Jump to content

King34Maine

Bronze Member
  • Content Count

    815
  • Joined

  • Last visited

5 Followers

About King34Maine

  • Rank
    Advanced

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. SWIFT is a consortium that is funded by banks so it's not a company that can be bought out by anyone. To me, an R3 acquisition by Ripple, merger of the two, and I'll add an alliance (similar to the EEA and Hyperledger) of the two makes more sense. I say this because it seems that Ripple has already begun testing the waters around Trade Finance. We all know that Trade finance has/is R3's bread-n-butter: I think SWIFT will eventually be dissolved overtime as its banking participants join newer, cheaper, faster, direct P2P/B2B blockchain/DLT-based networks (i.e. RippleNet, R3, etc.). A lot of folks are talking about Ripple being bought out by a tech company, however, with the recent Facebook debacle around privacy, I don't see a Google or Apple buyout on the horizon. There's a reason that Google partnered with Citi and Amazon with JP Morgan. It's because the world of banking and finance is laden with lots of regulatory red tape and is very expensive to manage. All risks/headaches tech companies would gladly allow banks to take on. Now, I can also envision Ripple making additional acquisitions to help shore up efforts around Codius: One such company that I'm really looking is a Ripple funded Javascript-based smart contract platform called Agoric. I think Agoric would pair well with xPring especially as we've seen xPring's metamorphosis from what was once a Ripple-based VC platform to a more developer-centric platform. As Ethan B. mentioned in his announcement: I think the Agoric smart contract tech fits nicely within the mission/theme of what xPring is trying to accomplish since it's based on JavaScript, one of the most widely utilized programming languages.
  2. My best guess is that Ripple is more likely to be making a significant acquisition themselves, especially in light of that 200-million Series C funding round.
  3. Ultimately, we are all speculating here. I just tend to think that with Brads recent talks of "consolidation" and Ripple's recent Series C funding round all point to a M&A in the works. Now, if Ripple did not have the best year with respects to partnerships and growth in 2019, the Series C, the increase demand for ODL, and recent acquisitions of Logos, Algrim, and Strata, and we had this many key employees leave, I would agree that something might be afoot. However, you have to look at the complete picture of what is/has transpired and not solely at who/how many ppl are leaving or retiring.
  4. I wouldn't make any decisions based on FOMO. All of this back-n-forth is ONLY SPECULATION at this point. We have no insight or inside knowledge with regards to Ripple's current or future plans!!
  5. Yeah, I speculated about a possible Ripple acquisition of R3 or Ripple/R3 merger back in August of 2019: Either a Ripple acquisition of R3 or a merger of the two isn't out of the realm of possibilities as many like to think. As I reference in the above post, the Ethereum Enterprise Alliance (EEA) and Hyperledger have formed a strategic alliance.
  6. I tend to agree with you. There's more going on here than what we, as 3rd party on-lookers, are privy to. Like you said, you don't get investors to pony up 200-million dollars via a Series C if they suspect they wouldn't/couldn't see a return on that size of an investment. I think that 1 of 3 things are possible. The 1st is that Ripple is about to make a significant acquisition (most likely). The 2nd is that they are working on a merger between themselves and another entity (my #2 guess). The 3rd and final is that they are possibly being bought-out (least likely). All of this is pure speculation on my part, however, I believe it fits/aligns with recent statements (01:15 - 01:47) made by Brad G (Ripple CEO) of late around the topic of M&A/Consolidation of this space. In a recent Fortune article regarding Ripple's recent Series C funding round Brad stated that "the company did not need the money, though the funds will provide "balance sheet flexibility." "Balance Sheet Flexibility," to me, is code for a M&A move. He goes on to say, at the end of that article, "It's been a tremendous, tremendous year for Ripple....adding that the company will be disclosing more numbers and major announcements in early 2020." If either of my assumptions above are true, I suspect the exodus of these top executives and directors is as a result of negotiated re-structuring. As with most M&As often times the acquiring company or newly merged entity has to streamline the work-force. I'm expecting to hear something significant from Ripple on the M&A front here shortly or within the next couple of months.
  7. There's not much that is known publicly about Polysign other than what is provided via the company's website. This is because the details of what's being planned is still under wraps for now per David. It's my personal opinnion that we should be hearing something regarding the platform here shortly as the company has been in stealth mode for 3 years now. Below is a question David fielded from an audience member about Polysign. .
  8. Np. No, it was something that Evan mentioned briefly at the end of his presentation as something he will be researching and looking into as ILP develops and matures. I would think that switching from TCP/IP to and ILP-based standard would fall under the purview of the the W3C since they are responsible for maintaining the Web standards. With a potential change of this magnitude I would envision this would be an all hands on deck collaboration with all groups/committee personnel. Sorry, my previous response was my personal assumptions.
  9. Yes, basically ILP will just replace TCP/IP. You would still have your ISP's (i.e. Spectrum, AT&T, etc) charging a similar fee. At least that's what I got from his presentation.
  10. In the YouTube clip above Graham Bright mentions at (11:30 - 13:25) where the EuroExim bank is currently investigating, with Ripple, the ability to not only handle the payment authorization component for their trade finance platform, but also the contract instructions/documents/data for a derivative or bond so that the complete contract is carried forward via a RippleNet message. Graham also mentioned this at a Ripple Regionals event in Europe. This got me to thinking about the most recent blog post Xpring released regarding the new Java inspired Interledger Protocol solution for Hyperledger called QUILT. The blog referenced a payments/data streaming feature (STREAM) similar to what Coil uses for web monetization. However, this ILP-derived money/data transport protocol also allows for bulk/large data/payment instructions. If Ripple is able to build trade finance features into RippleNet they will then be able offer similar services like R3 Corda's (Marco Polo and Voltron) and Hyperledger's (We.Trade) platforms. I guess the biggest issue would be targeting the ideal clientele. R3 and Hyperledger have 1st mover advantage in trade finance especially among your large banks and corporates. I suspect that if Ripple is seriously considering moving into this vertical they could form a trade finance platform via a consortium of their small/medium-sized banking and FI partners like EuroExim bank. Also, at a CSail conference last year, Evan Schwartz (co-developer of ILP) alluded to the possibility of ILP serving as a replacement for the Internet itself. Where ILP not only becomes the backbone for the IoV but morphs into a new platform for the exchange of Information or the Internet 2.0. As has been mentioned by Stefan Thomas, "Interledger can process TRILLIONS of TPS without any central authority." This underpins the thesis behind Schwartz's idea that ILP shouldn't be relegated to only financial transactions, but any value transfers whether they be monetary or informational.
