?topic=1115.0)

I had foolishly hotlinked LendingClub's image in my original post, and Lending Club (wisely) took down the image from their 'About Us' page, shredding the evidence, after I exposed their deceit.  So it no longer shows with the post.  But archive.org does have a snapshot of their About Us page from 2013 which contains the image:

https://web.archive.org/web/20130115113150/http://www.lendingclub.com/public/about-us.action

(https://web.archive.org/web/20130123014446im_/http://www.lendingclub.com/public/images/43939/content/marketing/about-building.jpg)

Note that the alt= caption for the photo says "Lending Club HQ".  Not satellite office, abandoned building, buku expensive roadside advertisement, Stephanie's lair, etc.  No, it says headquarters.  And it does look nice.  Problem is, that wasn't their headquarters when they claimed it was.  It was a fake.  And so is the photoshopped American flag. 
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Fred on October 01, 2014, 10:20:56 PM
I was under the impression that it was LC HQ when they were still in Redwood City, CA.

Here is from a different perspective.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lending_Club_HQ_2.JPG

(https://forum.lendacademy.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fcb%2FLending_Club_HQ_2.JPG%2F800px-Lending_Club_HQ_2.JPG&hash=f7781737630bcd74d553c8e5cbc7a52c)
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 01, 2014, 10:30:20 PM
I was under the impression that it was LC HQ when they were still in Redwood City, CA.

That may be, Fred, but according to Peter in the original thread, they moved in 2011.   The archive.org snapshot saying "HQ" is from 2013.  I never claimed that they built a fake office building, merely that they maintain one.


Here is from a different perspective.

Yes, you posted this one in the original thread.  No pretty tree.  It's more like a shrub.  No American flag.  Viewers may be humored by Fred's pic of Frenchie standing in front of the building, which is also in the original thread.

Certainly I did not mean to take this off topic.  LC is guilty as charged with the building fakery and that's that.

The whole reason WebBank is involved is, as Dan said, because Lending Club does not have a bank "license", as he put it.  A license to create money out of thin air, a license to convert a promise to cold hard cash, as WebBank does.   Isn't our banking system grand?  WebBank does not need our cash, because they can create it just like any other bank.  They only need us to be on the hook when the borrower doesn't pay.  That's IT.  You're not lenders, and in fact LC doesn't even call you that.  You're "investors".  Gamblers would be more appropriate.  Maybe even suckers.  But when the dealer keeps dealing blackjacks, you keep playing.  And hope you're gone from the table when the music stops.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Fred on October 01, 2014, 10:56:40 PM
The whole reason WebBank is involved is, as Dan said, because Lending Club does not have a bank "license", as he put it.

From my perspective, this is a good strategy.  Many Wall Street investment banks purposely do not want to have a (commercial) bank license, because this will put them under the supervision of the Federal Reserve, which may impose very stringent, and expensive, regulatory requirements.

As far as LC having no skin in the game, this seems best described by Bloomberg as "Lending Club's assets and liabilities are perfectly matched in loss bearing: Every dollar that a borrower doesn't pay back to Lending Club is a dollar that Lending Club doesn't pay back to note holders."
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-08-27/lending-club-can-be-a-better-bank-than-the-banks
The article also describe another strategic advantage over regular banks: "Lending Club's assets and liabilities are perfectly matched in duration", but this is a separate issue.

The majority of the risks are born by investors/lenders, and thus the majority of rewards go to them as well.  LC is the originator and servicer for the notes.  The risk-reward profiles of investors are different than those of LC.  However, the fundamental "more-risk more-reward" structure is intact.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 01, 2014, 11:47:43 PM
I can't believe we're stuck on this was it or was it not their HQ thing again.............when it could easily be argued to be the least contentious of the 5 points Core listed.

But for those inclined to pursue this til the end of time perhaps you should consider the possibility that for all we know they might not have officially change the designation of HQ until way later as they moved from Sunnyvale to Redwood City to SF in pretty rapid succession. My official business HQ was a UPS mailbox for many years, even though my office was miles away & had never been inside that box.  I'm just sayin'
Yes, the building pictured was their main offices in Redwood City.  For those in the area, the building can be clearly seen on your right while heading south on Hwy 101.  I believe the logo has since been removed as I didn't see it the last time I sped by at night.


 
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 01, 2014, 11:55:21 PM
From my perspective, this is a good strategy.  Many Wall Street investment banks purposely do not want to have a (commercial) bank license, because this will put them under the supervision of the Federal Reserve, which may impose very stringent, and expensive, regulatory requirements.

Translation:  "We want to do X, but X is regulated.  Let's do it but call it something else, or borrow someone else's license so we can continue to do X without oversight."

Ever wonder why your bank says they may cover overdrafts?  If they say that they will then it becomes a contractual obligation and they are now under the Truth In Lending Act and they have to tell you how much you're getting raped in fees.  Whereas if it's just a "courtesy", now they are immune.

"Good strategy" indeed, Fred.  And it stinks.


"Lending Club's assets and liabilities are perfectly matched in loss bearing: Every dollar that a borrower doesn't pay back to Lending Club is a dollar that Lending Club doesn't pay back to note holders."
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-08-27/lending-club-can-be-a-better-bank-than-the-banks

Translation:  "For every inch we get shafted, we stick it to someone else"

Out here in Iowa, we've got a name for that.  And it ain't family-friendly.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 01, 2014, 11:57:42 PM
The whole reason WebBank is involved is, as Dan said, because Lending Club does not have a bank "license", as he put it.

