Jump to content
Panosmek

"The only problem that holds XRP back is regulatory certainty, not technical issues." - Ryan Zagone

Recommended Posts

Just watched the full panel- really fantastic across the board including from ZCash and the gentleman on the right.  Ryan did a fantastic job and got straight to the point clearing the centralization FUD on XRP as well as highlighting the clear superiority of XRP to POW when it comes to payments and serving the unbanked.  The lightning network being able to help scalability and also centralization is still such a question.  How far are they from actually implementing a viable solution with 100% accuracy on transactions?  It's interesting that Ryan mentioned volume between JPY and Thai has doubled since that corridor opened recently.  I'm really looking forward to the Q4 report that hopefully digs into detail on XRapid utility volume.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Wandering_Dog said:

The market originally did choose, afaik they chose Ethereum, despite it's flaws.

maybe i'm a bit dumb here, but for what exactly did the market choose ethereum over xrp?

 

3 hours ago, Valhalla_Guy said:

“The only problem with XRP is Govt uncertainty” That’s like saying “The only problem with jumping off a building is gravity” It is a HUGE  problem, and I struggle finding a logical way to deem XRP as an independent asset.

Unfortunately, RL went full in, back in the early days, even naming the asset after their company. Very hard tfor them to distance themselves (perhaps a renaming contest??) as long as they insist on being the “stewards” of the world’s wealth, by being the sole, controlling force, for the huge escrow.

Can’t have it both ways: claim independence, while at the same time claim controlling ownership of the market distribution and price of their commodity.

following your posts generally you both dont seem to be quiet happy with xrp as an investment

@Valhalla_Guy, amongst other things, you seem to be convinced xrp should and/or will be likely to be deemed a security - from that perspective investing in it wouldnt make much sense to me. what leads to the following questions - are you invested in xrp despite of seeing it the way you do? if yes, why? if not, why are you here?

no offense intended, just trying to understand ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, VanHasen said:

maybe i'm a bit dumb here, but for what exactly did the market choose ethereum over xrp?

My understanding, correct my numbers if I'm wrong, is that developers in the past chose Ethereum to build their projects. And developers continue to choose other platforms for developing projects. The only project on Ripple, afaik, is Coil, excluding xrptipbot. And Coil is technically Ripple. This is not my opinion, but what I hear most when talking with developers at CC conventions in Zug. Developers do not like Ripple. The problem was so acute that Ripple implemented its own recruiting program, xPring, to woo projects. 

Quote

following your posts generally you both dont seem to be quiet happy with xrp as an investment

Let's assume I love XRP, and then let's assume I hate XRP, we can hold a discussion of something relating to XRP (in fact, the same discussion) in both cases. 

Edited by Wandering_Dog
Aha! You mean myself and Valhalla! Got it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JA8 said:

It seems blindingly obvious (to me) that regulatory bodies - if they're doing their job properly - will feel that XRP's ownership of such a vast quantity of XRP is an absolutely massive problem. And further, that Ripple is being unbelievably naive if they think this isn't having any sort of impact on relevant regulatory discussions relating to XRP and xRapid.

Assuming that XRP will become the global standard in future I cannot see that major FIs would pay high price per XRP when they start seriously filling their bags. It would be just too good to be true imho. Thus, the only way I see major FIs could initially fill their bags with XRPs is to buy with low unit price. What is low unit price for XRP then? I dunno. However, I really hope that we would see increasing monthly XRP sales from Ripple during 2019 because that would signal that the price of XRP is currently low-ish and also it would help to ease the concerns of massive XRP holdings of Ripple more and more.

I guess the dream scenario for us small XRP investors would be that Ripple sells large portion of its XRPs to major FIs with large discount via OTC. These OTC sales would not affect the market price of  XRP and now the major FIs would have more motivation to settle their payments via XRP/xRapid and hence solidify XRP the standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Wandering_Dog said:

My understanding, correct my numbers if I'm wrong, is that developers in the past chose Ethereum to build their projects. And developers continue to choose other platforms for developing projects. The only project on Ripple, afaik, is Coil, excluding xrptipbot. And Coil is technically Ripple. This is not my opinion, but what I hear most when talking with developers at CC conventions in Zug.

well then, i dont think its accurate to call developers "the market". right?

lets assume this is true (im no developer btw) - i dont think xrp's success is depending on more developers in the first place - it's usecase is clear and besides ripple, r3, sbi etc pushing it's main usecase, coil is a great and powerful addition to the xrp ecosystem overall. what developements on ethereum are really groundbreaking in your opinion (besides the ico-boom from 2017)?

i'd like them more to be laserfocussed on the main usecase(s) than spreading the peanut butter too thin

Biggest Ethereum Development Firm, ConsenSys, May Lay Off 50~60% of Firm’s Workforce

https://www.newsbtc.com/2018/12/20/ethereum-consensys-lay-offs/

 

1 hour ago, Wandering_Dog said:

Developers do not like Ripple

they do not like ripple the company? or XRP? or both?

and what are they saying why they dont like it? is it the source code of xrpl or is it that they just hate (like most eth and btc maxis) what ripple is doing in the space?

 

1 hour ago, Wandering_Dog said:

Let's assume I love XRP, and then let's assume I hate XRP, we can hold a discussion of something relating to XRP (in fact, the same discussion) in both cases.

what an answer :D

no because the question still stands - are you invested in xrp? if yes, why? if not, why are you here?

 

and i still would love to hear valhalla's intentions and opinions btw ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2019 at 10:58 AM, JA8 said:

Sometimes I wonder if common sense still makes sense in this crazy world. But still, I press on with common sense.

