Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Pablo

    XRPL Genesis

    Wasn't aware of AB's holdings of XLM. Surprised this doesn't come up more often with the Jed FUD that makes the rounds every week. If it's true he's selling XLM as fast as Jed sells XRP, that is a brilliant strategy to counter Jed's attempts to undermine Ripple.
  2. Pablo

    XRPL Genesis

    Wow! Very cool. Poor Arthur Britto. I’ve never seen more than a few thousand XRP to his name. Chris on the other hand...
  3. Tone doesn’t get these ideas himself. For a long time, he and Jimmy Song whipped each other into ecstasy over ****-coins and XRP. I’m guessing Jimmy is the driver on Tone’s crazy train. That said, it would be a brave man/woman to trade against Tone, who is pretty level headed about the state of the crypto market. I just laugh at the anti-XRP crap he pumps out. It’s been going on for years.
  4. Brave. I don’t know a single person here who can pick the market like that over a stretch. May you continue to make profits for the rest of this year. I will be first to applaud you!
  5. @Kal316 Nicely said. I agree with you on all your points. I should have clarified that we only ever competed with IBM on managed services and ITO deals and in that space they had sound strategy and were brutal, competitive beasts. I had the impression that some of their fringe projects and hardware plays are almost window dressing to their main game (e.g offloading laptops to Lenovo was a smart move). At one stage they were offering their entire office software suite for free because (I’m assuming here) it gave them the pull-through on infrastructure and managed services. That’s certainly what we would have done (sneaky ********). Maybe Stellar, AI etc are in that category or do you think it is even more fringe than that? Some of the IBM announcements about Stellar were from wacky-land. But the idea itself was worth investigating. Do you think the IBM services division would develop “package offerings” in the blockchain and AI space once the smoke settles and if so, what shape would that take? They (and we) almost need to. I ask because what you can expand on here is an important guidepost for what Ripple has to do next.
  6. Pablo