From my perspective, this is a good strategy.  Many Wall Street investment banks purposely do not want to have a (commercial) bank license, because this will put them under the supervision of the Federal Reserve, which may impose very stringent, and expensive, regulatory requirements.

As far as LC having no skin in the game, this seems best described by Bloomberg as "Lending Club's assets and liabilities are perfectly matched in loss bearing: Every dollar that a borrower doesn't pay back to Lending Club is a dollar that Lending Club doesn't pay back to note holders."
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-08-27/lending-club-can-be-a-better-bank-than-the-banks
The article also describe another strategic advantage over regular banks: "Lending Club's assets and liabilities are perfectly matched in duration", but this is a separate issue.

The majority of the risks are born by investors/lenders, and thus the majority of rewards go to them as well.  LC is the originator and servicer for the notes.  The risk-reward profiles of investors are different than those of LC.  However, the fundamental "more-risk more-reward" structure is intact.

At best that's an extreme oversimplification of the risks. At worst, it's just plain incorrect.  As Core & I have described above ( & ad nauseam in the past) & as LC clearly states in the "risks" section of its own prospectus, it is entirely possible that a borrower may pay back LC & LC may not pay us back................unless you're investing like their institutional investors. That is why I have been harping on for a year now about LC creating a BRV (like Prosper) which shields the notes from being just another LC obligation & protects us (retail investors) from the platform risk described.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Fred on October 02, 2014, 12:03:05 AM
Translation:  "We want to do X, but X is regulated.  Let's do it but call it something else, or borrow someone else's license so we can continue to do X without oversight."

I  think LC is neither doing it nor borrowing license.

Translation:  "For every inch we get shafted, we stick it to someone else"
Out here in Iowa, we've got a name for that.  And it ain't family-friendly.

LC does not get shafted when borrower does not pay.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Fred on October 02, 2014, 12:12:42 AM
At best that's an extreme oversimplification of the risks. At worst, it's just plain incorrect. 

Matching duration and risk is a unique LC advantage that regular commercial banks cannot afford.  It eliminates a whole host of financial and regulatory issues.

As an investor, I want LC to be profitable, so that I can be profitable.  If LC charges fees here and there (totaling 1.1% instead of 1.0%), that is fine.  I want it to stay alive.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: LonghornSF on October 02, 2014, 12:20:05 AM
I hope the bit about Lending Club's HQ being a conspiracy is a joke. That was their original HQ before they move to SF. They probably forgot to change the image when they moved -- startups tend to have more important things to worry about. There are bones to pick with LC but this is not one of them.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 02, 2014, 12:23:46 AM
LC does not get shafted when borrower does not pay.

Well of course they don't, because they stick it to someone else first.  Yes it is a good strategy.

I  think LC is neither doing it nor borrowing license.

They are borrowing license in my opinion.  They are hanging themselves out as a lender.  They are acting as a bank, piggybacking on WebBank's charter.

As a pilot, the most recent case that comes to my mind is the 2005 Teterboro crash (http://www.justice.gov/usao/nj/Press/files/Brassington,%20Michael%20and%20Paul%20Sentencing%20News%20Release.html).  Platinum Jet Management LLC was a charter jet company but did not have a part 135 certificate (therefore not legal to fly on-demand flights).  So instead they had Darby Aviation, a valid certificate holder, take legal responsibility for the actual flights and PJM would do the flying after the flight was booked. 

Much like what LendingClub and WebBank are doing.  Sound familiar?

The owners of Platinum Jet Mangement were sentenced to prison.  The FAA was aware of what they were doing all along.  All it took was one unpleasant event, and things suddenly rose to a higher standard.  That moment may come some day for Lending Club.  When/if it happens, all of your funds are at risk because the company itself will be.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Fred on October 02, 2014, 12:35:28 AM
Well of course they don't, because they stick it to someone else first.  Yes it is a good strategy.

Sorry, LC does not stick it to someone else.   Investors should know about the risks coming in.  No surprise here.

I  think LC is neither doing it nor borrowing license.

They are borrowing license in my opinion.  They are hanging themselves out as a lender.  They are acting as a bank, piggybacking on WebBank's charter.

As a pilot, the most recent case that comes to my mind is the 2005 Teterboro crash (http://www.justice.gov/usao/nj/Press/files/Brassington,%20Michael%20and%20Paul%20Sentencing%20News%20Release.html).  Platinum Jet Management LLC was a charter jet company but did not have a part 135 certificate (therefore not legal to fly on-demand flights).  So instead they had Darby Aviation, a valid certificate holder, take legal responsibility for the actual flights and PJM would do the flying after the flight was booked. 

Much like what LendingClub and WebBank are doing.  Sound familiar?

I am not an expert in aviation licensing, but this seems a bit too stretched to relate this to LC and WebBank.  The interaction between LC and WebBank is well-defined; similar practice is done in mortgage industry -- i.e., almost similar to mortgage originators and servicers.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 02, 2014, 12:58:44 AM
Sorry, LC does not stick it to someone else.   Investors should know about the risks coming in. 

