Jump to content

ICookinBrine

Member
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About ICookinBrine

  • Rank
    Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Additional details from Moneygram's filings are below on the details of their relationship with Ripple. This gives more specific contours to everything previously diclosed, indicating that the market development fees are paid by Ripple in XRP and Moneygram liquidates the XRP, as the CEO has publicly said in the past:
  2. Weren’t they talking about volume incentive payments, rather than volume itself? That is, the payments are not arithmetic and the volume increase anticipated would not unlock a proportionate incentive increase? I could be mistaken so don’t hesitate to correct me.
  3. My guess: xrparcade.com / @LeonidasH . The timing of an uptick in coverage coincides, and the style is similar. If not Hodor, the mantle has been taken up. No pressure to confirm or deny
  4. Here were a couple of comments from the Q&A: Fees are proportional to the amount of volume but they will flatten out (i.e., they are not arithmetic) Will sequentially build into other corridors; doing Australian dollars and Filipino pesos Contract extended to 2023
  5. Just to add to the original post, Ripple's former MGI board observer announced she was taking a position at Standard Chartered confirming she was no longer serving in the role with Ripple/MGI.
  6. Looks like it will actually be the morning of the 25th: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/moneygram-release-fourth-quarter-full-163700522.html
  7. Agreed, and I would expand on both points. First, Ripple Labs, Inc.'s work for XRP is demonstrable and rational because it is profit motivated and more insulated from irrationality due to the duties of its executives. While nothing is bathed in sunlight, they outwardly seem to be doing pretty well. Second, early individual holders have the same incentive from a theoretical perspective. Nonetheless, the gap between economic theory and reality when the market is still not perfectly liquid is concerning. Who knows when someone will decide to renovate their penthouse and require some Simoleons, eh? Beyond the example you note, there are some instances of correlation in price drop with large transfers by early accounts to exchanges. E.g., see the excess of 50 million xrp transferred to Bitstamp prior to and correlating (precipitating?) a price drop days later at this account end of June beginning of July 2019: https://bithomp.com/explorer/rnibStRfnopHMHYLbcYQKBF9eXic1UK7jg But perhaps time and increased utility will cause the waters to still (cue rimshot).
  8. The extent of any benefit to Moneygram or its customers is beyond me, but as pertains to the ODL check out the this Worldbank.org site cataloging remittance data: https://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/en/corridor/United-States/Mexico https://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/en/corridor/United-States/Philippines It was interesting that US>Mexico and US>Philippine both had negative exchange rate margins for Moneygram, and Moneygram alone. Not all access points belonging to Moneygram, but I didn't see other providers with negative margins. I'm sure that observation could use some critical analysis and may be purely coincidental, but it caught my eye given that this seemed to be a variable that Ripple has touted as an advantage of ODL.
  9. I’d be interested if anyone more knowledgeable has insight on the apparent shareholder shakeup (?) at Moneygram. Longtime shareholder Thomas H. Lee Partners (and various interrelated companies, “THL Funds”) has been a substantial owner for a period of years (see, for instance: https://nypost.com/2018/01/06/thl-partners-risky-bet-may-cost-them-decent-moneygram-bid/). 17-6-2019/27-6-2019: Ripple Labs acquires 6,230,895 shares. Notably, for purpose of this post, THL entered into a voting agreement committing to voting its shares in favor of any Ripple Director nominated as part of the transaction. 12-11-2019: Notice re THL Funds’ distribution of 23,707,852 shares to limited partners/affiliates of the THL Funds (seemingly eliminating reporting obligations as to the disposition of those shares) and liquidation of the remaining 30,006 shares held by one of the THL entities. The THL Funds’ divestment terminates the obligation to vote for a Ripple Labs director under the voting agreement, per the notice. 22-11-2019: Ripple Lab's stake is raised to 6,237,523 shares in finalizing the stock purchase agreement Does this appear to be (a) all part of the plan; (b) Thomas H. Lee Partners’ scheme to exit stage left and get out of the voting agreement; or (c) none of the above? [p.s., Please feel free to move elsewhere--it has long been my aspiration to have a post moved "Off Topic" to a useful page rather than the opposite ]
  10. Right, no one will be throwing themselves in the gears on principle alone. Still, we'll see how the Moneygram play works out. If customer fees appreciably drop and people flock to it, the risk calculus may change for other financial institutions in other parts of the money business on a faster than expected timeline.
  11. Haha -- I won't claim to be able to predict any catastrophic upheaval, but I think you can still find value in something like the "bullshit talks" observation (even if bullshit is supposed to be doing the walking). Incumbent institutions (from whom these regulators appear to have been gathering information) may be sitting on the sidelines now and predicting the status quo will remain for some time, but I understood him to be saying they will embrace a sudden jump forward if the money is talking.
  12. Fair point--it could be more rapid than they expect, but perhaps this indicates nothing is imminent. It is also worth putting this in context. The agency is addressing whether to extend a rule allowing regulated entities to estimate exchange rates on money transfers in certain situations as opposed to providing the exact amount ("the Bureau is proposing changes to the Rule to mitigate the effects of the expiration of a statutory exception that allows insured institutions to disclose estimates to consumers of the exchange rate and covered third-party fees instead of exact amounts"). Ripple/XRP and SWIFT gpi are recognized as solutions that would eliminate the need for this less desirable exception (estimated exchange rates). In other words, this isn't about regulating Ripple/XRP, rather it recognizes Ripple/XRP as among potential future solutions to an existing problem while allowing the band-aid to remain on.
  13. Note the following excerpt, which indicates we should not expect mass adoption in the short-to-medium term based on comments from the industry. Perhaps it is not surprising, but interesting:
  14. Thanks, that is helpful. So it appears, for whatever reason, these transactions are repeatedly listing Address One in the metadata. See, e.g. Tx hash: A6C5C939D72133D1E7215A37C663B57B43CF87F7BFB4CD1297857A09778A9251:
  15. There was another spike of these sorts of transactions, which Ledger.Observer is associating with rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrBZbvji (an early--i.e. spring 2013--account, seemingly now with a link to sologenic?). I'm curious how Ledger.Observer associates this account as the hub of each these transactions because it does not appear on the transaction details.
×
×
  • Create New...