    Hey there

    Hi @jmanoneand welcome to XRPChat! Looking forward to hearing more from you in the coming months and years. If you've been hodling since 2017, you've got the right temperament for this crazy market.
  7. I can see they have been looking at this for a while. From my perspective, channel partners are important because their sales teams are incentivised to convert PoCs into production platforms and can drive rapid outcomes in ways a bank’s in-house team would never do (due to the politics, natural intransigence and the lack of incentive structures). IT folk working inside a bank or FI have little personal financial incentive to move from a PoC to production. A channel partner and their staff has $$$ and career resting on it. And we don’t muck around. Savings aren’t enough to drive adoption - that’s the pitch but does a CISO or CTO get anything for it? Keeping their job? They can do that with or without Ripple. It’s not enough of an incentive. An account manager on the other hand has sales targets, bonuses and commissions hanging off a full xRapid implementation. It’s a simple sale as the pitch for xRapid and Coil is massively compelling. Account managers are annoying little ***** too. Constantly on the phone, constantly nagging their clients and their own teams to close deals and projects and move their sales up the value stack. Faster and faster. A supplier such as Ripple can’t afford to annoy clients and isn’t built for that. It’s a culture shift to drive these massive sales juggernauts. Everything comes down to 2 things: (1) the sale and (2) delivery of solutions. That’s it. One almost never sees teams from Fireeye, VMWare, Genesys, Verint, Redhat, Microsoft, Cisco or SAP commenting on twitter. That’s where I’d expect to see Ripple next. Not seeing them. We’ll know Ripple has made it when we almost never hear about them anymore. I think Brad gets that very well hence the winding back of announcements. And while I hate it as much as anyone, we might need to accept the rampant Twitter rage from maximalists and influencers for some time to come. But it’s irrelevant and so are they. Let’s face it, they don’t have much hope. The “store of value” pivot is like a badly formed comb-over these days. As for the Lightning Network, it’s nothing more than spray-on hair. As a further example of Ripple’s DNA, I thought it was interesting that Ripple hired a new General Counsel from the banking sector with a regulatory and litigation background. I would have expected a GC from a sales oriented organisation (OK, call me jealous). That strikes me as interesting because it fits the narrative that Ripple isn’t really set up to sell stuff and could do with some sales muscle. All said, a strategic shift is coming in this space. It has to.
  8. The Quadriga story has plenty of twists and turns and is far from over. Plenty of further info on the “alternative” Reddit page set up to investigate this: https://www.reddit.com/r/QuadrigaCX2
  9. Spam and FUD and not Press and low value post and... locked.
  10. TLDR? There are lots of announcements about banking/FI partnerships but very few about channel partners for Ripple. Is that where they head next? Having read through the Jed/IBM thread started me thinking about where Ripple goes next in its business cycle. Ok, blame the quiet market action for me getting a bit distracted. The comment that triggered these thoughts is the following from @King34Maine: Having competed with IBM over the last 20 years (reasonably successfully I should add!), I don't recall them making too many bad calls when it comes to strategy so the Stellar colaby seems initially strange. IBM are a solid brand, hugely competitive and have a stronghold on the banking sector that goes back to mainframe and tape days and never really let up. They have serious political and lobbying muscle as well. My point is not to suggest a pairing with IBM but what channel partners Ripple will need to be a successful software and DLT vendor. Channels is where it's at. Back to IBM: IBM's big money is in areas that don't get much attention - it sure as hell isn't PCs or FMCG. They'll be there once DLT solutions become mainstream and they'll be making serious bucks along the way with zero press. They'll be re-packaging or reselling third party solutions as will the other systems integrators, outsourcers and the like that I've worked with over the years. Unlike most of the lightweights in the cryptomarket, companies like IBM back their solutions with contractual guarantees, SLAs and indemnities and don't have any knotty problems with regulators. If you're a large bank, that risk allocation on tech solutions is essential and something that crypto and DLT companies can't offer. Just to give one example of how critical this issue is, the question of risk allocation for tech solutions can take anything from 6-18 months to negotiate and resolve (depending on the size of the deal) and requires massive amounts of pre-sales effort. Banks invest a LOT of time and money to get this right and this is the case even for banking systems that aren't system critical (c.f. trading desk, retail banking systems, online banking that come with much more exposure for the bank and even fiercer debates about risk allocation). For those systems transferring billions of dollars such as Ripple's DLT, I'd expect the bank would expect the supplier to put even more skin in the game. The thing that struck me today is that Ripple does direct sales which restricts how much risk they can absorb. And the direct sale model spreads the sales effort very thin. Dilip Rao and Brad are amazing, flying here, there and everywhere but we need 1000 of them. Channel partners give you access to that sales juggernaut. Which brings me to the key point. Part of me wonders about whether the strategic next steps for Ripple will be to focus less on actual banking clients and more on identifying IT channel partners who have scale and assets (to provide the type of "got you by the balls" assurance ol' school bankies love), engineering muscle and political clout in the banking space. So not R3 or Temenos but perhaps an organisation such as NTT? Not Amazon or Tencent or Alibaba but perhaps a HP, CSC or Accenture? There aren't many announcements about this type of thing (i.e. channel partners) so I'm curious if anyone has seen anything in that space that I've missed? Anyone think channel partners aren't critical at this point, or at all?
  11. @justmoon a few thoughts on the Terms of Service that I worked on today - most of these will be more relevant in common law countries and the EU. At some stage, you may want to consider jurisdiction-specific annexures if your client base is spread across those locations. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1780IrPxhiQPDrxr2HtaOypyEXUgzTPYa As I mentioned in my opening comments on the doc, the agreement is typically one-sided (meaning not unusual for public-facing IT contracts) which is something I usually advise against. Those one-sided contracts have a habit of backfiring and can often provide less protection than what the language would otherwise suggest. That said, I'm responding as a potential user and your legal advisers will advise what's best for Coil (even if it looks a bit "belts and braces"). The Privacy Policy is nicely detailed and points to a problem that very few people understand: there is so much data already collected on web citizens that sites can legitimately provide access to a lot of personal information, particularly from "weak" privacy jurisdictions to "strong" ones (the EU is still the gold standard in that regard, the US not so much). I still feel really uncomfortable about the Policy but it's akin to the discomfort I have about 90% of online privacy terms. I think the pendulum will swing back to citizens once a tech solution is identified that grants citizens greater control over the use of their personal information. While the GDPR placed the brakes on those organisations who flagrantly abused the trust of their users, what it doesn't do is stop "legitimate use" of personally identifiable information - an aircraft carrier sized loophole that I'm sure will be tested by "creative" data collectors and receive plenty of judicial consideration. Finally, I'm strongly of the view that any organisation with pretences to global operations should implement the highest standard when it comes to Privacy and Anti-Corruption, even when that's not always easy to achieve. There's still a way to go but I can only applaud Coil's response to the legitimate questions posed by @Liagala.
  12. Trolly’s article is so ludicrous and laughably written, the only criticism I have is that it should have been posted in the humour or /x/ sub, not press. We applaud all efforts to seek balance on the forum. When anyone finds an intelligent, considered article written by someone who knows what they are talking about please do let us know.
  13. There is absolutely no reason why a gaming/betting platform couldn’t be built on Codius and I suspect gaming will be a major use-case for a whole range of smart contract platforms, particularly those platforms where one can readily on and off-ramp and trade your winnings/prizes. XRP is way out ahead of a lot of other gaming-specific coins in that regard. Those that had liquidity and tried without the underlying tech being able to support adoption (such as ETH) failed miserably. Those that have the tech but no liquidity eg CSC) can pull it off but not without partnerships, marketing and capital. And who knows, perhaps one day Ripple will start buying up these small-fry and roll the software onto an XRP-focused platform.
  14. Pablo

    Toast wallet

    Topics merged.
  15. The suggestion is interesting but there is one catch with that idea - the original VCs and shareholders. Ripple would effectively be breaking up their investment (which comprises key personnel, intellectual property, revenue from software sales and the escrowed funds). That was something Linux never had to worry about.