Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About n2it

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Wouldn't they have to get legal documentation on that 1 million valuation between the two banks? Or else one bank could scam the other. What if the bank wants to exchange with 2 or 3 other banks? Wouldn't that require separate agreements with each of the other banks? Seems like a PITA when all banks could just use xRapid as is. Don't think you've thought this through, but if you have, provide more detail on how it would work to short cut xRapid usage at a lower cost.
  2. Does seem odd that the OP got a call back rather than email. Wondering if the government caller asked the OP "How much XRP do you own?" If I got that kind of question, I'd be very suspicious, and wouldn't answer that question. The OP didn't provide details on his conversation so who knows? I'm not doubting the OP actually got the call. Just really curious about the questions the SEC asked.
  3. BTW, I have a real problem with calling XRP "pre-mined". "Pre-mined" is simply a construct to cast XRP's existence in the context of mined currencies. Problem is, there's no mining at all for XRP, so calling it pre-mined is like saying "bald" is a hair color. I'm amazed that a lot of people can't understand this.
  4. I'm pretty sure the market will set XRP pricing based on Available Supply. That is, the number of XRP, not in escrow, not in HODLer's wallets, but what exchanges, and correspondent banks hold for transfer purposes, can use to provide liquidity for the number and size of transactions required to support an ever increasing payment volume. Yes, the amount in escrow counts. Yes the amount held by HOLDer's counts. Both reduce the Available Supply. Escrow releases and bank holdings are essentially vostro accounts in XRP's case to fund transfers to other currencies, increasing the Available Supp
  5. I guess those first two posts made me think that. Of course I could be wrong. I don't think we're making any progress so I'll bow out on this thread. Thanks for your viewpoint.
  6. Seriously? I'll stand by my assertion that omitting long term fundamentals from XRP price discussion creates an incomplete argument. That's not too controversial, IMHO, so your insult is surprising but I'll get over it Cheers.
  7. I was simply pointing out that you left out any consideration about long term prospects for XRP prices, thus creating an incomplete argument IMHO. That's not creating a strawman. That's highlighting an omission of the larger context surrounding your statement. Many believe XRP fundamentals are more important than small day-to-day price fluctuations.
  8. You're looking at today's pricing and not considering the long term. That's OK if you're a day trader, but for long term investors, it's just a blip on the radar.
  9. Shortsighted on your part. Crawl, walk, run...
  10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remittance says over 250 billion USD equivalent was transferred as remittances in 2017. Yes this is less than the trillions transferred between central banks. If you think, however that 10% of 250 billion USD won't move XRP's price then you're not paying attention. Ripple's strategy IMHO is to capture this smaller 25 billion market to undercut the SWIFT/CentralBank current transfer rate with something that does the same thing at lower cost to both the remittance providers and their customers. From 10% it will only go up. Once profits from central banks
  11. Sorry for the poor wording. I didn't mean to imply a decision is pending. The SEC hasn't officially indicated, to my knowledge, anything at all about securities classifications of crypto. Thanks for catching that.
  12. From what I know an SEC official stated *as his personal opinion*, that BTC and ETH were not securities. No official statement from the SEC has been made on XRP or any other crypto. They have also stated the personal opinion was just that and no decision has been reached.
  13. I get that WU has a pile of fiat cash machines worldwide and don't want to go all out on fully digital money transfers. Wondering why they don't add an option to use digital transfers to those fiat cash machines and phase in the digital use case with incentives, like lower fees when using the digital option. Yes it would take upgrades to the fiat machines software, but would allow them to transition to all digital transfers without having to write down, all at once, the investment in those machines. Maybe they've already done that cost/benefit calculation and decided all fiat is the way
  14. Of course XRP is undervalued and due for a rise. I'd be *very* surprised if we don't see a bull run before EOY. How high that bull run will go, I'm not sure. I'm hodl'ing for the long term (2 to 4 years) because 1) XRP has a real world use case and 2) maturity takes time, and 3) because no other crypto is even close to scoring the adoption Ripple (and thus XRP) has across the globe. Meta: I give myself kudos for including a boatload of parenthetic logic. Meta-Meta: "patientable" isn't a word (although I understand your intent) and you're new (see Meta :))
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.