Jump to content

Sporticus

Member
  • Posts

    167
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

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

Sporticus's Achievements

  1. Wait till Buttcoin gets dumped back down 80% again like it has over and over and then we will see who howls last. Same thing happened to XRP and Ripple got sued. The fat lady is Janet Yellen and she has not done very little singing yet.https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/22/yellen-sounds-warning-about-extremely-inefficient-bitcoin.html
  2. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/dalio-sees-good-probability-bitcoin-gets-outlawed/ar-BB1eUImm?ocid=msedgntp Billionaire investor Ray Dalio, the founder of the $150 billion hedge fund Bridgewater Associates — the world’s largest — made a case that there’s a “good probability” bitcoin could be outlawed, similar to when the U.S. government made it illegal to privately own gold. As Dalio points out in his upcoming book “The Changing World Order,” the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 made it illegal for individuals to own gold “because government leaders didn’t want gold to compete with money and credit as a storehold of wealth.” Something similar could happen with bitcoin, which has surged against a backdrop of high levels of debt, low interest rates, a lot of liquidity and stimulus, and investors seeking alternatives to bonds and currencies. At the time of this writing, bitcoin’s price was near $56,559.98, spiking after Elon Musk tweeted that you can use it to buy Teslas (TSLA). “Every country treasures its monopoly on controlling the supply and demand. They don’t want other monies to be operating or competing, because things can get out of control. So I think that it would be very likely that you will have it under a certain set of circumstances outlawed the way gold was outlawed,” Dalio told Yahoo Finance Editor-in-Chief Andy Serwer in an episode of “Influencers with Andy Serwer,” a weekly interview series with leaders in business, politics, and entertainment.
  3. I am a lawyer and have been seeking guidance from the SEC, but not on a "competitior" in any way, shape, or form. Our incubation is the difference between the miscarried fetus the tween aged homeless, junkie prostitute throws out in the dumpster at 3 AM. By comparison our baby is the pink lace clad infant the stork brings to your door and later graduates number one at both Harvard med and law schools and goes on to defuse nuclear missiles in flight, wins the Super Bowl MVP, and solves the unified field theory problem... XRP is a disaster and I personally lost a small fortune because of the Ripple gang and their garbage tech and racketeering marketing and solicitation scam. My bad--and I tried to learn from my ignorance by becoming better informed. I think the systematic uses of distributed ledger technologies have great promise, just like democracy has great promise. But democracy is likely to work better now that Trump is gone, and DLT will perform better and gain more respect without Ripple and most all the thousands of other schemes to defraud which pass as cryptocurrencies. These securities crime rings should be shut out and the exchnges which offer them should be slammed shut. Some would say that the German SS and the Nazi war machine were a good thing, but the sooner that forces marshaled sufficient to take the war lords down, then the better off the rest of the world became with the bad guys reduction to maggots. The sooner we realize we are on the lawless and losing side, the better the chances survival become and the less damge is wrought. I know this will hurt a lot of your tender feelings, but all cryptos in their present forms are house corrupted gambling, tax evasion, and money laundering. The only exceptions are the ones that have no action letters from the SEC or fit under those letters. The way that is done is to spend a couple million $USD on lawyer fees going through the SEC no action guidamce process. The XRP congregation is a cult but the Ripple koolaid costs dearly. I am wasting my time here.
  4. Zakinov filed a law suit against Ripple for violation of the securities laws and Ripple moved to dismiss but the federal judge refused. The SEC filed a law suit against Ripple for violation of the securities laws. Who here purchases XRP for anything except to see its value to rise? The SEC does not give a damned about Ripple's value. They only look at the law and whether it has been broken. Bitstamp and the US exchanges do not allow Americans to trade XRP. I lost quite a lot at Bitstamp when they announced you could sell XRP but not purchase. Gensler expressed in his lectures at MIT that he thought XRP was a security. The Ripple XRP project is dead in the US as far as I can tell. It never really had a purpose that would cause its value to rise. There are many more better technologies fro value transfer. At eight years old, the project is an eternity in crypto terms. I began trading Btc in 2013 and bought XRP in 2016. Cryptotrading is a lot different now than then. I am different now too. I just do not see the value and the innovation has receded.
