Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 07/23/2018 in all areas

  1. 153 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    We certainly would never discourage anyone from using the XRPL's distributed exchange feature! I'm still a bit sad that our strategy lead us in a different direction and that we abandoned the nascent ecosystem we had been building. It was clear that the feature was way ahead of its time and there was no direct path to adoption then. I talk to Ethan (head of Xpring and pretty much everything at Ripple other than cross-currency payments) frequently about whether there are good use cases for the ledger's decentralized exchange now and whether that's something we can use Xpring to help develop. I have a plan that moves us in that direction that I've been working on and shown to several people inside the company. The problem I keep coming back to is that there isn't quite a great use case that I can see how to move to a product just yet. But getting more minds thinking in that direction might yield results and time has brought the rest of the world in this direction. The other thing that Arthur and I built into the ledger in the early days is community credit. That is, I think, even further ahead of its time and even harder to see a solid use case for in the near term. I sometimes feel like I work for Twitter in 2000 and I'm trying to explain to everyone that for us to really grow, people need better phones. Of course, there was no Twitter in 2000 -- it was too early. I'm trying to find ways to make it later as quickly as possible.
  2. 133 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    Hello all. Just wanted to introduce myself. I'm Bob Way, formerly of Ripple. Thank you in advance for allowing me to join your forum. Back in the early days of crypto I was pretty active in the Bitcointalk and Ripple communities (under the username "Red"). In fact my community participation was what directly led to me going to work for Chris and the gang at OpenCoin. I made a lot of good friend in the forums five years back. I'm hoping to make some new ones now. Bob
  3. 112 points
    A tweet recently caught my attention about the Bill and Melinda gates foundation possibly being live on the XRP Ledger in this tweet there were some interesting transactions in a currency I hadn't seen before called UPU - the wallet is - rMHSvqV83BhFDhkQtXELxNYyyhq776dhzG - so using a wallet explorer application I noticed other transactions and obligations connected to this wallet using similar codes such as UPA, UPC, UPY etc. After some digging, I determined that UPU in this case stands for "Universal Postal Union", which I had never heard of, on their site www.upu.int I found language that describes them as "As an intergovernmental organization and a United Nations specialized agency, the UPU is the principal forum for cooperation between governments, designated operators, and other sector-wide stakeholders." The mention of the United Nations caught my eye because recently Ripple released a marketing video where the U.N. headquarters building in New York city is featured in one of the scenes, and just happens to capture the Korean flag, Mexican flag, and Japanese flag next to each other (all key markets for XRP), but still I wondered what would a postal organization have to do with Ripple and XRP? Well it seems the answer is right there on UPUs website. Here are some direct quotes from the UPU site. "According to a UPU study, postal operators provide some 1.5 billion people worldwide with access to basic financial services (payments, money transfers, and savings)." "The postal network, through its worldwide coverage and the combination of electronic, financial and physical dimensions, ensures that all citizens of the world have access to efficient, reliable, secure and affordable electronic payment services. The postal network comprises more than 663,000 physical contact points offering remittances and is traditionally a more affordable formal financial services channel compared to banks, money transfer operators and others." "It is the UPU's mission to help build a worldwide electronic postal payment network. It does this in the form of an international treaty, known as the Postal Payment Services Agreement and its Regulations, and through its Postal Technology Centre's International Financial System (IFS) software." This suite of software tools allows postal operators to offer electronic postal payment services, providing state-of-the-art guarantees to secure payments between operators and protecting the interests of consumers, senders and beneficiaries alike. These are complemented with the UPU trademark “PostTranfer”, the automated clearing and settlement system (PPS*Clearing) and a set of additional tools for business and quality support." "The UPU provides Posts with the necessary technical and financial assistance toward activities and programmes that are coordinated on the regional level. Joint projects are also being managed in partnership with various international organizations, among others the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, International Fund for Agricultural Development, International Organization for Migration, World Bank, World Savings and Retail Banking Institute and Visa. The projects' scope covers a variety of assistance, including equipment and technical support, connectivity, security, fraud prevention, Anti-money laundering, Combating the financing of terrorism TF, business development and marketing, cash and risk management, internal control, skills management, customer care and operational matters, taking into account the specific needs of Posts. As a result, more and more Posts are able to transform into sustainable, modern and competitive enterprises in the new ecosystem." So after reading this I was very surprised by several points, first that the UPU is actively working towards building a global payments system through the 663,000 physical postal points of contact, but also that this seems to be in collaboration with the Bill and Melinda gates foundation, Visa and The World Bank. That is truly amazing, my thoughts here go back to the announcement made last year during Ripple's Swell conference about MojaLoop and the collaboration between the Bill and Melinda Gates's foundation and Ripple. There wasn't a lot of information given about the project, but it was clear that the high level objective was to bring financial services to the unbanked and it seems that maybe the UPU and the existing postal system are key to the delivery side of this solution. Next, I found a link for "UPU Clearing" I'll just provide a quote direct form the site here also. "UPU*Clearing is the UPU's efficient, low-cost solution for settling international accounts between Posts. Members simply consolidate their invoices using the system's centralized online platform and pay their debts with one easy payment per month in euros (EUR) and/or United States dollars (USD). The interface also allows them to comment on, change, accept or refuse electronic bills via a discussion platform. Some 47 countries already use the system to handle bills related to terminal dues, Quality of Service Fund (QSF) payments, the UPU's Postal Technology Centre (PTC), and more, allowing them to reap benefits such as:" A couple of things caught my eye here, it seems that UPU members are requited to settle up at least once a month in either USD or EUR, that's very interesting, but I also notice that it states the UPU clearing / payments system currently has 47 memeber countries, UPU has a couple hundred members but only 47 are currently part of UPU clearing. This number caught my eye because I do remember Brad Garlinghouse and other Ripple executives using this as the number of Central Banks that Ripple is working with, later they started using the language "40 - 50 Central Banks", but I am certain 47 was the number they used for a while. Also, in regards to UPU clearing, the site provides a brochure that describes the service, so I open that up and there is a graphic that states in 2017 there were "78M EUR + 154M USD = 175M SDR" cleared through the system - this I find extremely interesting because I don't know a currency that uses the symbol SDR, but the IMF has "Special Drawing Rights" which are commonly refereed to as SDR, I won't get into what IMF and SDR are, but I'll provide some links at the end. Lastly, the site also includes a TradeMark License agreement that seems to be intended to be used by member countries wishing to use the internationally registered trademark "UPU" and it goes into some detail as to how you should display the TradeMark for a variety of uses, including mobile applications. What does all this mean? At a minimum I think it means that there is real progress on the Micro-Payments / Unbanked use case, along with what seems to be a real partnership with a "United Nations Specialized Agency", but if you wanted to take the theory a little further, you could wonder why the settlement currencies are USD / EUR? And why the number of member countries seems to align very well with the number of Central Banks Ripple is working with and of course the many connections between IMF / World Bank and the Central Banks. So I don't think its a huge stretch to imagine we could see Central Banks hold XRP in the near future or even become market makers for XRP. I realize that opinion is likely to stir up some controversy, but I believe there are enough facts that make it not fall under the "TFH" category. Also, sort of interesting, there have been multiple mentions of Malta now being the biggest XRP market, including in Ripple's Q2 market report, Malta is an interesting case as they have permanent observer status in the U.N. https://twitter.com/1980SteveH36/status/1024969090698502144?s=20 http://www.upu.int/en/activities/postal-financial-services/about-postal-financial-services.html http://www.upu.int/en/activities/upuclearing/about-upuclearing.html http://www.upu.int/uploads/tx_sbdownloader/brochureUpuClearingEn.pdf http://www.upu.int/en/activities/postal-financial-services/postransfer-group/about-postransfer-group.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Postal_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_drawing_rights
  4. 106 points
    Hi Christopher, Interested in how you can reduce your cross-border payments inefficiencies? Then download the new AFP Payments Guide, underwritten by MUFG Union Bank. In this guide you’ll learn: • About some of the prominent systems in cross-border payments • How to determine if you should consider a new payments system • The pros and the cons of new technology available in the payments space Efficiency, transparency and optimization should be your top concerns when it comes to cross-border payments. While new technologies can help in these facets, no one system is perfect for everyone. Find out what is best for you and your organization in this new guide. You must sign up to download the full white-paper and I'm unable to attach PDFs so I've taken some screenshots to assist. https://www.afponline.org/publications-data-tools/reports/guides/afp-payments/Detail/2018paymentsguide-crossborder-final/?utm_source=internal_email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=payg18crossboarderpayments&_zs=SbNuW&_zl=4KSL1
  5. 98 points

