Jump to content

Dikwhit

Member
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dikwhit

  • Rank
    Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Could perhaps someone explain the differences between a) A Ripple Customer b) A Ripple Partner c) A member of Ripple Net and whether a member of Ripple Net is also both a partner and a customer. I become more confused by the day. Ripple partner Finablr announces today a partnership with Alipay - a hugely significant announcement in the global remittance world - does that mean that through Finablr that Ripple is partnered with Alipay? Alipay and Ripple are both partners of GCash in the Philippines. Perhaps some member of the Ripple management could help me understand and get a much better feel for the global spread of the use of Ripple technology. Thank You
  2. Seagate also are a significant shareholder of Ripple Labs.
  3. I was wondering as to whether anybody in the community can answer the following question. " Does any bank or financial institution which installs the Temenos T24 software then automatically become part of RippleNet by default and become part of the 100+ financial institutions adopting Ripple technology?"
  4. Hodor - have just watched a video on Jasper-Ubin and the relationship with the Central Banks of Canada , England and Singapore and the use of Corda and R3 on cross border payments. How does the recent SBI led reconciliation between Ripple and R3 fit in with this initiative. We may be early to the party but should we view this as a long term threat. Can we expect close collaboration between the R3 consortium and Ripple. Any help in reducing my confusion perhaps in a future blog ?
  5. I think that you have to look at this issue from the banks perspective. The banks own, control and direct Swift. The banks see the writing on the wall - in that DLT and RTGS are the way forward. They (the banks) need an interim solution to remain competitive whilst they transition. Their legacy infrastructure ( both IT and staffing ) are way off current day requirements. They need time and above all courage to change. This hybrid interim Swift/Ripple collaboration is their only chance of long term viability in the payments/settlements arena.
  6. MUFG who have "underwritten" this paper are a member of the Ripple GlobaL Payments Steering Group. Need we say more. HODL.HODL.
  7. SBI Holdings are listed on the Frankfurt Stock exchange under the ZOF.F stock symbol.
  8. Having spent more years than I care to remember as a Director of major global corporations and already having a knowledge of the Ripple offering I would have walked out of the presentation. They very obviously do not have in house the capability and technical ability to create a product - so they have to sub contract and all of the issues surrounding that fact - not least of which is the increased cost. If there are any Swift employees or advocates of Swift or members of the banking community who support the Swift organisation - I say to you what is being presented is "Mickey Mouse" and I would be ashamed to be associated with it. Banks who continue to rely on Swift for cross border global payments will very quickly be losing customers and missing the opportunity to solve liquidity issues related to nostro accounts in addition to real time transfers. It will be the banks customers who will walk to the Ripple technology users if the banks do not accept the reality surrounding "the marginal at best" SWIFT product. I think I will go out and buy some more XRP if this is the major competition to Ripple.
  9. Am relatively new to the Ripple scene but am a firm believer in the long term value of both Ripple Labs and XRP. I continue to read all the FUD about the competition be it IBM, Visa etc. and the bleak outlook arising from the "bigboys" entry in to the market. It is my belief that the strategy of Ripple Labs to make their product open source was both brilliant and visionary providing the had the technical ability to continue to adapt their product. Combining this open source strategy with the drive for inter ledger operability effectively thwarts the opposition's ability to compete and forces them to either be open source themselves or use Ripple's software on their current network. SWIFT could continue as a viable entity if they would only accept to use the Ripple software and be part of the global network. Is the Visa blockchain product for cross border payments going to be open source? I doubt it very much. Providing the Ripple software provides comparable speed and at least top line security I find it hard to believe that the "customer" would opt to use Visa than the world wide standard for cross border payments underpinned by Ripple technology and hopefully "liquified" by XRP. I would love to hear responses from the hero members and in particular Hodor on my analysis. Looking at the Blockchain company BitFury ( which I believe will very quickly be a major player in the blockchain space they also have made their platform Open Source and I personally view their payment product Lightning Network more of a long term threat because it is Open Source. The offices of BitFury in San Francisco are on the same street as Ripple Labs. Perhaps an "Open Source" collaboration could have huge customer benefits on a global basis. Dikwhit
  10. The "tentacles" that Ripple Labs has in to the financial and regulatory compliance world cannot do anything but add to the stability and future importance of XRP.
  11. It is interesting in this article to see the reference to HSBC Holdings possibly jumping on the bandwagon. I wonder if the author of this article knows that Chris Larsen is on the Global Technology Advisory Board of HSBC. Watch this space.
  12. I wonder how many people know that Everis is a subsidiary company of NTTDATA - which in itself is a subsidiary of Nippon Telecom. Don't really understand what the implications of this are but cannot see it being harmful to Ripple at all. All fits in with Hyperledger?
  13. In order to remain competitive against for example American Express wouldn't they have to adjust their charges from current "Swift" levels. KYC becomes fundamental to the banks if they are to survive in their current format. Remittances are already in certain corridors significantly cheaper. The banks need to be competitive just to retain some portion of existing revenues. If they had any sense and stop delaying the inevitability in the hope that SWIFT can catch up they would quickly adopt Ripple open source technology and avoid their huge cost burden of holding nostro accounts. It is close to crunch time and the march of FinTech will not go away. They can no longer hide behind regulation.
×
×
  • Create New...