Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About madToo

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. So no getting it up when you're going down? My flying blacksmith will be very disappointed
  2. @Wandering_Dog first of all thank you for starting and continuing to contribute to an interesting discussion. I have to agree with @tar who I thank for their detailed explanation. To put a different slant on what @tarsaid. It's not about xrp being a bridging tool. It's the fact that XRP is not a national currency. The issues you describe are to do with monetary policy manipulating fiat currency to influence the local (or regional) economy. XRP will have a floating value compared to fiat just like gold (as already stated by others and agree not 100% perfect analogy). As stated by others, if liquidity dries up for xrp (unlikely if it gets critical mass). Then an alternate method for exchanging value will be used. Probably a more liquid crypto asset. Is it likely that a crypto asset is used as fiat currency in the medium term. Probably, but only for small economies that want to use it as a stable currency. But they will lose the ability to use it as a fiscal tool and would only do so when it does become stable. Is it likely that XRP could be used to buy items in every day life in the medium term. Yes, but it will be correlated with the local currency value. The other thing to be mindful of is that economic theory is an ever evolving field. I am no expert, but I would not be surprised to see current norms evolve into a drastically different philosophy in the near to mid term future. Also for others here that say that Ripple can use their XRP to provide liquidity. XRP for sale is only half the equation. The more difficult half are buyers for that XRP. They can certainly use it to incentivise market makers, but not magically make people want to buy XRP. Thanks everyone for one of the most interesting reads in a long time.
  3. The first rule of NDA club, is you don't talk about NDA club.
  4. It is probably worth answering with an overview of the terms and what they actually mean. If not for you then for others who may be reading. RippleNet is the name for Ripples' suite of products which are xCurrent, xRappid and xVia. xCurrent is the most mature product which has been live for over a year. It allows banks etc to transfer and settle in near real time. It does not use a crypto asset, so in order to be used it requires Nostro Vostro relationships to exist. Just like SWIFT, just a lot quicker and better tracking. In more exotic corridors this will involve chains of banks / FIs. xRappid is designed to use crypto assets as the intermediary asset removing the need for Nostro Vostro and intermediaries. It can use any crypto asset but XRP is usually the cheapest which is why it's used. It's also the asset being pushed by Ripple. xVia is a product that allows easy access to the other two products and is just an interface. This is aimed at non FI organizations. Eg Amazon. Now to answer your question. When using xRappid as described above by others. Bank sends USD to exchange Exchange uses that USD to purchase XRP at local rates Exchange sends to Europe exchange European exchange sells XRP for EUR Note that the transactions are done based on local xrp exchange rates and will vary over time. The missing piece is that the process checks for the cheapest path each transaction. Even if that means using the old Nostro Vostro settlement. Assuming XRP is cheapest, the rates used in both the buy and sell process are locked in before the buy occurs so there is certainty that it will still be cheapest. Hope this helps
  5. I don't know their financials either, but since the 2010 statement they have signed a lot more production contracts and therefore have that as cashflow as well. These contracts will have values in the millions. I don't know how much it offsets the new hires, but I doubt that they are as reliant on xrp sales now compared to then. At 300 staff it is still relatively small company. Not saying you're wrong (neither of us know) just highlighting a significant change since then.