    Analysis of Ripple's XRP sales

    I would like to present here my findings on a slightly more detailed examination of sales from the ripple XRP-II wallet (rHjJwY4maqRyUxCnJ9bNNQ2Tva9fe9T8ud) and also the 3 wallets rHjJwY4maqRyUxCnJ9bNNQ2Tva9fe9T8ud, r49yezViZ8N6FtwwKg9byDYtJ3UDuJi1zv, r3epSojEkn6pFRwjxkFjwJLPAxC8Hj9ZTK that we believe are ripple controlled and have been supplied to my by @xp3215233 who deserves your thanks for the numbers I have extracted and plotted here. I will refer to the 3 wallets hereafter as RP1, RP2, RP3 to indicate that we think they are ripple controlled. In addition, I will also include some details of sales from the "BearWhale" account and Jed's tacostand account as a tag-along bonus at the end. There is no particular agenda to the analysis presented here, other than to further our understanding of the XRP ecosystem and broaden our knowledge (in the spirit of DYOR). The analysis I presented prior to the Q3 results release was a bit sloppy and I thought I would try again with a slightly more rigorous approach. Disclaimer : Although the numbers/dates extracted from wallets can be considered 'facts', the actual ownership/control/motives of wallets and transactions through them is mostly unknown and suppositions are based on the collective guesswork and historical evidence gleaned from resources such as xrpchat and previous ripple forums. Other than the XRP-II wallet which is known to be owned and controlled by the ripple subsidiary XRP-II and is licensed to sell XRP, I do not actually know for certain who controls any of the wallets mentioned in this post, and therefore any discussion or conclusions made here must be considered speculation. Nothing else that you read here should be taken at face value and you should even consider the possibility that everything presented here is forged material, made up just to manipulate the market. Let's start by looking at all the sales from the 4 (ripple controlled?) wallets going back to last year. Note that in the following plot, transactions between accounts are not included, only those that leave them are shown. The plot shows payments from the 4 wallets in separate colours to distinguish and identify their origin, overlaid on the total sales volume on exchanges (as returned by queries to https://min-api.cryptocompare.com/data). It is immediately clear that the 4 wallets are being used to make transactions with different 'sales' patterns. (The word sales is quoted here because in general, I assume that transfers from wallets are for the purpose of sales, but in many cases they may not be, however the term 'sales pattern' is a nice one to describe activity). Note that the plot uses linear scale (left) for the (black) volume from cryptocompare, and logarithmic scale (right) for the payments as they span a wide range of values and are best viewed thusly. The patterns become slightly more interesting when we look at the destination wallets of the payments, as shown in the following plot where we see the same data coloured by destination rather than source. I have tried to cross reference the destination account with the names of wallets used by exchanges. Again, I stress that the names presented here may not be correct, however, the chances are high that some/most of them are valid and what we care about is the pattern, rather than the specifics of each payment. The coloured dots represent payments and the solid line above is the daily sum of those payments, all are again overlaid on the daily volume from cryptocompare and a logarithmic scale is used for payments and their daily sum. The logarithmic plot compresses the sum line considerably and so it is not immediately obvious that their is any correlation between the transfers from ripple and the daily volume. Let’s have another look, but this time we will add another filter, we will remove all payments that went to addresses/wallets that do not have a destination tag. We do not know the addresses of all exchanges, but most exchanges require the use of a destination tag to separate client accounts. (GateHub is one notable exception where each user has an individual wallet). Filtering by tag gives us a reasonable approximation of payments that are going to exchanges and we can see the list of destination accounts is significantly reduced. Some things are obvious from the plots of payments: The sheer number of payments from these wallets during the second half of 2018 is quite staggering, and the fact that a very large number of them appear to be going to exchanges is very interesting. There do appear to be correlations between payments/sales and trade volumes, though those correlations change subtly over time and it is quite evident that in early April 2018 the sales strategy of ripple changed dramatically. It is of course possible that ripple uses other wallets for sales and simply changed at this time to one that we are tracking, from one that we do not know about. The pattern of payments changes on 12th April 2018 so let us examine more closely the pattern from that time onwards, excluding the payments from the XRP-II wallet. (This wallet is believed to be responsible for “direct” sales rather than programmatic and careful observation of the first plot shows that it makes less frequent, but often very large payments that do not look like programmed sales to an exchange). This plot shows us payments from RP1,RP2,RP3, only to accounts using a destination tag and it is now quite clear that there is a correlation between payment volume and exchange volume. There is also a mysterious gap in payments between 12th and 19th of September this year. The correlation is a little difficult to see due to the log/linear comparison, so lets compute the correlation time shift and normalize the plots to see how they compare and overlay them using linear scale for both. The correlation is good, the cross correlation function has a peak that appears with a time shift of 1 day. This plot shows the ripple sales volume (blue) time shifted by 1 day (earlier = to the left) and overlaid on the exchange volume (black). Normalization of the two volumes give a factor of 29.19 difference between the ripple sales and the exchange volume - this seems to me to be a fairly remarkable result. It tells us that ripple are selling XRP at approximately 1/29.19 = 0.034 = ~3% of daily volume based on the previous days exchange total. This is far higher than I had expected and higher than reported in their quarterly sales figures. The figures declared by Ripple are as follows Note that we do not know if the figures for 2016-Q4, 2017-Q1 are direct or programmatic, but I put them in the direct column since it would appear that their programmatic sales have been better coordinated more recently than in the past. Whilst the correlation is good (with time shift we have Pearson coeff 0.88), with the peaks and troughs lining up extremely well, there are some deviations. Around the region of Jul-Aug on the graph, the (normalized) volume sold by ripple appears slightly higher than the exchange volume, so it is possible that they have been adjusting the amounts slightly over time on a month by month basis to see how the market is affected. It’s also possible that the volume being used for calculations is coming from another source (i.e. not cryptocompare) and is slightly different, it is also possible that I am including sales from wallets that are not part of their programmatic sales, or other wallets exist that I am not aware of. Certainly we can see that when the trade volume rises and the xrp price rises, the programmatic sales increase the next day and this in turn brings the price back down. The ongoing bear market (at least for XRP) has not been assisted by the selling pressure of 3% per day - especially when we consider that significant parts of the other 97% of trade may be of suspicious activity on largely unregulated exchanges. How do the sales we have extracted compare in terms of $$$ with those declared by ripple in their quarterly reports? We assume here that the price that the XRP is being sold for is the mean price on the day it is transferred, this is at best an approximation, but since the transfers are happening every day (at least for RP2 since April), we must assume that the XRP is actually entering the market and not simply accumulating in wallets on the exchange. edit: ERRATUM: The table shows $$$ amounts for the quarters, but the right column total is the XRP amount, the $total is less. Apologies. . The numbers here are much larger than those declared by ripple (and shown earlier). I have experimented with different combinations of summation from different wallets, using different combinations of high/low/closing price, but have not been able to find a set that reliably reproduces the figures from ripple. What hypothetical conclusions can we draw from this Ripple are telling outrageous lies about the amount they sell? This seems highly improbable. Everything we know about the company indicates that they are “Very Serious People” in the right sense of the words (if you pardon me parodying a phrase partially popularized by Krugman). Ripple are making the payments we see on the ledger, but they are not all ripple sales. This is my own best guess. They have setup bots to make transfers to exchanges. Many many exchanges, far more than I imagined, and now that this infrastructure is in place, they are using it for their own programmatic sales, but reusing it for sales from staff/founders wallets. Why not sell some fraction of daily volume direct from ripple, and include some of the other XRP they need to offload. This way, they only have to worry about 1 set of scripts and can do the accounting of who is owed what internally within the company. Ripple are looking after us. True that they are ‘dumping’ massive quantities of XRP into the markets which is certainly keeping the price down and preventing wild speculative fluctuations - from the sums above, we are looking at around $500m (edit: not $1B as written previously) in total since 2017-Q4. This is interesting because it is ‘new money’ entering the markets. This is not wash trading between day traders on exchanges, but continuous drip feeding of XRP into the markets that is building the liquidity that will be needed when large scale adoption of the “internet of value” kicks off. Ripple are looking after us. Look closely at the graph of sales for September 2018. Ripple sales stopped for 1 week between 12-19 of the month, apart from a small amount that was probably setup on a different trading algorithm from the main programmatic sales that started after April 12th. Why did sales stop that week? I chose to overlay the price on the volume correlation in the plot above because on Sep 11th the closing price (as cited by cryptocompare) of XRP was around $0.26, the lowest value of the year and I suspect that ripple decided that it would be a good idea to stop their sales temporarily to help the market. Sales stopped and the price began to recover. In fact by the end of the week it shot up dramatically, partly based no doubt on news about xRapid adoption, as there was much talk prior to swell - but the correlation between a sudden doubling of XRP price right after the cessation of ripple sales seems to me to be extremely interesting. Correlation does not imply causation and we cannot be sure, however, should ripple cease sales again for some reason and a similar effect take place, we will have better evidence to support our hypothesis. (If anyone from ripple is reading this, then please feel free to temporarily shut down sales so that we can see if the price spikes again). The market is healthy. We have only shown what we believe are programmatic sales in the correlation and summations, but XRP-II is also making direct sales that add to the total. In addition there are ongoing sales from the bearwhale and Jed and possibly many many more wallets that we are not aware of, that are all being absorbed by the market and it appears to be holding up very well. Up to this point we have looked at the sales from RP1, RP2, RP3, but XRP-II which we believe to be the direct sales account. Here are the payments from XRP-II to accounts with a destination tag, the total is around 264 million XRP paid (not the $ amount since we do not know the sale price). If we remove the restriction of only counting payments to tagged accounts, then the figure jumps to a tidy 3.8 billion XRP transferred since Q4 2016. Not bad at all. Let’s take a small diversion and add Jed and the bearwhale to our analysis to see if it gives consistent figures. Payments from Jed’s accounts do not correlate well with exchange volume unless we only consider Feb 2018 onwards. There are some gaps in sales where trading appears to have temporarily stopped, however if we consider sales from 2018-02-01 (Feb 1st 2018), we have a very good correlation with volume with a time shift of 13 days and a normalization coefficient of 221 which equates to a daily selling of 1/221 = 0.0045 or 0.45% of daily volume. This appears to be consistent with the agreement which appears to allow 0.5% of daily volume based on the average volume of the period 2 weeks prior (please inform me if I have used the wrong agreement details). The BearWhale remains our most ardent foe, with semi random transfers to exchanges that happen when the volume increases. Presumably the sales then take place in steady chunks on the exchanges, and we cannot track them individually, but we can assume that the sale happen over the days and weeks following transfers to exchanges. Using 24 account that are believed to be BearWhale related, we see the following pattern. Out of curiosity, if we sum the sales from BearWhale, Jed, and Ripple and assume they are all traded at the price on the day, what do we get. edit: ERRATUM: The table shows $$$ amounts for the quarters, but the right column total is the XRP amount, the $total is less. Apologies. . The sums are quite impressive. Note that Jed's tacostand is not included in the figures above as it send to a non tagged account, so please add $50m (not $131m as written previously) to the total. edit: ERRATUM: The table shows $$$ amounts for the quarters, but the right column total is the XRP amount, the $total is less. Apologies. To conclude this post, I am rather stunned by the scale of xrp sales that are going on, whilst many of the numbers presented here may be incorrect, and not attributable to ripple, jed or the BearWhale, the fact remains that huge amounts of xrp are being purchased and we are still well over double the price of this time last year. I am very confident that if and when xRapid is adopted at scale, we will see further improvements in the market.
  6. 98 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    As promised, I didn't go to bed before finishing monstrosity. It is the delayed continuation of the post I left hanging here. Sorry for the delay. ----- I've had a long love/hate relationship with bitcoin. When I first heard about it I was inthralled with the technology. I dug in deep to understand everything I could. It seemed like a global LETS system to me. There were a few things I didn't like. It wasn't very private even though everyone kept calling it anonymous. I was one of the first to point out how the DAG could be used to unmask people. I may also have been one of the first to describe the mixer concept. I kicked around some ideas for a next generation more private blockchain data structure with Satoshi. I wasn't cryptography savvy enough to make that work, but I was happy when the zerocoin folks worked it out. But the one thing I always hated about bitcoin was the monetary policy, I made that clear with my first post on bitcointalk. I thought and still think that volatile cryptocurrencies make lousy "money". Medium of exchange -- OK, that works Unit of account -- Hum? Is it really a consistent "measure of value" Standard of deferred payment -- Nope, you can's agree to BTC denominated rent or other contracts Store of value -- Not really, store implies you get the same value out you put in It turns out bitcoin is much better described as a commodity than a currency. This argument did not win me popularity either. Over the next three years I explored other monetary policies and spent a lot of time trying to work out how to make a stable valued cryptocurrency. It was during that exploration that I discovered Ripple. It turns out Ripple is a uniquely suitable platform on which to build a stable coin. ----- By 2013 there were a lot of bitcoin maximalists pumping BTC. There pitch went something like this: The Dollar is going to crash! The Euro is going to crash! People are going to NEED to use BTC. The whole world's financial system is going to hell! You can buy BTC now and be RICH! Or you can buy BTC later with the poor people. I thought that was a pretty sucky marketing plan. "The whole world's gonna be miserable, but hey, we DESERVE to be rich! We didn't actually do anything. But we did happen to notice this weird thing on Slashdot first!" I thought that pitch was lamely transparent even for a scammer. I didn't expect many to fall for it. ----- It was in that context that I made the comments that kicked off the request for comment. Keep in mind that when Ripple launched OpenCoin was giving away XRP. Please read at least the first page here. You'll see that there was an organized campaign to call Ripple a scam right from the beginning. Crypto is a hostile environment. The initial amounts given were 50,000 XRP. Note Jed was first in line. Also note that Vitalik Buterin was on the first page. That XRP amounts tapered down over time. By the time I discovered Ripple the giveaway amount was 20,000 XRP. I had begged David for XRP a few days before I received my giveaway amount. I'd been posting in the forum and was way too impatient to wait. He graciously funded my initial wallet with 555 XRP. Keep in mind the account reserve was 200 XRP, and trust lines and offers were 50 XRP each. So 555 only represented a half dozen trust lines and market orders. What's most important to the discussion we are having now, and the mindset I had then, is the relative valuation. The story I was told is that when PayPal launched, they gave everyone who signed up at the beginning $10. At the beginning of the giveaway OpenCoin considered 50,000 XRP to be worth about $10. ($0.0002 in Feb 2013). By May, people in the forums had been speculating that XRP would reach $5 by the end of the year. I had shouted down a few of those speculation threads, and that was what I was referring to when I wrote this: I thought such outlandish speculation made Ripple actually sound like the scam others were claiming it was. I also thought that most of the speculators had no idea what the "rippling" concept in Ripple actually was. Most were just happy they had gotten free crypto since the bitcoin faucet had long ago dried up. ----- Now in retrospect, I made two bad presumptions in the 4 points I made in that original post. First, I was a Ripple maximalist and presumed that OpenCoin wanted all 6 billion people on the planet to have their own Ripple address on ledger. Having a Ripple address means needing some amount of XRP for the account reserve and trust lines. The average amount 6 billion people would pay just to have an account is pretty small. ($1 would be a pretty high barrier to entry in poorer regions) That was what I was referring to here: Say 6-8 billion people and add in a couple billion businesses. You are looking at 10 billion addresses. That averages to only 10 XRP per address. Now you have to consider some of that is locked into the account reserves. If you support the local currencies as well, that's at least 10 billion trust lines and and offer reserves. The reserves will need to fall into drop amounts at that point. Otherwise there isn't much XRP to use for transaction fees. The use of trust lines to represent local fiat currencies was what I meant by "unlimited supply" here: All in all, it didn't seem to me that XRP was being considered by OpenCoin as a common payment denomination. (Meaning to specify the price of goods or services in XRP rather than in USD) It was pretty clear OpenCoin saw XRP as a bridge currency, but that would be hidden from most Ripple users who continued to hold and spend their local fiat currency. This third point I have discussed in at least a couple of other places in this thread. This logic is still sound. I began to realize my presumption about 10 billion on ledger addresses was incorrect shortly afterwards. The second bad presumption I made was that OpenCoin was manipulating XRP prices by selling off enough XRP to keep the price stable. (Remember I'm a fan of stable money) Stable XRP value seemed such an obvious precursor to XRP becoming a bridge currency, that I couldn't see any other way that could happen. (Why stable currencies make good bridge currencies is a longer discussion that I'll make in my "book" but you are probably bored of this already.) This presumption was what I was referring to in 4a: I learned much to my surprise that OpenCoin had never even considered manipulating the market price to increase stability! I never saw any inclination to do during my tenure either. So clearly I was wrong about 4a. If you are holding XRP like I am, I don't have any reason to believe that Ripple is competing against you and attempting to hold down XRP prices. That also invalidates my 4b crack about greater fools. But really that was just a rude crack made at the expense of the folks who were speculating in the forums in 2013. To them, and anyone here who was taken aback, I offer my humble apologies. ----- Now if I ended the story here and referred you back to this post about upward XRP price pressures, I could rationalize this as a "more optimistic ending"... ...but come on. Do you really think I'm that lame? This whole story would make me sound like I'm just one of those lesser fools I mocked, waiting for the greater fools to show up. I'm not that kind of d***. So I'll leave you with something that just might make your head explode. But I'll have to say this very carefully using words that I've already heard authorized Ripplers say in public. Hopefully, that will keep me out of trouble... It's conventional wisdom that the one thing you can't do by giving away an asset like XRP--is make its price go up. Except one day, a while back, Stefan proposed a concept in which it might... I was quite reticent to believe it. It seemed intuitively impossible, much like you are thinking now. So I sat down to analyze it. And analyze it. And analyze it... And in the end I concluded his exact proposal was wrong. It was likely to put downward pressure on the prices of XRP. But, Stefan wasn't very wrong. In fact, using his proposal as a starting place, I tweaked the parameters and intermediate goals and came up with a mechanism that I'm completely convinced will work. It leads to a net upward pressure on the price of XRP... ..and Ripple and I received a patent for it. Now I don't speak for the company so I can't say if they'll ever deploy the system. I can't say they won't either. But I can say that I know at least one method exists that defies the above conventional wisdom. Hopefully, that is optimistic enough to make up for any panic triggers you might have suffered!
  7. 91 points
    I was asked to review this video to see if there were any subtle undertones that would indicate Goldman Sachs interest in XRP. These are my findings... (Law and Order Chime - "Dong - Dong") Jitin Jain (Wharton MBA '18), seated on the far left, moderates a discussion between, from left to right, Andrew Keys (Co-Founder Consensys Capital), Brian Steele (MD Goldman), Griffin Anderson (Founder Balanc3@ConsenSys), and Danny Aranda (MD Ripple). 7:06 Andrew Keys (Co-Founder Consensys Capital) says – “what this will do from a macro perspective, in my opinion, is going to create a thawing of liquidity unlike anything planet earth has ever seen” Brian Steele (MD Goldman) then raises both eyebrows, tucks in his mouth and shakes his head in stern acknowledgment. ***Indicating the thought - “these people have no idea what’s coming”*** 9:16 Jitin Jain (Wharton MBA '18) asks Danny Aranda (MD Ripple) - “what kind of competitive risk is there or value-add you can put to banks let’s say, Swift...” Brian Steele (MD Goldman) shakes his head in acknowledgment when the word “Swift” is mentioned. More so again when it’s mentioned a second time. *** Brian clearly understands that the paradigm of using Swift is about to change.*** 13:37 Danny Aranda (MD Ripple) says – “hey you need new infrastructure because customer demands are changing.” Brian Steele (MD Goldman) shakes his head in acknowledgment. 19:59 Jitin Jain (Wharton MBA '18) asks – “we have seen different strategies; some have invested in blockchain startups companies. Others have tied up with R3, Ripple, and other blockchain based companies. How do you see investment in blockchain from incumbents’ point of view?” Brian Steele (MD Goldman) responds – “…we’re not a member of R3, we’re not a member of the hyper ledger, we’re not a member of you know enterprising ethereum alliance…” ***This is odd, as Brian mentions these extra entities that weren’t even asked. But Ripple, which was just mentioned to him, should have still been fresh in his memory to recall but he intentionally left it out. A clear deflection.*** 22:56 Brian Steele (MD Goldman) states – “...it’s bringing the industry together” ***His body language is indicating a strong conviction. A sign that he and his superiors at least want that.*** 29:17 Danny Aranda (MD Ripple) says – “…we invented a protocol called inter ledger” Brian Steele (MD Goldman) shakes his head comfortably. ***Indicating he’s familiar with and at ease with the inter ledger.*** 31:03 Griffin Anderson (Founder Balanc3@ConsenSys) askes – “How many people own digital currencies right now?” Brian Steele (MD Goldman) openly raises his hand. ***If I’m not mistaken, not too long ago Goldman Sachs forbid its employees from messing with Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies altogether. Now they are openly admitting they own it. A clear sign of Goldman's change in their ideology and vision.*** 40:27 Danny Aranda (MD Ripple) says – “it’s going to come from innovation, from new products, like new services you can offer…” Brian Steele (MD Goldman) shakes his head in stern acknowledgment. 44:11 Brian Steele (MD Goldman) says – “if you’re able to settle the asset in a real-time environment and you’re able to move money in very much of a real-time fashion…” Jitin Jain (Wharton MBA '18) then asks Danny Aranda (MD Ripple) to directly follow up. ***I have no idea if this was a tell but it certainly was coincidental. He asks Danny Aranda (MD Ripple) to follow up directly after Brian Steele (MD Goldman) states – “move money in very much of a real-time”.*** 52:12 This is the most revealing of them all. Someone in the audience asks – “I’d like to repeat the earlier question about XRP but direct it at Brian specifically. It’s clear that Ripple and other blockchains are useful for banks but what about these so-called bridge currencies and there’s this unclear whether banks like Goldman are actually going to use this part of their treasury. Is it, can you give a clear answer at this point?” Brian Steele (MD Goldman) responds – “yeah… I mean, unfortunately… it’s ahh – we’re not in a position at this point to say…” ***He instantly becomes nervous. He’s stuttering, His feet begin tapping vigorously – he’s lying (at least his body believes he is). And then to ease the obvious tension Danny Aranda (MD Ripple) stutters in. (You always swoop in to save your wingman)*** Also, Goldman Sachs new CEO, David Soloman, is openly for cryptocurrencies. A Wikipedia search of him indicates he’s also a part-time EDM DJ. Which would indicate his personality is one of a trendsetter and a forward thinker. One who’s not afraid to think outside the box. Conclusion: Goldman Sachs is very interested in Ripple (XRP) – VERY! Some may or may not agree with this assessment but I welcome an open discussion about it.
  8. 87 points

    Answer: Wen Moon?