  5. Unless your favorite, crypto Ponzi scam has a no action letter from the SEC or comes in under one of the three exisiting no action letters, that crypto project should be assumed to be a security. That is all you need to know. The CFTC and Giancarlo do not determine anything about securities status. Yellen does not like crypto and Genslar does not like crypto. That is all you need to know. The fat lady is about to fart.
  6. I agree and I think the Visa-Circle fee structure is the rub. The idea that you can get something for free inheres in the problem of tech generally and these freebies allow companies like Google and Facebook (or Ripple) to rob us of our informed consent. We never know what Ripple is doing with the money we invest in XRP which Ripple uses to fund its company and platform. The Internet is largely devoid of the social contract. The legal relationships we take for granted in the real world are suddenly gone in the virtual world. But, all the freebies we see in the virtual world are illusory, there is no free lunch. I agree the merchant fees charged by Visa are excessive and there is a likely medium. My team's project seeks to address these problems by decentralizing the organization and allowing participaton and control at the periphery. This is what is sometimnes called "cooperative capitalism". I too am weary of the data colonialists and surveillance capitalism which are exploitative. I do not agree that the Circle and Visa projects are the best way forward, but they are the legal way forward and you know what you are gettign and pay for what you get.. We have had resistance from the SEC on our cooperative approach and we have had to retool our approach and eliminate parts in the short term, but we paln to revisit. Giving autonomy to the participant is not new, but the way the corporatist mind set operates, it is really difficult. That corporate mindset extends especially into the government agencies Ripple too is an expression of the corporatist mindset. Brad and all the rest control veverything and we are just left to sit there and marvel at their genius and all the while they pick our pockets.
  7. If arrogance is explaining what the relevant SEC policy and securities laws allow, then I am guilty of arrogance. If arrogance is trying to find the truth and being objective about the most advanced state of payments, then guilty as charged. This is the technology, legal, and organizational approach which has been SEC vetted for VISA and Circle to use which performs the many tasks that Ripple set out to perform. This explanation documented in this article and by the SEC filing is not haughtiness, conceit, hubris, self-importance, or egotism. These explanations identify the prper way forward in perfecting a technology and legal design that does the job Ripple set out to perform and without ripping off the public. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeldelcastillo/2020/12/02/visa-partners-with-ethereum-digital-dollar-startup-that-raised-271-million/?sh=29398bbb4b1 Credit card giant Visa today announced it is connecting its global payments network of 60 million merchants to the U.S. Dollar Coin (USDC) developed by Circle Internet Financial on the ethereum blockchain. The digital currency is now valued at $2.9 billion. While Visa itself won’t custody the digital currency, effective immediately, the partnership will see Circle working with Visa to help select Visa credit card issuers start integrating the USDC software into their platforms and send and receive USDC payments. Circle itself is also going through the same Fast Track program. In turn, businesses will eventually be able to send international USDC payments to any business supported by Visa, and after those funds are converted to the national currency, spend them anywhere that accepts Visa. After Circle itself graduates from Visa’s Fast Track program, likely sometime next year, Visa will issue a credit card that lets businesses send and receive USDC payments directly from any business using the card. “This will be the first corporate card that will allow businesses to be able to spend a balance of USDC,” says Visa head of crypto Cuy Sheffield. “And so we think that this will significantly increase the utility that USDC can have for Circle’s business clients.” The partnership, in conjunction with an earlier $40 million investment Visa led in a cryptocurrency startup for holding similar assets issued on a blockchain, a recent blockchain patent application for minting traditional currency on a blockchain, and an increasing amount of work directly with central banks, is the latest evidence that the credit card giant sees the technology first popularized by bitcoin as a crucial part of the future of money. https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/imvu-111920-2a1 IMVU, Inc. Response of the Division of Corporation Finance Securities Act of 1933 Section 2(a)(1) Re: IMVU, Inc. Incoming letter dated November 17, 2020 Based on the facts presented, the Division will not recommend enforcement action to the Commission if, in reliance on your opinion as counsel that VCOIN is not a security, IMVU offers and sells VCOIN, which is transferable both on and off of IMVU’s platform, without registration under Section 5 of the Securities Act and does not register VCOIN as a class of equity securities under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act. Capitalized terms have the same meanings as defined in your letter. In reaching this position, we particularly note that: IMVU will not use proceeds from the sale