Comments on: Prosper 2.0: The Next Generation of Prosper.com http://www.realestatemegabook.com/prosper-20-the-next-generation-of-prospercom.html Just another WordPress weblog Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:53:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.3 by: Sharp http://www.realestatemegabook.com/prosper-20-the-next-generation-of-prospercom.html#comment-880 Sun, 08 Jul 2007 20:19:19 +0000 http://www.realestatemegabook.com/prosper-20-the-next-generation-of-prospercom.html#comment-880 You need liquid net worth real property income shares with exchange-traded cyber-share markets with a private capital source for start-up costs and share price floor purchase of units for those who make a bet but have to leave the market and want a floor price for their shares. If each area has specialized information that makes a difference in relationship to region, housing type, and sector dependent activity, and the participant market-maker must contribute that specialized knowledge in a manner that is timely: By *having a first-in-market position that blocks barriers-to-entry *and is willing to trade active information for passive income to instrument backer with a tiered by traunch position, *and created for an inefficient liquid market, *and the offering of each unit is more for pschic income as well as a safe return plus potencial of being in a specialized situation, *and has a market managed portfolio of property, customers/clients, and markets that can respond to threats and opportunities, *and has information that is imcomplete and accepted as non-fiduciary, ...> then the need for the next step is the institutional mechanisms for "private personal management of pension share incomes" that can be bought and sold just like options, in a electronic-based platform. How much can you afford to loose? Private Equity Group would need to raise $5 billion. Accept having 5% capture of sub-marktet property transactions in U.S. as maximun reached before regulators step-in for those you competete with. What is 5% of $2 trillion? 2 million under performing properties with shares to be traded to somebody outside the area that does not know the market--but its liquid net worth shares would still have a steep discount or premium. THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA--THERE IS ALWAYS A FIX, AND YOU ARE THE LEAST EFFICIENT INVESTOR THAT SOMEBODY WILL GET THE BIGGEST BANG FROM WITH THE LEAST AMOUNT OF WORK. Safe rates plus portfolio rate plus special situation rate--managed by a professional that you pay a good fee--is by far the better choice for your exhange of ideas, energy, mobility, and hopes. You need liquid net worth real property income shares with exchange-traded cyber-share markets with a private capital source for start-up costs and share price floor purchase of units for those who make a bet but have to leave the market and want a floor price for their shares.

If each area has specialized information that makes a difference in relationship to region, housing type, and sector dependent activity, and the participant market-maker must contribute that specialized knowledge in a manner that is timely:

By
*having a first-in-market position that blocks barriers-to-entry
*and is willing to trade active information for passive income to instrument backer with a tiered by traunch position,
*and created for an inefficient liquid market,
*and the offering of each unit is more for pschic income as well as a safe return plus potencial of being in a specialized situation,
*and has a market managed portfolio of property, customers/clients, and markets that can respond to threats and opportunities,
*and has information that is imcomplete and accepted as non-fiduciary,

…> then the need for the next step is the institutional mechanisms for “private personal management of pension share incomes” that can be bought and sold just like options, in a electronic-based platform.

How much can you afford to loose?

Private Equity Group would need to raise $5 billion.

Accept having 5% capture of sub-marktet property transactions in U.S. as maximun reached before regulators step-in for those you competete with.

What is 5% of $2 trillion?
2 million under performing properties with shares to be traded to somebody outside the area that does not know the market–but its liquid net worth shares would still have a steep discount or premium.

THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA–THERE IS ALWAYS A FIX, AND YOU ARE THE LEAST EFFICIENT INVESTOR THAT SOMEBODY WILL GET THE BIGGEST BANG FROM WITH THE LEAST AMOUNT OF WORK.

Safe rates plus portfolio rate plus special situation rate–managed by a professional that you pay a good fee–is by far the better choice for your exhange of ideas, energy, mobility, and hopes.

]]> by: Paul http://www.realestatemegabook.com/prosper-20-the-next-generation-of-prospercom.html#comment-37 Mon, 26 Mar 2007 13:01:10 +0000 http://www.realestatemegabook.com/prosper-20-the-next-generation-of-prospercom.html#comment-37 I think that there is a real need here, I have been trying to find sources of private money but without much success and have been forced to use hard money. It seems to me that there could be a link between self-directed IRA's and some Prosper like market place. There are millions of people out there with IRA's earning less than optimal returns I think that there is a real need here, I have been trying to find sources of private money but without much success and have been forced to use hard money. It seems to me that there could be a link between self-directed IRA’s and some Prosper like market place. There are millions of people out there with IRA’s earning less than optimal returns

]]> by: Jon http://www.realestatemegabook.com/prosper-20-the-next-generation-of-prospercom.html#comment-32 Tue, 20 Mar 2007 02:25:01 +0000 http://www.realestatemegabook.com/prosper-20-the-next-generation-of-prospercom.html#comment-32 That's a good point. Yes, I think you would have to create a limited partnership that would own the property. I still think they should do it though. I need lower interest loans :-) That’s a good point. Yes, I think you would have to create a limited partnership that would own the property.

I still think they should do it though. I need lower interest loans :-)

]]> by: Gaming the Credit System http://www.realestatemegabook.com/prosper-20-the-next-generation-of-prospercom.html#comment-29 Mon, 19 Mar 2007 23:09:21 +0000 http://www.realestatemegabook.com/prosper-20-the-next-generation-of-prospercom.html#comment-29 This is a really interesting idea, but it seems like there are some legal hurdles there. One of the nice things about being a lender on a mortgage is the ability to foreclose. So assuming that a Prosper property goes into foreclosure, "who" would actually own the house once it's foreclosed? The most straightforward answer would be a partnership or limited partnership, with ownership based on the percentage each lender contributed to the loan. Just to make things easy, the best thing might be to have it a LP with the number of General Partners limited somehow.... e.g. GP's are only those individuals with 25% or more of the loan value, or (if nobody has that much individually) as many individual lenders as it takes to make the sum of their contributions over 50%. Or 30%. Or something. So Prosper would become a sort of Partnership Registration service in all 50 states. There would be a Prosper fee for setting up the partnership and maintaining its registration. That way if the loan goes to foreclosure, there is a real business entity there to take title to the property. As you said, pretty much anything would have to be much more complicated (and risky) than Prosper currently is set up. It would cater to a much more sophisticated lender. If I were setting it up, potential lenders would need to sign some sort of a waiver as well as pass a test in order to be able to lend in this new "Hard Money" arena. This is a really interesting idea, but it seems like there are some legal hurdles there. One of the nice things about being a lender on a mortgage is the ability to foreclose. So assuming that a Prosper property goes into foreclosure, “who” would actually own the house once it’s foreclosed? The most straightforward answer would be a partnership or limited partnership, with ownership based on the percentage each lender contributed to the loan. Just to make things easy, the best thing might be to have it a LP with the number of General Partners limited somehow…. e.g. GP’s are only those individuals with 25% or more of the loan value, or (if nobody has that much individually) as many individual lenders as it takes to make the sum of their contributions over 50%. Or 30%. Or something.

So Prosper would become a sort of Partnership Registration service in all 50 states. There would be a Prosper fee for setting up the partnership and maintaining its registration. That way if the loan goes to foreclosure, there is a real business entity there to take title to the property.

As you said, pretty much anything would have to be much more complicated (and risky) than Prosper currently is set up. It would cater to a much more sophisticated lender. If I were setting it up, potential lenders would need to sign some sort of a waiver as well as pass a test in order to be able to lend in this new “Hard Money” arena.

]]>