    I don't know. As I've mentioned in my introductory thread, I am bullish on XRP in the long term. I own XRP and I also own Ripple stock. Ripple stock is not publicly traded and is generally much more illiquid that XRP. However, based on other people's reports of selling Ripple stock on the secondary markets, it appears that the price of Ripple stock is closely correlated to the price of XRP. Based on my back of the envelope calculations, the market value of my investments is split about evenly between stock and XRP. If I could, I'd gladly trade my stock for XRP to gain the added liquidity XRP brings. It is important for you to know that I'm not rich enough to be worth kidnapping. It is also important for you to know that if I was a savvy trader I would be. I discovered bitcoin when the price of BTC was 5 to a dollar. I didn't buy it then and haven't traded much over the past 8 years at all. I also had someone point me to Microsoft stock in the very early days. I didn't buy that either. I don't gamble when I go to Vegas and I don't even like to follow the price of XRP and BTC because volatility gives me a huge amount of anxiety. So it should be absolutely clear to the average observer, that no one should take trading or investment advice from me. But if you want to know my personal unsubstantiated opinion I'm happy to tell you. In the long term, I expect Ripple as a company and XRP as an asset to succeed big time. Big time, means dramatically transforming and improving the world's financial systems and the way money works today. I'm expecting XRP's longterm moving average to rise as more more and more transactional liquidity flows through a growing RippleNet. In the short term, I expect XRPs price to be volatile and prone to spikes. I expect this volatility will be true of all other traditional cryptocurrencies as well. The reason I think so, is that it appears to me that speculators are trading multiple cryptocurrencies at a time using similar buy/sell strategies. I don't have any evidence of this, it just seems so to me from watching correlation (not causation) in the price charts. In the long term I expect XRP to be the "winning" cryptocurrency displacing all the others. I've come to this opinion without considering the low level technical details of the coins or their marketing spin. My opinion is based on the observation that all business transactions are circular. And this circle determines how currencies are valued. Here, the concept of circular business transaction means that when Alice buys widgets from Bob in exchange for currency, from Alice's perspective the value of the good equals the value of the currency used to pay for it. That seems obvious to the casual observer, but in the crypto space people rarely talk about it. In thinking about this I realized that the return value flow (the goods or services delivered) defines the value of the currency used to make the payment. Not the other way around. (Perhaps the goods or services have intrinsic value while the currency's value is relative, but that starts to sound like philosophy rather than economics.) So I began thinking about the business cycle along with the full transactional circle. Of course, no business transaction can take place without the agreement of BOTH Alice and Bob. Alice wants something and Bob wants something. The relationship is circular but it is not symmetrical. What Alice wants (the good or services) drives the transaction. What Bob wants (the money) is secondary. So in the business flow, Alice always decides what she wants first. Only then can Bob tell her what he wants in exchange (Alice's cost). So in my mind, the value of a currency is strictly CAUSED by the number of transactional circles it can participate in. If you make the presumption that any given Alice could potentially want something from any given Bob. And also the presumption that any given Bob could deliver to any given Alice. Then return value part of every transactional circle is unconstrained. So then you must focus on how Bob's choice of currency (what Bob wants) constrains the number of circles that can be completed. Which obviously brings us to set theory. That's just a fancy way of saying if Bob wants a currency that Alice doesn't have then they can't do a deal. So if Bob wants EUR but Alice only has USD then the deal can't be done. And if the deal can't be done, the return value (goods or services that don't trade) can't support the value of either USD or EUR. So both of those currencies subsequently becomes worth less than it would have been if that deal could be done. Curiously, if you add a bridge currency like XRP into the transaction in order to complete the transactional circle, then the return value (which now does trade) equally supports the value of all three currencies. Which seems odd so lets do some simple "figurin". Alice wants (X widgets) from Bob. Bob wants (Y EUR) from Mak. Mak wants (Z XRP) from Mark. Mark wanting (Q USD) from Alice completes the transactional circle. So as we stated before by definition if Alice pays then she decided it was a fair (equal) trade. And Mark and Mak thought their deals were fair (equal) as well. So: (X widget) = (Q USD) = (Z XRP) = (Y EUR). But what would happen if both Alice and Bob used XRP? Well then you'd have: (X widget) = (Z XRP) So my lay man's conclusion (I am not an economist) says that XRP being used as a bridge currency supports XRP's value equally as much as XRP being used as a retail currency. But the set of transaction circles that can be created using XRP as a bridge currency is DRAMATICALLY larger than the set of transaction circles that can be created using XRP or any cryptocurrency as a retail currency. And actually, the set of all transactions that can be completed using XRP as retail currency is a proper subset of the transactions that can be completed using XRP as a bridge currency. So to maximize XRP's value, you must focus on the XRP bridge use case. And that is exactly what Ripple is focused on. But, can't the same be said of any cryptocurrency? Meaning if BTC became the de facto bridge currency then it would be the most valuable cryptocurrency. Actually, yes. If that came to pass it would be true. But, I proved to myself that you can't actually get BTC there from here. It just mathematically can't happen. BTC as a bridge currency will always initially be a more expensive transaction path than an alternative path without BTC. And nobody has enough BTC to force (subsidize or incentivize) BTC into that position. My same logic hold for all the currently popular cryptocurrencies. But, I believe, it is actually possible to force XRP into the position of de facto bridge currency. And that is what that patent is about. Of course, I could be wrong in my logic somewhere, or Ripple could fail in their execution, or a million other bad things might happen along the way. So let me repeat, no one should take trading or investment advice from me.
  9. 87 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    Ripple as a company can be pretty opaque. Especially if you are not a banker getting regular updates on our progress. I'm happy to answer questions about the people involved historically and currently. The company grows and changes quickly so I'm probably out of date already on exactly who is on which team at the moment though. I guess I should introduce myself for those who don't know me. Don't feel bad if you don't. I purposely kept a low profile. I discovered bitcoin reasonably early in 2010. I was pondering creating a digital currency for the web (for my own reasons) when I happened into it. I had a bit of a love/hate relationship with bitcoin. I loved the concept of a pure digital currency. I hated the monetary policy and I wasn't a big fan of the community or its "marketing plan". If you check my history (Red) from way back you'll see that I was very off and on in the bitcointalk forums. April of 2013 was one of those "on" times again with the bitcointalk forum. Occasionally people called be back to talk about stable coins. It was during that period that I was canvasing to see of any of the alt-coin forks implemented any of the long list of suggestions we had created for bitcoin. That was when I ran across Ripple. It turned out that Ripple implemented all the improvements people had suggested for bitcoin and also a bunch of really cool stuff that I hardly understood. So I became obsessive about Ripple. First (unpopularily) discussing it at bitcointalk. Then later at JoelKatz's suggestion discussing it on the Ripple forums. During that period a lot of really smart Canadian's (Singpolyma, dchapes, etc.) from the earlier "Classic Ripple Pay" community taught me an amazing amount about money and rippling. I obsessed so much that after 6 weeks I was the number one poster on the Ripple forum. More posts at that time than even JoelKatz! :-) So in June I wrote Ripple asking for a job. I was the 10th hire after the founders. In my 5 years at Ripple I served in a lot of different roles all of which I'm very proud of. The original integration engineer Designed Ripple "pre-transaction messaging" system Designed the Ripple Rest API Designed RippleConnect/xCurrent Original product manager for RippleConnect Original member of Ripple research (ILP atomic mode, XRP bridge currency incentive analysis) Original sales engineer once we pivoted to a banking sales model Finally served as intellectual property wrangler between the research, engineering and legal teams I only write al this so folks here will understand the breadth of questions I'm willing to answer. During my time at Ripple I also served is informal historian. One of the things I've realized recently is that my greatest utility in increasing the adoption and value of XRP (and rippling in general) is in explaining to other just how well thought out the system is. I hope I can start doing that here.
  10. 84 points

    XRP - The Standard (Big read)