  6. Thanks for the link, wondered why I was getting new likes for an old post
  7. Hey @xSODAx, Thanks for putting context around your opinions. It's been hard to get negative opinion posters to explain their rationale. I have to say I agree with the majority of your post. But there are a couple of points I disagree with. First the statement regarding failed promises by Ripple. I have read a massive amount about Ripple and XRP. I haven't read a single failed promise from Ripple. Have I wanted more info direct from them? Of course. But I'm amazed at how much they have shared, which is way more than any other company. There is a lot of failed promises, but it has always been from press and XRP lovers & haters spreading misinformation. The XRP lovers usually because they are blinded by hope and read too much into things. The second is needing results in the near future. We are rightly given a tiny amount of information about what is going on. I prefer Ripple to keep their customers happy rather than us. My story: I investigated crypto in Nov 17. The only one that made sense to me was XRP because the use case was being driven by a real business. If anything I was too complacent that the price would stay static for at least 6 months. The bull run took me by surprise because it was driven by speculation and I didn't appreciate that back then. So my expectations was that Ripple's use case was that it would only start about now. Which it has going live a couple of months ago. But being in the business of implementing IT systems I knew that going live was not going to be a magic switch. I know how long it takes to evaluate, implement and test systems. I wouldn't seriously look at a beta product. I'd monitor interesting developments. But I wouldn't be doing a full evaluation until there is an actual finished product. So now is the time when the majority of banks and FI's will start evaluating and testing and hopefully implementing. This will take months (my guess at least 6 months). There will also be limited Ripple bandwidth to help implement, even if there are additional implementation partners. So only a limited number could be implemented in parallel. Obviously the best way to fasttrack xRapid usage is to already have xCurrent installed. But this is best served by version 4 which has also only just been released. There may not be the appetite to upgrade so soon after going live with the previous version. So new xCurrent customers are most likely to transition first. I don't expect announcements of customers until they are live. Some customers may even keep it quiet after go live with xRapid. So the above knowledge means I don't expect decent volumes until late 2019 at the earliest. This will drive utility price and anything before then is a speculative bonus. It also means excitement over x date are just mild amusement to me and hold no validity. Of course I hope for price increases before then, but that will just be me getting lucky that the market picked up again. Maybe fueled by news or maybe not. In short I'm very bullish, but my certainty is long term. Short term I have no idea. Edit: to answer your competition catching up concern. It is an absolute risk. But bear in mind they face the same implementation lag as Ripple. Ripple appear to have the most complete solution and best traction. I do expect others to go live and get customers that Ripple do not have. There maybe a VHS Betamax type war. But that will take years to play out and we should have still had great returns even if Ripple becomes Betamax. There is also a good chance that we end up with multiple solutions being successful.
  8. Also remember the top 50 banks have the most to lose from this revolution. They're the ones who charge lots of fees via the swift system.
  9. @jabit I wouldn't worry about GPI uptake. Even if ripple becomes the standard in future, banks need to transfer money to many different destinations today. It therefore makes sense for them to join even 'if' they plan to be ripple only in future. Ripple have done an amazing job, but you can't build a network over night. I expect the rate of adoption to go up exponentially, but it will still take years to get complete coverage. Until then swift will be needed. Even with multi hop. As for antagonizing swift, there has been a very interesting change of tone in the last 6 months. Very confident. Even the 2017 swell, yes they were cheeky with the sibos piggyback. But they were generally very restrained. This new confidence is very exciting and nothing to be worried about
  10. I don't think our opinions are that different. Your second point coexists perfectly with mine. The first point you are talking about is a wider view where I was focusing just on banks. So let's agree to agree
  11. Definition of a monopoly "a company or group having exclusive control over a commodity or service" You could also argue most if not all of the swift member banks profited greatly by charging high fees for an archaic service. A service smaller banks had no choice and had to use. I am not saying this because I doubt the success of Ripple (I am very bullish). It was more in relation to an earlier post that was worried about swift making a come back. And to that point I don't believe the industry will want to go back to a monopoly situation.
  12. The best result from a bank perspective (at least the banks that don't financially gain from SWIFT legacy systems) is for both systems to be adopted and used. We are in this situation because of a lack of competition and therefore progress. After 30 years of stagnation who would want to go back to a monopoly, even a Ripple one. An agile startup can always become a lumbering beast. I would also not rule out other successful solutions, but I doubt the ecosystem would sustain more than 3 or 4.
  13. You are absolutely correct. Caullex is the only one that appears to be doing live transactions to date. With the other two production companies still implementing. But to your point. An FI would only transmit lower values to begin with, which will grow as liquidity grows.
  14. Here's my take on usage increasing price https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/24470-why-will-xrapid-increase-price/ Regarding the need for the price to increase for xRapid to be useful, this is where I disagree with others. There are billions of xrp so it can theoretically handle large value transactions. What is lacking is liquidity. xRapid needs lots of fiat buying xrp and likewise lots of xrp being sold, it doesn't care about the price - I know obvious. But a higher price of xrp does not necessarily mean there is more liquidity ie fiat buying xrp. Having said that as increased liquidity occurs, the price will increase. So the end result is the same and this is just semantics. Also bear in mind that xRapid transactions will create liquidity for other xRappid transactions.
  • Create New...