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.


Messages - Ran

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Foliofn - LC / Re: Buying Notes at premium in current environment
« on: June 26, 2020, 02:43:25 PM »
(1) some states such as NY do not have access to new issue loans, so Folio is the only option for them. NY must have a lot of investors.
(2) Will be interested to know what grades were sold in premium? C or D? some people might be willing to pay a premium for FICO-trend-up never-late B/C/D loans a few months after issuance

2
Foliofn - LC / Re: Folio API stopped working since yesterday
« on: March 31, 2020, 11:24:45 AM »
I take is that as long as 1% fee can fairly compensate Folio without sizable subsidize from LC, LC will leave Folio the way it is. But zero improvements/enhancements
Liquid started buying again on Folio again at approximately 6:30 Sunday evening.

I guess my "Announcement of Folio's death was greatly exaggerated". :)

3
Foliofn - LC / Folio API stopped working since yesterday
« on: March 29, 2020, 10:27:08 AM »
Anyone seeing this issue since 3/28? Getting "The remote server returned an error: (403) Forbidden." error when trying to get the list from https://api.lendingclub.com/api/investor/v1/secondarymarket/listings?updatedSince=60

4
So LC got robbed by Folio?
I did get a call from LC this afternoon which went to my voicemail and later received an email too.
I guess if the feature is driving their cost up, then its best its gone. The important thing for us is having the secondary market.. which is in line with what Rob mentioned about a dwindling market.
At least we tried.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Hilario,

Thanks for your patience. I've reached out to the appropriate teams to relay your feedback and gain additional clarity on why the "Download Search Results" feature was removed.

My team has informed me that this feature was discontinued due to high costs with a relatively small population using this feature. However, I definitely understand that this is important to our valued investors such as yourself and apologize for the inconvenience. At the time of the removal, under 200 investors utilized and downloaded the file. Even though a small population downloaded the file, we were billed for each download. As a result, the cumulative number of times the file was pinged added up to high costs.

Once again, I apologize and definitely appreciate your understanding in advance. We hope to prioritize and expand our secondary platform functionalities in the future.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

5
Well said!
To give a counter argument about owning lending club stock:
Lending club is in a two sided market, the borrower side and the investor side. For them to effectively compete long term with likes of Marcus, they have to make at least one side or both sides cheaper. So either cheaper customer acquisition cost or cheaper cost of capital. Marcus has a cheaper capital cost because it doesn't have a middle man deducting origination fees. It also has the power to undercut lending club by reducing their margins. Lending club doesn't have that power because they are dependent on their investors giving them money.  I don't see Marcus squeezing them in the short term because the more players in the market, the bigger the consumer awareness is and better for all players. However, they could decide to go near 0 margin (amazon business model for a long time) and drive competitors out. This could be even worse if they buy a company like creditKarma and also reduce their cost on the consumer acquisition side as well. Lending club's CEO isn't a visionary. That's why I think the best path for them is to be acquired by a bank or by a company like Intuit (mint) to be able to compete long term.
It's unfortunate Renaud got ousted over something so minor. He was actually a visionary. There is a possibility that lending club ends up buying Upgrade and Renaud  returning as CEO but chances of that is pretty slim.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

6
Foliofn - LC / Re: Folio API note selling
« on: March 11, 2018, 09:54:01 PM »
I used the old api which has access point like /account/buy to buy Folio notes and it still works fine. Guess we need to wait for LC to sort the new API out.
Yes. I have a similar problem with that API (I use the buy function)
 I have been going back and forth with LC Support for about a month now .

With the new api i tried Content-Type - application/json and Accept - application/json which failed. When I mentioned it to support they asked me to change it to text/csv. That failed too. Then they asked to change it back to application/json.. wow. now we are having funnnnnn.. and I have been sending them screenshots everytime.

They used to have a different API to buy/sell earlier which needed the "order id" and that was working fine. Now they go and change it and dont want to admit there is a problem.

7
Foliofn - LC / Folio API note selling
« on: March 07, 2018, 09:14:07 PM »
Anyone successfully used the latest Folio Notes API to post notes for sell?
The API document said you may POST to url https://api.lendingclub.com/api/investor/v1/secondarymarket/accounts/ACCOUNTID/orders
with JSON content like [{"noteId":"NOTEID","price":25.00, "orderType":"SELL","expirationDate":"2018-03-14"}].
I tried but only get 400 bad request which means my JSON content is rejected. Now I am wondering whether that API document simply contains error. 

8
Investors - LC / Re: Dear LC
« on: November 15, 2017, 09:28:16 PM »
I regularly receive mails from discover bank, chase or AMEX offering personal loans. Do not know how their rate compares to LC, but the terms are very similar. I always think traditional banks have stronger client relationship so their marketing cost is lower than LC, but their branches are way more costly. But a lot of us are wrong thinking LC can easily beat traditional banks just by lower operating cost. One side though is that China p2p companies almost entirely rely on Apps for consumer lending, but LC never saw the need to let borrower take out loans using App. Why not?.
I recently took out a peer loan. LendingClub has lots of competition and their rate offered to me was much higher with an origination fee. I went with an alternative. I think you guys have been net savers for too long and don't understand what the consumer loan market place looks like. That's my two cents

9
Investors - LC / tax reform
« on: November 15, 2017, 09:14:02 PM »
The except from LC just states that LC neither guarantees nor has the obligation to enforce timely payment. However, each note is individually numbered, tied to a particular borrower and has fixed rates & terms, which is stated clearly in LC’s prospectus and the rate & schedule is listed individually on prospectus supplement. The note is delinquent when the investor failed to receive the payment based on stated schedule, not matter what is the cause. You can call it “late” instead if you believe “delinquent” carries legal implications. And you may be able to argue that the note can never be declared defaulted no matter how late the payment is behind stated schedule. But from IRS’s point as I have argued, the note can simply be written off as bad debt as ling as you have good reason to expect no chance to receive the owed payment.
Notes *do not* carry a fixed repay schedule *to you*.  LC is only delinquent *to you* if they receive a payment and fail to pay their obligated amount of it to you.