Is that why I'm not allowed to sell Folio notes for negative YTM anymore?  Is that why there's a big ol' warning added saying you're about to get raped when you click over to the Folio site?  Because investors are so smart they should already have "known about the risks coming in"? 

No, the San Francisco pinkos have decided I'm not allowed to stick it to investors anymore because the investors are too stupid and need to be protected.  I don't see how this agrees with your suggestion.  If anyone's going to get stuck, LC is going to be the ones to do it.  That's how I see it.

I am not an expert in aviation licensing, but this seems a bit too stretched to relate this to LC and WebBank. 

Perhaps.  I never let facts get in the way of a point, nor a good plane crash story.  But it's something to ponder.  Everyone involved thought they had found the perfect loophole.  Indeed, they had.  Until...!  It could be argued that the goalposts were moved in response to public outcry.  Lending Club is not immune from this either.  And wouldn't it be ever-so-ironic if the experts of goalpost-moving were brought down by that very same activity.

similar practice is done in mortgage industry -- i.e., almost similar to mortgage originators and servicers.

Translation:  "But, everyone else is doing it!"

Actually, not quite:
Mortgage servicers do not run radio ads enticing potential borrowers to apply for a loan at their own site.  Mortgage servicers do not have underwriters that grade potential loans.  Mortgage servicers do not decide what date the borrower can have their money, or if s/he is even qualified.

I'm suddenly starting to have a bad feeling about the future of Lending Club.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 02, 2014, 01:10:05 AM
At best that's an extreme oversimplification of the risks. At worst, it's just plain incorrect. 

Matching duration and risk is a unique LC advantage that regular commercial banks cannot afford.  It eliminates a whole host of financial and regulatory issues.

As an investor, I want LC to be profitable, so that I can be profitable.  If LC charges fees here and there (totaling 1.1% instead of 1.0%), that is fine.  I want it to stay alive.

 But your response did not in any way address the concerns about diminishing the platform risk. If LC has a problem in the future or makes some serious blunder that shakes public confidence & has problems achieving consistent profitability, then I'd just as soon not let that debacle have the potential of taking all of our money down as well. You're deluding yourself if you don't think that is a big potential problem.

But I can respect your position that you're satisfied with giving LC a bit more & a bit more & a bit more in order for them to remain alive. I'm assuming you feel this way because you find your returns to be adequate considering the alternatives. My question is how will you feel when your returns decrease (which they will) & how will you feel when the gap closes between what you "earn" here & what you can get effortlessly elsewhere..............which will also happen in the not too distant future.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 02, 2014, 03:30:32 AM
I'm hesitant to even bring this up again, but just to put it to rest...

Fred, you may recall saying this in the thread about the office building:

Please do let us know what you discover.

Better late than never, I guess.  I now have the results of my investigation ready to share.

The photo appears to be legit.  It was taken from approximately this angle; this is as granular as I could get Google streetview to go.  The logo does not say LC but this is the shot:

(https://forum.lendacademy.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs3.postimg.org%2Fzd9omfbpv%2Flc_street_view.jpg&hash=a903041af5d12a1c30302839d31a47dc) (https://www.google.com/maps?q=370+convention+way,+redwood+city,+ca&hl=en&ll=37.494671,-122.230348&spn=0.000847,0.000856&sll=30.937336,-91.40087&sspn=5.303701,7.009277&hnear=370+Convention+Way,+Redwood+City,+California+94063&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=37.494702,-122.230447&panoid=SI2b0LvrUhjBdfcTqFkz5w&cbp=12,71.32,,0,2.38)

I would guess that the photographer stood next to the pink electrical enclosure near the black car, or on top of it.  Since I doubt it matters to anyone here which one, I did not actually calculate the angles.  Notice how the 4 trees blend together to look like one.  In reality they are awfully spindly looking trees from the side.

As for the flag:

(https://forum.lendacademy.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs8.postimg.org%2Fhk7o08xmt%2Flc_flagpole.jpg&hash=f2ee36babd53db06f599836014f0960b) (https://www.google.com/maps?q=370+convention+way,+redwood+city,+ca&hl=en&ll=37.494914,-122.229646&spn=0.001694,0.001711&sll=30.937336,-91.40087&sspn=5.303701,7.009277&t=h&hnear=370+Convention+Way,+Redwood+City,+California+94063&z=19)

So I hope this settles it for all you skeptics.  Lending Club obviously planted some mature trees and erected a flagpole after the original discussion to make things look legit.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Fred93 on October 02, 2014, 04:56:23 AM
Wow.  Now this is real lending analytics!
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: rawraw on October 02, 2014, 07:14:33 AM
\
Mortgage servicers do not run radio ads enticing potential borrowers to apply for a loan at their own site.

 Mortgage servicers do not have underwriters that grade potential loans. 

Mortgage servicers do not decide what date the borrower can have their money, or if s/he is even qualified.

Yes they can.  Yes they can. And yes they can. 

Quote
My question is how will you feel when your returns decrease (which they will) & how will you feel when the gap closes between what you "earn" here & what you can get effortlessly elsewhere..............which will also happen in the not too distant future.
Your question is misleading, assuming that LC pricing is not impacted by market rates.  I forget what index they are pegged to, but their rates will move when index rates move.  Of course they can adjust by how much to tweak supply/demand.

Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 02, 2014, 08:50:36 AM
\
Mortgage servicers do not run radio ads enticing potential borrowers to apply for a loan at their own site.

