Jump to content

Frisia

Member
  • Posts

    205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Frisia

  1. I agree with this interpretation. So the matter is formal, the policies are not written black on white as of now. So as long as that is not the case, the "guidance" provided by the SEC, as individuals, it is legitimate to state that this can be used for internal policy making by the market participants. This is substantial and content driven without being formally approved as regulations. The difference is subtle but cannot be ignored. A second matter, even if it were strictly personal, which is not the case, it also matters how public speaches are perceived by the market.
  2. I did the opposite, I sold ETH for XRP last week almost one year after the start of the SEC case.
  3. Yes, all very true and we're in the middle of it. I have children (~early 20's) and, I hope (but I know 😊) they have a balanced view on society. This inherently means that examples are of a fundamental importance, so indeed, family, school, work, any context, but most of all we need examples and leaders. What this topic is all about, and to make the circle round, is that we have too many bad examples and bad leaders that do exactly the opposite of we think would be necessary to reverse. Gensler & Co are perhaps not the worst but surely representative examples of today's polarization and hunger for power rather than justice and equal rights for everyone. Thx for your response mate! Good to read your view on such a complex matter.
  4. I'm not a US citizen but please allow me to provide a view as a spectator and not as a participant in US politics. What we see, not only in the US but also where I live (Italy) as well as in my home country (Netherlands), is an ever increasing polarization. Many discussions in our daily life, from vaccination, migration, right or left, the use of guns or arms in general, have made a profound gap between those who are in favour and those who are against. Within such a separation there is no place for meaningful discussions and moderation of opinions and hardly ever you will come to balanced view or common or shared statements. The indirect consequence is, unfortunately, an increase of violence and aggression almost everywhere in all layers of society. Think of it, all the focus is on whatever divides and never what we share as a view. I hope we ("we" a wide sense) will be able to reverse this sooner or later...
  5. In terms of invested money roughly: XRP 60%, ETH 30% and XLM 10%. As of today, in terms of portfolio, XRP and ETH are almost equal...🙄
  6. That seems a bit high to me because that would mean about 2B per day! If I remember well the highest volumes were about 40/50mln last year (before the SEC soap) according to utility-scan and other reporting tools.
  7. I think his remark is that the ODL report is useless as it is without numbers. I agree that the information that is provided is very minimal. Many have tried to build algorithms to monitor the ODL traffic but all were abandoned because the information was not reliable simply because too many factors are the involved. Regarding ODL itself the matter is very complex and many discussions are present (even here on xrpchat) that try to understand into which extent ODL 1) creates a price floor and 2) whether or not high volumes might also have an impact on price. As far as I have seen there are many assumptions but very few solid logics. My view is that it will have an impact on the price if the daily volumes in payments are billions (and not several millions as they seem to be today). So this indeed will take time...
  8. Well the incredible paradox is that the SEC almost killed one of the most relevant and innovative use cases (ODL) in the entire crypto industry at the same time stating that it's not existing. Fortunately facts show otherwise.
  9. Agree but for me the question is who can (or will) hold him accountable for his actions?
  10. Exactly this is how I see it. Obviously, if Bailard would have requested the SEC's view on the document prior to the publishing by the SEC, that would be completely different. If that would be the case, it might come out during the review behind closed doors by judge Netburn (but that's speculation).
  11. " BAILARD, INC. CODE OF ETHICS Updated as of January 4, 2021 A. INTRODUCTION As mandated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), this Code of Ethics (this “Code”) sets forth legal and ethical standards of conduct for the employees of Bailard, Inc. and its Affiliated Entities (the “Firm/Bailard”). This Code has been adopted by the Firm and is intended to set forth our policies and procedures concerning personal trading and other matters as well as to state the Firm’s broader policies regarding our duty of loyalty to clients. This Code is intended to promote the conduct of each employee and the Firm with high standards of integrity and compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. Bailard is required to adopt a code of ethics in accord with Rule 204A-1 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”) and in accord with Rule 17j-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”) as it is a SEC registered investment adviser and serves as a sub-adviser to certain registered investment companies." So indeed this is an internal (Bailard) code of ethics as required by the SEC published on their website. This news circulated months ago but could indeed be relevant... https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1048702/000119312521047532/d119950dex9928p7.htm
