Expert’ states XRP [XRP] is a security, Ripple adopted a “wrong regulatory approach”

[Still1]

https://ambcrypto.com/expert-states-xrp-security-says-ripple-adopted-wrong-regulatory-approach/

I'm looking forward to listening to the chat room's take in these comments.

 

This is reflected in investor sentiment, as seen when billionaire Steve Cohen invested in cryptocurrency through the hedge fund Autonomous Partners, he did not do so in XRP. On this, Arianna Simpson, Managing Director at the fund, stated:

“I have a lot of concerns about the level of centralisation there, and I have regulatory concerns if what they have issued is a security.”

While many experts have offered their opinions on the matter, the latest to do is Anatoly Castella, the CEO of Elpis Investments. Castella said that the XRP token belongs to a category he calls ”digital fiat”, stating that XRP falls short of the “purest interpretation of cryptocurrency”.

He elaborated:

“Ripple [sic] resembles a fintech platform combining the best elements of fiat money and blockchain cryptocurrency. It should be considered ‘Digital Fiat’, not a cryptocurrency.”

Castella stated that these digital fiats exist in a state of regulatory ‘limbo’, as there is no sustainable ecosystem. He said:

“This will ensure that ‘real’ cryptocurrencies like bitcoin will not be damaged and misunderstood by these start-ups adopting the wrong regulatory approach from the outset.”

It is interesting to note that Ripple, the company, has adopted an open stance to regulation since its genesis. This is evidenced by the multiple statements made by Ripple staff, one such comment was from Asheesh Birla, he stated:

“Maintaining local accounts is a huge pain point for financial institutions…If you want to work with those financial institutions, you have to provide a product that can comply with local regulation and compliance information.”

Castella made a prediction for the price of XRP if it is declared a security, stating:

“If the SEC categorises Ripple [sic] as a security, we will experience in the short term a big dip in its market value. In the long term it will simply become a digital asset owned by institutional investors.”

 

 

[Kpuff]

Such a trash article. People try everything in their power to influence the general public. Good ole market manipulation. You know what they say if you got haters you must be doing something right ?

[GiddyUp]

Read this, I think it will make you feel better...

https://agriculture.house.gov/uploadedfiles/07.18.18_ness_testimony.pdf

"Proposed Regulatory Framework for Utility Tokens To remedy the uncertainty and confusion in this space, we are part of a group of academics, venture capital firms and law firms practicing in this area that has proposed the following regulatory framework to serve as the basis for a more detailed non-exclusive safe harbor that would help provide guidance to the industry on what constitutes an “investment contract” and how the investment contract law and guidance should apply to utility tokens with respect to primary sales, resales and use of the tokens for their intended purposes. Similar to the steps the SEC took by putting in place Regulation D, a non-exclusive safe harbor to address the uncertainty caused by SEC v. Ralston Purina in the private placement arena, we believe the proposed framework outlined below could be codified in a no-action letter or series of no-action letters that could ultimately lead to a rulemaking around a safe harbor that will assist in relieving the regulatory uncertainty around utility tokens. The goals of the proposed framework are to (i) establish clarity for the industry, (ii) permit use of tokens for their intended purposes (i.e., on their software platform) and (iii) establish appropriate investor protections for both primary sales and resales of tokens, with emphasis on eliminating trading manipulation."

 

 

Edited July 19, 2018 by GiddyUp
quote

[WrathofKahneman]

Ripple hired an expert named Mary Jo White who disagrees.  She is the former chair of the SEC.

Pick your expert I guess.

https://www.coindesk.com/former-sec-chair-represents-ripple-xrp-lawsuit/

 

 

Edited July 19, 2018 by WrathofKahneman
link provided

[0083041]

If ripple wasn't a threat to these people they wouldn't go out of their way to bash it. This unnatural hatred stems from fear.

 

I was going to leave my stash at 6k XRPs but I think i'm going to have to add more. I'll stop at 10k!

[Guest]

Before the price goes up we will see more and more statements like this. I usually like to watch what they do rather than listen to what they say. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, 0083041 said:

If ripple wasn't a threat to these people they wouldn't go out of their way to bash it. This unnatural hatred stems from fear.

 

I was going to leave my stash at 6k XRPs but I think i'm going to have to add more. I'll stop at 10k!

I think it stems less from their fear and more from their intentions they aren't sharing with the rest of us

[NightJanitor]

"Bitcoin - which the regulators have declared not to be a security - actually lacks technical security.  We think the regulators are confused, but we're taking advantage of their confusion and hoping that nobody figures out that all it would take is DoE to turn on a couple of supercomputers to take 51% hashing power and totally capture PoW models, kinda like China can do, at present, and like Russia almost did, when they had to arrest a few poor nuclear scientists, at one of their weapons facilities, who had hooked up a Top500 machine to the internet to mine bitcoin to try to make a buck or two."

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/02/russian-nuclear-weapons-engineers-caught-­­­­minting-blockchange-with-supercomputer/

I love bitcoin "experts" with opinions who don't know anything about science.