 Mortgage servicers do not have underwriters that grade potential loans. 

Mortgage servicers do not decide what date the borrower can have their money, or if s/he is even qualified.

Yes they can.  Yes they can. And yes they can. 

Quote
My question is how will you feel when your returns decrease (which they will) & how will you feel when the gap closes between what you "earn" here & what you can get effortlessly elsewhere..............which will also happen in the not too distant future.
Your question is misleading, assuming that LC pricing is not impacted by market rates.  I forget what index they are pegged to, but their rates will move when index rates move.  Of course they can adjust by how much to tweak supply/demand.

And your statement is misleading as well because the scenario you suggest has never been tested & presupposes that there is much upside room available. What is the highest rate charged today in this near zero interest rate environment?  24%, 25%? What do you suspect the rates will be be when the time comes where you can roll into a bank & get a three year & five year CD at 3%-5%? You think that the ever increasing number of borrowers needed by p2p will support a 27-29% top rate? Really because I'm certain the current type of borrowers, (80% of whom supposedly consolidate or pay off credit) will have little appetite for rates above their MC/Visa.  What policy code number will they call these sub 640 individuals?  What type of annual default numbers will these guys have? 
Title: Re: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: rawraw on October 02, 2014, 08:52:32 AM

And your statement is misleading as well because the scenario you suggest has never been tested & presupposes that there is much upside room available. What is the highest rate charged today in this near zero interest rate environment?  24%, 25%? What do you suspect the rates will be be when the time comes where you can roll into a bank & get a three year & five year CD at 3%-5%? You think that the ever increasing number of borrowers needed by p2p will support a 27-29% top rate? Really because I'm certain the current type of borrowers, (80% of whom supposedly consolidate or pay off credit) will have little appetite for rates above their MC/Visa.  What policy code number will they call these sub 640 individuals?  What type of annual default numbers will these guys have?
So now your saying that your credit card rates aren't floating. Well I can't speak for the one percent, but all ten of mine are also variable rate.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: lascott on October 02, 2014, 09:30:23 AM
I forget what index they are pegged to, but their rates will move when index rates move.  Of course they can adjust by how much to tweak supply/demand.

http://andirog.blogspot.com/2012/06/lending-club-base-interest-rate-excess.html
Quote
Base Interest Rate
The starting point for base interest rate is the middle of the spread between the interest rate for unsecured consumer credit as published in Federal Reserve Board Consumer Credit G.19 Release and the average interest rate for 6-month certificates of deposit as published in Federal Reserve Board Selected Interest Rate H.15 Release.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: Half Right on October 02, 2014, 10:57:42 AM
Does anyone know if the LC Advisor funds are also paying WebBank?
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: GS on October 02, 2014, 02:22:59 PM
That flag probably is photoshopped, since it would have to be huge to appear that large in the reflection of the window from that distance.  So what?  Someone "enhanced" the images they use in their advertisements?  That's pretty standard in the professional photography industry, isn't it?  They didn't update their website pics when the moved offices?  Again, who cares?

There are plenty of valid things to criticize LC over ... like decreasing investor returns through (1) knocking off a few days of interest, (2) inexplicably sneaking a "no IRA trading" notice onto the back page of website, (3) holding "approved and funded" notes, that could be issued, near the end of each month, (4) fining INVESTORS 18% if the BORROWER pays 16+ days late, (5) increasingly lackadaisical collection efforts, etc ... These are all things that have changed in the last 20 months since I started participating, and they all eat away at returns.  It's concerning to me that if this much has changed in recent times, to the detriment of investors, where are we headed with this?


I'm more concerned about that, than solving the "who photoshopped the flag" conspiracy theory. 
Title: Re: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 02, 2014, 04:20:36 PM

And your statement is misleading as well because the scenario you suggest has never been tested & presupposes that there is much upside room available. What is the highest rate charged today in this near zero interest rate environment?  24%, 25%? What do you suspect the rates will be be when the time comes where you can roll into a bank & get a three year & five year CD at 3%-5%? You think that the ever increasing number of borrowers needed by p2p will support a 27-29% top rate? Really because I'm certain the current type of borrowers, (80% of whom supposedly consolidate or pay off credit) will have little appetite for rates above their MC/Visa.  What policy code number will they call these sub 640 individuals?  What type of annual default numbers will these guys have?
So now your saying that your credit card rates aren't floating. Well I can't speak for the one percent, but all ten of mine are also variable rate.

No, that is not what I am saying. Please read my post again.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: rawraw on October 02, 2014, 04:31:20 PM
Do you have reason to believe that rising rates will increase the default rates of prime borrowers?
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 03, 2014, 01:58:17 AM
Do you have reason to believe that rising rates will increase the default rates of prime borrowers?

None whatsoever. But are we calling these people "prime borrowers" too now? That  term has been getting seriously abused ever since p2p started.  660 Fico is called Prime Consumer Notes? What a joke.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: lascott on October 03, 2014, 02:21:49 AM
Do you have reason to believe that rising rates will increase the default rates of prime borrowers?
None whatsoever. But are we calling these people "prime borrowers" too now? That  term has been getting seriously abused ever since p2p started.  660 Fico is called Prime Consumer Notes? What a joke.

It is interesting that whatever FICO score you want to consider prime consumers that you can find them across all grades.

