Jump to content

Hikmet Ersek( ceo Western Union) talk about ripple 07/11/2018


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

"Today we don't see the customer use cases yet." He's more like a mafia guy, protecting his neighborhood. Ripple shall not waste their time trying to convince "him" but focus on people and e

Starts @ 20.36  

WU will be blockbuster in 5 years. Obsolete. Why? Because smaller startups will create apps for sending money using software that Ripple provides and everyone will be sending money cross border for fr

No doubt that this system which they designed 40 years ago, when cryptography did not even exist, and in which extenive capital has been invested, “works pretty well”. And no surprise they try to not give away their competitive advantage of having this system in full production today, easily. But the time is coming fast that this competitive advantage is gone, when they have to compete with systems that are designed from the ground up, with new technology, on a platform where multiple participants can draw from a shared pool of liquidity, instead of a private pool.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@lucky i agree with you but what is your take on WU's scepticism towards Ripple/XRP? Do you think WU shareholders and top management are that dumb to not see Ripple/XRP's potential? Do you think they are just over relaxed and rest on their solid market share oars? Is it at all possible for the company of such a caliber to actually behave like this (negligence)? 

In other words - me and you and dozens of folks on XRP chat realizes Ripple/XRP's potential and WU tops do not? 

Doesn't it look wierd?   

Link to post
Share on other sites

@WillGetThere  Not only is it hard to accept that the software for which you paid millions years ago, is now only worth a fraction because it is outdated.  As long as you don’t trash that software, it is still listed for it’s full value in your books. This may also play a role here. Once they put their own software overboard and replace with xRapid, the value of their propietary system (goodwill) is removed from their books, making the company less valuable on paper.

Plus, if they route their private liquidity through the public network, their competitors will be able to take advantage of it. In case of market leader, it may strategically be more wise to not pioneer with DLT, but stall the transformation to this new technology for as long as possible. This will buy them time.

WU’s business depends on high friction low value payments. That business model is under huge threat, but will take some time still. Meanwhile, the message to shareholders is that they’re still ahead in the game, because they’ve invented cryptocurrency 40 years ago. I don’t believe that is true, but the message is not directed to me but to their shareholders.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

     At around 18:00 when asked about the un-banked and cryptocurrency Mr. Ersek becomes uncomfortable. Closing of the jacket an then crossing his arms (defensive behavior), before going to what Western Union does and and how many countries they operate in.

     Western Union can't help the Un-Banked. Cryptocurrencies can. By eliminating the need for two accounts each country can support local exchanges vs. an international giant. That is a point that western union can not defend against.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone understand why Amazon partnered with Western Union to "collect monies" as he reports? We saw this news a week or so ago, and it's a headscratcher.  Amazon is not exactly a regressive company.  What benefits do they see in WU which they don't in DLT? 

There was speculation that Amazon/WU is using Ripple technology, but that has yet to be confirmed or denied by any credible source.  Anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, xrphilosophy said:

Does anyone understand why Amazon partnered with Western Union to "collect monies" as he reports? We saw this news a week or so ago, and it's a headscratcher.  Amazon is not exactly a regressive company.  What benefits do they see in WU which they don't in DLT? 

There was speculation that Amazon/WU is using Ripple technology, but that has yet to be confirmed or denied by any credible source.  Anyone?

WU can provide what XRP can not: input and output of real fiat bills and coins through an immense global network of physical offices.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is anyone surprised? Do you think a company that sends money globally wants to lower their transaction costs? That's how they make their money. 

Personally, I think WU messed up because they could've have crushed any and all competition by saving tons of money to send fiat anywhere. Just because they're lowering the cost to send money on their end, doesn't mean they have to lower their fees down to what their cost of sending is for the customer. I mean really, it's just a matter of time... WU is not some groundbreaking innovation that can't be copied. All it takes is someone with a lot of money to start a company like WU using Ripple's tech (i.e money gram), and WU will either have to find a cheaper solution than Ripple, or get Thanos'd. The only real advantage they have is that they're pretty much known throughout the world, but that won't last if they don't innovate and keep up with the competition. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. The way I read his remarks were in the context of what they do now, and how he seems to think it works for them and they don't see an urgent need to change the way they operate at the moment. He was still positive about the innovation from Ripple, but it doesn't fit with whatever their business plan is going forward at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that WU has a pile of fiat cash machines worldwide and don't want to go all out on fully digital money transfers. Wondering why they don't add an option to use digital transfers to those fiat cash machines and phase in the digital use case with incentives, like lower fees when using the digital option. 

Yes it would take upgrades to the fiat machines software, but would allow them to transition to all digital transfers without having to write down, all at once, the investment in those machines. Maybe they've already done that cost/benefit calculation and decided all fiat is the way to go. If so, their demise is inevitable.

Edited by n2it
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.