Jump to content

Mpolnet

Member
  • Content Count

    212
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mpolnet

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    XRP, Crypto Assets, DLT, Finance & Real Estate
  • Location
    United States
  • Occupation
    Analyst
  1. Full report is linked below if anyone wants to dive into it: https://research.bloomberg.com/pub/res/d37g1yWebn9LbRbS09rquSuSoDQ I haven't had time to fully dive in and digest the report but from a brief skim through it looked like they were applying MV = PQ as the primary methodology for valuing a crypto asset. This is the same methodology used in the valuation models I've posted in xrpchat with the link to the shared google doc. Based on their concluding value per unit of XPR they must have assumed a high velocity for XRP, which is fair, but at the end of the day is just an assumption around velocity. The only reason bitcoin's derived value is so high (applying the MV = PQ methodology) is because they use it as a store of value use case, which inherently has a velocity of zero. While this methodology may be fair to use, it is heavily (emphasis on heavily) based on the input assumptions used to derive output values. And predicting velocity is just that, a prediction. I wouldn't necessarily call it FUD, instead I would question their assumptions surrounding velocity, monetary base (i.e. number of units of XRP in circulation at any given point in time), and the size of the total addressable market that they used (and if they used multiple or one). Additionally, the total addressable market size used today most likely isn't factoring other potential use cases that could arise in the future. Lastly, I didn't see them apply the other commonly used valuation methodology, which is metcalfe's law (the value of a network is the number of users in the network, squared, times a coefficient). Would have been nice for them to apply both methodologies and then present valuations based on both, rather than just one thereby, allowing the reader to apply what they think is appropriate and attempt to remove bias from the report. Would have also been great for them to give specifics about their assumptions rather than just throwing out valuations. For example, if I run a DCF analysis on a company and say that sales will grow at 25% (which may be totally false) this will drive the outputs to be false, since my going-in inputs are false. The MV = PQ approach can be referred to as "Garbage in, Garbage out" meaning that if the input assumptions are garbage (not accurate) then the output results will be garbage (not accurate). The methodology hinges on having the correct inputs to derive the correct outputs, which is much easier said than done. Hope this helps everyone and please add if I missed anything.
  2. Mpolnet

    AMA w/ David Schwartz today @3pm PST

    Hi @peebo38, thank you for posting to xrpchat - I hope it's not too late to still pose questions to @JoelKatz. Is there any chance we could get additional insight into how Fincen's ruling of regulating the Ripple entity that sells XRP as a money service business affects the potential classification of XRP as money and not a security? From my understanding, Fincen is under the same government umbrella as the SEC, CFTC, and IRS and therefore, if one governing body such as the CFTC classifies something as a commodity then the SEC cannot reverse that ruling and classify that same thing as a security. Similarly, if Fincen says something is money the SEC cannot say that it is a security and the CFTC cannot claim it to be a commodity. Since the Ripple entity that sells XRP was ruled to be a money service business thereby classifying the sale of XRP as a money service business, wouldn't this mean that the sale of XRP is classified as a transmission/conversion of money by Fincen, thereby classifying XRP as money? Therefore, the SEC cannot overrule this and classify it as a security. I understand there's a lot going on that the public may not know about and Ripple, the company, may not be able to disclose publicly but any insight that could be provided into this would be greatly appreciated!
  3. Mpolnet

    Coinbase considering everything but XRP

    Coinbase tweet is still there however, I believe XRP Trumps comment on the tweet, which was shared by @Rutski has been deleted. Not sure if he deleted it or if it was someone else... Edit: Tweet was: This is just so ridiculous. How in the world can you justify adding XLM but won't add XRP which is what it's a cheap knock-off of? Both use a form of distributed agreement protocol, just that Stellar Development foundation has EVEN MORE lumens than Ripple has XRP and NO ESCROW!! pic.twitter.com/ya7eDSWUkI — Dr. T (@XRPTrump) July 13, 2018
  4. Mpolnet

    Coinbase considering everything but XRP

    Great comment that highlights some major catalysts for the XRP ecosystem coming this year. @JoelKatz did discuss Ripple's internal theory that currently market makers are being pressured by speculators (which forces them to buy and sell at times they necessarily wouldn't want to) but that their belief was if you introduce market takers, who are willing to pay whatever the price is at that moment in time, then it would increase spreads (i.e. profits for market makers) and result in a healthier and more price stable XRP. From my understanding, the market takers would be companies like Caulix, who source XRP on-demand on an as needed basis thereby the price at the time of sourcing XRP is irrelevant to them but beneficial to the market makers as they are facilitating real demand vs speculative price movements. However, I think it would further help the overall ecosystem if XRP was listed on an exchange like Coinbase mainly for liquidity purpose in my opinion. The more liquid XRP is the more value can be transferred through the asset, which seems to be the main hurdle for XRP + xRapid adoption by traditional FI's and banks and not just remittance companies. If SBI is able to integrate XRP into it's Forex business then getting listed on an exchange like Coinbase would become less relevant in my view. A caveat to that would be the existing brand of Coinbase being trusted by institutional investors and thus acting as an on ramp for those said investors. Hopefully, my logic here isn't flawed - let me know what you guys think!
  5. Mpolnet

    Coinbase considering everything but XRP

    Quote from the article: Q: Does this mean Coinbase has deemed these assets to not be securities under a particular country’s laws? No. That legal analysis is ongoing and will vary by jurisdiction. As we only plan to launch assets which are compliant with local law, some assets may only be available in specific jurisdictions. I own a majority of the assets they stated that they are considering listing so I'm not trying to be biased here. But given the Q&A above, I don't see the logic for not potentially listing XRP but potentially listing these other assets. Not sure what I'm missing.
  6. Thanks for sharing this - very interesting read. It's funny that Multicoin has been short XRP, which has successfully closed 40M+ transactions on it's public open source ledger but they're long EOS, which can't seem to figure out it's governance model, has yet to go fully live, and in theory is more centralized than the XRP ledger (especially as time goes on and more validators are added to the network). Maybe it's just me but I can't seem to follow the Multicoin investment thesis of long EOS but short XRP. I guess we'll see how it plays out but I personally have more confidence in David Schwartz and Stefan Thomas + the rest of the Ripple team than I do in David Larimer. Edit: Ripple (the company) is already regulated by Fincen as a money service business. They were fined by Fincen a couple years back for not being registered, which was then resolved. Please correct me if I'm wrong here (since I also would like a better understanding) but I believe Fincen, the SEC, IRS, and CFTC all fall under one umbrella of the US Government - even though they have jurisdiction over different realms. Because of this the SEC can't come in and say something is a security after the CFTC has already classified something a commodity. Again please correct me if I'm wrong, but for this reason, Ripple (the company), which sells XRP (the open public source digital asset) is currently regulated by Fincen as a money service business meaning that sales of XRP to whomever are regulated by Fincen as transmission of money therefore, classifying XRP as money.
  7. Great, thanks for the clarity! Very excited for developments on this front and the future applications it could create
  8. I'm not technically savy either so I apologize for what might be a silly question. How will one be able to tell when the Codius hosts start processing/operating/validating at full capacity rather than being in testing/debugging phase?
  9. Mpolnet

    This from Western Union CEO

    Please provide a link to the screenshot source. Thanks
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. Mpolnet

    IBM's Jesse Lund

  14. 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.
×