Jump to content

Bettergoham

Member
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. The Faster Payments Task Force asked for comments on whether or not the Federal Reserve should develop an RTGS system and also if it should develop a liquidity management tool either themselves or with help from the private sector. If you read through the comments made, most large banks seem to agree that the The Clearing House's RTP system is the future domestically and that the Federal Reserve should not intervene at this point because it would only hinder adoption of this RTGS system that has been in the works for several years. Domestically, it appears that the RTP system will continue to gain traction and that it should be widely adopted in the U.S. by 2020.
  2. Bettergoham

    Accenture, Spoke & Hub, Global Takeover

    I completely agree, my biased mind says if this was to their knowledge in 2016 imagine what that means nearly 3 years later. Alas, it could be that their is less positivity but who really knows.
  3. I was going down the rabbit hole again and stumbled across this link at Accenture: https://www.accenture.com/t20181030T101039Z__w__/us-en/_acnmedia/PDF-23/Accenture-Banking-Real-time-Cross-Border-Payments.pdf#zoom=50 On page 6 they discuss a software provider called D&H which "provide standard Ripple integration to their payment engines platform", this is a new one we haven't heard of I believe. You also can't find anything on their website about Ripple, NDA? Page 7 is a ******* bamboozle of exciting **** that only partners could really have confidence saying: "Ripple has proven technology. It is already in operation with banks like Santander and Fidor and is being implemented by others. Governments and central banks are interested and supportive of the technology, and among commercial banks there is a strong desire and appetite to road test the technology with real live transactions. Numerous banks have run internal proof of concepts including the real transfer of money. Thirty have completed pilots and are actively progressing plans to extend into live operation, including a group of several banks who are forming an alliance to build a cross-border payments network together. These banks are drawn from the top 50 banks globally, broadly configured to enable wide geographic reach, with one bank per geography, each with access to local domestic clearing systems. "The Ripple enterprise solution is mature enough to launch and scale a cross-border payments network, and a consortium of banks is forming to use this Ripple technology to keep ahead of the competition." <- In my opinion this consortium are the 12 that met on the eve of Swell to discuss governance. This is happening now, Ripple has partnered with hubs all over the world and the spokes will be dragged along due to the beauty of network effects. PSP/Banking Software providers have been partnered with Ripple for years and are fully integrated into the network. When the network has enough "value" a simple choice will be made by send payments via correspondent banking or send them via Ripplenet. These plans have been in place for 5 years, testing is over I believe we are right around the corner from a massive "switch" being flipped. If Ripple has captured the hub in 40 countries as they state they have access to the majority of all banks in each country and those banks have the option to tap ripplenet. Edit: D&H was known, hidden, but known. The more interesting part is the statements made by Accenture.
  4. Many of my comments have been about how I think PSP's or bank software providers are the way Ripple can exponentially grow the network they are attempting to build. This hypothesis leads me to check out various PSP's and software providers frequently for any new information they may put out in relation to Ripple. ACI Worldwide posted this video back in September and I think is ties in pretty directly to where the world is headed: https://www.aciworldwide.com/insights/videos/2018/september/cross-border-real-time-payments-the-next-opportunity-for-banks This video makes it very clear to me that banks are quickly realizing that Swift can't go it alone anymore. ISO20022 + Blockchain (Ripple) are probably the way to the future, a defined interoperable messaging system and a settlement system will allow real time cross boarder payments. I don't think banks themselves can move quickly enough to update old payment rails and I don't think Ripple really wants to go through the trouble of plugging in each individual bank. Ripple needed to "get the ball rolling" and prove that some entities saw the benefits of their network and increase its value so they partnered "directly" with their first 100-200 partners. I believe we are getting very close to the point where one day banks will turn to their PSP/Banking Software and find an option to send a payment that settles in minutes at an extremely cheap cost. These benefits will increase over the next several years as National RTGS systems go live with Open API's and PSP's can directly plug into the entire domestic network. These RTGS' will be connected through the ILP and XRP will transfer/settle value across them all.
  5. One of the largest "savings" that will be gained at majority usage is opportunity cost. Most people are still looking at this revolution as how much cost can be cut dollar for dollar, which is huge in and of itself. The bigger picture is those nostro/vostro accounts. Lets assume these banks can earn 1.25% on this dormant cash and lets assume there is 10 trillion locked up at any given moment, that $125 billion generated as dormant cash. Now let's say we can completely eliminate the need for these accounts, banks can now use these excess cash in a useful manner such as making loans, now they can make 2 more percent and the businesses that take these loans can purchase assets and earn 5-6 more percent on that (modify these numbers as you will). If this can be achieved it will create a ripple effect (no pun intended), global gdp can increase, demand for more capital, and everyone makes money up the value chain all because of ripplenet and the little token that could, XRP.
  6. https://www.federalreserve.gov/SECRS/2018/December/20181214/OP-1625/OP-1625_121218_133017_455297386737_1.pdf Amazon submitted a comment to the Federal Reserve regarding the Payments Task force, while obviously there are no direct links to Ripple I did find some comments interesting. "The development of an improved U.S. payments infrastructure, including real-time payments service options, is critical to supporting business operations, as well as enabling innovative digital payments..." "Real-time payments and funds availability for businesses and consumer are important to ensuring U.S. global competitiveness in financial services" "We also strongly encourage the Federal Reserve to develop tools, such as technology-flexible application programming interfaces (APIs), for enabling secure and affordable access to RTGS services to ensure multiple stakeholders - including financial technology companies..." "The Federal Reserve can serve an important role in developing interoperability and accessibility tools, such service directories and application programming interfaces (APIs), through which various stakeholders can gain secure and efficient access to RTGS services." The whole read is pretty damn interesting and uses some very similar buzz words that we have all heard in this space. Mentions of ECB and Australia's Central Banks are also made. EDIT: Dilip Rao made comment on 12/13/18 https://www.federalreserve.gov/SECRS/2018/December/20181217/OP-1625/OP-1625_121318_133062_342361754812_1.pdf
  7. Bettergoham

    Ripple currently has 150 signed institutions.

