Jump to content

Montoya

Member
  • Content Count

    509
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Montoya

  • Rank
    Advanced

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Who cares? Those who may be considering investing money in the token, for one. I am not complaining about getting free stuff, but while I see a lot of promise in the Flare ecosystem, and would considering investing a substantial sum into it, my concerns regarding this issue are giving me pause.
  2. From what I understand, while the Flare Foundation is non-profit, Flare Networks is a for profit entity. I generally prefer for-profit industries in the interest of efficiency, but given the context of this discussion it would seem to place Flare in the exact same conundrum as XRP regarding the securities issue.
  3. Apparently KIK and SEC came to a settlement which allowed for the ongoing survival of its blockchain and cryptocurrency. From what I gather, the company was ordered to pay a fine, and thereafter, notify the SEC before any sales of the token made by the company. A similar settlement being reached by Ripple and the SEC, would seem to be the best case scenario. It also doesn't seem altogether unlikely. Does anyone know more details of the KIK settlement? As a fairly recent case it could provide insight into the current posture of the SEC and how this whole shit show may play out.
  4. As I understand it, it only applies to regulations passed during the period after the election and before the new admin takes power. I don't see how a specific court case would fall into that category. Would be happy to be wrong though.
  5. I would add another possibility: ---XRP was a security at time of sale, but under certain conditions of settlement will no longer be a security. This would allow the SEC to punish Ripple while somewhat minimizing the damage to XRP holders and still allow future operations of the protocol. It also has some basis in the SEC's own words regarding the potential for a crypto to have once been a security but now be a non-security. Unlikely to happen in my opinion, but probably the only realistic hope for a non-disastrous outcome for XRP holders.
  6. While I would love to blindly take the word of the CEO, I think I have heard that tune before somewhere... I have high hopes for Flare, but I would also like to see more discussion on the topic. If XRP's usage dwindles following a negative court decision, how much use is there likely to be for the Flare protocol? Furthermore, what exactly is Flare Network's profit model? I understand the Flare Foundation is retaining 30 billion and using it for development purposes in a non-profit manner (no problem there), but what of the Flare Network? They will apparently retain ~25 billion FLR? And because
  7. Ethically, I agree with you. But any attempt to push some sort of legal recourse against the SEC is a waste of time IMO. They have a built in legal excuse. They are bound by statute to enforce US securities law. If the court decides that XRP was a security at time of sale, then the SEC had no choice but to do their jobs, and any collateral damage inflicted upon investors lies solely on the hands of Ripple as the guilty party. To do otherwise would set legal precedent in which no actually useful and needed enforcement action could occur in the case of genuine scams or ponzi schemes because it c
  8. I would also prefer to see the XRP currently controlled by Ripple put to a more productive use than a "burn", but I simply cannot see how institutions or companies could be chosen without creating conflicts of interest or the appearance of impropriety. The simple act of Ripple choosing to whom the spoils go, would be demonstrating their continued control over the protocol and its future. Any and all "gifted" XRP appear now to be the proverbial fruit of the poison tree. I suppose if it were the community which decided where and to whom those XRP go, it could avoid such a problem, but it could a
  9. I think even sans Ripple, XRP can still be far more useful as a cross border transfer medium than other crypto options (or non-crypto options such as GPI) due to the speed and the previous relationships Ripple (the company) has forged overseas between institutions and XRP. Furthermore, the software that Ripple has developed still seems unmatched by other offerings. In a situation such as i described above, Ripple's profit model would change from asset ownership to being purely a software supplier for banks and institutions. Is this a likely scenario? probably not. But, as I said, I don't see m
  10. I see very little chance of XRP being deemed a non-security in court while Ripple maintains its massive ownership of XRP. Even if Ripple wins, and XRP is somehow deemed a non-security, the deleterious effects of a drawn out court case will make the business model of Ripple along with consumer speculation in XRP dead on arrival. Therefore, I see some form of settlement as the only manner of salvaging Ripple as a company, and XRP as a speculative investment. The only settlement I can imagine the SEC will accept that allows for the designation of XRP as a non-security will require Ripple to end i
  11. The USD is not pegged though. It has a free floating exchange rate. My point being that XRP needs to have a floating exchange rate to be useful for market making. Otehrwise it cannot expand and contract with demand.
  12. Pegging the price of XRP would make it worthless as a bridge currency. It would create the same distortions as price setting any commodity.
  13. I can see the world definitely wanting to shift away from USD hegemony for various reasons. And I am familiar with the role of SDR. I think it would be greatly beneficial. But, once again, it is not governments who will be providing liquidity in the Ripple model, it is commercial market makers. If we have XRP and USD cryptos competing, I don't see people preferring a less liquid asset as a bridge. Obviously this could all change very quickly, and if that is the argument that most of you are making, then I can understand your point. But, if we assume the dollar maintains its preferential place
  14. Our money is NOT currently digitized though. I think that is one the biggest misconceptions here. What IS digitized in our current system are bank IOUs. You trade your physical dollars (which act as assets) in exchange for an IOU from whatever bank you utilize.
×
×
  • 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.