Online peer-to-peer (P2P) business lending, where individual investors provide unsecured loans directly to individual business borrowers without the intermediation of banks, has experienced rapid growth in recent years. However, very little is currently known about the individuals who lend money through the online P2P lending platforms. Drawing on the cognitive evaluation theory and responses to a survey from 630 investors of the Funding Circle platform, the largest P2P business-lending platform in the United Kingdom, this article describes their personal characteristics, investment criteria and their motivation to invest. A typical P2P business lender is male, highly educated and relatively wealthy with a science, business or finance degree. According to the factor analysis, variables related to company quality and associated risks are important investment criteria, while the expectation of making a financial return is the main motivation behind individuals’ decision to lend money to companies. In contrast, intrinsic motives such as geographical location, personal relationship or knowledge of the company are of significantly less importance.
AgrawalAKCataliniCGoldfarbA (2011) The Geography of Crowdfunding (No. w16820). National Bureau of Economic Research. Available at: https://www.nber.org/papers/w16820
2.
AgrawalAKCataliniCGoldfarbA (2014) Some simple economics of crowdfunding. Innovation Policy and the Economy14(1): 63–97.
3.
AhlersGKCummingDGüntherC, et al. (2015) Signaling in equity crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice39(4): 955–980.
4.
AllisonTHDavisBCShortJC, et al. (2015) Crowdfunding in a prosocial microlending environment: examining the role of intrinsic versus extrinsic cues. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice39(1): 53–73.
5.
BaldockR.NorthD (2015) The role of UK government hybrid venture capital funds in addressing the finance gap facing innovative SMEs in the post-2007 financial crisis era. Handbook on Entrepreneurial Finance125–146.
6.
BanerjeeAV (1992) A simple model of herd behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics107(3): 797–817.
7.
BarasinskaNSchäferD (2014) Is crowdfunding different? Evidence on the relation between gender and funding success from a German peer-to-peer lending platform. German Economic Review15(4): 436–452.
8.
BelleflammePLambertTSchwienbacherA (2014) Crowdfunding: tapping the right crowd. Journal of business venturing29(5): 585–609.
9.
BernsJPFigueroa-ArmijosMda Motta VeigaSP, et al. (2018) Dynamics of lending-based prosocial crowdfunding: using a social responsibility lens. Journal of Business Ethics1–17.
10.
BogostI (2012) Kickstarter: crowdfunding platform or reality show. Fast Company18.
11.
BretschneiderUKnaubKWieckE (2014) Motivations for crowdfunding: What drives the crowd to invest in start-ups? In: European conference on information systems (ECIS), Tel Aviv, Israel.
12.
BretschneiderULeimeisterJM (2017) Not just an ego-trip: exploring backers’ motivation for funding in incentive-based crowdfunding. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems26(4): 246–260.
13.
BrettelM (2003) Business angels in Germany: a research note. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance5(3): 251–268.
14.
BrutonGKhavulSSiegelD, et al. (2015) New financial alternatives in seeding entrepreneurship: microfinance, crowdfunding, and peer-to-peer innovations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice39(1): 9–26.
15.
BurtchGGhoseAWattalS (2013) An empirical examination of the antecedents and consequences of contribution patterns in crowd-funded markets. Information Systems Research24(3): 499–519.
16.
CholakovaMClarysseB (2015) Does the possibility to make equity investments in crowdfunding projects crowd out reward-based investments?Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice39(1): 145–172.
CulkinNMurzachevaEDavisA (2016) Critical innovations in the UK peer-to-peer (P2P) and equity alternative finance markets for small firm growth. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation17(3): 194–202.
DeciERyanRM (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.
21.
DeciELKoestnerRRyanRM (1999) A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological bulletin125(6): 627.
22.
GambleJRBrennanMMcAdamR (2017) A rewarding experience? Exploring how crowdfunding is affecting music industry business models. Journal of business research70: 25–36.
23.
GerberEMHuiJSKuoPY (2012February) Crowdfunding: why people are motivated to post and fund projects on crowdfunding platforms. In Proceedings of the international workshop on design, influence, and social technologies: techniques, impacts and ethics (Vol. 2, No. 11). New York: ACM.
24.
GerberLHuiJ (2016) Crowdfunding: how and why people participate. In: International perspectives on crowdfunding: positive, normative and critical theory. Bingley: Emerald Group, pp. 37–64.
25.
GreenbergMDPardoBHariharanK, et al. (2013, April) Crowdfunding support tools: predicting success & failure. In: CHI’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, pp. 1815–1820.
26.
GriffinZJ (2012) Crowdfunding: fleecing the American masses. Case Western Reserve Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet4: 375.
27.
GuentherCHienerthCRiarF (2015) The due diligence of crowdinvestors: thorough evaluation or gut feeling only? In: Academy of management proceedings (Vol. 2015, No. 1). pp. 16862. Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
28.
HerzensteinMDholakiaUMAndrewsRL (2011) Strategic herding behavior in peer-to-peer loan auctions. Journal of Interactive Marketing25(1): 27–36.
29.
HildebrandTPuriMRochollJ (2016) Adverse incentives in crowdfunding. Management Science63(3): 587–608.
30.
HollanderMWolfeDA (1999) Nonparametric statistical methods. Douglas A. Wolfe (No. 519.5 H65.).
31.
IyerRKhwajaAILuttmerEFP, et al. (2009) Screening in new credit markets: Can individual lenders infer borrower creditworthiness in peer-to-peer lending?NBER Working Paper Series (15242). Available at: https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/4448882
32.
KrautREResnickP (2012) Building Successful Online Communities: Evidence-based Social Design. Cambridge: MIT Press.
33.
LambertTSchwienbacherA (2010) An empirical analysis of crowdfunding. Social Science Research Network1578175: 1–23.
34.
LehnerOM (2013) Crowdfunding social ventures: a model and research agenda. Venture Capital15(4): 289–311.
LinMViswanathanS (2015) Home bias in online investments: an empirical study of an online crowdfunding market. Management Science62(5): 1393–1414.
37.
LinMPrabhalaNRViswanathanS (2013) Judging borrowers by the company they keep: friendship networks and information asymmetry in online peer-to-peer lending. Management Science59(1): 17–35.
38.
Mac an BhairdC (2013) Demand for debt and equity before and after the financial crisis. Research in International Business and Finance28: 105–117.
39.
McKennyAFAllisonTHKetchenJr DJ, et al. (2017) How should crowdfunding research evolve? A survey of the entrepreneurship theory and practice editorial board. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice41(2): 291–304.
40.
MitraTGilbertE (2014February) The language that gets people to give: phrases that predict success on kickstarter. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing. ACM, pp. 49–61. Available at: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2531656
41.
MohammadiAShafiK (2018) Gender differences in the contribution patterns of equity-crowdfunding investors. Small Business Economics50(2): 275–287.
NyborgKRegeM (2003) Does public policy crowd out private contributions to public goods. Public Choice115(3-4): 397–418.
46.
OrdaniniAMiceliLPizzettiM, et al. (2011) Crowd-funding: transforming customers into investors through innovative service platforms. Journal of service management22(4): 443–470.
SchwienbacherALarraldeB (2012) Crowdfunding of Small Entrepreneurial Ventures. The Oxford Handbook Entrepreneurial Finance. D. Cumming. New York: Oxford University Press.