(https://forum.lendacademy.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fico.com%2Fen%2Fblogs%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fimg%2F6a00d83451629b69e201a73ddeac2b970d-pi&hash=cc84bf012c3144dc49aae6c710f957ca)

(https://forum.lendacademy.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FpEwGHtw.png&hash=306a0d5a916c06c3734c96873445834d)
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: AnilG on October 03, 2014, 02:58:45 AM
Those who believe lending on Lending Club is less risky should consider reading about subprime crisis and role of securitization in the crisis. Following quote from Federal Reserve paper is very telling about the incentive mis-alignment with "originate-to-distribute" model. LC platform is using the same "originate-to-distribute" model that led to problems in mortgage market. The undoing of Lending Club will be lowering of standards in screening applicants. Once LC goes public, the pressure to meet quarterly targets will lead to it sooner or later.

The Rise in Mortgage Defaults http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2008/200859/200859pap.pdf
Did Securitization Lead to Lax Screening? Evidence from Subprime Loans http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1093137

Quote
We then consider incentives in the mortgage market, which during the 2000s shifted to an “originate-to-distribute” model, under which mortgage brokers originated loans and then sold them to institutions that securitized them. As brokers did not bear the ultimate costs of default, they may have had a lower incentive to screen applicants carefully (Keys, Mukherjee, Seru, and Vig, 2008). We find that underwriting deteriorated along several dimensions: more loans were originated to borrowers with very small down payments and little or no documentation of their income or assets, in particular. The final culprit we consider is changes in underlying macroeconomic conditions such as interest rates, unemployment, and house prices. We find substantial evidence that declines in house prices are a key factor in the current problems facing the mortgage market.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 03, 2014, 06:07:24 AM
Those who believe lending on Lending Club is less risky should consider reading about subprime crisis and role of securitization in the crisis. Following quote from Federal Reserve paper is very telling about the incentive mis-alignment with "originate-to-distribute" model. LC platform is using the same "originate-to-distribute" model that led to problems in mortgage market. The undoing of Lending Club will be lowering of standards in screening applicants. Once LC goes public, the pressure to meet quarterly targets will lead to it sooner or later.

The Rise in Mortgage Defaults http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2008/200859/200859pap.pdf
Did Securitization Lead to Lax Screening? Evidence from Subprime Loans http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1093137

Quote
We then consider incentives in the mortgage market, which during the 2000s shifted to an “originate-to-distribute” model, under which mortgage brokers originated loans and then sold them to institutions that securitized them. As brokers did not bear the ultimate costs of default, they may have had a lower incentive to screen applicants carefully (Keys, Mukherjee, Seru, and Vig, 2008). We find that underwriting deteriorated along several dimensions: more loans were originated to borrowers with very small down payments and little or no documentation of their income or assets, in particular. The final culprit we consider is changes in underlying macroeconomic conditions such as interest rates, unemployment, and house prices. We find substantial evidence that declines in house prices are a key factor in the current problems facing the mortgage market.

I agree. In fact I'd contend that we are already in the early ongoing lowering of standards period. Note the average returns continuing to decline. Also, remember when LC emphatically & proudly touted how only the very best 10% of borrowers were approved? Remember when they had a running count  that showed how many people applied, how many were rejected & how many approved?  I remember all that being easily located on the site back when I started in late 2009. Where is all that now? Does anyone at LC even talk about any of that anymore?

Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: rawraw on October 03, 2014, 07:02:32 AM
Do you have reason to believe that rising rates will increase the default rates of prime borrowers?

None whatsoever. But are we calling these people "prime borrowers" too now? That  term has been getting seriously abused ever since p2p started.  660 Fico is called Prime Consumer Notes? What a joke.
Because I'm having trouble following your rational.  You seem to be tweaking all these variables in your question and I'm not understanding the order. You are mentioning rate limits, policy code numbers, etc.  Let's just assume for simplicity rates rise a parallel 400 bps immediately (which would return it to the long term average-ish).

1) All index rates rise 400 bps at all maturities.
2) Lending Club Rates Rise 400 bps at all credit grades ( no usury limits because of Utah)
3) Credit Card Rates Rise 400 BPS for all borrowers
4) Default Rates are largely unimpacted by the rising rates

So the exact same borrower with A1 rating now has 10.03 interest rate instead of 6.03 percent.  If default rates remain constant, the net return roughly increases 4 percent.  So an investor who just wanted a certain return (for example 12), could actually get it with less credit risk than before.  But the top rate borrowers also have moved up.

So I'm struggling to understand your question.  Which of the 4 are you concerned with?  These are potential concerns, but you haven't explicitly mentioned any

1) Non-parallel yield curve shift that significantly impacts the returns due to the different index rates
2) Lending Club has a correlation coefficient (ultimately the midpoint rate used) of less than 100. 
4) Default rates are impacted.

Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: rawraw on October 03, 2014, 07:03:33 AM
Those who believe lending on Lending Club is less risky should consider reading about subprime crisis and role of securitization in the crisis. Following quote from Federal Reserve paper is very telling about the incentive mis-alignment with "originate-to-distribute" model. LC platform is using the same "originate-to-distribute" model that led to problems in mortgage market. The undoing of Lending Club will be lowering of standards in screening applicants. Once LC goes public, the pressure to meet quarterly targets will lead to it sooner or later.