Edited July 19, 2018 by NightJanitor

[PG1]

In the crypto world it's easy to find an 'expert' to support just about any viewpoint.  I will agree that XRP (not digital fiat) is in a state of regulatory limbo in the US.  It could be this way for some time.  I don't think it will be deemed a security as XRPL is becoming more decentralized but Ripple needs to demonstrate more 'live' utility within their use-case/product.  A major bank using XRP announcement would definitely help.

[0083041]

17 minutes ago, FixnUrPowerline said:

I think it stems less from their fear and more from their intentions they aren't sharing with the rest of us

I can bet you he's into stellar for what he might consider an easier pump. 

[enrique11]

59 minutes ago, Still1 said:

https://ambcrypto.com/expert-states-xrp-security-says-ripple-adopted-wrong-regulatory-approach/

I'm looking forward to listening to the chat room's take in these comments.

 

This is reflected in investor sentiment, as seen when billionaire Steve Cohen invested in cryptocurrency through the hedge fund Autonomous Partners, he did not do so in XRP. On this, Arianna Simpson, Managing Director at the fund, stated:

“I have a lot of concerns about the level of centralisation there, and I have regulatory concerns if what they have issued is a security.”

While many experts have offered their opinions on the matter, the latest to do is Anatoly Castella, the CEO of Elpis Investments. Castella said that the XRP token belongs to a category he calls ”digital fiat”, stating that XRP falls short of the “purest interpretation of cryptocurrency”.

He elaborated:

“Ripple [sic] resembles a fintech platform combining the best elements of fiat money and blockchain cryptocurrency. It should be considered ‘Digital Fiat’, not a cryptocurrency.”

Castella stated that these digital fiats exist in a state of regulatory ‘limbo’, as there is no sustainable ecosystem. He said:

“This will ensure that ‘real’ cryptocurrencies like bitcoin will not be damaged and misunderstood by these start-ups adopting the wrong regulatory approach from the outset.”

It is interesting to note that Ripple, the company, has adopted an open stance to regulation since its genesis. This is evidenced by the multiple statements made by Ripple staff, one such comment was from Asheesh Birla, he stated:

“Maintaining local accounts is a huge pain point for financial institutions…If you want to work with those financial institutions, you have to provide a product that can comply with local regulation and compliance information.”

Castella made a prediction for the price of XRP if it is declared a security, stating:

“If the SEC categorises Ripple [sic] as a security, we will experience in the short term a big dip in its market value. In the long term it will simply become a digital asset owned by institutional investors.”

 

 

The institutional investors wouldn't mind this at all since they are accredited investors whether they be individuals acting on their own behalf, as hedge funds managers, or actual corporations, etc.

The  SEC said they weren't going to do any "violence" to the traditional  notion of a security (@4:40: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFr1ooaVPjY ).

So, what is the traditional notion of a security?

And if no violence is done, that means IMO that something can be declared a security even if it isn't a traditional security.  Look at the Howey Test.

Real estate investors had a stipulation in the contract that allowed  'Howey Co." to have access to their land for business purposes. This type of security did not give these real estate investors any traditional rights to the company, like stock in a company does, so IMO the same can happen to cryptos that qualify as securities...a significant number might wind up as odd-ball securities, depending on how heavy-handed the SEC decides to be with those cryptos that qualify in their eyes as non-evolvable securites.

 

 

 

Edited July 19, 2018 by enrique11

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, Still1 said:

“If the SEC categorises Ripple [sic] as a security, we will experience in the short term a big dip in its market value. In the long term it will simply become a digital asset owned by institutional investors.”

i'm happy with that, as long as it doesnt impact the actual public liquidity/trading side, which would kill it dead as a bridge currency

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, PG1 said:

In the crypto world it's easy to find an 'expert' to support just about any viewpoint.  I will agree that XRP (not digital fiat) is in a state of regulatory limbo in the US.  It could be this way for some time.  I don't think it will be deemed a security as XRPL is becoming more decentralized but Ripple needs to demonstrate more 'live' utility within their use-case/product.  A major bank using XRP announcement would definitely help.

I think this is probably why we haven't heard any statements by the SEC about XRP specifically. With the type of relationship Ripple has with regulators I can see them being given a little leeway in terms of time before the SEC would make a declaration. Perhaps to allow them to get all of their xRapid ducks in a row and demonstrate actual "live" utility and further decentralization. 

[Danny]

39 minutes ago, 0083041 said:

If ripple wasn't a threat to these people they wouldn't go out of their way to bash it. This unnatural hatred stems from fear.

 

I was going to leave my stash at 6k XRPs but I think i'm going to have to add more. I'll stop at 10k!

[xrphilosophy]

Be careful about quoting "managing partners" at hedge funds as "experts" -ambcrypto and other outlets.  Fund managers will lean towards advocacy of XRP as a security because they wish to sell it to their clients.  They stand to make a lot of money off this expert advocacy.  The only opinion that matters are the voices of the SEC.   I'm still not sure how this turns out, or even what impact it may have.  Lots of folks think it will be the end of XRP, and I am leaning now that it definitely won't.  Nonetheless after ALL that has been said by the regulatory bodies thus far it would seem a huge stretch for the SEC or anyone of note to seriously consider the crypto space securities "just cause".  It would be tied up in courts for a decade if that happened, and we would moon in the meantime...?