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. Mpolnet

    This from Western Union CEO

    Please provide a link to the screenshot source. Thanks
  2. Winning this lawsuit would set a major precedent going forward. If Ripple wins, which I don't see why they wouldn't, it could settle the current uncertainty that XRP is a not a security as has been concluded in a court of law. This could open up the flood gates for institutional US investors since this is a US case and it's ruling could be pointed to going forward when determining which crypto assets are securities. It could also result in more US exchanges listing XRP due to clarification that it is not a security and thus the exchange does not have to register with regulatory bodies when listing XRP. What's more interesting is the tax implication if it's deemed to be a currency or a commodity. Assuming they win the case and based on current currency and commodity taxation I believe this could be favorable to investors. Hopefully it gets resolved sooner rather than later and we see an influx of institutional capital buying up XRP.
  3. Not sure if this was already posted - apologies if it was. I thought this was a great interview with the Omni CEO. He covers Omni, the Ripple investment, and his long term view on Ripple.
  4. Hodor thanks for the post and for continuing to champion #XRPthestandard. When watching the Bangkok Fintech Fair, YouTube video that you linked in the article, I noticed that in addition to mentioning that Ripple was working with 40 to 50 banks the comment was made that Bank of Thailand was a customer/they were working with them. Hopefully, it wasn't just me hearing this. If this is in fact what was said, would it be fair to say that we now know of 3 official central banks that Ripple is working with? I would think that this is a fair assumption given how careful Ripple is with not violating NDA (non disclosure agreement) terms with partners/customers - but that's my opinion so curious to hear what others think.
  5. Mpolnet

    IBM's Jesse Lund

  6. I think you're correct for the most part that it'll focus on the financials but they could talk about recent company developments. Also, if their bottom line has improved due to the use of xCurrent and xRapid then that could be a driver of discussing Ripple's tech and how beneficial it has been. But that is just speculation on my part - it'll be interesting to see what's discussed.
  7. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SB_9CCcuu9N70Xr-9Uqi16oN-X9DwPna Please reference the model with the latest date. Points 1-3 are addressed in the supply schedule. Feel free to check the formulas and if you have any input it'd be greatly appreciated. Each individual market works off the main supply schedule, in doing so it basically individually values each market as it's own standalone (by not reducing the total supply based across all addressable markets transactions but just the one in question). All of these standalone utility values are then summed to come up with an aggregate utility value. You can add a speculative premium to each individual market if you deem it appropriate. I say that velocity is the turnover of money in order to come up with the total amount transacted, which comes from the P*Q side. Transactions are an exchange of goods and services for a unit of account - M, the monetary base. The same unit of account can be exchanged multiple times in a given period since it retains value in this theory. P being a price of a basket of goods and Q being the quantity of the goods gives us the amount transacted. Obviously, the model deals with assumptions so it's "garbage in, garbage out". No one is saying this is a perfect method, more of an exercise to see what levers could affect price through this framework. I am working to figure out how to apply Metcalfe's Law as a valuation framework - I think it's more applicable since it values network effects/
  8. Mpolnet

    David "JoelKatz" Schwartz

    This is an incredible find - thanks a ton! Love getting firsthand insight from one of the main cryptographers behind Ripple's tech. Just another justification to keep hodling and what's even better is that it reaffirms that XRP is contrarian crypto investment. Not due to mismanagement or lack of use case, but rather due to a sheer lack of understanding or willingness to educate oneself in the market right now. Trusting the opinion of these fudster is like listening to an explanation of how the mac computer works from some guy on the street vs listening to Steve Wozniack, the guy who built the thing. Trying to see the logic there
  9. From my understanding, the Ripple team has multiple executives working with government officials on regulation itself and on educating those individuals and governmental departments. So maybe it's a plus that the SEC has remained quiet on Ripple. XRP has clearly not been marketed as a security. You don't have to use it but you can use it to reduce operational costs - from this standpoint it acts as a digital tool rather than a digital security. They have never said buy XRP because the price will go up - they have been very very careful about that.
  10. It has never been marketed with the promise of delivering future returns and XRP hasn't been sold with the promise that one day they will build a network where you can use XRP and because of that price will rise. These factors would 100% make it a security but they have avoided doing so. In fact the team has steered clear of explicitly saying anything to manipulate the price. This is one of the big things I noticed from the team - prior to any talks of regulation they were approaching this like the traditional equities market and making sure they couldn't be implicated with price manipulation. I wouldn't be surprised if they help push through regulation that gets XRP qualified as a utility token or commodity type of asset. B/c you don't need to use it but you can use as it a tool if you want to solve various operational problems. Edit: Overall big picture though I agree that regulation is the biggest hurdle for many players right now. I feel like a lot of big institutional players have cash on the sidelines waiting for the green light from regulatory bodies.
  11. Would be nice to get listed on Gemini but I think there may be a slight misalignment of interest given that the Winkelvoss twins are heavily invested in Bitcoin. I don't claim to know what they think but they could view XRP as a competitor to their direct invest in Bitcoin and the Bitcoin ecosystem. However, I would assume they would be making more money off of fees by listing additional assets. CB touts itself as trying to help the ecosystem and for digital assets like bitcoin being good for the general public and solving all of these problems for everyone, yet only releases new products to institutional investors. They're a bit hypocritical from my standpoint but I would also think that they would benefit from increased fee revenue if they were to list more assets.
  12. Not going to lie, while this is extremely annoying and not the best thing for the ecosystem as a whole (meaning a proven non credible individual advertising their project to the mass public - i.e. what behavioral economist would call "Noise") this does present a good opportunity for those who dig in and do their own due diligence. It allows us to separate the irrational noise from the rational investment decision and ultimately when the market realizes what is noise vs what is fact - I strongly believe prices will adjust to accurately reflect projects and XRP hodlers will be rewarded for the effort and time they have put in.
  13. I love this double sided perspective! Thank you for sharing with us Just want to make sure I'm following - but you're saying that on one hand, due to the fees associated with a micropayment, they end up reducing the amount of payments made (since the fee takes up a larger % of the total transaction value vs with a larger payement)? So while the total dollar amount of the fee with decrease with XRP (relative to what it is today) we could still carry that logic through of the fee as a % of the total transaction thus, sending more money equals a lower % fee? Ideally, we wont have to deal with bank clearing so that should eliminate (or reduce) the carry cost of transactions. On the other hand you're saying that if XRP allows for cheaper and quicker, smaller sized transactions, that this would lead to an exponential growth in the amount of micropayments made due to it becoming cheaper, easier, and quicker? From this perspective, more individuals would engage in the activity of micropayments thereby causing velocity to increase exponentially, relative to the velocity of large payments (since you would also need to have the capital required to make those large multi million or billion dollar transactions vs today where more people have $5 or less, making it a more accessible use case for the masses and driving velocity). Is this the correct way to think about your comment? Edit: I'm personally all for a lower velocity since that will increase price. I just try to be as spectacle as possible and would rather come up with undervalued projections rather than overvalued - and a higher velocity was helping the conservative case. Always happy to lower it and bump up the price projections should there be a strong case arguing for it
  14. I don't think you're account was hacked - I think he may just be quoting your quote of my comment on the previous page lol