Quote
PAYMENT ON THE NOTES, IF ANY, DEPENDS ENTIRELY ON THE RECEIPT OF PAYMENTS BY LENDINGCLUB FROM THE RESPECTIVE BORROWER MEMBER(S) IN RESPECT OF THE CORRESPONDING MEMBER LOAN. LENDINGCLUB DOES NOT WARRANT OR GUARANTEE IN ANY MANNER THAT YOU WILL RECEIVE ALL OR ANY PORTION OF THE PRINCIPAL OR INTEREST YOU EXPECT TO RECEIVE ON ANY NOTE OR REALIZE ANY PARTICULAR OR EXPECTED RATE OF RETURN. THE AMOUNT YOU RECEIVE ON YOUR NOTE, IF ANY, IS SPECIFICALLY RESTRICTED TO PAYMENTS MADE BY US EQUAL TO THE PAYMENTS MADE BY THE BORROWER MEMBER UNDER A MEMBER LOAN TO WHICH YOU COMMITTED NET OF THE FOLLOWING: (A) A ONE (1) PERCENT SERVICE CHARGE ON ANY BORROWER PAYMENTS RECEIVED BY LENDINGCLUB; AND (B) AN UP TO 35% COLLECTION FEE ON BORROWER PAYMENTS RECEIVED AS A RESULT OF SUCCESSFUL COLLECTION EFFORTS IF NO LITIGATION IS INVOLVED; OR (C) A COLLECTION FEE OF 30% OF AN ATTORNEYS' HOURLY FEES PLUS COSTS AS A RESULT OF SUCCESSFUL COLLECTION EFFORTS IF LITIGATION IS INVOLVED AND, IN THE CASE OF THE FIRST MONTH'S PAYMENT, ACCRUED INTEREST FOR THE NUMBER OF CALENDAR DAYS FROM THE DATE THE MEMBER LOAN IS ISSUED TO THE DATE IT IS PURCHASED BY US AND YOUR NOTE IS ISSUED.

https://www.lendingclub.com/legal/investor-agreement

10
Investors - LC / Re: tax reform
« on: November 15, 2017, 05:01:04 PM »
Interesting point. But the notes do carry fixed repay schedules and if not paid on schedule, then it’s delinquent. The fact that Investor could not sue or demand LC for timely repayment does not mean the note is not delinquent. Also IRS does not seem to treat “bad debt” under a legal point, but rather an economical point. If you look at publication 550, it says”You do not have to wait until a debt is due to determine whether it’s worthless. A debt becomes worthless when there is no longer any chance that the amount owned will be paid”. I think the fact that LC pursues the delinquent borrower and put collection action notes on loan history is strong enough to demonstrate to IRS that the chance to get paid back is slim and can be written off.

11
Investors - LC / Re: tax reform
« on: November 15, 2017, 03:07:12 PM »
It’s still bad debt. IRS says “As long as someone owes you money that you cannot collect, you have a bad debt”.   Contingent payment notes only says LC’s liability to repay is contingent, but does not imply the principal repay is optional.
In order to have a bad debt, I think you might need to own the loan.

If you are a note-holder, those notes you hold are  contingent payment notes.  This means that LC does not actually owe you the payments unless the borrower pays them.  Therefore, the note is not bad debt.

12
Investors - LC / Feb recoveries from charge off loans
« on: March 03, 2017, 08:48:44 AM »
Did not see any recoveries posted in Feb for charged off loans. Usually see it in the last week of a month.

13
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-08-18/how-lending-club-s-biggest-fanboy-uncovered-shady-loans
Let me throw today's Bloomeberg news article into the discussion. To be clear, Bloomberg journalists are extremely good at generating clicks by exploring public's emotion, be it greed or fear. And this article is negative as usual on LC, but it does open a window into how LC has transformed in the past a few years

14
Quote
You never know when someone is running a "ponzi" scheme. Trust but verify.

The Ezubao peer-to-peer scheme in China and the staggering amount that was lost is enough to make anyone skittish about investing in P2P funds of any sort, especially when attractive returns are floated around as if they were a given. The amount of credibility that Ezubao had and the implicit backing that state-owned media seemed to give it led many Chinese investors to believe if was much safer than it actually was. Then the whole house of cards came tumbling down. Over $7 billion lost.
P2P corps in China can operate without proper auditing, which cannot happen for US public companies. Remember that (1) LC's auditing firm is Deloitte and (2) LC went through a wave of scrutiny by IPO underwriters. Now to speak of trustworthiness of auditing firms, Andersen went bankrupt because of Enron scandal, Madoff used a one man auditing firm no one heard of before. To push LC fraud case, one has to really push Deloitte's bankruptcy case

15
Investors - LC / Increased number of "cease and desist" requests
« on: August 12, 2016, 01:43:55 PM »
You guys are lucky, for whatever reason I have about 6 of these.

7/19/16 (Tuesday)Borrower passed away
Out of how many notes?
And what is earliest credit line on these accounts? Should not be higher than .5%, otherwise interesting

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10