of VCOIN to finance its Upgrade, which has been fully developed and will be fully functional and operational immediately upon its launch and before any VCOIN is sold; VCOIN will be immediately usable for its intended purpose at the time it is sold; IMVU will impose specified limits on VCOIN purchases, conversions, and transfers; VCOIN holders will be subject to KYC/AML checks when they establish Open Wallets and thereafter on an ongoing basis; VCOIN will be made continuously available in unlimited quantities and at a fixed price, and IMVU will always generate enough supply of VCOIN to maintain VCOIN’s fixed price; IMVU will not promote or support listing or trading of VCOIN on any third-party trading platform; IMVU will market and sell VCOIN to Users solely for consumptive use as a means of exchanging value on, and in connection with, the Platform; and IMVU will require Users who purchase VCOIN from IMVU to affirm that, among other things, they are acquiring the VCOIN for consumptive use and not for speculative purposes. This position is based on the representations made to the Division in your letter. Any different facts or conditions might require the Division to reach a different conclusion. Further, this response expresses the Division’s position on enforcement action only and does not express any legal conclusion on the question presented or on the applicability of any other laws, including the Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering and related frameworks. Sincerely, Jonathan A. Ingram Legal Advisor, FinHub Division of Corporation Finance
  8. The project has not been released pending final guidance by the SEC. It is not a "competitor coin", Ripple and XRP are at this point really deficient tech and easily bested, not only from the technical standpoint, but the legal, marketing, and organizational designs. So there is simply no competition from the deficient and criminal Ripple design with what our team is doing. The idea that in the United States you can launch a token without prior SEC vetting is a fools errand, just ask the Ripple fools with the fat bags of our money, which they invariably will have frozen and be required to disgorge.. Unless there is regulatory clarity in advance of a launch, you risk doing what Ripple did by engaging in an unregistered general solicitation of a securities offering. Ripple's focus right now should be on avoiding a DOJ indictment, instead they are attacking the SEC about it attacking all crypto, as if Ripple is all crypto. Telling the bear that it needs to brush its teeth better as it is about to take a bite out of your behind is probably not a wise or productive discussion. Good luck wih your unregistered secutity token.
  9. Yes. The no action process is available to anyone who wants to obtain the position of the SEC about whether or not their asset is a security. Ripple never did this. It should have and to proclaim it is not a security without having obtained the SEC no action letter is probably criminal fraud.
  10. I think that with Ripple out of the picture then XRP is like any other decentralized crypto. Ripple as central controlled enterprise is what makes XRP a security. Otherwise, XRP is decentralized and operates much like Bitcoin, but without the mining costs and very much faster. If Ripple is required to destroy its nest egg, then there is certainty and a chance for scarcity. I think in the US there will need to be anti-money-laundering features put in place. The project I have been working on for the past three years has approached its launch in the exact opposite way that Ripple did. We have approached the securities regulators first and have painstakingly covered every detail with the SEC. We have used all the failures of Bitcoin and Ripple and we built a truly regulated ecosystem. Noone is going to make $400,000,000 off of other people's hopes and it will actually function for the intended use and it is asset backed with the money being deposited in banks, so the banks are an integral part of what the SEC is approving. But I can say without doubt were it not for the Ripple/XRP project, we would have never understood the problem or how to get the SEC to help us fix it. Do not think that a project like One Coin that was cobbled together in 2013 will work in 2021. They knowingly went in the wrong direction contrary to the US laws and they have never gotten the buy in they claimed they would. Pretty much all the exchanges and projects will have to get in line and follow the travel rule, AML, KYC, and the SEC allowed configurations from here on out. I do not seriously think that the Howie Case is going to be overturned just because Garlinghouse and Larsen want to run a Ponnzi scam and call it innovation. I do not think that the Biden administration is going to make much different. With all that said, 90% of trades are outside the US. I took out all of my XRP because I knew it was going to fall hard after the law suit and then there was the Bitstamp announcement. In the ensuing days, we will likely here one bad news after another. Last week it was the law suit, then Bitstamp, now Coinbase. It will keep on happening. The price is likely to go down and hopefully stabilize. The resistance the last couple of years on the flash crashes was 12 or 13. I think we could see it even fall below that for a while. Ripple is pretty much a ruined project right now. I think XRP will survive, but I really do not see much of a future for Ripple. Personally, I have no use for those guys and how poorly they behaved toward those who have trusted them.
