Jump to content

wogojump

Member
  • Content Count

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About wogojump

  • Rank
    Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Ripple membership does not mean anything. I worked at one of those organizations a few years ago, when our CIO joined the faster payments council. I worked close with her, but not positive on the FPC details. Believe the group had a smaller core group that met more often and provided more direction. Then the larger group provided feedback and joined webinars a few times a year. I would imagine Ripple is not in the core group (if this structure still exists). Looks like they are in a cross boarder payments sub group. I believe at that time they were focusing on stuff like faster ACH payments between correspondent banks and respondent banks. Like reducing ACH processing time by a factor of day(s). The larger banks and correspondent banks are interested in improving the current infrastructure that they control and make money off, rather than loosing control and profits from distributive technology like Ripple. International payments are notourous for being slow and requiring a lot of work, so ripple may be able to fill that gap for smaller organizations.
  2. I don't know for sure, but I was expecting him leave or at least take a break from the forums. Same reason why Hodor left (which I expected to happen a few months prior to him leaving). Members on the forums like TinyAccount and Hodor spend a lot of their personal time posting content, that is very pro Ripple and XRP. They most likely have a significant financial interest in XRP being successful. They open themselves up to criticism on their topics from others that take a more realistic stance (which I have posted criticism on both of their topics), especially when their predictions and expectations fail to occur after a few years. Spending that much time on forums, getting negative feedback from others and realizing their expectations have not met for 3+ years is mentally exhaustive. Best thing to do is take a break or spend time focusing on other areas. For example this is example of another user posting their frustration against TinyAccount earlier this year: .
  3. A few additional examples have been posted in this thread. Some other examples: The first year of Xpring, they had a very different strategy (which was flawed). They primary focused on giving XRP to any organization that wanted to experiment with cryptocurrency (regardless of them having solid business case, capabilities, or intentions to utilize XRP). They should of had the foresite at the beginning, but realized after the first year they did not have efficient tools and APIs for businesses to benefit pursuing integrating with XRP. So most of the progress up to this point, basically resulted in them realizing their current strategy was not effective. Last year, they changed their strategy to build development toolkits (like APIs), in order to make it more efficient and feasible for businesses to integrate with XRP. There was clearly a disconnect within Ripple last year on what was really going on with Xpring. One of Brad's last FUD rants on twitter left off with him using Dharma example as proof XRP sales are used to help expand XRP utility. Which Dharma directly confirmed they are not developing with XRP: Investment with COIL was a significant failure. Half of the XRP community, that was desperately looking for XRP utility did not approve of COIL. Which says something when that many people are invested in XRP, despise the solutions that are being invested in. COIL was a start up from the former employees/friends of Ripple. Ripple gave them 1 billion XRP (valued at ~$250 million at the time). While COIL didn't have any real business cases, revenue, a few thousand customer (charging $5 a month), etc. Investing that amount of money into a business with such little revenue and customers is unheard of and a terrible business decision, typically only occurs when you have personal connections. Last year Ripple leadership was posting the benefits of them investing in other cryptocurrency initiatives, even if it increased the competition with XRP. Which is a desperate strategy to rely on. Even more odd when they actually accomplished this like with Dharma, developing alternative solutions rather than using XRP, while value of XRP has depreciated from the mass selling to fund these organizations.
  4. There will be plenty of more examples like Dharma and Coil in the next few years. Ethan should have never been given the responsibility to lead Xpring. There were plenty of red flags within the first year that he should be pulled from the role based on lack of competence.
  5. I had to block Tiny Account in the past. He goes on tangents spamming off topic nonsense.
  6. When looking at the earliest saved page on way back time machine (may 2017) it looks like Susan and Gene were on the board at this time: https://web.archive.org/web/20170518024151/https://ripple.com/company/. They are supposed to have expertise in economics, but allowed Ripple to continue a strategy of mass selling XRP (including giving XRP to partners to sell) during a bear market. In this same time frame, XRP had over a 95% trading value decrease from the 2 year high to the 2 year low. We do not have direct insight into the board meeting notes, so we can not be sure if they provided recommendations and the other board members voted against them. Either way, this is bad economics. Yes it is true, that mistakes like giving founders such large amounts of XRP probably occurred before most of the current board members were involved. There are actions taken place in the last few years that I would expect competent economic advisers to recommend against. For example, reducing sales of XRP much sooner (starting early 2018), when you are seeing a trend of XRP price decrease to ~95%.
  7. Sorry buddy, demand is constantly impacted by market sentiment. See the determinants of demand: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand.
  8. Your response is based on nonsense. I would recommend for you to review standard economic factors, like long-run vs. short-run impacts: https://opentextbc.ca/principlesofeconomics/chapter/5-3-elasticity-and-pricing/.
  9. Ripple's and Jed's sales were not the only problem, but were part of the problem. Over selling (aka increasing supply) during a bear market, will cause prices to crash. The market sentiment confidence in XRP is still low from the crash. For example, look how many people are still voicing their mistrust in Ripple and XRP. These people are much more likely to sell their holdings of XRP, rather than buy additional XRP. Lastly, impacts from XRP sales are more likely to be visible 3-6 months after changes are put into place. These strategies won't have major impacts overnight. Starting in 2020 we have seen prices level out. Next 3 months will provide more evidence of the true impacts of the sales strategy changes in 2019 impacting XRP trading value.
  10. Yes, they have strong qualifications, but you have to remember they are not perfect. They have already shown to have a lack of foresight and/or oversight to fully control Ripple's actions that negatively impact XRP's price. Please see the article below explaining a mistake of XRP sales. This was a reactive measure taken after community backlash and negative consequences occurred because of mismanagement of the supply and demand of XRP. https://ripple.com/insights/q2-2019-xrp-markets-report/?
  11. Yes, he has a valid point. Both stocks and cryptoccurency share similar fundamentals of supply and demand, which is relevant to his point. Also one of the advantages for investors putting their money into to stock securities, is the companies have to disclose details on their largest shareholders. This is an advantage for investors buying stocks, that currently does not exist in regulations or laws within the cryptocurrency industry.
  12. Nice job. Keep on keeping on.
  13. Many of the points are valid. A few are out of touch of reality. Noting ripple had "zero" impact on XRP price falling, is nonsense. Such a large stakeholder group (including their employees) selling billions of XRP and having control over developmental aspects will have some type of impact. Then shifting all the blame on whales, is ridiculous. Yes, we all know there are whale groups intentionally organizing pump and dump initiatives. Whales have little impact on the majority of the XRP holders becoming more frustrated and untrusting of Ripple. When people pull their money out of XRP because they are frustrated with Ripple's actions, this proves the Ripple had "zero" impact theory to be false.
  14. I sent a request on the Coil website to see if they can share this information. Businesses typically will not publicly share this information, unless they hit a sufficient target that they feel is beneficial to share. I will forward these numbers if Coil shares.
  15. Can you provide the numbers on growth for both creators and subscribers? For example numbers at start of 2019 vs. start of 2020?
×
×
  • Create New...