Is a Credit Crisis the Best or Worst Time to Start a Lending Site?

It is a good idea as long as it is well capitalized and sustainable long term.

Yes provided they discipline and stick to it no string attach to be greed in the end is doubtful.If they stick to moralvalues and discipline no doubt,it will be successful. as long as no stirng attached of too many charges......

Oh yeah, GREAT! Because when borrowers shop on line, everybody wins....NOT!! THINK: Online Mortgages and the housing collapse. This guy is a thief!

Just because the housing market bubble burst - it doesn't make everyone a thief. Wallstreet started buying wholesale mortgage lenders because they were tired of being the middleman (and anyone who knows wallstreet - knows the EGOs are ginormous). Once one of them did it and they saw the opportunity to own the origination platforms - they jumped at the opportunity. The firms then competing over volume drove credit windows open. Speculators and late night informercials on how to make millions with no money down fueled fires. Stories of houses being bought and sold in weeks or days for big profits were common. Peer to peer lending cuts out banks and wallstreet - this gives the person with money to invest in bonds containing debt instruments he would never understand the opportunity to buy debts he atleast can understand. It gives people who need money a way to make the decision on their own without the pressure of ANY sales person calling them or face to face pushing them to make a decision. Would love to hear DJ's deep thoughts on why he thinks this guy is a thief. Are you really a DJ?

I have two sites with big existing client base for sale Turboloans.com and Loanprofessionals.com getting ready to retire. Great success in online lending for last 10 years.

Response to Johnny. Your right the discipline without the greed is the key. The problem in todays society is the expense to create something that is criminal proof (secure) and complies with the Security and Exchange Commission, the lending regulations in each state or federal banking authorities, insurance requirments, vendors to handle the various tasks required: SOX, Collections, Credit, Lawyers, Accountants, Marketing, Public Relations, Web Designers, Developers ETC. It all costs money and plenty of it. To do business you have to sell your soul - those who own the souls want profits and plenty of it. The pressure begins as the greed sets in. Figure out how to raise the money without selling your soul and you could accomplish sticking to a discipline and not getting greedy.

You are playing a dangerous game............Not this time.....People are not fool all the tine.........Lending this day are good for a couple of months or a year or two then the string attach of too many hidden charge will come......You are planning a very dangerous game.....Sorry ........

i think its all a crock of shyt!! People suck the economy is just going to get worse before it gets better!! Nobody has a plan to do anything right, but to rob us americans and make us work so stupid foreigners can live off our tax money! Thanks!

Why would savvy credit institutions loan money to anyone based on an illusion?................Which came first? borrowers who could not repay? or artificially inflated prices driven by phony market forces and fraud, driving working class people in to insolvency?........come on man! the vast majority of people earn a very limited amount of money, and wages have not supported these pretend prices that we've seen.....you can't simply allow prices to reach astronomical levels based on phony market forces, fraud, and unbridled speculation, then expect everyone to magically afford them......why would savvy credit institutions loan money to people based on what has now become nothing more than a false illusion? and now the government has intervened to help support this illusion......Kirk Kerkorian's recent sale of Ford stock at a tremendous 66% loss, and countless other losses by unsuspecting savers, 401k holders, and home buyers proves this false illusion ....how long could this "confidence game" last? If we want prosperity; we must provide free educational opportunities to our people so they can earn enough dough to buy all this overpriced crap, and....properly regulate and police the marketplaces so the crooks don't enter the game........LETS STOP PLAYING GAMES WITH THE FUTURE OF AMERICA AND GET BACK TO SOME REALITY. Let this economic correction occur no matter the consequences, IT WAS ALL AN ILLUSION ANYWAY, A GAME THAT HAS FOR NOW, COME TO AN ABRUPT END..........Both presidential candidates are big time losers, and each one will continue the same non-sense that got us into this mess......choose your loser......the white guy or the black guy.

I would not touch this outfit with a ten-foot pole. I'd rather take my money to Las Vegas. Haven't people learned anything in the market in the last few weeks?

simply no comment for what hapenning! we are simply attached to those nutty guys with the help of the system itself. cross your fingers!

prosper.com does exactly this... And they've been around for much longer. The only new thing these guys could bring in would be to create a secondary loan market within their system; this is the feature prosper is missing and many are asking for.

