Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mpolnet

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    XRP, Crypto Assets, DLT, Finance & Real Estate
  • Location
    United States
  • Occupation
  1. XRP is my largest holding % wise, also holding KIN, FunFair Technologies (FUN), Civic (CVC), Icon (ICX), Aragon Network Token (ANT), and 0x Protocl (0x).
  2. Good things come to those who wait
  3. New Liquidity in the Next Few Months

    Wow I didn't know about the tax aspect! I think that's extremely beneficial to new users and will definitely simply the process (hopefully leading to more retail investments into the space). Here's what I was able to find: https://support.robinhood.com/hc/en-us/articles/360000088663-Crypto-Transfers-Deposits I guess for the time being you can neither transfer to or from Robinhood but they are working on changing that. So I guess that means that it will have a direct impact on price since they will actually have to deliver the funds being bought by their customers to the customers wallets. Great news!
  4. New Liquidity in the Next Few Months

    Great news! I've heard that trading on Robin Hood doesn't allow you to transfer the crypto asset you trade so it was compared to trading an IOU. Does anyone know how this will affect price? Or if at some point they would just go out into the open market and buy the asset, then transfer to the buyer, and allow them to transfer?
  5. Thompson Reuters Financial Services Sale!

    I actually have been a holder of Blackstone (NYSE: BX) in my traditional portfolio for quite some time now (prior to even learning about Ripple and XRP). The Real Estate market is extremely inefficient in terms of data/information transparency relative to the traditional stock market where companies are required to report every single detail. In Real Estate there are orders of magnitudes more private/closed door deals that occur where all of the information does not typically get disclosed. Additionally, each state and municipality within those states have their own specific requirements and laws governing different types of real estate assets. I think that information transparency is one big area where blockchain could be used to increase the efficiency of the industry. I was wondering where you read or saw that Blackstone had properties that were put "on ledger"? This would be pretty big news in my opinion as they are considered the largest landlord in America. Thanks in advance! I really hope Blackstone partners with Ripple at some point in the future
  6. In my first post I forgot to mention that we should also try to go after FileCoins use case . Can't believe I forgot that one!
  7. Okay - everyone is entitled to their own opinion, no one can take that away from you. BUT 1) You speak about the Ripple team as "AMATEURS" but what background/experience do you have to claim to not be an amateur yourself? Pretty much all of us are amateurs compared to the Ripple team 2) When quoting price predictions please provide a source of reference - I have never heard David Schwartz say the limit of the price of XRP would be $2. In addition to this, you are basically taking the approach that Ripple never wanted to continue to grow the XRP ecosystem. That would be comparable to saying that Amazon never wanted to do anything but sell books, obviously the approach and thesis of a company can change as they grow and obtain more resources. 3) If you don't own Ripple or have no interest in it's future growth then this may be the wrong forum. If you're a Bitcoin maximalist then I believe the Bitcoin forums might be more suitable - but that's just my opinion. 4) If you are trying to convince ALL of us on here that XRP will die then I wish you luck my friend. We have too many people who have dedicated too much of their own precious time towards educating the people in this forum, with extreme due diligence (providing endless sources) and helping us to form our own opinions - we are the many you are the few. 5) We will be smiling to the bank in the medium to long term when Ripple's plans for XRP come to fruition. As I've stated before, there's a reason Ripple executives are part of U.S. government regulatory bodies - these guys are not "AMATEURS", personally that's a team that I want championing my investment (but as I've said before, everyone is entitled to their own opinion) 6) If you're not an investor in Ripple that's fine, it's your money and you can do what you want. But if you are an investor in Ripple then I don't see the point of your comments. I would never wish upon anyone to loss all of their money so good luck and god speed with your investment decisions, I know where I stand with mine and it's been working out just fine
  8. I think Ripple is in a good position regardless. I really have no clue what will happen in court but to your earlier point, if Ripple is forced to pay R3, then I think it's reasonable to assume that R3 would have to deliver on the clientele to Ripple. Plus, as Ripple grows its customer base, which it has been doing (getting Central Banks onboard) that's a huge piece that they can leverage. Those businesses may even impose some pressure on their partners to begin switching over to the RippleNet. The network effects will be huge and I think if they get access to the R3's clients (who may even have overlap with Ripple's clients) then the effects will be greater than we may be assuming. All in all it's a good time to be an investor in Ripple and their team is beyond prepared to handle any outcome, in my personal opinion.
  9. Yes, Ripple is centralized since it is a company however, the protocol is decentralized. There is a clear distinction between the two - one is a technology that runs on nodes in a network and one is a company. This argument can be applied to Ethereum and the Ethereum Foundation or Ethereum Enterprise Alliance. I would even go as far as arguing that Bitcoin is centralized since only the core developers can submit code repositories/code changes so there is a form of centralization there and that doesn't even get into mining. The decentralization is in regards to how Ripple's technology is distributed across nodes, across the network making it decentralized (i.e. any node can run the network without permission from Ripple the centralized entity). Edit: A technology/protocol can be decentralized thus allowing for no central point of failure.