The Rise in Mortgage Defaults http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2008/200859/200859pap.pdf
Did Securitization Lead to Lax Screening? Evidence from Subprime Loans http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1093137

Quote
We then consider incentives in the mortgage market, which during the 2000s shifted to an “originate-to-distribute” model, under which mortgage brokers originated loans and then sold them to institutions that securitized them. As brokers did not bear the ultimate costs of default, they may have had a lower incentive to screen applicants carefully (Keys, Mukherjee, Seru, and Vig, 2008). We find that underwriting deteriorated along several dimensions: more loans were originated to borrowers with very small down payments and little or no documentation of their income or assets, in particular. The final culprit we consider is changes in underlying macroeconomic conditions such as interest rates, unemployment, and house prices. We find substantial evidence that declines in house prices are a key factor in the current problems facing the mortgage market.

I agree. In fact I'd contend that we are already in the early ongoing lowering of standards period. Note the average returns continuing to decline. Also, remember when LC emphatically & proudly touted how only the very best 10% of borrowers were approved? Remember when they had a running count  that showed how many people applied, how many were rejected & how many approved?  I remember all that being easily located on the site back when I started in late 2009. Where is all that now? Does anyone at LC even talk about any of that anymore?
And yes, LC getting involved in subprime borrowers has made me not the happiest.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 03, 2014, 09:44:41 AM
Do you have reason to believe that rising rates will increase the default rates of prime borrowers?

None whatsoever. But are we calling these people "prime borrowers" too now? That  term has been getting seriously abused ever since p2p started.  660 Fico is called Prime Consumer Notes? What a joke.
Because I'm having trouble following your rational.  You seem to be tweaking all these variables in your question and I'm not understanding the order. You are mentioning rate limits, policy code numbers, etc.  Let's just assume for simplicity rates rise a parallel 400 bps immediately (which would return it to the long term average-ish).

1) All index rates rise 400 bps at all maturities.
2) Lending Club Rates Rise 400 bps at all credit grades ( no usury limits because of Utah)
3) Credit Card Rates Rise 400 BPS for all borrowers
4) Default Rates are largely unimpacted by the rising rates

So the exact same borrower with A1 rating now has 10.03 interest rate instead of 6.03 percent.  If default rates remain constant, the net return roughly increases 4 percent.  So an investor who just wanted a certain return (for example 12), could actually get it with less credit risk than before.  But the top rate borrowers also have moved up.

So I'm struggling to understand your question.  Which of the 4 are you concerned with?  These are potential concerns, but you haven't explicitly mentioned any

1) Non-parallel yield curve shift that significantly impacts the returns due to the different index rates
2) Lending Club has a correlation coefficient (ultimately the midpoint rate used) of less than 100. 
4) Default rates are impacted.

Normally when someone starts a post with the word "because", it's an indication that they are answering a question. I'm sorry, but I just don't see the connection in this case. I don't normally hold people to this conventional behavior.............but am pointing it out to highlight your rather interesting comment of you having problems following me! But I apologize nonetheless. My mind tends to function on multiple levels simultaneously. I can understand why some may find it challenging to follow.  :)

I also find it interesting that you've chosen to pose your question within the confines of the 1 group of borrowers (A1) which are of the least interest to most readers here. Besides, I believe I've already answered that question when I said "none whatsoever" in response to your question about the default rates of prime borrowers, Of course I mean true prime & not this collective mishmash of borrowers which LC calls "prime consumers", a categorization so broad that it includes lots of people who I wouldn't trust lending $35 to ............to say nothing of $35k.

Title: Re: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: rawraw on October 03, 2014, 10:53:54 AM
Do you have reason to believe that rising rates will increase the default rates of prime borrowers?

None whatsoever. But are we calling these people "prime borrowers" too now? That  term has been getting seriously abused ever since p2p started.  660 Fico is called Prime Consumer Notes? What a joke.
Because I'm having trouble following your rational.  You seem to be tweaking all these variables in your question and I'm not understanding the order. You are mentioning rate limits, policy code numbers, etc.  Let's just assume for simplicity rates rise a parallel 400 bps immediately (which would return it to the long term average-ish).

1) All index rates rise 400 bps at all maturities.
2) Lending Club Rates Rise 400 bps at all credit grades ( no usury limits because of Utah)
3) Credit Card Rates Rise 400 BPS for all borrowers
4) Default Rates are largely unimpacted by the rising rates

So the exact same borrower with A1 rating now has 10.03 interest rate instead of 6.03 percent.  If default rates remain constant, the net return roughly increases 4 percent.  So an investor who just wanted a certain return (for example 12), could actually get it with less credit risk than before.  But the top rate borrowers also have moved up.

So I'm struggling to understand your question.  Which of the 4 are you concerned with?  These are potential concerns, but you haven't explicitly mentioned any

1) Non-parallel yield curve shift that significantly impacts the returns due to the different index rates
2) Lending Club has a correlation coefficient (ultimately the midpoint rate used) of less than 100. 
4) Default rates are impacted.