  11. but why now in late December is this being filed? Why December 22nd? Apparently, there was nothing left to negotiate and XRP was starting pump again with the flare scam and the nend of year rise, so there would be a new wave of bag holders if the SEC did not stop it. This is the part that doesn't make sense to me. The SEC had several years to stop and freeze these accounts, but instead allowed this to happen for years. If the SEC is meant to protect us, why did the organization and it's leaders not stop this from happening sooner? The position of the SEC has evolved slowly and began to accelerate after the DAO ICO in summer of 2017. Chaitrman Clayton stated a position in Dec 2018. The Turn Key Jet No Action memo was in Apr 2019. They shut down Telegram a few months back. You have stated publicly that you speculated and purchased XRP. You've purchased 1.66 million units at one point in time. You yourself, a lawyer by profession, and knowledgeable on the SEC Securities laws of the United States would have never done so had you thought the XRP purchased on the secondary market were securities, right? Just like everyone else. I was listening to Ripple and the rest of those in this and other social media. I did not start putting on my law hat until I began working on a crypto project in 2017 and then began working directly with the SEC in 2019. I saw first hand how they strict they had become and I said, how is it that Ripple is getting away with this. Then I realized, when BG announced they were thinking of relocating to UK, it was over. What I learned in the law suit is that Ripple had hired lawyers early on to vet their ecosystem and they were warned it was a security. The US Attorneys and FBI have lots of investigation tools using any number of machine and human resources to develop their case. It has been my experience defending against US attorneys that they use the FBI and informants to get their case built. Oftentimes they do not let the party they are investigsating know what they are doing. They just let them keep doing it so they can develop miore evidence. An example easily understood is the drug ring where the FBI and DEA will have informants actually selling drugs and buying drugs and the federal gov't will delay in busting the drug ring leaders so that all the evidence can be obtained. Ripple fooled me and now the bottom is falling out, I am just glad I got olut when I did . I actually held through the peak in Jan 2018. I trusted the guys at Ripple, like everyone else. I had my suspicions but when I voiced them on Twitter, even JK came up and addressed them What changed to make you decide to sell 1.66 million XRP, or are you still holding?
  12. Tesla is a publicly traded company and it is very simple to know wnat it is doing when it produces electric automobiles and markets them to the public. Those matters are all a subject of public disclosure. Ripple produces lots fo questions and the answers they give are suited to make them rich, and their marketing is an unlawful communication based upon the United States laws. Ripple et al can have their day in court and choose to defend before a jury. They are really very lucky that there is not yet an indictment. I have every confidence based upon my knowledge of the relevant law, my practice in the US courts doing RICO law, my practice before the SEC, and having been an XRP trader since 2016, that Ripple and all their executives are in some serious trouble. The fact that all these parties signed to which you reference is simply a measure of how well those at Ripple pulled off their confidence game. They even have you still drinking the Koolaid. Poor pitiful Quan, just admit that you were fooled and go on, there is nothing more to see here. READ IT FOR YOURSELF FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF Violations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act (All Defendants) 394. The Commission realleges and incorporates by reference here the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 393. 395. By virtue of the foregoing, (a) without a registration statement in effect as to that security, Defendants, directly and indirectly, made use of the means and instruments of transportation or communications in interstate commerce or of the mails to sell securities through the use or medium of any prospectus or otherwise, and (b) made use of the means and instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell through the use or medium of a prospectus or otherwise, securities as to which no registration statement had been filed. 396. Ripple violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act by conducting the Offering. Ripple violated these provisions by, among other things, from 2013 through the present, directly and indirectly making use of the means and instruments of transportation or communications in interstate commerce or of the mails to sell 14.6 billion XRP without a registration statement in effect as to XRP, and by making use of the means and instruments of Case 1:20-cv-10832 Document 4 Filed 12/22/20 Page 67 of 71 68 transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell XRP, which were offered and sold as securities, as to which no registration statement had been filed. 