    Here's my new 4500-word article on everything from the USD, SDR, sovereign debt restructuring, economic collapses, China, Russia, SWIFT, SAP, and XRP. Attempting to bring some clarity and a deeper understanding of some of the topics which have been getting misconstrued and some of the false narratives which have been running wild. Hope its worth the read. XRP - The Standard
  11. 78 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    I'm offended. What do you want me to do, put a shoe on my head? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Come on! Let's have some fun here!
  12. 78 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    I am bullish on XRP and I am hodling XRP as well. I also own some Ripple stock. It is only fair for everyone to know both of those things, so y'all can weight my opinions accordingly. PLEASE NOTE: I have enough XRP for it to be a significant bet for me personally, but not enough to make me worth kidnapping. You would be disappointed.
  13. 77 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    I'm not sure I'm qualified to use fancy words like "geopolitical" correctly. :-) But there are huge improvements coming to the structure of banking. Please keep in mind that while I think of myself as a reasonably smart guy, I'm by no means smart about everything. However, in my various positions at Ripple, a lot of much smarter people than me showed up in our office to tell me the details of their particular problems. They then left it to me to figure out if Ripple or its technologies could help. That was one of my key contributions to the company. I could almost always figure out a way to deploy Ripple technologies to solve other people's hard problems. So "geopolitically" speaking, one of the weirdest things about banking is how the international relationships are structured. This is true especially among the smaller countries. Take a random made up example. Say Alice lives in Barbados and want to do a business transaction with Bob in Saint Lucia. It is just a standard two party business deal for services rendered. But Alice uses BBD and Bob uses XCD. So how do their banks settle that transaction? Well it turns out in many cases they use USD. That sentence sounds pretty sensible not earth shaking to anyone... But how does that really work? Well it turns out that important banks in Barbados keep "correspondent" accounts with a large US bank. Let's say Citi in this case. And some large bank in Sant Lucia also keeps a correspondent account with a US bank. Let's say BofA in that case. The settlement actually happens by the Barbados bank telling Citi to wire money through the FedWire system to the St Lucia's account at BofA. These requests are transmitted via SWIFT. But the crazy thing is that US law says that both Citi and BofA need to screen the transaction between Alice and Bob for compliance with US laws! And if a bad transaction slips through, both Citi and BofA can be fined huge amounts. So in effect, whether Alice in Barbados can do business with Bob in St Lucia becomes dependent on whether or not US banks want to allow it. Even though the transaction doesn't involve US jurisdiction at all! The side effect of the US bank's risk in these transactions is that they've started closing the correspondent banking accounts for entire countries. The risk is just seen as too high for the reward (fees) that they can charge. This is called in banking jargon, "the de-risking problem". A bridge currency like XRP changes that dynamic dramatically. Transaction that don't involve the US (or other third countries) don't have to travel through their systems to settle. That allows people to stop jumping through third party regulatory hoops and just get one with doing business. I hope that counts as "geopolitical"!
  14. 75 points
    Great article for Crypto investors. Tuesdays with Teeka: The Great Crypto Conspiracy of 2018 Deadwood was an acclaimed Western series that ran on HBO from 2004–2006. The series was set in the town of Deadwood, South Dakota during the Black Hills Gold Rush of the late 1870s. As you can imagine, the show was full of shootouts, filthy language, and quite a few sex scenes… Certainly not a show you’d want to watch with your kids. But there is an episode of Deadwood that holds a valuable lesson for crypto investors…During the Dakota gold rush, regular folks who got in early made fortunes. These weren’t mining magnates or industrialists. Much like today’s crypto investors, they were savvy speculators pouncing on an opportunity. What happened to all those early-stage prospectors? In the fictionalized Deadwood version, wealthy miner George Hearst (father of publishing magnate William Randolph Hearst), swindled them out of their mining shares. This wasn’t too far from the truth. According to rumors at the time, Hearst used murder, intimidation, and misinformation to force people to sell their claims. He even purchased newspapers in the town to influence public opinion. Crypto investors will recognize the strategy Hearst used. In a bid to buy in cheap, Hearst’s agents started to float rumors that the government would seize all land in the town. Prospectors believed the rumors—and sold their mining stakes for pennies to Hearst’s agents. The conspiracy worked. Hearst and his partners bought the biggest mine in the region—Homestake—for a bargain-basement price of $70,000 ($1.7 million in today’s dollars). Homestake would become the richest gold mine in U.S. history. From 1879 to 2002, the mine produced 44 million ounces of gold and 9 million ounces of silver. At today’s prices, that’s a combined $56.5 billion in precious metals. I’m seeing a similar heist play out in today’s crypto markets. Who’s Behind the Conspiracy: Every day, we hear in the press how the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is cracking down on cryptocurrencies.We hear that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is starting a new investigation. We hear JPMorgan’s CEO saying he’ll fire any of his employees buying cryptos—then we find out his traders in London are buying with both hands. We hear central banks float stories designed to scare and ward off crypto investors. In February 2018, the Polish central bank even admitted it hired a firm to spread a “smear campaign” against cryptos. (And do you remember IMF head Christine Lagarde saying central banks need to band together against cryptos?) Friends, the great crypto conspiracy of 2018 is upon us. All year long, we’ve been under assault by rumors of central bank collusion against cryptos: threats of bans… endless investigations… and the ceaseless drumbeat of negativity from the traditional press. And yet—amid this shower of negative news—careful observers will have noticed institutions are actually running into crypto investments. Today, I’m seeing banks, regulators, and the press drown the market in negative news. They’re using the same old trick Hearst used to scare speculators so he could scoop up the Homestake mine for pennies… Guess what? It’s working. Institutions are getting the best prices on cryptos since mid-2017… While the average investor is panic-selling, big investors are buying. Crypto Wealth Is Being Redistributed Over the last 90 days, we’ve seen some of the biggest investors in the world flood into cryptos: Wall Street investment bank Goldman Sachs announced that it would launch a crypto trading desk. Susquehanna—the 12th-largest trading firm in the world by volume—announced it would start trading cryptos, too. The firm even went as far as creating its own custody company to hold its cryptos. Billionaire investor George Soros—one of the world’s greatest moneymakers—gave the green light to his team to buy cryptos. Coinbase—one of the world’s largest crypto exchanges—launched a crypto index fund for wealthy investors and institutions. Financial services company State Street said it’s considering acting as a custodian for bitcoin. State Street has $2.7 trillion under management. Wellington Capital—with over $1 trillion of assets under management—stated its intention to start trading bitcoin. The Rockefeller family’s venture capital firm, Venrock, said it’s also buying cryptos. Every important lawyer I talk to in the investment space is overwhelmed with crypto questions from their institutional clients. That’s just the latest evidence that institutions are trying to get into this market—not stay out of it. Don’t Fall Victim to This Conspiracy Friends, make no mistake… We’re in the middle of a massive handover of wealth from individuals to institutions. I saw this happen after the housing crisis in 2010–2012, when institutions started buying up foreclosures by the thousands… but individual investors couldn’t get a mortgage. I saw it in 2003 after the dot-com crash, when institutions started buying up internet and technology stocks on the cheap… But on CNBC, they kept telling the public it was too early to buy. I saw it during 1994–1995, when institutions scoffed outwardly about how “dumb” money was buying internet stocks… while they were loading up as individuals were selling. I’ve seen this institutional blueprint for stealing wealth play out again and again. Don’t be a victim of this strategy. The key is to focus on what institutions are doing…not on what they’re saying. Across the world, institutional investors are embracing cryptos—not rejecting them. Just as George Hearst made a fortune using misinformation to buy the Homestake mine on the cheap… institutions know they will make vast fortunes buying cryptos at depressed prices. Otherwise, they just wouldn’t bother with it. Don’t be a statistic. Stay strong. Keep your position sizes rational. We will ride the wave of misinformation through this dark valley of despair and into the bright sunlight of the life-changing future ahead of us. This is an area I’m personally investing in now, to build a financial legacy I can leave to my daughters. Nobody else sees this coming. Let the Game Come to You! https://townhall.com/columnists/teekatiwari/2018/09/04/tuesdays-with-teeka-the-great-crypto-conspiracy-of-2018-n2514775
  15. 74 points
    Dear XRPChat, I had planned on making another prediction of Q1 sales before the quarterly report came out, but unfortunately, my day job has been keeping me very busy so I didn't have the time needed to attend to it - and I had problems with my analysis that I didn't understand and that I hope I have rectified now. In my previous posts Analysis of Ripple's XRP sales and 2018 Q4 analysis, I summed payments from wallets to XRP-II to see what the quarterly payments were, and to total them up to see if they matched the sales figures announced by ripple. I had expected to do the same for Q1 2019, but the numbers looked wrong, my correlations were not consistent and the sales figures as a % of coinmarketcap volume didn't look right. I have extensively rewritten (and improved) my software and now have new findings that I feel confident enough about to share them. First, lets remind ourself of daily sales by ripple - in previous threads I found a strong correlation between yesterday's trading volume on coinmarketcap and today's sales (transfers) to the XRP-II distribution wallet. I identified 4 wallets that appeared to sum to about the right amount to explain the sales figures in the quarterly reports. Those wallets were referred to as RP1, RP2, RP3 and RP9. I refer the interested reader to the links above to find further details. If we plot the daily payments from those 4 wallets into the XRP-II wallet (XRP-II being the legal entity licensed to sell XRP to exchanges and customers and is presumably responsible for the programmatic daily sales as well as any number of other sales that we know little about). Here's what the sales look like from April 2018 until today, Note the line plot (linear, left y axis) is the sum of all the individual payments represented by dots that are logarithmically plotted (right axis). I found a strong correlation between the sum of payments and the coinmarketcap exchange volume, scaled by a factor that was around the 0.3% mark. I was intrigued by the drop in sales around mid Sept 2018 that preceeded a large jump in price and volume a week later. My hypothesis was that the drop in sales might be responsible for part of the rise in price (supply/demand). The sales pattern continued, largely unchanged until this year, though there are many wallets that transfer into XRP-II and they change over time, so it is difficult to be certain as to the true nature/volume or reason for the sales taking place. Please be aware that the graph above shows payments INTO the XRP-II wallet, and not out - this is because there are many more payments out and I was trying to identify that portion of sales that represents the daily programmatic sales. For the reasons I've just mentioned, it's too hard to be certain of any motives for individual wallet payments, so instead, I shall focus on payments OUT of XRP-II. Let's have a look at another plot, this time I plot all transfers OUT of XRP-II going into exchange accounts. I am grateful for the google sheet provided by @Silkjaer for a list of wallets that I have used for my assumptions of exchange addresses. You can immediately see that the payments to exchanges is very numerous. The summed total is shown by the solid line and the axes are consistent with the first plot. The totals also follow the same pattern as the sales into XRP-II from the subset of wallets, but is much higher as we are now including other payments from other wallets that are passed through and then go on to exchanges. Let's now show a more interesting graph - this has plots of the total exchange volume from coinmarketcap in green, I have normalized the plot to have the same area under it as the summed total of payments into XRP-II with a time shift of 1 day to show the correlation of the two graphs. The lighter blue line is the RP1,2,3,9 payments into XRP-II and the darker blue line is the summed payments out to exchanges. You should hopefully be able to see that the correlation between XRP-II payments and exchange volume is very strong, however, the correlation starts to break down in Q1 2019 and deteriorates further in Q2 2019 - the reason why my earlier correlation plots failed to give (to me) satisfying results. I have highlighted 3 regions on this plot. The first is in Sept 2018 (grey bar) when the sales from XRP-II virtually stopped. I speculated at the time that the xrp price (shown in the above plot as the black solid line) dropped to a low value for the year and probably ripple wanted to support the price by holding off sales temporarily. If that was the plan, then it worked very well as there was a massive jump at the end of Sept that still defies any reasonable explanation. So many news announcements are constantly being made about partnerships with ripple and events taking place that it is hard to know what might have triggered the rise. The second (grey bar) highlighted region in the plot is in May of this year - the difference between the green (coinmarketcap) and blue lines become very clear. Ripple shut down sales significantly again this month, and we have seen the price rise from ~30c to ~40c. I begin to wonder if my earlier hypothesis might have been correct, but sadly, two events is not enough for a 5 sigma announcement! What else is interesting in the plot? - the red shaded rectangle represents a point where the price of bitcoin was pumping hard, the exchange volume for all coins soared, but the price of XRP did not move very much. Why is that - we can see that the two blue lines rise well above the green one as ripple increased sales significantly - I speculate that they did not wish to see the price shoot up as we saw in Dec 2017, only to fall down again after the pump/dump/fomo/madness was over. Another interesting piece of data is revealed in the plot - the red crosses are payments from exchange accounts BACK to XRP-II - this hardly ever happened in 2018, except for a few scattered points in the year and a cluster of them around Sept 2018 when the sales halted. It is my second hypothesis that ripple have changed strategy during Q1. Prior to this, we see an almost constant sale of XRP proportional to exchange volume, during Q1, particularly after Feb 2019, the sales deviate from a simple pattern and we see returns from exchanges back to XRP-II. It would appear that their algorithm is smarter now and is trying to adapt better to market fluctuations rather than just continuously sell every day. Do we have any way of corroborating this? well, I'm glad you asked. Here's another graph, this time I take a sliding window of 10 days worth of data from XRP-II sales, and the same 10 day window of data from coinmarketcap exchange volume and correlate them, normalize them and plot the scaling coefficient. This gives us the XRP-II sales as a % fraction of the coinmarketcap volume in a running plot and we can see the fluctuation in sales as time progresses. The solid line shows the closing price of XRP, the two dotted lines are the running scale coefficients of the daily % of sales from XRP-II - the red is RP1,2,3,9 the green is ALL payments from exchanges (subtracting the return payments shown by the red crosses in the plot above). Now we can see quite clearly the event in Sept 2018 and the massive drop in may 2019. what is now apparent is Feb-May 2019 there was a large increase in sales as a % of daily volume. Throughout 2018, the red line holds reasonably closely to 0.15% of daily sales, which is fairly consistent with the figures quoted in the ripple quarterly reports. In Q1, things start deviating, and Q2 is all over the place. The drops in Sep 2018 and May 2019 are both followed by XRP price rallies. I added a dotted line at 0.05% of sales just to show how low the sales have dipped. What do I conclude from this... Ripple have changed their selling strategy to better adapt to market conditions and during March/April they increased quite significantly the sales, presumably to smooth out market pump/dump peaks and troughs. Financial institutions do not want like price fluctuations as it increases their cost of holdings - something we should all be grateful for as we want banks to buy in, not run away. Price fluctuations can also increase lay-off costs for market makers which also negatively impacts the market. (We're in this for the long play after all). There has been a slight decoupling over the last month or two with BTC as sales from XRP-II have been historically speaking very high. The large volumes we've seen did not move the price as much as one would have expected. Now would be a great time to pump XRP if whales are reading this! with XRP-II sales very low, it will be easier to move the market. Please go ahead and do this if you can. I'd like to see how high you can push XRP EDIT: I forgot to add one point - why do I think that sales have dropped in recent days? My suspicion (pure speculation) is that with the bear market seemingly coming to an end, Ripple feel safer in allowing the price to rise slightly to accommodate the new corridors they are adding. Disclaimers. All the data has been collected here by a random amateur on the internet. I do not even know for sure if the wallets I examine belong to XRP-II. I do not know for sure if the exchange address I use are correct. All the data in this article could be wrong. I might have even made it up just for giggles (I didn't but how do you know? Do you trust me?) This is not investment advice. But IMHO price rises are more likely when XRP-II sales are low.
  16. 70 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    Sorry to answer out of order, but I think this is closely related to what I just got done writing about. I addressed this in my previous post. I would absolutely expect that to happen. Ripple has a team called "Product" and a separate team called "Development". The Ripple development team has created a set of core technologies. Rippled, RippleConnect, the Interledger Protocol, the ILP components (ledger, connector, notary). The Ripple product team has take these technologies and "productized" them for certain markets. (xCurrent, xVia, xRapid) The Ripple marketing and communication team and sales team then promotes these products. Marcom through the Ripple website, press and conferences. The sales team through direct meetings with banks and payment service providers. The marcom efforts are what tend to leak across to this site. What you don't really hear about are the core technology developments and how they underly current products. Once you understand that it becomes easier to guess about future products.So specifically, you hear xRapid is meant for non-banking financial institutions. That is absolutely true at the moment. What I hear is much different. I hear: We've put together glossy fliers to explain some core Ripple technology to payment services providers in these countries who serve these types of customers We're setting up press interviews to get word of this particular growth tactic into our targeted market We've also put together a sales team to approach payment service providers in those countries We've also put together operations and support teams to make sure anything they've deployed doesn't fall over We've also setup a markets team to monitory the prices and trading volume to make sure XRP is cheaper than alternative paths We've also has the markets team analyze alternative rebalancing paths than can compensate for one-way-flow price imbalances Note that all of the things I've bulleted build operation excellence. They don't actually constrain XRPs use to that particular market in perpetuity. At any given moment, the product and marketing teams might decide to take the exact same underlying core technologies and "re-productize" them towards a new set of potential customers. When this happens, all the operational excellence will transfer and the new teams will have a running start as they grow RippleNet. I think the "write a book" side is winning at the moment! What I'm trying to clarify is that banks as gateways is exactly what Ripple is trying to achieve! It just seems like Ripple is taking a rather convoluted path to get there. There are several reasons for that. Early on we tried to sell Banks on the idea of being directly on the RCL (Ripple ledger) and allowing their customers to open accounts (trust lines) with them directly on ledger. The banks pushed back on this pretty hard. It is pretty easy to see why. The Ripple client was a bit hard to use and understand for someone who wasn't a crypto geek. The already had their own "web banking" clients and preferred to keep their customers in their own walled garden. Secondly, the banks really didn't like the concept of a "public" ledger. Banks are used to keeping all their relationships and transactions private. And third, all high volume financial institutions kept asking, "Will it scale?" Questions like, "Can you support every credit card transaction during the Christmas season?" There is no getting around the fact that consensus based systems have limits. If everyone world wide needed to reach agreement that every Chinese lunch CNY payment happened and serialize them into a single globally agreed upon sequence that seems a bit silly if you are a European bank specialized in local EUR payments. Beyond transactional scalability, you need to think about user account scalability. If you want to put 8 billion people on ledger and each of them is going to have a couple of trust lines and maybe market orders then you are looking towards 100 billion ledger entries. That means server get larger and operational costs do as well. User scalability led us toward a "hosted wallet" model. Most customer fiat accounts are kept off RCL at the banks that currently hold them. Only a single RCL account root is needed for the bank. Individual customers. All transaction are processed via RCL using source/destination tags so the institutions can figure out which customers were involved. RippleConnect was designed to protect the customer's privacy even though the ledger transactions among banks were still public. It did away with the need for publicly visible source/destination tags. It implemented the concept of "pre-transaction negotiation" between financial institutions. Institutions communicate off ledger to: Determine who Alice and Bob are Exchange KYC/AML information Decide if all parties are willing to participate in a transaction PRIOR TO moving any money on the RCL This ability to reject a transaction before it happens completely avoids the lossy reversal problem inherent with market based payments. ILP was Ripple's attempt to address the other banks concerns of privacy and scalability ILP based networks use bi-lateral communication between account co-parties. No one else sees those messages. ILP based networks are highly scalable because your server doesn't receive messages for transactions you don't participate in. Every Ripple product you read about is built out of a handful of core technologies. The Ripple consensus ledger (XRPL now). This is useful when you need synchronized transactions and no counter party risk. ILP based components (xCurrent, xVia). These are useful when you need synchronized transactions as well and privacy and scalability. RippleConnect's pre-transaction messaging and payment object. This allows institutions to agree on what they are doing and the costs, prior to moving money. xCurrent, xVia, xRapid all use the payment object and pre-transaction messaging concepts. RippleConnect 1.0-2.0 implemented hosted wallets for RCL RippleConnect 3.0 implemented hosted wallets for ILP If you separate the core technologies from the product/marketing discussion it becomes much easer to see a roadmap that takes us all the way to the end.
  17. 69 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    Let's start with the easy ones: Please feel free to ask me anything compromising or not. I would really like to know what is on everyones mind. If I can't answer directly I promise to say so. I'll try not to spin ******** just to look like I outsmarted your hard question. That's not why I'm here. Ripple does have a lot of internal communication about what is happening. Mostly this relates to new contracts and meeting internal goals. Some of the "good developments" include the XRP price moving up. Interestingly, that is a bit of a double edged sword internally. The more the price moves, the more distracted people can get from what they are supposed to be working on. So I'd say that there is a lot less XRP price speculation talk inside Ripple than here. But there is probably more talk about the network building wins and how they fit into Ripple's overall strategy then you see on this site. Of course this site is mentioned. I lot of people at Ripple read this site even if fewer post. The same is true for Ripple's own forum. I wish there was more public interaction between employees and the community. But I can also see how difficult it is for the communication team to keep secrets long enough to have a well coordinated press strategy. The remaining two question are awesome, but they require long hard answers. Exactly the kind of answers I like to give. If this was an "ask me anything" I'd probably give the normal platitudes just to move on to the next question and finish up. But instead, I'll tell you why I want to defer answering these in detail so you'll all hold me to "getting around to it". The is really the topic I hoped to discuss on this site long term. You've just spun it in a different direction. I wanted to answer, "What advantages does Ripple have (after all these years) against the headwinds it and every other cryptocurrency must face." This is not a short answer. It presumes that we all have the same understanding about the direction that Ripple is flying and also which way the wind is blowing. That's rarely ever the case with Ripple. I'll expand on this as I can but if you want the nutshell version. The hardest thing in crypto and money in general is compliance. That is underestimated by everyone in the space. Ripple has build out a great team and worked hard over the years in discussing these issues directly with regulators. Few other crypto ecosystems have this experience. The second hardest thing in money is inertia. We think of banks as a single entity. But they're not. They are a bunch of departments headed by individuals. Most of these individuals are great people but each is looking out for their own personal self interest (just like everyone else). If you are the first to implement something new and different at a bank and it goes wrong--you can be fired! On the other hand, if someone else implements something first and it goes right--it's unlikely you'll be fired for implementing it second. So one of the keys is to canvas the world broadly enough to find the people whose problems are bad enough that the potential benefits overwhelm the perceived risks. Ripple has been awesome at identifying areas where the need it greatest. (by the way, that's what I mean by short answer) Again, this is a great question that is part of a much longer discussion. But I'll try to a short answer without sounding like a ... The phrase "xrp adoption" begs the counter question "adoption by whom?" But that's a ...ish answer. Currently, I think XRP adoption among the "right people" for the "right reasons" is getting better and better. In this case, the "right people" are exchanges and the "right reason" is to support xRapid. As xRapid volume increases more and more XRP holders and traders will be drawn into the ecosystem simply because there is money to be made trading the counterflow. Both the additional payment volume and additional traders should tend to put upward pressure on XRP's price. On the other hand, at the end of 2017 there were a lot of the "wrong people" buying XRP for the "wrong reasons". I have to admit that made me happy too! In fact, I'm a bit sad I didn't sell more at the high AND buy it all back at the low. ;-) But I'm pretty sure everyone else feels the same way. But don't mistake poor humor for cynicism. I'm hodling XRP longterm. I have complete confidence Ripple is well positioned to succeed. (Disclaimer: This is my personal opinion. I don't speak for Ripple the company and don't have insider knowledge of their current plans.)
  18. 69 points