Normally when someone starts a post with the word "because", it's an indication that they are answering a question. I'm sorry, but I just don't see the connection in this case. I don't normally hold people to this conventional behavior.............but am pointing it out to highlight your rather interesting comment of you having problems following me! But I apologize nonetheless. My mind tends to function on multiple levels simultaneously. I can understand why some may find it challenging to follow.  :)

I also find it interesting that you've chosen to pose your question within the confines of the 1 group of borrowers (A1) which are of the least interest to most readers here. Besides, I believe I've already answered that question when I said "none whatsoever" in response to your question about the default rates of prime borrowers, Of course I mean true prime & not this collective mishmash of borrowers which LC calls "prime consumers", a categorization so broad that it includes lots of people who I wouldn't trust lending $35 to ............to say nothing of $35k.
Well you just seem like you want to complain instead of think. Now I see why you haven't gotten meaningful responses. I realize now I'm wasting my time trying to understand your concern.
Title: Re: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: bobeubanks on October 03, 2014, 02:00:08 PM
So now your saying that your credit card rates aren't floating. Well I can't speak for the one percent, but all ten of mine are also variable rate.

Credit card rates do float, but the average credit card rate does not exactly follow prime rates.
Title: Re: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 03, 2014, 07:14:03 PM
Do you have reason to believe that rising rates will increase the default rates of prime borrowers?

None whatsoever. But are we calling these people "prime borrowers" too now? That  term has been getting seriously abused ever since p2p started.  660 Fico is called Prime Consumer Notes? What a joke.
Because I'm having trouble following your rational.  You seem to be tweaking all these variables in your question and I'm not understanding the order. You are mentioning rate limits, policy code numbers, etc.  Let's just assume for simplicity rates rise a parallel 400 bps immediately (which would return it to the long term average-ish).

1) All index rates rise 400 bps at all maturities.
2) Lending Club Rates Rise 400 bps at all credit grades ( no usury limits because of Utah)
3) Credit Card Rates Rise 400 BPS for all borrowers
4) Default Rates are largely unimpacted by the rising rates

So the exact same borrower with A1 rating now has 10.03 interest rate instead of 6.03 percent.  If default rates remain constant, the net return roughly increases 4 percent.  So an investor who just wanted a certain return (for example 12), could actually get it with less credit risk than before.  But the top rate borrowers also have moved up.

So I'm struggling to understand your question.  Which of the 4 are you concerned with?  These are potential concerns, but you haven't explicitly mentioned any

1) Non-parallel yield curve shift that significantly impacts the returns due to the different index rates
2) Lending Club has a correlation coefficient (ultimately the midpoint rate used) of less than 100. 
4) Default rates are impacted.

Normally when someone starts a post with the word "because", it's an indication that they are answering a question. I'm sorry, but I just don't see the connection in this case. I don't normally hold people to this conventional behavior.............but am pointing it out to highlight your rather interesting comment of you having problems following me! But I apologize nonetheless. My mind tends to function on multiple levels simultaneously. I can understand why some may find it challenging to follow.  :)

I also find it interesting that you've chosen to pose your question within the confines of the 1 group of borrowers (A1) which are of the least interest to most readers here. Besides, I believe I've already answered that question when I said "none whatsoever" in response to your question about the default rates of prime borrowers, Of course I mean true prime & not this collective mishmash of borrowers which LC calls "prime consumers", a categorization so broad that it includes lots of people who I wouldn't trust lending $35 to ............to say nothing of $35k.
Well you just seem like you want to complain instead of think. Now I see why you haven't gotten meaningful responses. I realize now I'm wasting my time trying to understand your concern.

Shockingly, I'm quite able to handle thinking & complaining simultaneously. I've not come here asking for "meaningful responses". I'm confident that in time enough of the concerns myself (& others) are bringing up now will be shown to have been accurate & valid. History will judge whether you're wise or a fool for dismissing it as mere complaining & I'm perfectly willing to wait for that verdict.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 03, 2014, 08:29:54 PM
Are you guys seriously bickering about what 400 basis points are going to do?  I can't really tell from reading the exchange.  I don't know, that doesn't seem like much to me.  If you're $30k in CC debt that's $100/mo.  If $100 causes someone to default that's pretty sad.  Strap on a leaf blower for 2 hours on some Saturday and it's earned.  Or stand on a street corner for 15 mins if you've got those kind of skills.

Whatever happens though, it won't happen overnight.  Rates are not going to go up 4% in one meeting.  Keep your ears open, and when you hear the music from the ice cream truck you will have time to run for cover.  Those ice cream trucks are usually driven by perverts anyway so this is wise action in any environment.

I would be much more concerned with the collection log notes we will soon see:

11/07/14 Borrower deceased
11/02/14 Borrower diagnosed with ebola

or

11/11/14 Borrower beheaded
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: DanB on October 03, 2014, 10:55:50 PM
Are you guys seriously bickering about what 400 basis points are going to do?  I can't really tell from reading the exchange.  I don't know, that doesn't seem like much to me.  If you're $30k in CC debt that's $100/mo. If $100 causes someone to default that's pretty sad. Strap on a leaf blower for 2 hours on some Saturday and it's earned.  Or stand on a street corner for 15 mins if you've got those kind of skills.

Whatever happens though, it won't happen overnight.  Rates are not going to go up 4% in one meeting.  Keep your ears open, and when you hear the music from the ice cream truck you will have time to run for cover.  Those ice cream trucks are usually driven by perverts anyway so this is wise action in any environment.

