Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by n2it

  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 :))
  15. If you bought $1000 USD of XRP in January of 2017 ($0.006) you'd have $75000 today ($0.45). Guess Alex Lieberman forgot to mention that.
  16. Agree that Ripple isn't beholden to the US government: they could easily move to a more accommodating country if the US wants to control them. Not sure I understand your second paragraph. What's a hybrid hookup? TIA.
  17. IMHO, The governments don't control the banks. The banks control the governments. Whatever the global banking players want, the local governments will support it. So, the global banks will control the tech they want to use. Unfortunately, these global banks move *really* slow. It'll take smaller remittance providers that are agile enough to see the value of xRapid and implement it, to *force* the big players to come to the xRapid table once their profits are undercut by the swarm of little fish.
  18. The most interesting part of the upcoming announcement is that it happens on CHEWSDAY.
  19. One thing I think Ari was overestimating was the amount of open source code available for a bankcoin to leverage. Sure rippled and its ledger are open source and would provide a base to build upon. But Ripple has built proprietary software (xCurrent, xVia, xRapid) already to do the hard parts of messaging, price discovery, atomic transactions, etc. They're using XRP to maximize cost savings. Walled gardens of multiple types of bankcoins just moves the fiat in nostro/vostro accounts into a nostro/vostro accounts of bankcoins. If the banks want a single digital asset, they can build an alte
  20. Uphold's been working great for me. Verified in 24h. Locks in your XRP price when you fund from your USD bank account and the transaction clears in about 8 days. Sending USD to your Uphold USD card takes about 8 days, which I do occasionally in order to have some funds ready to go for the future (e.g., my USD bank account could be waiting for an incoming transfer to fund a new buy). You can up your daily limit by request, although I was OK with the $500 daily limit and didn't do it. Surprisingly, they sent me email upping my daily limit after I'd been using them for a few months and that
  21. Lot's of good info here @Chewiecoin My TLDR version: International banks used to charging big fees for cross border payments get undercut by smaller players adopting xRapid. Large international companies like Amazon realize xRapid saves them boatloads of cash on internal B2B cross border transfers. Forward thinking remittance providers go to xRapid to cut their costs and overwhelm the SWIFT-using competitors. These smaller fish explode their payments volume, and the big players are forced, by competition, to adopt xRapid in order to stay alive. Did I say xRapid enough? Coil &
  22. I'm no tax expert either, but my understanding is that all cryptos are treated as commodities for tax purposes. Buying a crypto with USD doesn't create a tax event. Selling crypto for fiat creates a tax event on gains or losses. Selling one crypto to buy a different crypto *does* create a tax event based on the USD value of both at the time of the transaction. So going through Shapeshift, for example, to convert BTC to XRP, requires you to record the BTC and XRP price when the transaction happens. If the BTC is converted within a minute or less, the tax event should be pretty small, but it sti
  23. 1h MACD still looking OK, and 1h MFI just under 80, so a bit more of upward trend possible. The 2h, 3h, and 4h MACD's are still going up, but all of their MFI are over 90, indicating overbought conditions. I expect things to consolidate at slightly lower than the current $0.56 USD price.
  24. Note that using RippleNet's Payment Channels increases TPS into the 10,000s easily and even that is scalable. @dAck I'll add that Swift's throughput (TPS) isn't the whole story. Latency counts too! Swift takes days to settle transactions once initiated. xRapid settles in minutes if sender and receiver use liquidity providers, and just seconds if both hold fiat and XRP. Error rates matter as well. Swift's error rate has been estimated to be as high as 5%. That would be 1,200,000 errors per day. RippleNet's error rate is close to 0%. (Anyone have hard data on this?). Paraphrasing:
  • 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.