    Concerns about Coil data collection

    Hey all - thanks for the feedback, especially for breaking down the doc and highlighting the problematic sections. I just read through the thread and will be looking into this. The ToS were prepared by our external counsel and I wasn't part of that process, so I'll find out why those terms were included and if we can take them out. There may be some justification that I'm just not aware of. We have zero interest in selling user data or running ads - those are crappy, backwards ways of making money and the whole point of Coil is that those monetization workarounds are no longer necessary. We are paid directly by our users, so we don't need any other revenue stream. Expect a more full-fledged reply once I've had a chance to meet with the lawyers.
  19. 67 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    This is a great couple of questions. I feel handicapped by not having a whiteboard to draw on in answering. Excuse my ASCII art... The best way to think of XRP usage is in the context of Alice and Bob. But in the current world where neither Alice nor Bob know anything about XRP. Alice is part of an ecosystem of payment senders. The Alice's of the world work their day jobs and receive and hold their money in the local fiat currency. (Alice) ----@ (Bank A) So in Ascii art, "Alice hold her money in an account at Bank A" Bob is part of an ecosystem of payment receivers. The Bob's of the world also hold their money in their local fiat currency. (Bank A) @----- (Bob). "Bob holds his money in an account at Bank B" In drawing it out, you ALWAYS end up with a graph. That graph tells you if and how money can flow and how much it will cost along each path option. (Alice) ----@ (Bank A) @---- (Mark) ----@ (Bank B) @---- (Bob). "Mark holds accounts at both Bank A and Bank B" He allows money to flow through his accounts. Note: These are the types of diagrams the Ripple graph was intended to explore. So notice that I didn't list XRP anywhere in the above diagram. That seems like it sucks at first. But it is worth realizing that what I've done goes beyond Alice and Bob as individuals. What I've done is connect EVERY customer of Bank A with EVERY customer at Bank B. Meaning I've connected two whole ecosystems. If I replace the banks with something larger, then the payment potential gets larger. (Alice) ----@ (SPEI) @---- (Mark) ----@ (IMPS) @---- (Bob). "Now anyone with a bank account in Mexico can send synchronized payments to anyone in India" But what about XRP? Isn't Mark just going to get rich here trading fiat? Yes, but the first step is to get money moving through OUR system (RippleNet). The least scary way (for banks) to do that is via fiat like they are used to. XRP comes in as an alternate lower cost path. (Alice) ----@ (SPEI) @----------------------- (Mark) ----------------------@ (IMPS) @---- (Bob) We want this path to cost more (SPEI) @---- (Mark) ----@ (XRP) @---- (Mak) ----@ (IMPS) We want this path to cost less You can add that path without upsetting the original topology. If a bank is scared of crypto they can pay more. if they want to pay less, they can route through crypto. I'll leave it to you to decide how long you think banks will want to pay more for transactions. So a good way to think about Ripple's strategy is as multiple teams building out operational volume in different sections of the graph. The xCurrent part of RippleNet is building out operation value on the top line. This includes growing the total pool of "Alices and Bobs". The xRapid part of RippleNet is building out the operation that will assure that the XRP path always costs less. Initially this looks like two disconnected ecosystems, Banks vs Payment Services. But I think it is more insightful to think about it as building operational mastery in different conceptual areas. The payment services xRapid is targeting already use the top line banking ecosystem. They are not closing their bank accounts. They are just augmenting them with additional lower cost paths. One you realize that, it become easer to see how banks can adopt these same lower cost paths with few additional operation changes. With that as background, keep an eye on Japan, India, Mexico, and Canada. Then I'd start looking for large markets in South America and East Asia. As I mentioned in a previous post, any countries that are current clearing payments through US banks, but are at risk of "de-risking" account closure are very good candidates to use XRP. This allows them to dis-intermediate the correspondents looking to de-risk them. Again, I don't have first hand knowledge of which partnerships are farthest along. But that is the way I analyze the larger financial ecosystem as a whole.
  20. 66 points
    The ECB (European Central Bank) released an annual report on Target2, the RTGS system for all European banks where they settle all payments in central bank money. The ECB published it about two hours ago and it can be found here: https://t.co/GLJNtzrR19 The timeline for banks with all the milestones can be found here; https://t.co/tBB9WoDswF The big bang approach requires that all national central banks and their communities are prepared to migrate on time. All banks in Europe, will all be, at the same time, able to use XRP for domestic and international settlement of payments and securities within Europe, but also across other RTGS systems like Japan’s or the Federal Reserve’s. It means also the migration of TARGET2 (payments) with TS2 (securities) and TIPS (instant settlement) into one gateway for al European banks. All banks have to be signed with a contract to their selected Network Service Provider of choice BEFORE July 2020. RippleNet with it’s xCurrent (4.0) is one of those NSP’s. EDIT: 28/5/2019 - Ripple is NOT a NSP, since they have not participated in the tender, however RippleNet could probably be accessed though the two chosen NSP's. The new European RTGS system with integration to multiple NSP’s (like RippleNet for instance, currently Swift is the ONLY integrated NSP) will go live, with a “big bang migration” (as they like to call it themselves) in the whole of the EU on November 22, 2021. EDIT: 28/05/2019 - XRP usage "official"? The ECB paper Brad Garlinghouse referred to in his tweet: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpops/ecb.op223~3ce14e986c.en.pdf%3Ff2e9a2596a8f9c38c95f4735c05a0d47&ved=2ahUKEwjCsKP-gL7iAhXEalAKHZQFAskQFjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw0myveAY0kP7vl4vj81wZJa Somewhere in there, you will find one specific sentence which, in my opinion says A LOT about whether banks under the ECB may use XRP for settlement or not. Dyor and decide for yourself.
  21. 66 points

    Answer: My Dinner with David

    I just wanted everyone to know that Dinner with David (and four other great guys) was awesome! I really did come away pumped after our long discussions. The fact that everyone at the company is in agreement that David & Arthur's original (and later my) "long term" vision for XRP acting as a bridge currency has/is/was/will always be the guiding star forward. At least that is the way I heard it in my head. David can make his own public statements. But what PUMPED ME UP the most was that it is no longer seen as a "long term" vision. It is a focused activity that the company NEEDS to pursue now. But best of all, they ARE all actively pursuing it, NOW! To David, they all seem unified in the realization that, XRP as a bridge currency, has changed from a “WANT to happen” to become a “NEEDS to happen.” Or else TIME will shift from working with Ripple, to working against Ripple. The early Ripplers really, truly BELIEVED in the concept of a cryptocurrency and everything the fine folks on this forum believe. However, Ripple, for all the right reasons, hired the true cream of the crop from the financial services industry. Their experience gave Ripple insight into MANY many ways to improve payments and communication within the financial networks of the world. But they were not intrinsic fans of cryptocurrency. They were open to the idea of course. But still harbored some skepticism. For a long time it was fine with everyone if Ripple was seen as an enterprise banking software company. But that silly pipe dream evaporated as everyone realized how much more value could be created by shifting the focus back to XRP. Ripple still makes great enterprise banking and payments software. That will never stop. But Ripple is most definitely a cryptocurrency focused company again! --- Keep in mind, some of what I said above is perhaps owed to my interpretation of what David said and its personal impact on me, colored by my history with the company. I'm not a reporter quoting David's exact words. He speaks for himself. I'm writing my personal impression of what I heard along with my feelings about it. This may not be the official company position. But know that nothing we talked about was private. At best it was semi-private. We were all in the middle of a crowded restaurant talking pretty loudly. We were also all talking openly to people at the table neither David nor I had ever met before that moment. So I'm not selling out my friend or saying things whispered to me. (David didn’t say this next part.) I personally believe that the company is dramatically revisiting every situation where the software licensing cost was seen as a barrier to entry for institutions. I personally believe that was a case of “false economy”. Ripple the company benefits much more from the customers that small and medium size banks bring, then they do from any licensing fees they could charge the banks. Hearing what David has to say made me ecstatic… (But I want to be clear about why. I don’t want anyone mistaking what I’m saying as, “XRP to the moon, next week.” XRP will go to the moon, absolutely, in my mind. But I have no idea when.) … The reason it made me ecstatic, was that a long while back Stefan nicknamed me Cassandra. In Greek mythology, “Cassandra is cursed to utter prophecies that were true but that no one believed.”mI actually got a substantial raise that on my review said, “I have to rate you highly, because your initial ideas always end up being the ones we implement... wait for it ...after trying every other possible alternative. So truly believe me when I say me being ecstatic was not financially related or something you should trade on. The reason was pure vanity.
  22. 66 points

    ACI and Ripple finally public

    ACI’s UP (Universal Payments platform) and Ripple https://www.aciworldwide.com/lp/aci-swift ACI supports around 9 percent of global SWIFT traffic and approximately 30 percent in the US. ACI offers services to banks around the world wanting to connect to and leverage the SWIFT’s global payment initiative (gpi). ACI also supports real-time schemes around the world, meaning that any bank can use Real-time Payment Systems to support SWIFT FIN, gpi, DLT (e.g. Ripple), Wire and immediate payments. One random dot... There’s a lot more but don’t wanna dog for all the posts:
  23. 65 points

    Swift & Ripple New Angle

    I’ve been following the “Swipple” discussions and waiting for someone to articulate this theory and haven’t seen it yet, so I’m going to attempt to explain why I believe Swift and Ripple won’t need to form a partnership in order for Swift Payments to be settled over RippleNET/xRapid. First to understand the theory it is important to explain the difference between a payment and a settlement, which seems to be widely misunderstood in this space. Imagine you are playing black jack at a casino and the waitress comes by and you buy a pack of cigarettes, if you pay with your credit card you’ve made a payment, but not a settlement, there is a transference of obligations, but two settlements are left to be made, one from the credit card company to the casino and one from you to the credit card company. However, if you gave the same waitress casino chips you have settled this all the way through. So let me make the point, Swift is not and does not want to be in the business of settlement. One good reason for this is that would be in direct competition with most of their 11,000 customers, who do provide settlement services, and Swift has publicly stated they don’t want to do that. Each Swift Message includes instructions for how to settle a payment, with details such as which bank and account (Nostro/Vostro). This begs the question of, why would Ripple even want to partner with Swift? And if they did why would it do anything to drive up XRP price, since XRP is for settlement and Swift clearly is not in the settlement business? Good questions. The answer of course is there is no “partnership”, at least not in the way most people are envisioning, the common fantasy seems to be Swift unilaterally pushing 5 trillion a day in settlements across RippleNET and XRP, but of course Swift doesn’t manage these settlements, see the issue yet? Now on to my theory, in the past few months we’ve seen a few diagrams sourced directly from Ripple Partner websites that show payment flows that include both Swift and Ripple in the same flow. This has always had my curiosity up, because I don’t think someone drew these up for fun and posted them on partner websites, if they had come from Twitter or other dubious sources I could write them off as a hoax. Swift releases code updates yearly and has gradually been phasing in more support for ISO20022, (Swift being the primary contributor to the standards creation, some 75%) and after reviewing their release notes and other roadmap information it is clear that they have set a date in November where all nodes on the network are required to update their software to come into compliance with 2018’s update. This year's update is mainly about adding end-to-end tracking with a UETR tracking field in every transaction that will be mandatory for each hop/processor on the network to maintain as each message flows through said hops in the Swift network, hence the term end-to-end. Once the deadline crosses then payments using the Swift Application Programming Interface (API) will be able to read/use the UETR field. An API is used for program-to-program communication, essentially when disparate programs need to communicate with each other. So after the deadline has been crossed and all nodes on the network and the messages that they initiate or route have the UETR field in them end-to-end AND this information can be accessed by programs using the API (Ripple In this case), then that said program can determine the status of a payment, and if the payment has reached its final destination and been confirmed. Why is this important? Its important because if you want a third-party program to provide settlement services for your payments, then you must provide a way for that program to determine when it is appropriate to initiate a settlement - meaning you don't settle until after you have paid, for good reason (the API and UETR tracking allow a program to query payment status). Payments fail for various reasons, and we can’t be in the business of settling a payment before it is confirmed to be valid and final. Can you imagine the heart ache with trying to roll back a “Settlement” it’s the equivalent of “Hey I put money in your wallet on accident, please send it back”. So to summarize, I believe that after the November Swift Update, the front end processors such as Temenous, ACI, SAP Etc that leverage the Swift network, will now be able to leverage the Swift API to provide “settlement” services possibly with a settlement solution like xRapid. I don’t believe there is any partnership required for this to happen, simply Swift must / is in the process of providing the needed “Third-party extensions” to allow this to happen. Thereby bringing more value overall to using the Swift solution without the need for Swift themselves to provide an actual settlement service. I will take a moment to address another question that was raised continuously in the previous thread. Yes it is true that Swift customers can perform the code upgrade now, ahead of the deadline, and surely many have already done so. When you roll out an IT project it is rarely a good idea to cut everything over at once and at the last moment. You want early adopters and to phase things in ahead of time, that gives the project time to react if there are unexpected issues of any type. So the question then becomes, why wouldn't a settlement service be launched already? Why is the Novemeber deadline important and potentially a catalyst for price movement? It is important to understand one thing about the "deadline" it is in fact a "deadline" where after this set date and time, only then can you assume that 100% of the nodes on the network are either in compliance with the new standard OR have been dropped from the network. IMO, you wouldn't want to launch a new settlement service that relied on the November update until after the deadline, otherwise you'll see many failures in settlements or you'll see many payments you can't provide the new service for, because XYZ bank on the Swift network hasn't yet updated. You as the project team would likely end up in troubleshooting hell chasing down tons of issues only to find out in most cases "Oh this is one more issue we wouldn't even be talking about if we had waited to launch until after the deadline". P.s. There is another Commentator that has been raising this theory, but the thread is full of arguing and people not understanding his theory, I give this guy partial credit for raising the theory, I wrote this mainly to try and help him clarify his points. Keep in mind we are all on the same team and I assume we all want XRP to appreciate.
  24. 63 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    Just a quick note to everyone... I'm enjoying all the accolades and the really great welcome I've received here. Thank you all! I'm realizing that I really am quite vain! But really I'd appreciate everyone here being very skeptical. Just know It won't scare me off. This holds for questioning me and my presumptions... Really question EVERYTHING you've ever seen in a press release. I'm not a huge fan of puffery. There are too many awesome technical and ecosystem developments going to waste time puffing silliness. I'm happy to explain thing in either high-level marketing speak, or way too low-level technical talk. I love it when people understand and appreciate the Ripple Ledger, and ILP, and Synchronized Payments, and consensus algorithms, and... It's all quite beautiful once you see it clearly. My role is to help everyone see it clearly. I used to tell all the new Ripplers that I trained, "DON'T presume that you SHOULD BE able to understand everything we say. Lots of the words we use don't actually make any sense. Many phrases have weird connotations that you can't possibly understand. We are horrible about naming things and tend to explain easy things in quirky terms. NOBODY IN BANKING EVER ISSUES YOU A BALANCE! They simply credit your account. But we continue to say these silly things everyday." You can all presume that I think I'm right and also presume that I think I'm telling you the complete truth. But be skeptical! Make me explain it to your satisfaction and bring your own insights. That is where I get the most benefit. The fastest way for me to realize when I'm wrong is to have smarter people than me tell me so! I hate being wrong, but I hate more, being wrong without people telling me so. Anyway, I'm looking forward to some great discussion!
  25. 62 points

