Jump to content

BrownBear

Member
  • Content Count

    162
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Do they need a connection with a Pakistani Bank? There are several RippleNet customers operating in Pakistan (SC, MUFG ect)
  2. The article states Alibaba will use Standard Chartered as a settlement agent. Standard Chartered are a RippleNet client already.
  3. BrownBear

    Deutsche Bank Confirms HSBC and Xoom As Ripple Clients

    HSBC's "FX Everywhere" project is being used to coordinate payments across HSBC's internal balance sheets using a shared ledger.
  4. Or maybe they believe using xRapid allows them to bypass an FCA ruling that prohibits them from offering payment services. The more I look into this 'Bank' the more suspect I become of them. I of course want to see xRapid adopted just like we all do, but not with firms like this. Too many red flags, they have the potential to give Ripple a very negative reputation.
  5. I had a strange encounter with a Kiwi once while on a walk, I looked into the field beside the path and saw a Kiwi farmer having his way with a sheep. I was a little shocked, so I walked over and I tell the farmer "You know mate, in Australia we shear sheep." The Kiwi farmer looks up at me and exclaims "Not in New Zeelund bro, I ain't sharing with nobody!! Bloody get your own sheep!"
  6. As far as I am aware HSBC's "FX Everywhere," project is being used to coordinate payments across HSBC's internal balance sheets using a shared ledger.
  7. BrownBear

    Hello! + Question!

    Pretty much. Utility drives supply and demand. FI's need to move value between currency pairs, the more they move the higher the value XRP must reach to accommodate that value. Seeing as how there are 180 currencies and only <100B tokens. It is safe to say that utility will be THE single driver of XRPs price.
  8. BrownBear

    The pizza of xrp

    I heard they were a little too greasy and came out faster than they went in...
  9. So not with ease as you stated. It's always possible, but like my post above, it could have negative repercussions for the market participants. Again, it's a liquidity issue as stated in his talk in June.
  10. in his talk in June 2018, D.S. said he was unsure if there would be enough liquidity and it could simply die if large orders saturate the market. Time stamp is around 28 minute mark. So I would be interested where you are getting your information from. Please provide your source.
  11. Exactly. As seeing as how David said that xRapid uses limit orders for trading, the only advantage an OTC would have would be for orders so large that the exchange couldn't fill them on the open market without hitting multiple limit orders and introducing slippage when trying to sell it at the other end due to liquidity issues. xRapid will likely buy 1,000 XRP from Exchange A @ xx price and Sell 1,000 XRP at the closest Limit order on the corresponding Exchange B. If the order cannot be completed due to insignificant liquidity, that is - They cannot fill the same order for the same value on both exchanges without introducing an unreasonable level of slippage. The transaction won't go through anyway. It would fail in the negotiation phase. It wouldn't matter how much Exchange A has or prices XRP at. This whole idea that xRapid will automatically negotiate with an OTC trading desk is stupid. While the OTC can function as a Market-Maker using xRapid - Where they facilitate all of a FI's transactions on their behalf, absorbing any risk of volatility at BOTH ENDS OF THE TRANSACTION. They still need to negotiate their terms with the market participants that want to use them. xRapid isn't going to form counter-party contracts for you. That's beyond idiotic. Instead, Market-makers will offer competitive bid and ask prices in MULTIPLE currencies in different countries on public exchanges. So when you hear that Market-Makers are also liquidity providers you know where they are injecting their capital for liquidity - Public exchange order books. We ignorantly call them whales, those guys that have huge sell/buy walls? They are market-makers. They have 100k XRP on one exchange at one price and another 100k XRP at the equivalent price in another currency. These are the limit orders xRapid will likely try to fill during a transaction because there is no slippage here. Remember, in order to have 'tight spreads' on each side of the 'ticker' you need to hold funds on BOTH ends of the transaction. It doesn't matter how competitive you think you are offering XRP for if nobody can sell it at the other end for fiat at the same price.
  12. BrownBear

    Ripple XRP Groupthink

    It's almost if they were ... speculative investors.
  13. Sigh: If Exchange B has 10,000 XRP @0.33 and Exchange C has 9428.5714 XRP @ 0.35 - Guess what? They are both worth $3,300 - Learn math. The value of the limit order is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is if it can hold the required value. Remember, XRP is a bridge currency. You are confusing it with the XRPLedger. - A completely different thing. xRapid uses the XRPLedger - It isn't the XRPLedger itself. Please learn more about Ripple products before you make such a post again.
  14. Buy WITH XRP and Sell XRP mean the same things. You are trading INTO one thing from ANOTHER asset. So FIAT/XRP means getting rid of XRP for FIAT. and XRP/FIAT means getting rid of FIAT for XRP. Whether or not you say "I bought XRP with FIAT" or "I sold FIAT for XRP" it is still the same trade in the same order. You are simply confused and arguing over semantics because you have nothing else. End of story Martin, you're just wrong on everything.
×