O" BANANA THINKS HE KNOWS IT ALL. I HAVE NEWS FOR YOU SHMUCK, THE FINANCIAL SITUATION THIS COUNTRY IS IN, IS NOT DUE ENTIRELY ON EVERYONE LIVING BEYOND THEIR MEANS. I AM SOMEONE AND I MAKE SURE I DO NOT LIVE BEYOND MY MEANS. IN FACT I MANAGE TO PUT SOMETHING AWAY EVERY PAYDAY, AS I HAVE FOR OVER 40 YEARS.IT HAS NOT BEEN EASY, WHILE RAISING 4 CHILDREN.THE LEFTIST NEWS MEDIA, O' BANANA, AND HIS ILK LOVE TO SCARE HELL OUT OF THE PUBLIC.THEY WILL SAY AND DO ANYTHING TO GET OB IN THE WHITE HOUSE.THERE ARE MANY MORE LIKE ME, THAT KEEP OUR MOUTHS SHUT AND TRY TO MAKE THE MOST OUT OF A BAD SITUATION.WE ARE KNOWN AS WORKERS, NOT WHINERS. WE ARE THE ONES THAT WILL GET THIS COUNTRY MOVING AGAIN. BUT IT WILL TAKE AN HONEST, CARING AND COMPASSIONATE LEADER IN THE WHITE HOUSE TO KEEP IT ROLLING.IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMON SENSE AT ALL, YOU HAVE TO VOTE FOR MC CAIN. GOD HELP US ALL IF YOU DON'T,

Why is it that whenever anyone (and I mean anyone) that is interviewed and works in Silicon Valley has to start the answer to every question with, "So....."? How the hell did that start?

Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday October 21, 2008 03:07PM EDT No, Not a DJ....DJ stands for Dow Jones. I'm an economist. Your agruement is inherently flawed. Here's why - You ASSUME that borrowers are informed and intelligent about lending. They are NOT. They need guidance, and who will give them that guidance when they shop online? No one, or worse, someone who THINKS they know lending. Next, you are incorrect about Wall Street buying Wholesale Mortgage lenders to remove the middlweman. They bought those lenders to have access to the Mortgage market because a LAW change allowed them to do so - THINK: Deregulation Credit windows were not driven open by lenders. What happened was another LEGAL deregulation that allowed for home loans to be granted on lower credit qualifications - given to lenders by Congress. Next, we had a massive lowering of interest rates and the creation of something called ZERO DOWN loans. The low interest rates also made ARM loans very fashionable, especially if you were speculating on properties, and not living there as a primary residence. Lastly, Lenders went to congress to ask that lending requirements for the lenders (Leveraged Loans) be reduced from $10 in loans for every $1 dollar of deposits, to $40 in loans for every $1 in deposits. What happens online is that people NEED guidance when they take out a loan and they don't get it. Granted, some borrowers were being abused by lenders simply looking to make a buck and were steered into a bad loan structure. I agree that is bad. Why would you assume that just because a large corporation isn't making the loan it will be better for the borrower? The individual making the online loan isn't selling a property on land contract where a personal lender has a vested interest. He's just another lender looking to make money from lending his money to someone who needs it. He IS THE SALESPERSON and the LENDER! Sounds like double dipping the system - ie. larger cut of the pie for the lender! If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday October 21, 2008 03:07PM EDT No, Not a DJ....DJ stands for Dow Jones. I'm an economist. Your agruement is inherently flawed. Here's why - You ASSUME that borrowers are informed and intelligent about lending. They are NOT. They need guidance, and who will give them that guidance when they shop online? No one, or worse, someone who THINKS they know lending. Next, you are incorrect about Wall Street buying Wholesale Mortgage lenders to remove the middlweman. They bought those lenders to have access to the Mortgage market because a LAW change allowed them to do so - THINK: Deregulation Credit windows were not driven open by lenders. What happened was another LEGAL deregulation that allowed for home loans to be granted on lower credit qualifications - given to lenders by Congress. Next, we had a massive lowering of interest rates and the creation of something called ZERO DOWN loans. The low interest rates also made ARM loans very fashionable, especially if you were speculating on properties, and not living there as a primary residence. Lastly, Lenders went to congress to ask that lending requirements for the lenders (Leveraged Loans) be reduced from $10 in loans for every $1 dollar of deposits, to $40 in loans for every $1 in deposits. What happens online is that people NEED guidance when they take out a loan and they don't get it. Granted, some borrowers were being abused by lenders simply looking to make a buck and were steered into a bad loan structure. I agree that is bad. Why would you assume that just because a large corporation isn't making the loan it will be better for the borrower? The individual making the online loan isn't selling a property on land contract where a personal lender has a vested interest. He's just another lender looking to make money from lending his money to someone who needs it. He IS THE SALESPERSON and the LENDER! Sounds like double dipping the system - ie. larger cut of the pie for the lender! If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday October 21, 2008 03:07PM EDT No, Not a DJ....DJ stands for Dow Jones. I'm an economist. Your agruement is inherently flawed. Here's why - You ASSUME that borrowers are informed and intelligent about lending. They are NOT. They need guidance, and who will give them that guidance when they shop online? No one, or worse, someone who THINKS they know lending. Next, you are incorrect about Wall Street buying Wholesale Mortgage lenders to remove the middlweman. They bought those lenders to have access to the Mortgage market because a LAW change allowed them to do so - THINK: Deregulation Credit windows were not driven open by lenders. What happened was another LEGAL deregulation that allowed for home loans to be granted on lower credit qualifications - given to lenders by Congress. Next, we had a massive lowering of interest rates and the creation of something called ZERO DOWN loans. The low interest rates also made ARM loans very fashionable, especially if you were speculating on properties, and not living there as a primary residence. Lastly, Lenders went to congress to ask that lending requirements for the lenders (Leveraged Loans) be reduced from $10 in loans for every $1 dollar of deposits, to $40 in loans for every $1 in deposits. What happens online is that people NEED guidance when they take out a loan and they don't get it. Granted, some borrowers were being abused by lenders simply looking to make a buck and were steered into a bad loan structure. I agree that is bad. Why would you assume that just because a large corporation isn't making the loan it will be better for the borrower? The individual making the online loan isn't selling a property on land contract where a personal lender has a vested interest. He's just another lender looking to make money from lending his money to someone who needs it. He IS THE SALESPERSON and the LENDER! Sounds like double dipping the system - ie. larger cut of the pie for the lender! If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