    BearWhale research

    I have been digging deeper into the "BearWhale" (BW) and have made some discoveries along the way. Using the public Ripple data API I extracted all payments made to the BW's active known 3 exchange users: - Bitfinex, destination tag 2920435242 - Bitstamp, destination tag 16251624 - Bitstamp, destination tag 73428056 The sum of all the transfers is 1.340.880.214, a few hundred millions(!) more than we expected the total funds to be. These are the distinct wallets that have been funding the 3 exchange accounts. Amounting in 58 unique wallets in total! I plotted the payments by date, and to my surprise there was a lot of movement before the "selloff" started in early 2018: So the assumptions that the total amount of holdings are 1.08B is not the case. The web is widening. So where did it start? By looking at the wallets of the first payments made, there is 5 standing out: rfeZ93nX7m4mWYTMUm3vJZD73HoKwDxryJ (October 2017) - This wallet was activated by Changelly, directly funded by next wallet (rGiUzrwbW3SDQ5VRUQjB8ATDGs11iGUTM7) rGiUzrwbW3SDQ5VRUQjB8ATDGs11iGUTM7 (November 2017) - This wallet was activated by Changelly, directly funded by ~FundingWallet1 (Activated by Chris Larsen) rpiWoLNdX6KLrM66Hzp71gLc6vwYVgXVXL (December 2017) - This wallet was activated by r4ZTx8Kqh2sAxD3yZVovBpuxmywwb3we8W, that was activated by Dave Chapman. This wallet is largely funded by hashes.org (rUjxty1WWLwX1evhKf3C2XNZDMcXEZ9ToJ) rUrPTjbLkTpkJs5UWttMxadww6YrMUhGJy (December 2017) - This wallet was activated by ~tmcleod (Trent McLeod?), directly funded by ~FundingWallet1 (Activated by Chris Larsen) rMYYUjFAxqkyKzyXkYNG2K5H7pESUri4t3 (December 2017) - This wallet was activated by Hashes, and is largely funded by hashes.org (rUjxty1WWLwX1evhKf3C2XNZDMcXEZ9ToJ) I see a pattern especially between ~FundingWallet1 (Activated by Chris Larsen) and Hashes.org (Activated by ~dangermoose). Two other interesting names popping up is tmcleod and Dave Chapman (Octagon Strategy). How/why/when did hashes.org get access to these kinds of funds and who is "dangermoose"? I think that this is the key entity behind the selloffs we have seen since the beginning of the year. https://www.xrptipbot.com/u:Silkjaer/n:twitter
  26. 61 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    No, nothing like that. Community credit is about "money" arising from interactions between peers rather than between issuers and users. For example, suppose you do something for me and I allow you to "owe me one". The idea is for this to act as a currency. Someone who wants something from me (and who I don't trust enough to let them owe me one) wants me to owe them one rather than owing you one. So if they do something for you, you could give them the "marker" you got when you did me a favor and now I owe them a favor. These "markers" can function as a currency. It's kind of like a system where all that exists is balances between people. You may trust me enough to extend me credit. So when I want something from you, you may let me owe you $50 but no more. You now have a +$50 balance and I have a -$50 balance. Now if I want something else from you, I'm out of credit. So I need to find someone who either you owe money to or who will let you borrow from them and give them something for which they in return will restore my credit. So, for example, say you have Alice, Bill, and Charlie. Alice is highly trusted because she has a valuable commercial network and both Bill and Charlie are willing to let Alice owe them money. Alice needs something from Charlie and in exchange Charlie lets Alice owe her $20. So now, Charlie owes Alice $20. Alice can borrow from Bill or Charlie. Now, say Bill wants something from Alice. Alice won't extend Bill any credit because she doesn't trust him. But Bill can give Charlie $20 and in exchange for the $20 Alice owes him and now Alice owes $20 to Bill. Bill can pay Alice $20 with her own IOU. This is precisely how all assets other than XRP work in the XRP Ledger. They're always balances between accounts, either account can extend credit to the other, and balances can "ripple" through accounts. By having XRP in the mix, credit can be settled and restored immediately. For example, Alice can place an offer to give out a $10 IOU for 32 XRP. Now if someone owes Alice $10, they can buy a $10 IOU from Alice and the two IOUs cancel out. This will restore their credit. This is an implementation of Ryan Fugger's original vision of money arising out of community relationships and providing people a network of assets and credits they can contribute to and draw off of. Arthur's genius was to provide a system of gateways to allow the system to be easily connected to external financial systems to help avoid the problem of long paths or unidirectional flows.
  27. 60 points
  28. 59 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    I did a lot of analytic work on "XRP as a bridge currency" as I mentioned in a previous post on this tread. I found two distinct upward pressures. 1) new traders buying XRP to enter the market and compete as a market maker. 2) people holding XRP to reduce their international payment cost. (the 1/2 fee argument from above) Vijay and Miguel from Ripple's trading team in New York however created a lot of detailed trading models and simulations. It wasn't that they were trying to create upward pressure on XRP's price, more so that they we trying to understand what actions might but unnecessary downward pressure on price. Of course, so no one would accidentally make those mistakes. Thank you cmbartley and everyone else as well! Actually you all are! One of the things I've been trying to judge is if I should write a book or perhaps start a blog about Ripple, blockchain technology, crypto, money, the future of banking, etc. Does anyone feel something like that would be useful?
  29. 58 points
    Although arguments can be made against the notion of future adoption of the XRPL by the financial system thru supporting the retention of the current international payment system or emphasizing the technological progress in the SWIFT payment network, they fail to address critical flaws in today’s system. Hackers, political pressure, regulators, and the shrinking correspondent banking system are all legitimate issues that are impacting banking operations. Most international payments are facilitated through the SWIFT network today. SWIFT is a messaging network used to send and receive information on financial transactions between financial institutions. Currently, more than 11,000 financial institutions from around the world are linked to the SWIFT network for operations. Typically, the originating bank is required to have a working relationship with the destination bank in international wire transfers. If there is none, the originating bank can search the SWIFT network for a correspondent bank that has one with both banks.(2) Once found, the transaction is transferred through Nostro accounts held at the intermediary bank for a fee to the destination bank. Although SWIFT’s inception has proven to be beneficial in enabling international payments between banks globally, it’s reliance or the monopolistic position has become a double-edged sword. Due to their international relationships, SWIFT was viewed as an apolitical organization that was independent of any country’s domestic foreign policy. Unfortunately, this has not been proven the case the past few years as political disputes now threaten to fragment the international payments space. Regardless of your political views towards Iran, the United States pressure on SWIFT to disconnect Iranian financial institutions from the network has been unprecedented. While the action undergone by SWIFT contradicts the European Union’s desires. Although the EU intends to maintain trade with Iranian institutions, SWIFT complied with the US requests.(3) With the consequence being that now the international payment network has become weaponized to exert political pressure onto countries or regions. This undermines the trust within the network as participants can ultimately be on the wrong side of political discourse. Along with Iranian FIs, there has been heavy speculation from US media sources and diplomats that Russian financial institutions might face similar sanctions to their Iranian counterparts in the future.(4) Further eroding any participant confidence in SWIFT remaining apolitical. SWIFT’s inability to remain impartial to the network’s participants is already beginning to have repercussions. In Europe, there has been a political push back on the US influence over the payment network. Germany's foreign minister, Heiko Maas, has publicly stated that the EU should "strengthen European autonomy by creating payment channels that are independent of the United States — a European Monetary Fund and an independent SWIFT system".(5) Even more striking were Maas’ comments that the EU had already begun the process of developing an alternative payment system. Both Iran and Russia have also taken similar responses to the EU. Iran has begun implementing an alternative banking platform for banking transactions with foreign institutions.(6) Meanwhile, Russian financial institutions have prepared themselves to be disconnected from the SWIFT network at a moments notice and have begun to adopt another alternative payment system CIPS. CIPS or the Chinese Alternative Global Payments System is also an alternative payment platform provided by China. CIPS was intended to make transactions between China and Russia easier while enticing other countries to utilize the system.(7) Russia has also begun to develop its own payment system called the “System for Transfer of Financial Messages” (SPFS). Essentially, the global political environment has pushed regions or countries to develop or adopt alternative solutions to SWIFT. Creating an ever growing, fragmented international payment network that will require interoperability between systems. SWIFT’s security has also been exploited these past several years, further testing the participant's trust of the network. Along with the frequency of these hacks occurring, the severity of them is increasing. Of the top five biggest SWIFT hacks by money lost, four of them have occurred within the past two years.(8) The sophistication of these attacks is becoming so advanced for SWIFT’s liking that they have begun to issue warnings and urge participants to increase their security measures.(9) In some attacks, hackers have been able to order payments to banks in other countries by copying preformatted payment requests into the SWIFT messaging software. Even further eroding trust in the network’s security, it was discovered that the NSA had breached SWIFT’s security and have developed tools for its operations. Thru leaked documents and files by a hacker group, the public was made aware of how the NSA had accessed the messaging system. Possibly setting in an uncomfortable feeling for financial institutions located in Eastern countries that the SWIFT network is a possible vector for attacks. Structurally, the correspondent banking system has been on a gradual decline for several years while total volume and value of payments through SWIFT are increasing. The Financial Stability Board conducted a study in which the FSB found that from 2011 to the end of 2017, active correspondent relationships declined by 15.5 percent across all currencies.(1) While for 2017 alone, it declined by 4.1 percent. More recent studies have concluded that 2018 saw declines in active relationships and corridors of about 3.5% and 2% respectively.(11) With the global correspondent banking network now declining by about 20% and the number of active corridors having fallen by roughly 10% the past seven years. This decline in active correspondent relationships has also coincided with the increased concentration within the correspondent banking market. Remaining participants in the network have their market share increase as competing banks exit the system. Both these trends pose respective risks and issues to the banking system. An increase in the volume of payments with the decrease in the number of correspondent relationships is theorized to increase the length of the payment chains. Implying payments will need to be facilitated thru more intermediary parties to reach the same destination. Possibly adding more exchange or transaction fees along with increasing the settlement time. Meanwhile, a concentration in the correspondent banking market introduces an unwelcoming scenario. Theorized consequences include a decrease in the competition of services, leading to higher costs and more fragile networks. As the payment network relies on fewer participants to facilitate payments, the failure of a participant will have greater repercussions as they are more relied on. Ultimately, the global political environment is causing a fragmentation of the global payment system while the financial system is gradually entering a delicate state. Both trends have already begun to force global and financial institutions to adapt and find alternative systems. Regardless of what SWIFT can develop to enhance it’s services to its participants, there will be issues the organization cannot resolve. Interoperability will more than likely be the key in enabling the future global payment space to withstand any geopolitical shocks, along with providing a crucial capability if the financial system is under strain due to the structure of the correspondent banking system. Placing Ripple’s xCurrent or ILP in an advantageous position. 1. https://bankingjournal.aba.com/2018/11/basel-decline-in-global-correspondent-banking-relationships-accelerates/ 2. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/correspondent-bank.asp 3. https://www.ft.com/content/8f16f8aa-e104-11e8-8e70-5e22a430c1ad 4. https://www.voanews.com/a/us-diplomat-russia-should-release-ukrainian-sailors-by-christmas-/4688911.html 5. https://www.businessinsider.com/germany-wants-european-rival-to-us-backed-swift-payment-system-2018-8 6. https://en.mehrnews.com/news/139715/Iran-welcomes-foreign-banks-to-join-its-alternative-to-SWIFT 7. https://ethereumworldnews.com/after-ripple-chinas-cips-now-competes-with-swift-departure-from-us-dollar/ 8. https://medium.com/@kvantorcom/top-5-biggest-swift-hacks-52fca78145c 9. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cyber-heist-warning/swift-warns-banks-on-cyber-heists-as-hack-sophistication-grows-idUSKBN1DT012 10. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-swift/hacker-documents-show-nsa-tools-for-breaching-global-money-transfer-system-idUSKBN17H0NX 11. https://www.bis.org/cpmi/paysysinfo/corr_bank_data/corr_bank_data_commentary_1905.htm
  30. 58 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    I really hate this question because don't actually have a "gambling gene" in my body. Watching the price of XRP go up and down gives me a huge amount of anxiety. I've actually spent the past six months deliberately NOT looking at the price. I had more than enough stress in other areas of my life. But it is a fair question. I think the best answer I can give is to make a parallel with technology. "We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run," Amara's Law. I expect there will be price spikes in XRP and other crypto currencies in the near term. However, it is impossible for me to say what the right price is at any instant. I'd like XRP to set new highs over the next year, but really that is just my wishes. I don't have specific information to say "it will happen because of this, that or the other thing". In reality, all cryptocurrency prices are set by one thing and one thing only. People's perception of the asset's future utility. I personally believe that XRP has a uniquely huge utility value. I'm going to do my best to explain to everyone why I believe that. But do keep in mind that while Ripple the company and XRP the asset are uniquely placed and resourced to succeed. It is possible that individually or collaboratively this all ***** up. I'm going to do my best to make sure that doesn't happen. I hope everyone here will join me in that. --- Now that I re-read the question I see the part that says "internally at ripple"... Several people left fancy jobs and joined Ripple because (I paraphrase) "If we capture even a minor fraction of the international payments market, do you know the value XRP will need to have to support that! Do the math, (really, really big trade number) / 100 billion XRP = Wow! Those sort of conversations always buoyed my spirits and made me smile. But really they also gave me anxiety and made me remember that my job was to "make sure we don't all **** this up!" Curiously, XRP price speculation conversation are a bit of a sore spot internally at Ripple. The reason for this is the strange imbalance in XRP ownership among employees. It turns out how vested in XRP you are as an employee depends on the time period in which you started working for the company. If you started in Ripple's first year or so, you probably bought XRP on your own initiative. If you started after our pivot toward banks and away from the consumer client, you probably didn't buy XRP at all. If you started during the 2017 price run up, you might have bought XRP regularly in your first few months. Keep in mind I bought XRP at around a penny. Then watched it sink over three years to a low of 0.3 cents. That was not too long ago in my mind. So XRP @ 30 cents is up 100X since I took my last vacation. I have to keep that in mind when I'm pining away for XRP @ $3.
  31. 57 points
    Just when SWIFT thought they had just about caught up to xCurrent, what do Ripple do? They basically unbrand xCurrent and announce RippleNet and Multi-hop. It means that SWIFT GPI is already obsolete. Blockchain messaging (alone) is not enough, and settling using vostro/nostro is absolutely not enough. Ripple just pulled the rug from under SWIFT's feet. Multi-hop enables every xCurrent customer to also SETTLE their payments within a few minutes. Game over, SWIFT. If they want to compete they will need to use a digital asset that's as liquid, valuable, fast and cheap as XRP ...err, that leaves only XRP. No more shenanigans and bullsh!t from SWIFT - the rubber hits the road this year, and SWIFT don't have a digital asset to help them compete. They can either join Ripple or admit defeat.
  32. 56 points

    Q4 analysis/prediction

    Dear XRPChat, As the Ripple Q4Markets Report is imminent, I'd like to present an update to my previous analysis of ripple sales (in thread linked here) With a focus this time, on Q4 sales from 2018-10-01 to 2018-12-31. Part I The previous findings were that Ripple has been selling approximately 3% of daily volume and this trend appears to have continued without any significant change. I shall confine my plots to the period 2018-04-01 (2018-Q2) onwards, as this appears to be a time when a strategy shift occurred in the xrp sales and data appears consistent after this time. The up-to-date plot of daily sales (from the account previously referred to as RP2) to tagged (presumed to be exchange) accounts is and the correlation to daily volume is Which maintains the finding that around 1/35 = ~3% of daily volume is being sold off with the previous days volume (shift =1day) used as the reference. NB. Using the time period 2018-04-01 from cryptocompare.com to today as reference. I had previously hypothesized that ripple are selling xrp not only from their warchest of escrowed tokens, but also from founders/staff accounts since the declared sales of xrp in the Q2/Q3 reports do not tally with the summed totals I found in sales from RP2. This seems entirely reasonable and I decided to investigate this further. Two further pieces of information are useful. The first is that as pointed out in a recent comment by hodor - in the Q3 report, ripple state that their programmatic sales are 0.17% of market total (and total sales 0.43%). This is quite a significant difference from the 3% sales I have calculated. Either Ripple are using a different source of volume figures for their data, or I am not looking at the right numbers/wallets. Perhaps if I take only a subset of the 3% sales, they will match the numbers reported by ripple. In the previous analysis thread, I did not manage to find a good match between ripple's declared figures and the ones I presented - to try to improve this, I looked at the wallets that supply RP2 with the xrp that is sold daily. There are 9 of them, and I have labelled them as RD1, RD2, ... RD9 (for Ripple Daily 1-9). The payments from April until now are It's clear that they follow a similar pattern to the overall sales in the earlier plot since these are just the payments into the RP2 account that are then distributed to exchanges. Perhaps the 9 accounts represent different sources of xrp that correspond to warchest/founders/charity/other wallets that contribute to daily sales. This is a breakdown of the payments from the 9 into RP2 for recent quarters And let us remind ourselves of the ripple sales as published in the quarterly reports We are interested in 2018 Q2/Q3 programmatic sales and if any of the accounts RD1-9 match the figures quoted. The answer is "no", but perhaps several of the accounts together combined match the figures we are looking for. Summing RD1 RD2 RD3 RD9 gives a quite close result for Q2/Q3, here are the numbers The totals are 57.56 and 66.71 compared to 56.55 and 65.27. Those numbers are just 1.7% and 2.2% out for Q2 and Q3 respectively. Perhaps those are the accounts that are feeding the programmatic sales. If that is a correct assumption, then 2018-Q4 programmatic sales should be $83.47m. Allowing for +/-2.5% we would have a range of $81.4m to $85.6m. Actually, I suspect the number will be a little less because RD1,RD2,R3 look like good candidates, but why add RD9 in Q3 which had zero sales prior to then. Removing RD9 from the sum increases the error and reduces the total so I would not be surprised if the figure was a little lower. But I'll stick to $83.5m as a prediction for Q4 sales. One thing that troubles me is that the figures I get for programmatic sales using RD1,2,3,9 amounts to 1/57.33 = 0.1744 or 1.7% of the volume (which is about right, since we are only including half the accounts in our programmatic sales estimate that was ~3%). But in the Ripple Q3 report, they state that they sold only 0.17% of volume programmatically. And based on the figures presented in the report, it looks as though the volume data they are using is much higher than that sourced by myself, so I shall revisit these figures with better volume data. The average daily volume from their data is >$400M daily, which seems about right. It may be that the /v2/network/external_markets API can provide figures that improve the correlations with sales and give a better match to the %volume figures. Part II I said earlier that two further pieces of information were useful. One was the sales % numbers in the markets report, the second is that we do have extra data that might help us identify direct sales as well as programmatic ones. The extra data is the xrp distribution figures. Ripple provide data on how much xrp is in existence, how much is distributed/undistributed and escrowed. If we know how much xrp there is in April 2018 and we know how much is sold, escrowed and destroyed etc, then whatever remains in the difference between distributed and undistributed must be xrp that ripple has either loaned out or sold OTC. If it is undistributed, then it is part of the monthly escrow release but still sitting in a ripple wallet - if it is distributed, then it has been 'used' in some capacity. Lets have a look at the raw distribution data, here I've added 3 columns, 'remains' is just a sanity check to make sure that the totals are consistent (total-(escrowed+dist+undist)) and is zero or occasionally 1 due to roundoff errors. burned is the change in total each month and diff is the change in distributed. The other columns are as read from https://data.ripple.com/v2/network/xrp_distribution date distributed escrowed total undistributed remains burned diff 2018-01-07 39029058672 54000000024 99992855589 6963796893 0 NaN NaN 2018-01-14 39029001738 54000000024 99992777885 6963776123 0 77704.0 -56934.0 2018-01-21 39029011222 54000000024 99992725510 6963714263 1 52375.0 9484.0 2018-01-28 39032356092 54000000024 99992664799 6960308683 0 60711.0 3344870.0 2018-02-04 39094802192 53900000024 99992622540 6997820324 0 42259.0 62446100.0 etc etc ... when plotted the data for 2018 looks like the following graph. Note that we see drops in distributed XRP when it is placed in escrow (or potentially when large amounts are burned, but this is very small since the cap on transaction fees was introduced after a user lost 100k+ xrp in accidental fees). If we resample the distribution data to end of month totals, subtract the total distributed at the start of the period (giving zero initial distribution at the start of April 1st 2018, = start of Q2), then subtracting what we believe has been sold (using the figures we know from part I above) for each month, then the left over should be the amount that has been distributed by ripple, but not declared as part of programmatic sales. It should be 'direct sales' + xrp distribution from 'any other business' (sch as incentivisation of market makers and loans of xrp etc). The next graph shows the distributed xrp starting at zero on 1st April, with monthly and quarterly final amounts alongside. Note that as the distribution data is only published weekly, there can be big differences between the month end resampled and original data. For example, the data for the first week of Dec 2018 is 500m higher than the previous entry during the last week of Nov, and so the monthly Nov fig is much lower than the true data. Fortunately no big differences exist at quarterly boundaries so we don't need to make any adjustments to the data or our sampling. Previously we showed the quarterly sales from RD1,2,3,9 in $$$, the sales in terms of xrp tokens are so we should subtract those from the quarterly distribution numbers which are -------------------- Quarterly distribution -------------------- date distributed(since start Q2) 2018-06-30 146046852 2018-09-30 881583920 2018-12-31 1924354618 which gives Q2 65m, Q3 583.7m, Q4 1042.7m as the unaccounted for XRP for the 3 quarters we are interested in. Ripple have told us that in Q2 their direct sales were $16.87m - but we do not know what price they were sold at. The best we can do is use a flat rate based on the sales we do know about. In Q2 we found 81m xrp sold for $57.56m so we estimate that 23.7m xrp would have sold for $16.87m. This gives us (if we repeat the process for Q3) Q2 programmatic = 81m, direct = 23.7m, mystery remainder = 41.3m xrp Q3 programmatic = 151.8m, direct = 221.1m, mystery remainder = 583.7-221.1 = 362m xrp for Q4 we have Q4 programmatic = 196.3m, unaccounted for 866.5m of which some is going to be direct sales and some is unaccounted for. I had hoped that by conducting this little experiment, I would be able to recover the direct sales numbers from ripple, but unfortunately the numbers don't add up. There is still xrp being released that is unaccounted for. In Q2, it's 41m xrp, in Q3 it jumps to 362m and in Q4 we do not know the direct sales figures yet, but it could be anywhere from 0-866m xrp which would translate into a very large figure in $$$. Probably some of the xrp bound to the R3 settlement is included in this number, and probably the direct sales for Q4 will be very high (I'd guess over $100m). We will know soon and I will update my calculations when the Q4 report is released. Conclusion. TL;DR : My best guess for Q4 figures is between $81m and $86m for programmatic sales, over $100m for direct sales and a ton of xrp being loaned out, or distributed as part of other agreements. As usual, all my numbers are guesswork and as soon as I click send, I'll find loads of mistakes, please consider this analysis as a simple diversion from other mundane aspects of life. edit : deleted an image pasted by accident and fixed some typos
  33. 55 points

