Jump to content

Lamberth

Bronze Member
  • Content Count

    651
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Lamberth

  • Rank
    Advanced

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Tech
  • Occupation
    Investment banking
  • Country
    EU

Recent Profile Visitors

1,656 profile views
  1. Moneygram is a relatively big company and will probably be the first mover in the ODL usage but 100 billion? Come on! https://www.investing.com/equities/moneygram-int.-balance-sheet
  2. “Ripple <...> cross border payments marketed to GTS clients” + “P&L Ownership: Drive transaction and revenue growth and manage associated financial processes (eg forecast, etc.)”?! My reaction to this is WOW! For those of you who don’t know what GTS stands for: “The GTS organization provides comprehensive global treasury solutions to clients, including liquidity management, payments and receipts, trade and supply chain finance, foreign exchange, commercial card services, and custody and agency services.” The fact that Ripple products (which have something to do with liquidity and payments!) are marketed to clients as a standalone service with its own P/L is huge.
  3. Thank you, i am sooo honored. And special thanks to my mom and dad, I would not be able to pull this off without them!
  4. xCurrent is not an xRapid’s killer, it is a necessary next step before xRapid can be used. As it has been pointed out many times, GPI competes with xCurrent. Ripple is betting that xRapid will be an evolutionary next step because 2 hops in theory should be cheaper than, say, 5. It might be so, it might be not. Market depth, liquidity, LotLR etc etc. Financial system is not static though, it will start adjusting itself when xCurrent (and/or GPI) is widely used which will inevitably lead to lower (in certain cases even zero) nostro reserves. Summary just to make my opinion clear: Ripple has a sound strategy. More importantly, they adjust the strategy as they go which is even better. XRP alone won’t make nostro obsolete, xCurrent + xRapid + XRP might. The system also adjusts itself and lower nostro reserves (delivered by GPI/xCurrent) might be a good enough improvement to slow down further development. CBDC is an unknown at this point which explains why Ripple is so keen to work with the regulators.
  5. Say, you have a PayPal account which you use for your business to send money to your partner abroad. There are other ways to send money but this particular partner only accepts PayPal. You top up you PayPal account only when you need to send money (and probably don’t care if $10 is left now and again because, well, it’s $10). Imagine that topping up the account takes 4 days and you don’t know when you are out of stock and need to pay for the next delivery. You’d have started managing your account much more carefully, planning for the next week at least (and you probably don’t want to hold $10k if you only spend $1k per month, right?). This is the way to think about nostro accounts. It brings a philosophical question, if nostro technically exists but is empty most of the time, does it really exist to you? As for keeping money in different jurisdictions, you need to remember that many Tier1 / Tier 2 banks are multi-national entities which have presence in more than 1 country. Ripple’s multi-hop feature does not necessarily need to go through XRP (and it does not as of now). There is hope though, in theory 2 hops should be cheaper than, say, 5 (subject to liquidity, market depth etc etc).
  6. You actually do (with a certain probability), that’s what Treasury departments do on top of all other things. FIs have multiple ways to fund their current operations in case of unexpected funding gaps, holding reserves is not the only option. Problem of the current system is that if you can’t move money during the day (it takes days), there is no other option but to borrow overnight in case of an “overdraft”. Higher velocity of money solves this problem. Bear in mind, as a FI you don’t care about intra-day fluctuations, it is overnight what counts. P.S. I can imagine that the system will re-balance itself with the higher velocity of money and FIs will stop thinking in overnight batches but this is another discussion altogether.
  7. @KarmaCoverage, LCR treats nostro as cash. There is no benefit from a Capital perspective here. @kiwixrp you are mistaken. Banks need nostro exactly because moving money is slow. The second it becomes a reliable and fast experience, the problem solves itself and there is no need to keep excessive funds at nostro accounts. Nostro will still exist probably but the amount of money held will be significantly reduced. Sorry, I have somehow missed this topic in 2018. AMA about Basel BTW.
  8. This is correct. From a liquidity risk management / capital point of view nostro accounts are treated as cash. If I can move this cash within, say, 10 minutes - there is no missing opportunity cost for a FI. Current system suffers from delays measured in days and the SWIFT error rate, Ripple is correct. Bi-directional messaging and reasonable settlement time fixes the problem of nostro accounts though (having nostro is okay as long as you can move it quickly to another institution). I would argue that there is no real need for nostro if you can settle within minutes therefore the problem solves itself.
  9. This is quite common to get a title like this in a bank without being a group CTO / C-level executive. Does not mean much, just a badge of honor.
  10. It seems there are no restrictions but you can double check with Dees if you’d like to participate - https://forum.grantfortheweb.org/t/hi-from-the-program-team/22/2
  11. https://coil.com/p/coil/Coil-Mozilla-and-Creative-Commons-Launch-100-Million-Grant-for-the-Web-to-Advance-Web-Monetization-f/Bdp8Hgcf4
  12. Say what you want, but when "A" managers hire -- they hire other "A" people. They want to hire people who are winners - just like them.
  13. Whoever wrote this article, does not understand how Consensus works. Validators do not decide which transactions are included, all they do is
  14. You misunderstood. I used Enron merely as an example which is (supposedly) known to everybody, not to illustrate that Ripple is evil. There is nothing wrong in my opinion with inflating your sales as long as it is done within the existing legal framework (and not over-done to the point of no return). Boasting about your successes is not a bad thing and half of your success is how you present your achievements. In the game of business all’s fair. It is a job of a CEO to do whatever it takes to put up a good front and to attract positive attention to the company’s progress. XRP sales is one of the critical measures of Ripple’s success despite what some think. “Fake it until you make it” proved to be a working strategy for many start-ups and it is not unreasonable to assume that this might (just might) be the case with Ripple as well.
×
×
  • Create New...