Caracappa

Disagree with the last part. It can easily if the US government keeps printing dollars and devalue them like they are doing now (it's a joke, I agree)

This is a discussion you can not win. Debating during a multiple year running bearmarket is easy for one side because they will be right all this time until they are not (and probably disappear as done before when it goes up). And you are simply wrong until you're right. Ringer does not like debating what can happen, only what is happening. That will always make him right, added his 'avoiding debate during uptrends' technique. Talking about uptrends, what are you doing here anyway Ringer?

You seem somewhat bipolar. The one moment you are apologizing to the 'guys' on this forum, that this is because you're "such a victim" and all. The next moment you are taunting everybody again with pointless posts. Stay of Twitter It's dangerous for susceptible 'guys' like you.

Tell me, what is it you are trying to achieve with this post?

Sorry, but this response totally reads like a bluff you know what your talking about. Luckily you can do research between reading this and responding to it. Where is that claimed? Both are second layer solutions in where you give in on the 'decentralized' part, so some BTC proponents are very much against the LN. Imo it would not be a big problem if you setup LN/PC between parties that allready trust eachother to keep the pressure of the chain itself temporarily. LN is allready used (although I would call it more like tested), came up with some issues but mainly has a long way to go before it becomes a 'trusted' solution. I'm not aware whether PC are fully tested on scale and in production yet? Probably because it is not needed as of yet.

I think it is not even debatable that BTC is still king in volume and majority of newcomers, big and small, are attracted by BTC. Personally I dislike BTC because it is flawed in many ways, but it has one very big advantage. It was first. It is the best known and it has a big herd of wealthy people behind it who will keep promoting and pushing it into media to make sure they will do financially well in the near future. Big companies need a very liquid investment once they want to pull out, and BTC is by far the most liquid asset so that is currently the most interesting. Visit any random crypto site and compare BTC with XRP to see what is making real progress. All they are able to write about BTC is what the chart is doing, Twitter Trader X thinks BTC will go to Y, what exchange is doing what volume. Ripple reports partnership after partnership and progress after progress in RippleNet. Again, what most XRP investors are investing for is that eventually this traction will result in more demand for XRP. Will that happen? Who knows. What most in here are betting on, without the hopium part, is that there comes a moment in time where utility and technology will outweigh hype. 2017 allready showed BTC crashes once it is really used/traded and people hope a centralized second layer (Lightning) will save their network once they can get it working. It's the 2000 internet bubble all over, and people blindly buy everything that ends on .com without checking fundamentals of companies.

Says the child who puts a laughing smiley at every positive post of others forum users. Grow up, and stop whining about "all the promises Brad made on twitter that lured my dumbass into crypto". Thats the card you try to stick on to to disquise the real deal while you derail every thread you possibly can under the flag of being a poor poor victim. You are a victim indeed, a victim of your own incompetence. You're a kid, go play outside.

I could not imagine why BoA would want to buy Ripple. No one wants to use the net if it's not a neutral third party. Once they put the BoA logo on it other banks will tear apart their contracts. Or they want to neutralize RippleNet by buying and dismantling it, but that would be more of a JPM or Citi thing to do so they can keep charging insane fees on moneytransfers.

You discredit every news item that comes from a credible source and then come up with a Twitter user sharing tinfoil information. Ok... Really, you have to stay of Twitter as it also was the source that got you into investing in the first place it seemed.

I'm sorry, honest question. I don't get the first sentence with 'This in red'. Understand the view about newcomers. However my take on this is you don't want the newcomers yet. Looking at both the 2017 runs, the retail came in halfway during the bullmarket. It was around $ 2,00 I suddenly had multiple colleagues asking me about that crypto thing I invested in and had to help setting up wallets. The reason they came was they read in mainstream news that crypto was growing lots of percentages. When it becomes mainstream news (which are quiet right now) is the time to start selling. So if the conditions are created (stocks suck for example) and crypto made huge gains in recent weeks, news start covering that information, the fresh money comes in later. That is how it theoratically always should be. Because usually the old investors win, and new money loses.

What do you mean with "not enough volume"? In 2017 pre bullrun there was <5bln 24hr volume and 10 to 15bln during the fomo run. Now there is 30 bln volume during sideway action and 45+ today. Washtrading aside, which was also there in 2017.

During most part of the bearmarket majority of people kept expecting it to go up any time... Now after the big drop so many people say 'it will go down again - I sold to buy back in lower - 0,08 or 0,10 is the next target.' I would think this is the perfect setup to not come back down and let people buy back in at higher highs or higher lows, fueling the further growth. But it can also crash into oblivion and double your stack. Who knows.

You could have based your investment on a million one line quotes from CEO's and employees. It still makes the basis of your investments a bad one for which you are to blame. No matter how you try to turn the blame to others every single post. No I did not decide to buy because of twitter quotes. I invested before the 2017 run on an idea which solves a problem that still very much exists. Whether it will solve that problem or another solution comes up is the question, but that is how investments work. If it's a done deal, there is no risk. Untill now there is still no other solution, some small attempts at it and some upgrades on legacy systems. And with all do respect to the entire crypto market, Ripple and XRP are about the only ones who actually made progress, instead of some minor updates to a protocal or forks here and there. Probably not fast enough to your likings. And I've got easy talking, I know that, by taking out the investment money plus some extra on earlier runs. Now the collapse of the XRP price, and the whole crypto market for that matter is too bad, but logical after a ridiculous rise as in 2017. It still not solved the existing problem and is still in the race for doing just that. Has nothing to do with XRP price which is simply following BTC. It corrected harder because it grew unnaturally harder in 2017. So keep repeating the quotes of employees all day long to take the blame away from yourself. It shows you haven't changed a bit since the moment you decided to put money in an emotional and 'get rich quick' investment in the first place…

Buying because a CEO made positive statements and expectations… Well, that makes you something. You may choose the definition yourself. I understand your anger, but you should project it 100% at yourself, not other people. Still, I don't buy your 'I'm down 99%' victim play to justify some rants you post. If this is how it makes you respond on a public forum, you've got bigger problems than being down 95% on crypto.

Its a gamble, I hope the current effect is working towards a BTC halving run (although I dislike BTC a lot). The high volume drop to 11 cents and the gradual higher lows since then make me optimistic about a disbelief suckers rally. But hey, even then you can ride the waves like you're doing now.