397. Larsen violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act by, from 2013 through the present, directly and indirectly making use of the means and instruments of transportation or communications in interstate commerce or of the mails to sell 1.7 billion XRP without a registration statement in effect as to XRP, and by making use of the means and instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell XRP, which were offered and sold as securities, as to which no registration statement had been filed. 398. Garlinghouse violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act by, from 2016 through the present, directly and indirectly making use of the means and instruments of transportation or communications in interstate commerce or of the mails to sell 321 million XRP without a registration statement in effect as to XRP, and by making use of the means and instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell XRP, which were offered and sold as securities, as to which no registration statement had been filed. 399. By reason of the conduct described above, Defendants, directly or indirectly, violated, are violating, and, unless enjoined, will continue to violate Securities Act Sections 5(a) and 5(c) [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a), (c)]. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF Aiding and Abetting Violations of Securities Act Sections 5(a) and 5(c) (Larsen and Garlinghouse) 400. The Commission realleges and incorporates by reference here the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 393. 401. By engaging in the acts and conduct described in this Complaint, Defendants Larsen and Garlinghouse, directly or indirectly, knowingly or recklessly provided substantial assistance to Case 1:20-cv-10832 Document 4 Filed 12/22/20 Page 68 of 71 69 Ripple, who, from 2013 through the present, directly and indirectly have made and are making use of the means and instruments of transportation or communications in interstate commerce or of the mails to sell 14.6 billion XRP without a registration statement in effect as to XRP, and by making use of the means and instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell XRP, which were offered and sold as securities, as to which no registration statement had been filed. 402. Larsen knowingly or recklessly provided substantial assistance to Ripple’s violations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act including by: (i) from 2013 to 2016, deciding when and how much XRP Ripple would sell, establishing the XRP Escrow, making promotional statements with respect to XRP, and spearheading Ripple’s efforts to attempt to increase demand for XRP; and (ii) from 2015 to the present, making his own sales of XRP. 403. Garlinghouse knowingly or recklessly provided substantial assistance to Ripple’s violations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, including by, from 2015 to the present, deciding when and how much XRP Ripple would sell, establishing the XRP Escrow, making promotional statements with respect to XRP, spearheading Ripple’s efforts to attempt to increase demand for XRP, and making his own sales of XRP. 404. By reason of the foregoing, Larsen and Garlinghouse are liable pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77o(b)] for aiding and abetting Ripple’s violations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77e(a), (c)] and, unless enjoined, will again aid and abet violations of these provisions. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that the Court enter a Final Judgment: Case 1:20-cv-10832 Document 4 Filed 12/22/20 Page 69 of 71 70 I. Permanently enjoining Defendants, and each of their respective agents, servants, employees, attorneys and other persons in active concert or participation with any of them, from violating, directly or indirectly, Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77e(a), 77e(c)], including by delivering XRP to any persons or taking any other steps to effect any unregistered offer or sale of XRP; II. Ordering Defendants to disgorge all ill-gotten gains obtained within the statute of limitations, with prejudgment interest thereon, pursuant to Section 21(d)(5) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(5)]; III. Prohibiting Defendants from participating in any offering of digital asset securities pursuant to Section 21(d)(5) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(5)]; IV. Ordering Defendants to pay civil money penalties pursuant to Section 20(d) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(d)]; and V. Granting any other and further relief this Court may deem just and proper for the benefit of investors. Case 1:20-cv-10832 Document 4 Filed 12/22/20 Page 70 of 71 71 JURY DEMAND The Commission demands a trial by jury. Dated: New York, New York December 22, 2020 ________________________________ Richard R. Best Preethi Krishnamurthy Jorge G. Tenreiro Dugan Bliss Attorneys for Plaintiff SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION New York Regional Office Brookfield Place 200 Vesey Street, Suite 400 New York, New York 10281-1022 (212) 336-9145 (Tenreiro)
  13. They either signed it or the SEC filing would have occurred immediately. Quit making excses for these confidence aritists. They have done enough damage already and to continue to support their bad actions merely gives people hope and keeps them drinking the Koolaid, as the saying goes. Ripple is a fraudulent scheme and we have been scammed, The sooner we admit that, the sooner we can go on.