  12. It is traded only within the Bitrue market, so a very limited perimeter in terms of users, demand & supply and therefore liquidity. For sure it is not representative for real market conditions.
  13. I think on eToro this might have been decisive. I've seen thousands of requests to distribute SGB, so indeed making some pressing is the best strategy to obtain the tokens.
  14. Well expressed xrp-nuke. Flare is a good example of these projects.
  15. Let's not forget that the banking system with Swift and therefore the US, is in control of world wide payments including sanctions to those countries or organizations that do not fit in their agenda for whatever reason, right or wrong. Alternative payment systems bypass this control system created by the banking establishment (GS, JPM etc), which makes them nervous obviously... So yes I can understand that some forces are working behind the screens against Ripple & Co.
  16. Well this is exactly what makes me suspicious. If everyone says that the crypto market will go up, I prepare for the opposite. With preparing I mean mentally because I don't act unless we reach new time highs...
  17. He, as an ex chairman of the SEC, even has the courage to say, when he's asked about participations on conflict of interest, "I'm not sure about that...". This thing gets worse by the day and I'm glad this snowball starts to roll downhill. Let's see if this gets examined thoroughly.
  18. It's not only AML but also the matter of credit risk and counterpart risk regulatory reporting. As of today many processes are in place to report on risk to regulators and even if this risk (FX, credit, counterpart, country, systemic, operational) is significantly reduced it's not zero. Where all these types of risk are embedded in reporting requirements (Basle), for crypto & therefore ODL there is not a single rule on how to quantify these risks. So the banks need some "borderline workarounds" in order to handle these processes that foresee the use of crypto/ tokens.
  19. If I understood Quintez well these borders have already been established. Crypto is a type of commodity unless it is sold as an "investment contract". Only in that case the token would enter into the jurisdiction of the SEC. Is this the main question and of course the reason of "sharpening of knives" between commissions?
  20. Well that would mean that Hinman did not reply to the questions that were pre-agreed between Ripple and SEC. That would be weird right? I think those questions that were agreed in advance would focus on the matter into which extent this speech was agreed or checked in advance by SEC members/ staff and for that reason cannot be defined as purely personal opinions.
  21. Yes that's true, but traditional banks are never first movers, except some banks with an innovative branch (e.g. Santander). So this was destined to happen and was (and still is) a risk. However, the "contingency strategy" to focus first on remittance, which better suits the low value high volume payments building strategy, in my view is a better approach at the end. This is bringing innovation to the payment services sector, also forcing banks to follow that road, either by partnerships with payment services companies, or developing services by themselves.🐌 The whole payment services industry will be reshaped thoroughly and we don't know yet what the outcome will be and what the impact will be on the banking industry. I'm absolutely certain that banks fear fintech companies more than anything else and I know this as an ex-insider... But indeed the clock is ticking.
  22. I think this article pretty well summarizes recent discussions on BTC (e.g. resistance at 42k & support in the 28-31k region) and overall crypto market figures. This is one of the few writers that I read once and a while: https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-technicals-how-low-will-btc-price-go-after-failing-at-42k-resistance/amp
  23. We're close to the critical area that you often mentioned (about 42k if I remember well). What's your idea? Are we still under that threshold?
  24. Well we all know you because of your pessimistic views which have often become realistic scenarios. So you deserve some attention. I have learned to read and appreciate your comments notwithstanding the "🤣🤣🤣".
  25. I have some XLM for diversification but actually I'm not happy with the project and therefore with the investment. Regarding the acquisition honestly I don't understand: 1) how Moneygram could be happy with such a takeover for the lack of management qualities you have mentioned. I wonder if we should see this as a hostile takeover... 2) why would the Stellar Foundation acquire a specific payment services company like Moneygram? The same competitive reasons that we discussed when Ripple bought a stake in Moneygram come to my mind. How can they explain that to other contracted payment companies? It seems to me a bad move perhaps driven by the need to gain a slice of the remittance pie. Furthermore Stellar is lagging behind in the creation of corridors, liquidity, contracts with customers as well as with exchanges/ Money Makers which takes years. The patent issues (ODL/LOC) as mentioned by others, are obviously on top of this. I don't see how Stellar could keep up with Ripple even considering a possible temporary "advantage" in the US due to the SEC matter.
×
×
  • 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.