  10. I'm not 100% sure but I would think that if Ripple is forced by a judge to make good on their end of the agreement then this should hold true for R3. The initial agreement wasn't a one way street where Ripple just owed R3 5B XRP for no apparent reason so I think your point makes valid sense! And if that's the case then bring on the synergies and let's get XRP into the use case of being a settlement layer for securities settlement. Edit: Very observative point by you @brettmgs - this part honestly slipped my mind and it seems like it would be a net plus for Ripple.
  11. I know some members might be skeptical of Kin but I think their principles align with those of Ripple's in terms of trying to make the world a better and more open place. Tencent is actually a big investor in Kin/Kik and I would love to see Kin move away from Stellar and onto RippleNet. I think there could be an argument made for synergies between the two networks/use cases. People earning Kin, which is meant to be value in the digital world and then when they want to leave the digital world and convert that digital value to something they can spend in the real world, they simply have their Kin settle into XRP, which is naturally linked to all the fiat's of the world. This is just my opinion though. Obviously, just because one company (Tencent) is invested in two different assets it doesn't mean that the two assets/companies that Tencent is invested in will or need to work together. More likely Tencent is diversifying their investments.
  12. Wow this would be friggin YUGE if it's true! Thanks for sharing - hope it's confirmed by other sources.
  13. Jeez let's take a more extreme perspective here. To the point of @lucky there are contractual obligations in place that would restrict a mass one time sale (or even a mass couple of sales) of the allotted 5 billion XRP by R3. The sheer professionalism and forward thinking approach by the Ripple team is unmatched not only by other cyrpto teams but also by publicly traded corporations that have been around for decades. There's a reason that Ripple executives are on the Fed's faster payment initiative and the newly created U.S. crypto task force - these guys think of worst case scenarios but strive to achieve the best case outcomes. As history has shown with Jed's contract and (I'm pretty positive with statements made in the past in reference to the escrow agreement sales) there will be selling restrictions to prevent market manipulation. I mean jeez, if Ripple wanted to tank the price of XRP they would've just sold their entire holding of XRP themselves - they don't need R3 or Jed to do that lol. This team has proven itself time and time again. Furthermore to the point of escrow and R3 - they foresaw the probability of having to make promise on their prior agreement with R3, which is why they only locked away 55B XRP rather than the 60B that they hold. 60B - 5B = 55B, hmmm talk about being forward thinking. Additionally, from my understating, R3 and Corda require the network participants to be on one ledger whereas ILP allows interoperability between different ledgers. Thus, Corda is more of a walled garden type of network (i.e. private blockchain) but can be connected to other ledgers through ILP. Supposedly, they have successfully allowed for securities to be settled between different banking participants on the Corda network, which doesn't use a native digital asset. Now imagine worst case scenario: Ripple loses the lawsuit to R3 and they have to make good on the 5B XRP promise. Now R3 has the ability to offer real time settlement, without the need of Nostro/Vostro accounts, for securities settlement between their banking participants. Something they couldn't do prior to receiving the XRP because they don't have their own native asset. Talk about some synergies SYNERGIES coming out of that settlement and rise in the price of XRP (which makes R3's balance sheet rise in value ). I wouldn't be surprised if Ripple was always planning on settling but just wanted more favorable terms, I mean after all, just because this is a new asset class doesn't mean this isn't business.
  14. While I agree that 1) a higher price per unit of XRP will make it easier to move more money because a) you need less XRP per transaction and b ) from my understanding you are paying less in fees per transaction (even though the fee is marginal). And 2) a higher price will result in less volatility since volatility is measured as a % change in price and as the price gets higher it becomes harder to buy and sell in mass quantities thus moving the market. However, no where did the I see the mention of velocity of money, which has been covered on the forum before. Velocity of money is a critical component in regards to this discussion. Here is a link where the author explains it fairly well: https://medium.com/@cburniske/cryptoasset-valuations-ac83479ffca7 What does velocity of money mean? Let's explain through an example: If we have one, $1 and that dollar is exchanged between two people 100 times, in a given year (i.e. velocity = 100x for that time period) then ($1 x 1) x 100 = $100 worth of economic activity created. Now, lets say that same $1 has only been exchanged between those two people 5 times, in a given year (i.e. velocity = 5x for that time period) then ($1 x 1) x 5 = $5. So, in the case of the second example where we have a velocity of 5x, if we want to create that same $100 worth of economic activity then one of two things must occur. 1) the $1 must rise in value to become $20 so that ($20 x 1) x 5 = $100. Or 2) we must increase the supply of the $1 so that we have twenty, $1's so that ($1 x 20) x 5 = $100. Hope this makes sense - please keep velocity of money in mind when considering price as it plays a critical role!
  15. I’m not too familiar with CSC but FUN is a platform which is licensed to casinos on which they can then build their own games on. This business model was designed to enable casinos to build better, provably fair games. From my understanding of the casino industry as a whole, it is currently up to the casino operators discretion if they want to require KYC/AML requirements (I could be wrong on this). However, if the casino does require it then I’m pretty sure FUN is compatible with that requirement. Additionally, I do believe that the technology offered to the casino operators by FUN allows regulators to quickly audit what is going on behind the scenes. Again, not entirely sure with CSC so i’m not sure what differentiates it or how the two could work together. But FUN itself is not a casino - it’s a technology platform that’s licensed to the casinos.