  14. My opinion is XRP becomes like a decentralized BTC without any additional tokens once Ripple and its ring are blocked and locked. Without those con men dumping into the market, there is immediate scarcity and once the insiders are all shut down and the trove is locked up and destroyed, we are likely to see an organic rise comparable to LTC or Eth... XRP has a securities aspect because of Ripple. Take away the centrality and control, efforts of a third party, and all the other Howie and Turnkey Jet problems and XRP is one of the best payment tokens and rails. Ripple is the liablity. BTW this is not Ripple Chat, it is XRP chat. Ripple has always been the problem. Without Ripple and the gang dumping, there is scarcity is not a security. If Ripple is out of the picture, there are no more of its lies and manipulations to deal with.. I think HODOR shut down right around the time that the first securiies lawsuit was filed. I have quoted relevant law and underlined the portion germane to communicating and promoting an offering for an unregistered security. I think 37 USC section 320 Communications Decency Act) likely protects this platform. However, content provisders like HODOR, are not likely protected. I think XRP is actually more viable without all the hype and lies. Bitcoin is what it is. XRP s will be what it is without Ripple and its propaganda machine. 15 U.S. Code § 77fff - Securities not registered under Securities Act U.S. Code Notes prev | next (a)Prohibitions affecting unregistered securities not issued under indentureIn the case of any security which is not registered under the Securities Act of 1933 [15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.] and to which this subsection is applicable notwithstanding the provisions of section 77ddd of this title, unless such security has been or is to be issued under an indenture and an application for qualification is effective as to such indenture, it shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly—(1) to make use of any means or instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to sell such security through the use or medium of any prospectus or otherwise; or (2) to carry or cause to be carried through the mails or in interstate commerce, by any means or instruments of transportation, any such security for the purpose of sale or for delivery after sale. (b)Prohibitions affecting unregistered securities issued under indentureIn the case of any security which is not registered under the Securities Act of 1933 [15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.], but which has been or is to be issued under an indenture as to which an application for qualification is effective, it shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly—(1) to make use of any means or instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to carry or transmit any prospectus relating to any such security, unless such prospectus, to the extent the Commission may prescribe by rules and regulations as necessary and appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors, includes or is accompanied by a written statement that contains the information specified in subsection (c) of section 77eee of this title; or (2) to carry or to cause to be carried through the mails or in interstate commerce any such security for the purpose of sale or for delivery after sale, unless, to the extent the Commission may prescribe by rules and regulations as necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors, accompanied or preceded by a written statement that contains the information specified in subsection (c) of section 77eee of this title. (c)Necessity of issuance under indenture; application for qualification It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to make use of any means or instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell through the use or medium of any prospectus or otherwise any security which is not registered under the Securities Act of 1933 [15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.] and to which this subsection is applicable notwithstanding the provisions of section 77ddd of this title, unless such security has been or is to be issued under an indenture and an application for qualification has been filed as to such indenture, or while the application is the subject of a refusal order or stop order or (prior to qualification) any public proceeding or examination under section 77ggg(c) of this title.
  15. If Ripple is not in the picture, then XRP is like any other crypto, but without a lot of insiders dumping onto the market every time there is a rise. ODL might have promise, but at this point the hype about it is mostly broken promises. Mined coins require effort to create and they cost money to enter into the market, as well, there is a timing sequence which depends upon blocks' completion. You wonder why Ripple always bleeds back down to the twenties, while other top coins have robust rises since 2017? Well, maybe it has something to do with a cheap, relatively limitless aupply of tokens, Jeb, J Katz, Larsen, SBI, Garlinghouse and the other Ripple execs, multiple charitable donees and insiders forever dumping into the buys, continually exerting downward pressure for years on end. Ripple and its ragtag XRP Army of corporadoes have played everyone and have continued to tout Ripple's ability to create an XRP ecosystem using clever devices like ODL, when the evidence with SBI and Money Gram is otherwise. The way to approach crossborder payments is not with a security coin like XRP, which is networked back and sure to have problems of slippage and volatility. The best approach is a stable coin which is asset backed with funds in reputable banks and with KYC, AML, and the Travel Rule being observed. This is how the public is protected and there would be know class action law suit for those burned by Ripple's offerings and promotionals of an unreigistered investment security. I have held relatively lots of XRP since 2016 (1.6 MM at the peak of my holdings). In consequence of that I have learned a little about XRP and Ripple based on the dimininution in value I have experienced relative to toher tokens. I held on to XRP believing Ripple and the posts on this social media site. In the spring of 2018, I ceased believing Ripple and many of those on this site. I also have the benefit of working on a project as a lawyer seeking no action position with state securities departments and the SEC Fin HUB since early 2019. . Given the fact that Ripple has employed vast and talented legal resources, Ripple and its principals have knowingly violated the securities laws of the United States and they have profited massively by risking the public trust in their investment that they claimed was not a security, so as to encpourage more people to but their investment offering. I think they should lock up XRP and I trust that justice prevails for those who have violated the United States securities and finance laws and for those who have been harmed by those violations. Happy Holidays!
×
×
  • 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.