    That wasn't really the point of the post so much as the idea that adding banks one by one doesn't make much sense when talking about an Internet of Value. Even if they can sign on 50 banks a week starting today it would take the next five years, why go through that when they can talk to a few big players and open up channels directly to ripplenet through existing relationships? This is a rough example but imagine if everyone had to find a way to tap into the internet themselves. That would be pretty sucky, that is why we contact a few big companies to come and hook us all up to the internet, they already have the connections and can branch out rapidly. Of course this is all a theory but I think Ripple could understand that if they want to capture all of these banks and set up channels quickly they could just license software to some big players Temenos, TAS Group, Earthport, ACI Worldwide, R3 Corda, Volante, and others to have those channels exist immediately. Then their customers simply pay a small fee per transaction to use this fantastic payment option that settles immediately and frees up trapped liquidity. Edit: More tinfoil hat - I think Ripple did partner with specific banks or payment providers directly early on, this was to build some baseline of connectivity on the network and bring direct value. It also plays into their "spoke and hub" networking model. Basically by have a relationship with a bank in a country, ripplenet allows them to have relationships with many banks in that country.
  8. Bettergoham

    Ripple currently has 150 signed institutions.

    Does 200 bank and payment providers really equate to mass adoption? If Ripple can manage at some point to steal 10 customers a week away from Swift it will only take 19.23 years to have them all. Does that make any sense? Why would Ripple want to provide software to 10,000 members and continue to sign up over an arduous 20 years? This is where the Temenos, TAS Group, Voltere, R3 Corda come into the picture I believe. If those 4 software providers build Ripplenet into their backend systems then sure we only have 200 partners but several thousand banks all have access to Ripplenet which is the end goal. If Ripple is truly only talking about banks and payment providers then the road ahead, just for payment solutions, could be years away. I have to believe Ripple understood they could bypass that whole mess by working with the software providers to banks.
  9. I have thought about the Ripple business model and their strategy to capture the world's cross border payment system. The idea that they want to sign 2-3 banks a week until they have captured potentially all cross border transactions seems like a long and painful process. I believe Ripple realized they could simply capture payment provider such as Temenos, TAS Group, Volante, Corda, SAP (ERP system), and others we may not know about. Every bank who uses one of these software platforms has an open channel to Ripplenet increasing it's value should they decide to use it and I mean why not? Ripple could worry about licensing fees or they could gift the ILP to the world, license to a few payment providers, own 45 billionish XRP and sell it over the course of a few years when this thing finally moons and ride off into the sunset.
  10. Thanks to fluxor's comment I dug a little deeper, I find it interesting that TCH uses Volante and Volpay Hub as their software. I know it becomes rampant speculations but I truly can't help but wonder if Ripple said screw 1 to 1 partnerships with individual banks, get the platforms instead. Volante, Temenos, TAS Group, and now R3 Corda. Every single bank that implements that software has the ability to tap into Ripplenet. They don't have to, but it is sitting there waiting to be used. What happens if R3's customers start to tap into ripplenet and dramatically lower payment costs? Well Temenos', Volante, and Tas Group's customer will need to do the same simply to keep up. Have ripple potentially tapped into the majority of banks by integrating with their software providers?
  11. I clicked through pretty much every single one, nothing exilerating stuck out. The one's that do mention Ripple/XRP and pretty much "PLEASE USE RIPPLE/XRP BECAUSE IT IS THE GREATEST EVER AND I AM HEAVILY INVESTED, WHEN MOON?!"
  12. For those who are unfamiliar with the FPTF, they started in 2015 and set out with the goal to improve payments domestically and cross borders. Software providers submitted proposals (over 300) and these were finally whittled down to 19 of which 3 dropped out and 16 remained. Ripple is one of the final 16 and Ryan Zagone sits on the board of the FPTF. Recently, in October, the Federal Reserve Board "seeks public comment on potential actions to facilitate real-time interbank settlement of faster payments" that should be submitted by December 14th. Does anyone with knowledge of governmental interworkings find it odd that the FPTF was established 3 years ago, took the time to higher McKinley as a consultant to review all applications over the course of 2 years, whittled down to 16 applicants and is now asking for public opinion on a matter that they have already done the research on? You can follow the link below to see the comments that have been made available due to the Freedom of Information Act. After reading through a few of these comments I am not sure how much value they add to a topic that has been in the thinktank for over 3 years. One interesting comment was made by NACHA, you can view it on the 5th page of comments. https://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/foia/ViewComments.aspx?doc_id=OP-1625&amp;doc_ver=1 Edit: In NACHA's comment they discuss how the FPTF's requirements to qualify essentially "pick a winner" and "only allow for one solution".
×