    Ripple and R3 Reach Settlement

    https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180910005908/en/Ripple-R3-Reach-Settlement September 10, 2018 04:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Ripple Labs Inc., provider of the leading enterprise blockchain solutions for payments and XRP II, LLC, release the following statement today: R3 HoldCo LLC, R3 LLC, Ripple Labs Inc. and XRP II, LLC announce that they have reached a settlement of all outstanding litigation between the parties. The terms of the agreement will remain confidential and both sides look forward to putting these disputes behind them.
  34. 55 points

    XRP: Accelerating Network Expansion

    XRP's network - both from a liquidity and use standpoint - is expanding quickly at an ???????????? rate: I cover this trend, along with all the latest news about XRP and the businesses that are championing its use, as well as new developments about exchange listings, custody services, and hardware wallet providers. Please leave any feedback below - and feel free to share my blog with a friend or on any other platform - and thank you for doing so! Twitter Reddit r/Ripple Reddit r/CryptoCurrency Reddit r/CryptoMarkets Reddit r/xrp Reddit r/RippleTalk Reddit r/alternativecoin Bitcointalk - alt coin sub forum Bitcointalk - XRP speculation thread
  35. 55 points
    just found this on Twitter -- not sure if its ok to post it here if not - feel free to delete this post
  36. 54 points
    International Money Transfer, Remittances & X-Border Payments Conferences Link to the page Link to the agenda (pdf)
  37. 54 points

    Tiffany Hayden

    I think it's strange how much people care about this. After carrying kids around on my right hip for so long, I am used to using my left hand for things. Since I don't actually have a camera crew that follows me around, that's how left-handed pictures turn out. I don't like posting pictures of myself nearly as much as people like to chide me for. I don't like it all. I hate it. Try and find a picture of me in my 20's or even in my early 30's. Do you think any woman thinks "Now that I'm 41, it feels like a good time to start taking pictures of myself to share online in a predominantly (young) male industry, filled with vitriol, that scrutinizes every breath I take, and actively hates me?" No. I do it DESPITE that. Contrary to what dude's with middle-aged, single mom fetishes may think, I post pictures for the women. Like attracts like. I want to be visibly present and this is the best that I can do. People who like to talk about all of the attention I crave are never able to explain why, then, have I turned down every single interview request over the years? I push myself to be as personable as I can be because I want to be understood and I want to be visible to the other "regular people" in the world. Agreed. I was embarrassed at some of the comments and behavior coming from XRP supporters. It would be analogous to one flavor of Bitcoin making fun of another flavor of Bitcoin because their mempool was full. Same thing could happen to you, dude. Even more importantly, those people failed to recognize that the Stellar network SUCCEEDED, as designed, and stopped forward progress until it was safe. That was a victory for anyone championing Consensus over PoW. Thank you for this. Up until recently, I have never *only* liked XRP. One of the main features of the XRPL that originally attracted me to it is that it's currency agnostic. I am uncomfortably open about things so people don't have to speculate. I try really hard to do the right thing, knowing full well that not only are strangers online watching closely and judging, but my 2 kids as well. They are teenagers now and I have to atone for all that I do. They read every word written about me. I am sad at the way Bitcoin turned out. I didn't get involved in crypto to make a financial investment. I have always been poor. When the financial/housing crisis hit, I had a baby and a toddler and I felt terrified and helpless. The houses on every side of me went into foreclosure. They stayed empty for a long time. When somebody bought the house next door, they bought it for $12,000. When learned about Bitcoin, I latched on like it was a life raft. This is the Bitcoin that I was out evangelizing for: The entire article is good but it turned out to be ********. I was hopeful when Bitcoin forked that there was a chance to salvage it, but then Craig Wright showed up and there was just more infighting than I have the energy and capacity for, mostly because being an XRP supporter has been so damn taxing as well. And it's gotten worse lately. Nonstop **** like this. I don't know why, but as crypto enthusiasts poor into this space and grow in their knowledge, thoughts and reasoning, new XRP supporters have taken a different route, embracing ignorance and deciding to hunt cartoon bears and create conspiracies instead. Jed reached out to me, in a sincere way, because he felt misjudged by me and wanted a chance to be heard. I have no reason to hate him and everything he touches into eternity. Life is short and I don't enjoy fighting with people or holding onto hate. The second news broke about Steller and IBM, everybody was trying to make it sound like a loss for Ripple/XRP. Good news for Stellar doesn't mean bad news for Ripple and vice versa. I'm not willing to spend one second getting into an XLM/XRP ******* match. And I don't want to participate in the cheering that goes on whenever another project stumbles. I learn by doing and I'm here to learn. Because, for the most part, if one of you gets screwed over, nobody will care. I have a small platform and try to use it to amplify the voices that don''t get heard. I disagree. Neither my opinion of Ripple nor XRP has changed. It's because I am secure and feel confident in XRP that I don't feel the need to hate everything that isn't XRP. There are lots of cool projects popping up everyday. I think it's exciting and I definitely want to be a part of it. I don't view crypto as a spectator sport.
  38. 54 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    Sure, full disclosure wouldn't hurt. No, I'm not working for Ripple in any capacity at the moment. Not that I'm against doing so (do you know how much my COBRA insurance costs!) If they'd like me to come back and do exactly what I'm doing now for pay (or even just insurance) I'd be happy to do so. But that position would have to come with the independence to say and do what I personally think is best for the community (and myself). I retired from Ripple for three reasons: Stefan was leaving to start Coil with many of the others from the research team that I was on. I really love Stefan. We are the best of friends! We both have huge respect for each other's skills. Together we make a great team. He sees the world one way. I seem to see the world from exactly the opposite direction. (like looking through different ends of a telescope.) But together we manage to synthesize our different initial viewpoints into amazingly unexpected final products. But Coil is in SF and I was/am happy to be back in Texas. Stefan had a specific vision he wanted to pursue and I knew that and support it. I have a different specific vision I want to pursue and he knows that and supports it. So I did not want to go work at Coil and distract them. But I'm not ruling out collaborating in the future. Ripple offered me two great options: I could stay working remote in another position I could take a very generous (in my scale) severance package. I had recently been diagnosed with prostate cancer and I've been struggling with diabetes. Ripple didn't know this at the time. I chose to take the nice severance package (Thank You Ripple!) and concentrate on my health. Since that time I've had radiation treatment for the prostate cancer and that seem to be responding nicely. I've also been (with huge help from my wife) changing my diet and getting more exercise. My weight is starting to fall and my glucose levels are responding nicely. Of course, leaving also gave me the opportunity to pursue my "new crypto moonshot" as well. It turns out that will require me to step up publicly as a leader in order to promote that project. I'm not particularly comfortable being a "public frontman". So coming here gives me the opportunity to practice (pretending) being comfortable in public. And it also allows me to serve my own long-term personal financial interest as well by promoting Ripple and the RCL (I'm not a fan of the name XRPL) So that's all about me. Let's talk a little more about Ripple. As I mentioned in an early post, I was the first integration engineer for OpenCoin. I worked on the business development team for Patrick Griffin. My role was to talk to EVERYONE who was interested in doing anything with the Ripple ledger. I'm not inherently smart about the things I'm telling y'all. I'm only informed because very smart people kept asking to me with us to discuss their problems. My job was to figure out how to help all of them, no matter the industry, at that time. So if you go back to 2013 or 2014 with Ripple, you probably know me. I was also asked by Nilesh Dusane to join his brand new sales team as the first sales engineer. We had worked together in BD while I was the only integration engineer. It turns out we split my original position into three separate departments. (Integration Engineering, Sales Engineering, and Customer Support) So I was happy to jump in and support Nilesh. He was the one that proposed that Ripple "try to sell our system" rather than give everything away for free. He postulated that having a zero price was actually a barrier to entry for banks rather than a facilitator. He formed the sales team to test that hypothesis. He was absolutely correct! In my role of sales engineer I talked to almost every bank and banker we could get a meeting with. Sales is an interesting process. The grownup decision makers talk and decide there might be value in the proposition. But often the people high enough to green light a project don't have enough technical foundation to know if they are being bulls***ed. So at some point during the sales process, the grown ups always say something like, "It all sounds good, but I'd like you to talk to our technical lead and see...(reasons change here) ...but what is really doing is calling in a tech expert to play "tech jeopardy" with me in order to sniff out whether what we promised is real. The only way I know to play tech jeopardy without being called out for bulls*** is completely honestly. Sometimes painfully honestly. Because really, I'm not a sales guy, I'm an integration guy. I DIDN"T want to do a deal if the goals were impossible for the integration team to meet. Did I mention that I was very outspoken within Ripple? I believe in being brutally honest with every Rippler. Even about our warts. This is because everyone commits to work WAY TOO HARD when they come onboard. You really need to make a strong personal commitment and you can't make it based on bulls***. So curiously, some here might get a laugh out of this, while I talked to crazy numbers of people in my official capacity as sales and integration engineer... ...I was never officially allowed to speak to the public or press about Ripple! Go figure huh? I think the term I heard was loose cannon. Maybe because I was boring here. So, 100% no. My discussion here is not Ripple sanctioned.
  39. 54 points

    Things are AMAZING

    Am I the only one who is absolutely pumped after the past week? SBI making moves towards the derivatives market SBI still processing applications and KYC procedures for their live trading platform Ripple potentially making moves towards lending and banking structures XRP being used as a base pair on multiple exchanges A US based exchange using XRP as a base pair and therefore effectively killing the security debate Coinsquare finally rolling out XRP Coil linking up with hyperledger Ripple continuing to make massive waves in the donation and charity space SWELL lining up to be an impressive show Sure the price sucks but honestly we need to just stop focusing on it. Roger f&$!*** Ver has changed his tone re: XRP .... Ran "Pseudo Journalist" Neuner has changed his tone. Maybe XRP still fails. Maybe another project catches up. Right now though? XRP is so far out in front that its not even a fair fight. Zoom out. Look at the macro. Its blindingly gorgeous. Hodl.
  40. 53 points
    not a 100% word by word - i wrote it down by listening, but i like that dialogue between Brad and Joseph Lubin (Ethereum ConsenSys) @ about 24 min mark Brad: "the XRP Ledger is more decentralized than mining-based solutions (because of the nature of PoW)..." Joseph Lubin (Ethereum): "... talking about decentralized... but you do sell XRP regulary right...?" Brad: "... we're transparent about it... how much do you sell?" Joseph Lubin: "Ehm..." Brad: "...transparency and maturity in this market are critical...” Joseph: "sure" Brad: "there are many other ecosystems not being transparent...no one knows what happens in those ecosystems..." Joseph: "...but they are decentralized about the ownership of the token..." Brad: " ...if its a mining-based protocol, then centralization is based upon mining control, not ownership..." Joseph: ehm one small aspect of the governance of the ecosystem could be considered centralized if you talk about the mining aspect... sure" silence Moderator to Joseph: "Joe it's been said that you are one of the biggest ethereum holders... how do you manage treasury in consensys..." Joseph: "(laughs) ehm... i guess no comment..." ..."we manage our treasury like a company would manage it`s treasury..." Brad (jumps in): "...i find it interesting that ripple gets attacked for being transparent... actually the next xrp market report will come out sometime later in this week... but, because we share that information we get attacked for it while other platforms don't share that information and so they are insulated from the same critiques... i think in the dictionary it's called hypocrisy... i'm not 100% sure, but it's close" Joseph: "...ehm we are a private company..." Brad (jumps in again): "Ripple is a private company too"
  41. 53 points
    blog URL: https://xrpcommunity.blog/early-warning-adoption-signals-detected/ A tectonic shift in the market is well under way! Find out more in my latest blog. 𝙍𝙞𝙥𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙉𝙚𝙬𝙨: AMB Crypto reports strange wallet activity and ledger volume; and Brad Garlinghouse and Ross Leckow discuss ASEAN and regulation. 𝙓𝙍𝙋 𝙉𝙚𝙬𝙨: WietseWind rolls out XRParrot to European users; TOK exchange announces support for XRP; A massive SWISS investment fund pledges to spend 30% of its money on purchases of XRP; Crypto.com offers a prepaid MCO Visa card allowing you to spend your zerps; XRP Scan goes live; and @cz_binance sends out a strange tweet to XRP Community Hope you enjoy this latest edition: Please leave any feedback below, and feel free to share my blog on any other platform you wish! - And thanks for doing so! My blog announcement links on other forums: Twitter Reddit r/Ripple Reddit r/CryptoCurrency Reddit r/CryptoMarkets Reddit r/xrp Reddit r/RippleTalk Reddit r/alternativecoin Bitcointalk - alt coin sub forum Bitcointalk - XRP speculation thread
  42. 52 points

