Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. The truth is we don't know anything, and neither do these half witted bureaucrats. They only serve to slow down people who stake to make real progress in a stuffy environment.
  2. Now you've got the bureaucratic tail wagging the forward looking dog. Do you really think Ripple is trying to pull a fast one on us? Have a little faith in your investment.
  3. Your description of investing in xrp as "venture capital with liquidity" is appropriately descriptive. We are so fortunate to be able to invest at this stage, like venture capitalists. I have thought about it as being a venture capitalist, but never put together that we also have liquidity. I wish all the sellers would look at it more like venture capital and leave their money in, but none the less we (as in average, shallow-pocket investors) are lucky even with the waves of volatility. We all know that with stocks people like us don't get to get in before an IPO takes them public. Thanks for the analysis!
  4. Plus, funny enough, if there is any meat to the argument of decentralization because of one large holder, I trust Ripple more than I do the Fed or the IMF!
  5. Love to see them sell all their xrp to the IMF or the US Fed—even at the going rate of .33. Maybe they are trying to wait until the price rises a little more before selling. Maybe that's what all the delay and price manipulation is, price negotiations between Ripple and the prospective buyers! Buyers are using regulation as their leverage while Ripple is trying to get other sources to use xrp so the price goes up and thus their leverage. (wouldn't that be great@!)
  6. Interesting. I read the last page you have listed "Casting Light on Central Bank Digital Currencies". I get the feeling the Central Banks do not understand digital assets. Here's what they said in that paper: "22. Cryptocurrencies are different along many dimensions and struggle to fully satisfy the functions of money, in part because of erratic valuations. Examples include Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Ripple. These currencies are not the liability of any institution and are not backed by assets. Their value is usually volatile, because most have rigid issuance rules. Some new cryptocurrencies attempt to stabilize their value by controlling issuance according to a function of price deviations from a fiat currency or commodity (as in an exchange rate peg). Examples are Basecoin and Stablecoin.20 In all cases, transactions are settled in a decentralized fashion, using distributed ledger technology." And then in the article "Going Cashless": "And then there is the emergence of crypto assets. I do not consider these so-called currencies to be money, as they do not fulfill the three essential functions of money—to serve as a means of payment, a unit of account, and a store of value. This view is shared by most of my colleagues. Crypto assets’ main contribution is to show that financial infrastructure can be built in a new way with blockchain technology, smart contracts, and crypto solutions. Although the new technology is interesting and can probably create value added in the long run, it is important that central banks make it clear that cryptocurrencies are generally not currencies but rather assets and high-risk investments. The clearer we are in communicating this, the greater the chance that we can prevent unnecessary bubbles from arising in the future. We may also want to review the need for regulatory frameworks and supervision for this relatively new phenomenon." Companies like Ripple have a lot of work to do on the side of educating these people. I get it now why they are after the lower hanging fruit first. Edit: Although Christine Legard somewhat gets it, though she still needs to research xrp a little more: "1. Virtual currencies Let us start with virtual currencies. To be clear, this is not about digital payments in existing currencies—through Paypal and other “e-money” providers such as Alipay in China, or M-Pesa in Kenya. Virtual currencies are in a different category, because they provide their own unit of account and payment systems. These systems allow for peer-to-peer transactions without central clearinghouses, without central banks. For now, virtual currencies such as Bitcoin pose little or no challenge to the existing order of fiat currencies and central banks. Why? Because they are too volatile, too risky, too energy intensive, and because the underlying technologies are not yet scalable. Many are too opaque for regulators; and some have been hacked. But many of these are technological challenges that could be addressed over time. Not so long ago, some experts argued that personal computers would never be adopted, and that tablets would only be used as expensive coffee trays. So I think it may not be wise to dismiss virtual currencies."
  7. Consider this: We have no clarity in the U.S. nor in many others parts of the world such as India on how to classify, regulate or even use xrp. Is it a currency, a commodity, a security . . . there's no clarity yet. So, should we really be surprised that the first bank to use xrp is a bank that is an 'out of the box' type of bank. Do we really want to be held hostage forever by the big banks, who frankly are going to have to be dragged, slowly into the space? I see this small, nimble bank as an asset to the xrp cause. They will have the ability to implement the technology quickly and to shift quickly with developing regulatory clarity. Like many I was initially a little frustrated with the discovery of their size, etc, but as has been the case all along with being invested in a groundbreaking technology the path to success is sometimes through the back door.
  8. I kind of remember this conversation from a few months ago. Here's more info on it from then:
  9. I'm not a technical person. Could you offer a brief layperson's summary? Thanks in advance.
  10. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/75-banks-joined-jpmorgan-apos-092040990.html "IIN is a shared ledger for cross-border payments that allows banks to quickly and easily add or correct information necessary for payments sent between banks. It competes with legacy platforms such as SWIFT and new startups like Ripple." Later edit: The name of IIN seems to tell the tale: "The FT reported on Tuesday that lenders including Santander and Societe Generale are testing the Interbank Information Network (IIN)."
  11. It's listed under "other press" for that reason. However, the article reinforces that Bakkt is moving full steam ahead. This is good for BTC—and I can pretty much guarantee it'll be good for XRP too and all other digital assets. Here's a little reading between the lines for you: "...Bakkt reckons, will transform Bitcoin, or another dominant token, into a highly-liquid commercial currency,..."
  12. This is a pretty big deal! http://fortune.com/2019/01/14/bakkt-acquisition-consumer-payments/
  13. People can assess the value of 1 XRP even with the escrow; it's just one factor and is I'm sure outsized during this early stage. Thus, we have approximately .30/xrp. It's called uncertainty, and it's why I believe this is such a great opportunity. If you want certainty buy bonds or put your money into something with a longer track record, such as real estate. It will be more difficult for the US government to take XRP such as they confiscated people's gold during the Rosevelt administration. Yes, it's possible but only to the extent that they could outlaw it, but in my view more unlikely than the upside of XRP succeeding and the US government benefiting from it. The catts are out of the bag. It is not only a US thing and there is significant downside if the US sits out this financial revolution. The implementation is what it is. Personally I think Ripple is doing an amazing job. You'd have to be a dictator to have pulled it off any other way, and then that would defeat the entire point.