I would be much more concerned with the collection log notes we will soon see:

11/07/14 Borrower deceased
11/02/14 Borrower diagnosed with ebola

or

11/11/14 Borrower beheaded

Me bickering, never!  On the other hand I do take issue with the suggestion that anyone in your part of the country can make $100 by strapping on a leaf blower for just 2 hours on a Saturday.   
Wow, I didn't know the ice cream truck thing was a sort of universal constant. Good to know.  :)
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: SeanMCA on October 04, 2014, 01:44:06 AM
That flag probably is photoshopped, since it would have to be huge to appear that large in the reflection of the window from that distance.  So what?  Someone "enhanced" the images they use in their advertisements?  That's pretty standard in the professional photography industry, isn't it?  They didn't update their website pics when the moved offices?  Again, who cares?

There are plenty of valid things to criticize LC over ... like decreasing investor returns through (1) knocking off a few days of interest, (2) inexplicably sneaking a "no IRA trading" notice onto the back page of website, (3) holding "approved and funded" notes, that could be issued, near the end of each month, (4) fining INVESTORS 18% if the BORROWER pays 16+ days late, (5) increasingly lackadaisical collection efforts, etc ... These are all things that have changed in the last 20 months since I started participating, and they all eat away at returns.  It's concerning to me that if this much has changed in recent times, to the detriment of investors, where are we headed with this?


I'm more concerned about that, than solving the "who photoshopped the flag" conspiracy theory.

that last line is hilarious.
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: core on October 06, 2014, 03:24:47 AM
I do take issue with the suggestion that anyone in your part of the country can make $100 by strapping on a leaf blower for just 2 hours on a Saturday.   

That all depends on what one does with the leaf blower after they strap it on.  Dan, the most unskilled person can most certainly make $100 in a couple hours around here.  Even in Iowa, rich people are afraid of leaves.  I based my figures on $25 per leaf blowing, and 30 minutes per job, including travel time.  You can't hardly get your dog polished for less than $25 these days.  This is of course neglecting time spent lining up the jobs, which can be done via email throughout the week. 

I would challenge any $100/mo defaulter to give it some effort.  If one cannot mange such a feat, that is what is called brain damage.  And don't give me any bull about having kids.  Leave them home.  For decades now, it's much safer to leave your kids home alone than leave them with some pervert.

Wow, I didn't know the ice cream truck thing was a sort of universal constant. Good to know.  :)

Yeah Dan it's not just in your neck of the woods.  At least that's what I assumed you meant.  The only thing I'm confused about is, in California, how do you tell the fruit loops apart from the rest of the residents?

I'm more concerned about that, than solving the "who photoshopped the flag" conspiracy theory.

that last line is hilarious.

Yeah lots of people saying there are more important things to worry about.  But those same people keep bringing the flag up.  Some with good arguments (like the size of the flag, thanks GS).  For people that don't care, you guys sure seem to have a lot of input!

This has caused me to revisit the imagery.  I shall let the images speak for themselves.  Like last time, you can click on the image and use Google to 'walk around' for yourself.

(https://forum.lendacademy.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs8.postimg.org%2Fs9m87bx9x%2Flc_flagpole_height.jpg&hash=0705ae03f1637d24f124c6ba7da8c35e) (https://www.google.com/maps?q=370+convention+way,+redwood+city,+ca&hl=en&ll=37.494456,-122.229702&spn=0.009296,0.01369&sll=30.937336,-91.40087&sspn=5.143877,7.009277&t=h&hnear=370+Convention+Way,+Redwood+City,+California+94063&z=16&layer=c&cbll=37.494412,-122.229584&panoid=0UpGY-1QQKFDLPxCCEOE3Q&cbp=12,32.33,,0,0)

Here we see that the flagpole is not all that tall.  There is no slope to the land between these two points, but yet the reflection appears above the actual location of the flag.  The only way this could happen is if the observer is higher than the top story of LC's fake office. 

So, you say, why couldn't the photographer be on the neighboring building on the roof?  Because of the trees in the original photograph.  The 4 trees that visually merged into one.  The photographer would still have to be low enough to catch those trees.  As long as the trees were very tall, it would be possible.

But let's take a look at those 4 trees:

(https://forum.lendacademy.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs24.postimg.org%2Fx72a3galx%2Flc_trees.jpg&hash=5bddcba2c3841baa15a52d6c1da3b59a) (https://www.google.com/maps?q=370+convention+way,+redwood+city,+ca&hl=en&ll=37.494524,-122.229917&spn=0.009296,0.01369&sll=30.937336,-91.40087&sspn=5.143877,7.009277&t=h&hnear=370+Convention+Way,+Redwood+City,+California+94063&z=16&layer=c&cbll=37.494565,-122.230013&panoid=LaMWn9615Z8s8b4enSQ2xg&cbp=12,77.33,,0,0)

The photographer cannot be any higher than those trees.  Do they look 6+ stories tall?  Didn't think so.  Yes, there is slope here, but the flagpole would still have to be taller than the LC windows.  Which it is definitely not.

This is absolute proof that the picture is FAKE. 

Next question:  If you're going to fake a picture of a flag, why do it "backwards"?  Yes, I understand backwards flags are often used on the starboard side of airplanes and such to give the illusion of motion through the air, but this is not the case here.  Right-to-left wind is never used.

Another example of LendingClub incompetence?  They can't even get a fake photoshop job done right?
Title: Re: What's up with this WebBank thing?
Post by: hoggy1 on October 07, 2014, 02:53:53 PM
You guys need to apply for a job with NCIS.