Zopa gone over to the darkside?

What about a mortgage which instead of paying of the principal invests in P2P loans and then ...

It was clear that was the direction they were going in when they launched safeguard...

That was the point where it seemed to me that Zopa stopped looking at innovation, and instead sought to imitate the traditional banking system.


The question then is whether acquiring a banking licence will ultimately be used to allow the P2P side to become more innovative (branching out into new and innovative ideas that would scare off the mass-market investors who are more comfortable with something that looks like a bank, and even more comfortable with something that actually is a bank), or if the P2P side of the business will then simply be allowed to wither away and die over the following few years as the remaining P2P loans get paid off.

(compare with how Safeguard was originally introduced as an alternative to what were then "standard" P2P loans, and very quickly become the only available option).

Once they get availability to cheap capital as with any bank they will simply have a range of products with returns marginally higher than high street banks (due to lower costs). Bit depressing really if this is the long term goal for most p2p's. Fractional reserve banking is the problem for savers, p2p hoped to meet a need. Zopa is going over to the dark side.

Perhaps the evolution of the mutual societies will provide some guidance as to how P2P might evolve. Although the Nationwide is still a mutual in name some might question if it is a mutual in ethos and operation. In a similar way Zopa might remain a P2P lender in name but not in ethos or operation. (De P2Pisation?)

Eh? You're a new member, so did your Dad sit you on his knee and tell you about the good old days of choosing your rates and who you lent to.