  11. I think a few things will come from this Series C funding round. Firstly, we all know that they will be expanding/scaling their ODL platform with many more partnerships and corridors. Second, in a Fortune article about Ripple's Series C, Brad/Ripple spokesperson stated: I wouldn't be surprise if we see some major acquisitions/acqui-hire announcements and an influx of major banking partnerships here in the US, maybe China?? Thirdly, I think this Series C funding was, in many ways, a "Middle Finger" to the many Ripple/XRP doubters/haters. I like Brad's "shoulder shrug" response when asked why they did the raise. He was like, "we really didn't need it, but we did it because we could do it beeotches!!!"
  12. I can envision all of the above except the "company acquisition" bit. I think the C-Suite/BoD are in prime position to see the company grow into a financial software/services juggernaut!!!
  13. Response: First, there is no rule that says a start-up must obtain funding via the traditional VC route. Secondly, Ripple's business model isn't predicated on that of Coil's. Ripple's business model or raison d'etre is cross-border payments for banks, FIs, and corporates not web-monetization. Yes, if Coil ends up ending in failure there will be a lot of hand ringing, primarily from the constant chorus of anti-Ripple/XRP-lites who are always just looking for the chance to pounce. With that being said, taking risks is important for innovation!! No company or corporation has ever grown beyond their limitations without taking risks in doing so. Blockchain/DLT/digital assets are creating the foundation for the advent of new industries. Taking risk in this nascent market is 95% of what is going on to see what works and what doesn't work. We can argue back-n-forth about how much risk should be taken all day long, but fact remains that the C-Suite/BOD at Ripple is doing what they feel is within the company'e risk-tolerance. I understand the risks involved with respects to the challenges Coil faces in attempts to get their web-monetization platform up and running with a significant user-base, but they've only been operational for 6 months. I think it hardly the time to be questioning the validity of the thesis behind Coil just yet. Going back to what I said in my initial response this is why they (Coil) are collaborating with strong partners (Mozilla, Creative Commons, and Loup Design and Innovation) to help them get things going. Ethan Beard, Xpring's SVP, said that (2nd paragraph): Again, I've said this many times before, we are all XRP "holders" by CHOICE. Unless you own token(s) via an accredited IPO/ICO/STO you in no way, shape, form, or fashion have any say with respects to how any company/entity distributes, sells, or utilizes their holding of a particular token/digital asset/crypto. Brad G (Ripple CEO) said, and i'm quoting: "XRP sales are about helping expand XRP's utility - building RippleNet & supporting other biz building w/XRP ie Dharma & Forte." If you really want to get technical the use case for XRP doesn't even involve retail holders who are just simply buying/holding the asset in hopes to turn a profit as/if the price appreciates. At the end of the day this is pure unadulterated speculation on our part. I purposefully say retail "holders of XRP" because that's what retail ownership truly entails, just merely holding XRP or any other non-ICO/STO token/asset. We like to think of ourselves as "investors" just because we own XRP, but that doesn't make us an investor. No, it makes us nothing more than glorified followers and/or enthusiasts of Ripple and XRP period!!! Unless you own equity in Ripple you ultimately have no say with respect to what Ripple does or doesn't do with their XRP holdings or the business decisions the company decides implement. So, say it with me, "I am a holder not an Investor!!!" Stop blaming a company that didn't promise you riches in the first place for not making you any money. This is the risk you take purchasing/holding any digital asset or token not just XRP. Response: Bingo, you hit the nail on the head with your statement "Google is already dominating the market!!!" The business model for the web is completely and utterly broken with ads and subscription models that work best within the constructs of scaled models that has led to the concentration of power and influence in the hands of a few tech giants (i.e. FANG, Alibaba, Tencent, et al). Coil's web monetization platform is a new way for content creators to make money. It operates and utilizes open standards that are not subjugated to one particular tech giant. In combination with their Grant for the Web program, Coil intends to help smaller players (i.e. small publishers, indie musicians, indie game developers, etc.) compete with "Big Data" who hold the power to decide how content is shared. Coil offers an alternative monetization formula for these content creators to get paid for their work without relying on intrusive advertising schemes (i.e. Adword or Adsense), paywalls, as well as the known abuse of personal data that has run a muck of the Internet of late. In many respects, Coil is doing for your average content creator what Ripple has done for small-medium sized banks and FIs by offering them an alternative to SWIFT and your large correspondent banks (i.e. JP-Morgan, Citi, HSBC, et al). No one gave them a sliver of hope in the beginning. Even the small-medium sized banks who they were going to be most beneficial to were very cautious of engaging with them at the onset. However, the folks at Ripple kept their heads down, remained focused, kept building out the platform, made strategic partnerships and slowly banks/FIs, especially your small-medium sized entities, quickly saw the benefits of the tech stack they offered. Now look at Ripple. It is one of the most successful blockchain/DLT companies that has emerge out of this new industry with over +300 customers and still growing!!
×
×
  • Create New...