Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Still1

American Express Praises Ripple’s Capability to Process Cross-border Transactions ‘In a Matter of Seconds’

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Still1 said:

https://ethereumworldnews.com/american-express-ripple-process-transactions-matter-seconds/

"Blockchain is absolutely an option we’re looking at. Just to give you a sense, we have invested in a fintech lab based on blockchain technology, just to understand how to leverage this better….
We did a pilot. We did a test, partnering with Santander locally, and with Ripple to just do cross-border transactions. Cross-border transactions continue to be complex and slow. And in a matter of seconds, through this test, our clients were able to transfer funds in a very transparent and seamless way, from one part of the world to the other one.”

“There is more to come. There’s still a lot of things that need to get addressed with blockchain as a technology. But it’s very promising…
The future is definitely digital. Digital is the way payments will continue to be across both the consumer part of the business the commercial part of the business”.

It's great that Ethereumworldnews picked up the story; I covered it as well in my blog. 

I thought the guy doing the interview from the International Air Transport Association (IATA) - Juan Ivan Martín - did an exceptional job asking the tough questions.  :yes3:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is there any concern that companies wanting their own remittance token simply use ILP to bridge together a remittance network (thus not requiring XRP/Ripplenet)?

AMEX token, WU token, both interact and interoperate through ILP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, aye-epp said:

is there any concern that companies wanting their own remittance token simply use ILP to bridge together a remittance network (thus not requiring XRP/Ripplenet)?

AMEX token, WU token, both interact and interoperate through ILP?

No, they would need direct fiat pairings into all of the corridors they operate in as well as liquidity and trust. Last time anyone wanted to do this (I.e. SWIFT) it was an epic failure. Not to mention the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. You invest hundreds of millions of dollars just so you can save a few bucks on every transaction when you could just go with a turn key solution that doesn’t take maintenance, governance, nodes, trust, liquidity, fiat pairings, etc. for a fraction of the upfront cost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If different companies make their own coins, that would just make a new currency war. Companies would just defund themselves fighting these stupid fights. The XRP-ledger is a masterpiece of foresight. They are 6 years ahead. Anyone can use it for whatever they want. If someone copied the XRP-ledger today it would most likely fail because most people in tech are aware of it and the massive reach that Ripple as a company has.

Edited by mandelbaum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aye-epp said:

is there any concern that companies wanting their own remittance token simply use ILP to bridge together a remittance network (thus not requiring XRP/Ripplenet)?

AMEX token, WU token, both interact and interoperate through ILP?

Every bank wants their own coin, no bank wants to use another banks coin. I think thats Ripples advantage, they are the independent party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Caracappa said:

Every bank wants their own coin, no bank wants to use another banks coin. I think thats Ripples advantage, they are the independent party.

Every bank a 100 years ago made their own bank notes. How did that turn out for them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Caracappa said:

Every bank wants their own coin, no bank wants to use another banks coin. I think thats Ripples advantage, they are the independent party.

Not Ripple, but XRP and the XRP Ledger are independent and decentralised 
This true independency is what sets them apart from "company tokens" or "bank coins" ... even from "central bank coins"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Raz said:

No, they would need direct fiat pairings into all of the corridors they operate in as well as liquidity and trust. Last time anyone wanted to do this (I.e. SWIFT) it was an epic failure. Not to mention the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. You invest hundreds of millions of dollars just so you can save a few bucks on every transaction when you could just go with a turn key solution that doesn’t take maintenance, governance, nodes, trust, liquidity, fiat pairings, etc. for a fraction of the upfront cost. 

Makes sense.  If I'm understanding correctly, the only blocker is that USD is still primary global currency? 

I wonder somewhere down the road in 50-60 years, when ILP is used as often as HTTP is today, if everyone would just hold various tokens for varying use cases. If money evolves into anything like email, ILP would make it amazingly simple where holding and spending are essentially identical automated functions; actual token denomination would become merely an after thought.

Edited by aye-epp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, aye-epp said:

Makes sense.  If I'm understanding correctly, the only blocker is that USD is still primary global currency? 

I wonder somewhere down the road in 50-60 years, when ILP is used as often as HTTP is today, if everyone would just hold various tokens for varying use cases. If money evolves into anything like email, ILP would make it amazingly simple where holding and spending are essentially identical automated functions; actual token denomination would become merely an after thought.

Now you're thinking.  And this is why I have 5-10% of my XRP earmarked for "never sell".  But when you consider Moore's Law and the increasing speed of advancement in tech I think this is closer to 12-18 years away, not 50.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, aye-epp said:

Makes sense.  If I'm understanding correctly, the only blocker is that USD is still primary global currency? 

I wonder somewhere down the road in 50-60 years, when ILP is used as often as HTTP is today, if everyone would just hold various tokens for varying use cases. If money evolves into anything like email, ILP would make it amazingly simple where holding and spending are essentially identical automated functions; actual token denomination would become merely an after thought.

I don’t think the USD has anything to really do with it. I think the biggest blocker is regulation and the banks don’t want to screw with that. I will say though, I think that banks are itching to be the second mover but are waiting for someone to jump first. What I mean is, no one is edging out ahead just yet so they are content with business as usual. But don’t think for a second they haven’t already been discussing contingency plans for their competition if they move first. Liquidity has to get higher before you see any real moves on the banking front. That’s why Ripple is targeting remittance services because those small payments can be done today with the liquidity at hand.

As far as 50-60 years. I’m thinking more along the lines of 5-10 years before this thing is so house hold everyone wonders how sending a check or wire transfer was ever a thing.

Edited by Raz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they did a test pairing with Santander, it seems like it would be with X-current and the old Nostro/Vostro system and not with Xrapid/XRP since Santander said they aren't on X-rapid yet. Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Archbob said:

If they did a test pairing with Santander, it seems like it would be with X-current and the old Nostro/Vostro system and not with Xrapid/XRP since Santander said they aren't on X-rapid yet. Right?

XCurrent 2.0 is xRapid if it makes sense. All this to say that I’m sure Santander has tested xRapid as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t you think that if this is starting to be a trending topic, this will go smoother and faster? I think the problem of cross border payments needs to be solved ASAP I don’t think that it will take much more time to start booming, a timeline of 50 years sounds ridiculous. Technology moves much more faster.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, aavkk said:

I think this is closer to 12-18 years away, not 50.  

right - I conservatively ballpark'd based on email.  Created 1972, RFP in 1982, didn't really become widely integrated into daily life until maybe 2005-ish?  Figure money would be harder not only to implement and markets to develop, but also for key players to relinquish control.  Your time frame seems more likely.

11 hours ago, Raz said:

I think the biggest blocker is regulation and the banks don’t want to screw with that

agree - and I think we are making the same point.  Regulation is a form of protection and control.  US is the most difficult regulation because they have the most to lose.

Edited by aye-epp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×