Ripple xRapid Pilots Show Payments Powered by XRP Could Save $12-$21 Billion a Year

[xrpmeplease]

25 minutes ago, Capone said:

This is not an attractive proposition for banks . That’s why I think the real destiny of XRP is in P2P transactions.

that depends on the bank in question...the adoption plan is to start small and grow...crawl walk run

[n2it]

P2P is the last use case that XRP will target. Ripple is going after the big money in cross border payments, no matter who's doing it: central banks, remittance providers, internal international companies (like Amazon). These players have the most money and geez, who wouldn't go after the big players in that space. P2P is huge, but way distributed, and would take a long time to get onboard.

Ripple (the company) focusing on the few players that worldwide send a boatload of value across international borders is a highly effective strategy for getting their software and digital asset into the corridors that count.

What's cool is that by focusing on remittance providers, who are just below central banks in volume of cross border payments, they put pressure both above, on central banks, and below on B2B, P2P, etc.

I'm long on XRP. Just sayin' ...

[Alluvial]

41 minutes ago, Capone said:

But then if banks and financial institutions have to pass most of their savings from Xrapid to the customers because of competition they may not be as enthusiastic as you and me to adopt the new technology.

The really big banks - like HSBC and Citi - definitely won't adopt it.  Why would they?  They make a fortune on the current payment rails.  It seems that Ripple has realized that it is simply spinning its wheels trying to get them to change.  Now, Ripple literally views the HSBCs and Citis of the world as the enemy - finally.  The revolution will occur through the smaller banks and other FIs which are tired of running payments through the hostage big banks.  Same also applies to some extent to western banks vs eastern banks.  It seems that Ripple's focus should primarily be on the Pacific Rim, India and Gulf states, and worry about the West later.  The East is ready, the West is not.   

[n2it]

5 minutes ago, Alluvial said:

The really big banks - like HSBC and Citi - definitely won't adopt it.  Why would they?  They make a fortune on the current payment rails.  It seems that Ripple has realized that it is simply spinning its wheels trying to get them to change.  Now, Ripple literally views the HSBCs and Citis of the world as the enemy - finally.  The revolution will occur through the smaller banks and other FIs which are tired of running payments through the hostage big banks.  Same also applies to some extent to western banks vs eastern banks.  It seems that Ripple's focus should primarily be on the Pacific Rim, India and Gulf states, and worry about the West later.  The East is ready, the West is not.

They won't be making a fortune for long as new entrants will undercut their profits when xRapid goes live for the slightly smaller players. They might think they're cagey here, but competition will shortly be teaching them a hard lesson in basic economics: adapt or die.

@Alluvial Sorry I just realized I repeated your conclusion with different words. 

Edited July 4, 2018 by n2it
Acknowledge prior insight.

[enrique11]

8 minutes ago, Alluvial said:

The really big banks - like HSBC and Citi - definitely won't adopt it.  Why would they?  They make a fortune on the current payment rails.  It seems that Ripple has realized that it is simply spinning its wheels trying to get them to change.  Now, Ripple literally views the HSBCs and Citis of the world as the enemy - finally.  The revolution will occur through the smaller banks and other FIs which are tired of running payments through the hostage big banks.  Same also applies to some extent to western banks vs eastern banks.  It seems that Ripple's focus should primarily be on the Pacific Rim, India and Gulf states, and worry about the West later.  The East is ready, the West is not.   

That has been my sentiment for years.  The big banks have the power.  The smaller banks and FIs need to motivate them to change or have them suffer the consequences.

Edited July 4, 2018 by enrique11

[TinyRick]

1 hour ago, Capone said:

Banks and any Financial institutions will never voluntarily pass transactions saving to the costumers. 

Perhaps not - at least not in the short term, but they will sure as hell pass the savings on to themselves and increase the living **** out of their profit margins  Either way, it's good for us 'bag' holders.

Edited July 4, 2018 by PickleRick

[enrique11]

On the downside though, as I've argued before many times in the past...having the smaller banks and FIs upstage the well established banks could take many years, and the established ones can do all sort of lobbying, IMO...don't know how effective that would be though in stalling the process.

Edited July 4, 2018 by enrique11

[n2it]

I'm suddenly liking all @enrique11 posts. I swear it's not me on 2 accounts. 

 

[enrique11]

6 minutes ago, n2it said:

I'm suddenly liking all @enrique11 posts. I swear it's not me on 2 accounts. 

 

lol..don't worry...you're drunk...you'll regret your post when you sober up.

Edited July 4, 2018 by enrique11

[enrique11]

The thing is...are big banks too big to fail in the sense that they rely on cross-border payments currently for a substantial percentage of their profit...are they giving up a substantial money making service to people and businesses? If so, they might want to lobby government to keep the status quo, and then the little banks and FIs see a window of opportunity, since they have been largely kept out of cross-border payment market...they can leverage blockchain tech to put pressure on the big boys..maybe they form alliances of small banks and FIs...so, it might wind up a david and Goliath fight, which could take long time to resolve...or not, who knows...likely we'll get more clarity with time.

Edited July 4, 2018 by enrique11

[n2it]

Hmm... I'm wondering if the lost large fees for cross border payments would be recouped by the elimination of nostro/vostro accounts that xRapid would provide.

Edited July 4, 2018 by n2it

[enrique11]

The goverment's got the big banks' back.  Banks told the government, "We are so heavily regulated and have to pay out the nose for compliance, so we'll agree to pay your high fees, but you save our butts in return like with bailouts, etc.  because nobody is as heavily regulated as we are and we've played by your rules all along"...reminds me of New York cabbies and Uber...New York cabbies had heavy cost related to regulations, then in came Uber...

Edited July 4, 2018 by enrique11

[enrique11]

5 minutes ago, n2it said:

Hmm... I'm wondering if the large fees for cross border payments would be recouped by the elimination of nostro/vostro accounts that xRapid would provide.

Big businesses have power..they'll go to crazy lengths to keep their power even if they lose money...corporations actually lobby government to keep compliance costs high (something like 8% of revenue I've read goes toward compliance, out of corporation's budget) to keep competitive upstarts from entering the market.

Edited July 4, 2018 by enrique11

[n2it]

Wondering if they'll have to pay more than 8% of revenue to beat their competitors 70% savings when using xRapid.

[enrique11]

1 hour ago, n2it said:

Wondering if they'll have to pay more than 8% of revenue to beat their competitors 70% savings when using xRapid.

Maybe a pure crypto will put pressure on banks if smaller banks and FIs don't beat them to it. I think the big banks will be forced to adapt or perish in that market..the question is how soon and to what extent if any will the governments be willing to help the big banks, IMO.  What happens if central banks eventually get involved by issuing their own fiat?  I don't know what's going to happen...it's so early.

Edited July 4, 2018 by enrique11