    US Banks are Getting Frantic

    Alright guys, its been a hell of a week for Ripple and crypto in general. We are witnessing the beginning of a banking revolution- its only going to get crazier as we head into 2020. PART 1: Let me start this post by telling you a conversation I had with my mother, an executive loan officer and branch manager of a regional bank in the south: After the usual mother/son conversation, I asked her how her job was going since she just came back from family leave. APPARENTLY.... "The top executives are freaking out. The projections for loan income are completely off due to the FED announcement." If you're not in the US, basically the central bank wants to lower interest rates next month. The effect? Here is an excerpt from a Yahoo Finance article: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fed-interest-rate-cut-horizon-121512567.html So, US banks will be struggling to make the quota for this fiscal half because the banks projected the rate to actually increase rather than decline. This meant that many banks gave adjustable rate loans to borrowers in hopes that the prime rate would increase over time. PART 2: Responses from other banks have ranged from nonchalant to panic As you can imagine, banks want to keep a lid on their panic state. Most have released statements that say they were prepared for the rate decline. Some are in denial and think the FED will call back on its majority vote to cut the rate https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/20/one-major-bank-is-holding-the-line-saying-the-fed-wont-cut-rates-this-year.html Once Goldman Sachs executive went all the way to say smaller banks are screwed https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-20/goldman-sachs-executive-says-legacy-retail-banks-are-screwed Based of the conversation with my mother, I would agree that the banks are concerned and stand to lose a lot of money. PART 3: ENTER CRYPTO- Libra is announced, and the Moneygram Move Okay so, unless you live under a rock, the news this week has been amazing. Facebook announces Libra under much criticism. The announcement had a few effects: Whether you love it or hate it, it has helped bring crypto into the spotlight this week. All press is good press for crypto, that much is true. Regulators have sprung into action. Already making statements about the regulation of Libra and crypto in general. (See quotes below) https://www.apnews.com/ee872c2a79494a1183866bd1dc9c9083 https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/20/facebook-libra-cryptocurrency-faced-with-central-bank-warnings.html https://cryptonews.com/news/fatf-decides-to-tighten-crypto-regulation-report-4092.htm There are plenty of other quotes, but i think this suffices. A final effect is that banks will be looking for an alternative or an edge against their competitors. Ripple and Xrapid already exist and has gone through extensive trials over the past 5 years. Brad Garlinghouse has already made the statement that Ripple has has a "record week" due to the Libra Announcement: BOOM- Thank you, Facebook. Ripple is also in the spotlight for the Moneygram Deal. MoneyGram's Stock rose over 150% and huge announcements for new corridors were made as moneygram is expanding their footprint in India. Ripple is making other moves as SBI Remit and SCB Thailand are featured in their Paying Forward promo videos (check twitter, i'm too lazy at this point to embed them lol) Conclusion TLDR: Banks are hurting from the potential FED rate drop and crypto appears this week to banks as a way to cut costs. The financial transformation is on the horizon and is approaching fast! If your read all that, congratulations. You're amazing!
  43. 52 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    Yes, Ripple employees are allowed to speak on social media. David has been very active. I do have more freedom to talk about this stuff now, but mostly because I have much less actual work to do. But let me take the question a little more seriously because I know it seems like Ripple doesn't care about this community. One of the reasons you don't hear more from rank and file Ripplers (besides them being heads down working) is that Monica Long heads up a mind bogglingly effective MarComs team. Internally at Ripple I was known for being pretty outspoken about my opinions. My highest complement to Monica was that, "I have no idea how you do what you do. But you exceed my expectations by such a wide margin that I'm actually comfortable not knowing the details. I can't say that about any other groups in the company." Yes, I'm a detail freak. I expect to be able to grok everything. But one of the secrets to Monica's magic is that she has to give great stories to great reporters and great publications. The conundrum is, no story is "great" if it's already been told before. So there a lot of times when news is spread internally though company meetings, but everyone knows to keep it under raps so Monica and team can do their thing. So from an employee perspective, what is there to talk about. The most interesting stuff is what you just learned, but that is under embargo. Once the embargo has been lifted, everyone has already read a better written version of what you wanted to say published by a more authoritative source. So that makes you boring and yesterday's news. The except of course are geeky technical questions. Employees are generally happy to answer those. But of course what everyone really wants to know is "Should I buy XRP now? Or should I sell XRP now." Not only do employees risk trouble with either answer, it also reminds them they have no ideas which would be the correct trade. That tends to make them doubly uncomfortable. --- The second reason the community hears less from the company now than in the early days, is (in my opinion) that the company isn't sure what they'd like you to do. Of course the company might benefit if everyone buys and hodls more and more XRP, but Ripple has never encouraged people to do so. And now that Ripple doesn't operate a public client, it is hard for even me to tell people how they should use the system or what they should do with it. It would be great (from my perspective) if more people started business which interacted directly with the XRP ledger, but knowing what I know about financial regulation, it's not clear that I know what types of business to suggest. When you see the Xpring initiative think of that as a type of community outreach. From my perspective the Ripple community needs a really great consumer focused client. That is table stakes to give people the "rippling" education they need in order to recognize new XRPL based business opportunities. From my perspective this is all FUD theater staged by people who have bet on other cryptocurrencies. I wouldn't expect to see any particular XRP specific clarity announcements. The law is really funny in this regard. (IANAL) The law doesn't really care what something is. It cares what you tell people it is. So for example, if you create an ERC20 alt coin token, then tell people that then need to get in now because the price is going to go up. You've made it a security. What's more interesting is, say you haven't actually made that ERC20 token yet. It's just a figment of your imagination. But you go ahead and tell people they need to get in now because long term you are going to create token and then give them some and the price is going to go up. Well you've still created a security even though you haven't created a token yet. On the other hand, FinCen has issued guidance (section c) about users of virtual currency and also some clarification more recently. It's worth reading the last page to see that the SEC or the CFTC or FinCEN might be the controlling regulator depending on "the facts and circumstances" of the case. My personal opinion is that Ripple as a company has worked very hard comply with the laws regulating every possible interpretation of "the facts and circumstances". There are compliance teams and lawyers and specialty outside council keeping everyone away from even the grey areas. There have been stories published in the press about Ripple's various meetings with regulators and Ripple participation on various financial system committees. At this point I think regulators and other authorities see more potential benefit in Ripple than in potential harm. But that's just my personal opinion. Please keep in mind, I'm not asking you or encouraging you to buy XRP or to use Ripple technology in any way. Those are decisions everyone should make based on their own personal finances, appetite for risk, and/or need for awesome new payment technology. All I want you to take away from this, is that the team at Ripple isn't a bunch of naive idiots. I haven't met anyone who wants to risk jail time in exchange for a get rich quick scheme. Everyone I've met respects the law and feels a duty to stay compliant. That's probably all I'll say about that.
  44. 52 points
    Guys, Update to the Ripple Lawsuit Tracker List provided below, for there is one (1) new court case to report on this morning (8/10/2018). The newest case was filed on 2 days ago on August 8, 2018. It is #15 on the list (however, it is related to #14; notes on that below). I have been asked by a few people within the community as to whether there have been any updates on all of these lawsuits filed against Ripple Labs, Inc., so here is your update. Please keep in mind that the U.S. justice system moves pretty slow. That is just the way it is, so these lawsuits are not going to be decided anytime soon (unless there is a settlement). The open or active cases are in bold: 1.) 2014 - Ripple vs. LaCore Enterprises (closed) 2.) 2015 - Ripple vs. Kefi Labs (closed) 3.) 2015 - Arthur Britto vs. Jed McCaleb (closed)** 4.) 2016 - Bitstamp vs. Ripple, Jed McCaleb, Stellar (closed) 5.) 2016 - Ripple vs. Pixel Labs (closed) 6.) 2017 - R3 vs. Ripple (Delaware) (closed) 7.) 2017 - Ripple and XRP II vs. R3 (California) (open/active) 8.) 2017 - R3 vs. Ripple (New York) (open/active) 9.) 2017 - Tony Petrucci vs. Ripple (closed) 10.) 2018 - Ryan Coffey vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California) (open/active) 11.) 2018 - Ryan Coffey vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (U.S. Federal Court) (open/active) 12.) 2018 - Vladi Zakinov vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California) (open/active) 13.) 2018 - David Oconer vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California) (open/active) 14.) 2018 - Avner Greenwald vs. Ripple, XRP II, Bradley Garlinghouse, Christian Larsen, Ben Lawsky (California) (open/active) 15.) 2018 - Avner Greenwald vs. Ripple, XRP II, Bradley Garlinghouse, Christian Larsen, Ben Lawsky (U.S. Federal Court) (open/active) Notes on active cases: 7.) 2017 - Ripple and XRP II vs. R3 (California) (open/active) * Next date/hearing - November 28, 2018 ** This case is on appeal in California. The next hearing is a case management conference originally scheduled for July 25, 2018. However, it got moved to November 28, 2018. 8.) 2017 - R3 vs. Ripple (New York) (open/active) * Next date/hearing - September 4, 2018 ** This case is still ongoing in New York. This is the R3 case you need to pay attention to, not #7 (above). This case is in the discovery phase, and both parties are more likely than not combing through emails, texts, other correspondences, etc., preparing to go to trial. There is an upcoming compliance conference, and that is where the judge will be updated on whether the case is on schedule or whether there are delays. That conference was scheduled for July 10, 2018. However, it got moved to September 4, 2018. 10.) 2018 - Ryan Coffey vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California) (open/active) 11.) 2018 - Ryan Coffey vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (U.S. Federal Court) (open/active) * Next date/hearing - Unknown ** This case was originally filed in California. Ripple Labs, Inc. moved the case to U.S. Federal Court (#10 and #11 are related). Essentially, both parties are in a spat about venue choice. Ryan Coffey wants this case to stay in California Court whereas Ripple Labs, Inc. wants this case in Federal Court. Again, the main issue here being "securities related" (think SEC or federal level), one party wants the state court to hear the case whereas the other wants a federal court to hear the case. Not getting into that again, please read my post/response from May 5, 2018 on this very issue (Cyan v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund; the link is below). https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/23224-ripple-sued-for-securities-violations/?page=9&tab=comments#comment-386239 12.) 2018 - Vladi Zakinov vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California) (open/active) * Next date/hearing - September 7, 2018 ** This case is ongoing in California. We are waiting for Ripple's response or answer to the original complaint. Per their request and a motion filed, on June 26, 2018, the court granted Ripple additional time to answer and respond to the complaint; their time was extended to September 7, 2018. Not sure if this case will get moved to U.S. Federal Court or not (it does pertain to a securities related issue). 13.) 2018 - David Oconer vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California) (open/active) * Next date/hearing - August 29, 2018 ** This case is ongoing in California. We are waiting for Ripple's response or answer to the original complaint. Unlike #12 (above), no extension has been motioned for or requested by Ripple Labs, so I am expecting an answer to the original complaint soon. Case conferences with the judge have been scheduled for August 29, 2018 and October 25, 2018. Not sure if this case will get moved to U.S. Federal Court either (it does pertain to a securities related issue). 14.) 2018 - Avner Greenwald vs. Ripple, XRP II, Bradley Garlinghouse, Christian Larsen, Ben Lawsky (California) (open/active) 15.) 2018 - Avner Greenwald vs. Ripple, XRP II, Bradley Garlinghouse, Christian Larsen, Ben Lawsky (U.S. Federal Court) (open/active) * Next date/hearing - Unknown ** This case was originally filed in California. Ripple Labs, Inc. moved it to U.S. Federal Court two days ago on August 8, 2018. Read my notes on #10, #11 above. Same issue (#14 and #15 are related). We should have an update towards the end of August or early September. @Pablo @Snoopy @zerpdigger @vlad_got_it @Mrsrippley @Sebastian @xrpisking @mikkelhviid @MemberBerry @Dario_o
  45. 51 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    Just to give as well as I get... Anyone can accumulate fat stacks of XRP. But can you accumulate THIS! If you look closely at the two pictures, you notice that I'm wearing the original Ripple t-shirt from 2013.
  46. 51 points

    A Journey Of A Thousand Miles: XRP

    The journey may have been a thousand miles, but the destination is now clear for XRP. Lots Happening! As executives from Ripple continue to prompt governments - both in the US and in Japan - for regulatory clarity, they have not stopped expanding the RippleNet network or its list of clients. Chris Larsen announces that Ripple has signed over 100 clients to production contracts, and Ryan Zagone, Brad Garlinghouse, and Cory Johnson all make high-profile public appearances, emphasizing similar points in unison. ACI Worldwide, the US-based payments giant, mentions Ripple technology in a recent interview, and the Japanese Banking Consortium readies MoneyTap for initial release. Ripple also settles its lawsuit with R3 and provides further updates to the upcoming SWELL Conference, which is now only two weeks away! And in Coil news, an independent developer releases a step-by-step guide for how Wix website owners can sign up for web monetization. Winding things up, WietseWind reveals plans to help people monetize their own extra, home-generated electricity, and a new Python library to access the XRP Library is released by a community developer. Hope you enjoy the read & please leave any feedback below. Feel free to share my blog with a friend - or on any other platform - and thank you for doing so! Twitter Reddit r/Ripple Reddit r/CryptoCurrency Reddit r/CryptoMarkets Reddit r/xrp Reddit r/RippleTalk Reddit r/alternativecoin Bitcointalk - alt coin sub forum Bitcointalk - XRP speculation thread
  47. 51 points
  48. 50 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    OK, in the spirit of txID or it didn't happen. I submit: 4E1D594E045A92CBFDB6BC1698D3AD50F939B51D4DA0B6F1FD3F34D3CF2D7482 I noticed some unnamed individual sent me a XRP yesterday. So I sent it back to him. If you are still suspicious, I set the destination tag to "23155" which matches my profile on this site. https://www.xrpchat.com/profile/23155-bobway/ I also set the invoice ID to: 486920585250436861742E636F6D2049276D20426F6257617920202020202020 If you are too lazy to decode that yourself it says: Hi XRPChat.com I'm BobWay
  49. 50 points
    This is what I have written about this on our Discord today... ”Banks use software only for trading and ledger only when money moves in or out of their bank or consortium. Orderbooks are used in-house and XRP is owned by that unity. Giving value to all currencies they operate in one central exchange. And only when operating with other bank, XRP needs to move. Other than that, it just stays there and gives value to transactions One step in, one step out. If someone uses fiat in that system as base, it can’t be executed since it would give arbitrage to it, because it is on wrong side of the ticker. Using XRP only blocks that, when there is only one market globally in many exchanges and xRapid sources liquidity everywhere and routes payments using cheapest option. That closed ledger is just an orderbook where all related banks use XRP to convert fiat to fiat inside their banking network. Like Santander that operates in many currencies uses it as one pool of liquidity to transfer the whole value to another account in another currency. All those banks own some portion of that XRP but they pool it to be used where it is needed. Balance sheets show the total possessions for each bank whenever they want to settle that situation.” this is extremely good news for us and for banks, since the more they make cross-border payments inside their own banking network in many currencies, the bigger the savings when they hodl enough XRP, because they save the cost and time of entering ledger. Transactions and transition of value are in milliseconds, XRP is not burnt at all, and TPS can be as much as their trading software can handle, but easily hundreds of thousands per second. This makes banks want to buy and hold XRP because everything is valued in XRP and not in any fiat. XRP as counter currency, as The Base, means that it is needed always when making a conversion because counter currency is the ONLY used asset whenever something needs to be bought. XRP the Standard
  50. 49 points

    Hi! I'm Bob

    I do understand Codius. I'll start a thread to talk about it in the appropriate form when this thread dies down enough for me to get out of my chair. But just to get you started, you probably know that Stefan, Ben, and Peter founded a new company called Coil. What you probably don't know is that the name Coil was Ben's idea. It is a contraction of "Codius" and "ILP".
  • Create New...