12 percent lol what a joke !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GREAT RATE FOR PEIME LOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday October 21, 2008 03:07PM EDT No, Not a DJ....DJ stands for Dow Jones. I'm an economist. Your agruement is inherently flawed. Here's why - You ASSUME that borrowers are informed and intelligent about lending. They are NOT. They need guidance, and who will give them that guidance when they shop online? No one, or worse, someone who THINKS they know lending. Next, you are incorrect about Wall Street buying Wholesale Mortgage lenders to remove the middlweman. They bought those lenders to have access to the Mortgage market because a LAW change allowed them to do so - THINK: Deregulation Credit windows were not driven open by lenders. What happened was another LEGAL deregulation that allowed for home loans to be granted on lower credit qualifications - given to lenders by Congress. Next, we had a massive lowering of interest rates and the creation of something called ZERO DOWN loans. The low interest rates also made ARM loans very fashionable, especially if you were speculating on properties, and not living there as a primary residence. Lastly, Lenders went to congress to ask that lending requirements for the lenders (Leveraged Loans) be reduced from $10 in loans for every $1 dollar of deposits, to $40 in loans for every $1 in deposits. What happens online is that people NEED guidance when they take out a loan and they don't get it. Granted, some borrowers were being abused by lenders simply looking to make a buck and were steered into a bad loan structure. I agree that is bad. Why would you assume that just because a large corporation isn't making the loan it will be better for the borrower? The individual making the online loan isn't selling a property on land contract where a personal lender has a vested interest. He's just another lender looking to make money from lending his money to someone who needs it. He IS THE SALESPERSON and the LENDER! Sounds like double dipping the system - ie. larger cut of the pie for the lender! If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday October 21, 2008 03:07PM EDT No, Not a DJ....DJ stands for Dow Jones. I'm an economist. Your agruement is inherently flawed. Here's why - You ASSUME that borrowers are informed and intelligent about lending. They are NOT. They need guidance, and who will give them that guidance when they shop online? No one, or worse, someone who THINKS they know lending. Next, you are incorrect about Wall Street buying Wholesale Mortgage lenders to remove the middlweman. They bought those lenders to have access to the Mortgage market because a LAW change allowed them to do so - THINK: Deregulation Credit windows were not driven open by lenders. What happened was another LEGAL deregulation that allowed for home loans to be granted on lower credit qualifications - given to lenders by Congress. Next, we had a massive lowering of interest rates and the creation of something called ZERO DOWN loans. The low interest rates also made ARM loans very fashionable, especially if you were speculating on properties, and not living there as a primary residence. Lastly, Lenders went to congress to ask that lending requirements for the lenders (Leveraged Loans) be reduced from $10 in loans for every $1 dollar of deposits, to $40 in loans for every $1 in deposits. What happens online is that people NEED guidance when they take out a loan and they don't get it. Granted, some borrowers were being abused by lenders simply looking to make a buck and were steered into a bad loan structure. I agree that is bad. Why would you assume that just because a large corporation isn't making the loan it will be better for the borrower? The individual making the online loan isn't selling a property on land contract where a personal lender has a vested interest. He's just another lender looking to make money from lending his money to someone who needs it. He IS THE SALESPERSON and the LENDER! Sounds like double dipping the system - ie. larger cut of the pie for the lender! If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.