It seems blindingly obvious (to me) that regulatory bodies - if they're doing their job properly - will feel that XRP's ownership of such a vast quantity of XRP is an absolutely massive problem. And further, that Ripple is being unbelievably naive if they think this isn't having any sort of impact on relevant regulatory discussions relating to XRP and xRapid.
 

You could be right.  It does make sense!  Yet it's hard for me to imagine, when I think of all the folks from the regulatory environment who Ripple have in their employ, they are not having these discussions (have had these discussions), and aware of what regulatory bodies are weighing when deciding to move forward with XRP. 

I tend to think this because regulatory bodies, despite what good actors exist within them, have failed to regulate an endless number of financial institutions, instruments, and processes as we have seen over the years. 

There are internal arrangements, political inflluences, and the like which affect any regulation as it is strictly defined.

Not sure what to think until we hear about all this in the real.  Hopefully that will be sooner than later.  If Ripple is naive and simply ignoring these issues then shame on them.  It does seem as if they must have some degree of knowledge of how this will play out, only if because there is so much money and future growth at stake for banks globally.

 

Edited by xrphilosophy
clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JA8 said:

Agree with @Valhalla_Guy. What is needed is this:
(1) Ripple divests 90% of its holdings.
(2) As a direct result of (1) XRP and xRapid achieve regulatory certainty / approval in no time flat.
(3) As a direct result of (2), the world's biggest financial institutions jump on board with xRapid, sending its price to $xx or $xxx

Unfortunately however, I think it's much more likely they'll hold on to their vast XRP warchest. If they had plans to divest they would have made much stronger moves in this direction already. And this means that steps (2) and (3) may take far longer.

When you say divest what do you mean.....give XRP away?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, King34Maine said:

When you say divest what do you mean.....give XRP away?

Love to see them sell all their xrp to the IMF or the US Fed—even at the going rate of .33. Maybe they are trying to wait until the price rises a little more before selling. Maybe that's what all the delay and price manipulation is, price negotiations between Ripple and the prospective buyers!

Buyers are using regulation as their leverage while Ripple is trying to get other sources to use xrp so the price goes up and thus their leverage. (wouldn't that be great@!)

Edited by VanGogh

Share this post


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

Love to see them sell all their xrp to the IMF or the US Fed—even at the going rate of .33. Maybe they are trying to wait until the price rises a little more before selling. Maybe that's what all the delay and price manipulation is, price negotiations between Ripple and the prospective buyers!

Buyers are using regulation as their leverage while Ripple is trying to get other sources to use xrp so the price goes up and thus their leverage. (wouldn't that be great@!)

I personally don't think their XRP holding is a hindrance for xRapid adoption amongst their clientele.   Ripple's distribution of XRP is not following lock-step in the likes of other platforms where most are randomly giving their respective digital assets away via airdrops unless it is strategic to the interest of building Ripple's and the XRP-Ledger's ecosystems (i.e. xPring, UBRI, and RippleWorks). Selling all of their XRP holding to the IMF or the US Fed doesn't make much sense either, because they're a global technology firm where most of their partnerships are outside of the US. The goal for Ripple is to distribute XRP amongst their partner exchanges initially and then ultimately to banks, central banks, corporates, and FIs to hold on their balance sheets once we have consistent and coherent regulations in place. As xRapid expands the distribution of XRP will increase. As far as we know, banks and central banks are already holding digital assets.  Just dumping/selling-off XRP is not a strategic distribution/utilization of the digital asset in my opinion. This fear of Ripple dumping XRP on the open market has already been acknowledged and rectified via the Escrow of XRP. I think Ripple's distribution process for XRP is spot-on.   

Edited by King34Maine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ripple holding the majority of XRP in escrow is smart business for the use case they are trying to achieve.  If you are trying to build currency exchange software you need to make sure that the lion share of use is by large banks.  I don't give a rip what any Bitcoin or Ethereum maximalist says or believes.  The writing is already on the wall that XRP is the preferred DA of choice because they actually have a focused use case.  If the ecosystem around XRP creates new use cases through Xpring or other ventures; GREAT!!  If not, Ripple has still achieved far more than any other DA on arriving at the doorstep of widespread adoption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eventually XRP has to get to a point where there is high liquidity, high volume and yes a high but not outrageous price but high enough where every day people like myself will no longer be able to buy it in bulk.  Just take this into account say Ripple released all their XRP on the Market You would see prices tank, whales buy in heavy bulk and hold There would essentially be no accountable party then holding the bulk FI's wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole in those circumstances especially to move fiat are you serious? Ripple is looking at the accountability factor that regulation and business require when it comes to handling money because at the root of it all XRP and the tools that utilize it handle money so we need it to be governed in such a way that it adhere' to all the laws that govern money in various lands.  I do think when XRP rises to it's potential the price will go up fast and in doing so it will only be made available on institutional exchanges because there will be no value for Ripple, FI's and other entities  in individuals holding the token so for those of us who have got in before the real use case kicks in  enjoy and get more while you can!!

Edited by RikkiTikki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, King34Maine said:

I personally don't think their XRP holding is a hindrance for xRapid adoption amongst their clientele.   Ripple's distribution of XRP is not following lock-step in the likes of other platforms where most are randomly giving their respective digital assets away via airdrops unless it is strategic to the interest of building Ripple's and the XRP-Ledger's ecosystems (i.e. xPring, UBRI, and RippleWorks). Selling all of their XRP holding to the IMF or the US Fed doesn't make much sense either, because they're a global technology firm where most of their partnerships are outside of the US. The goal for Ripple is to distribute XRP amongst their partner exchanges initially and then ultimately to banks, central banks, corporates, and FIs to hold on their balance sheets once we have consistent and coherent regulations in place. As xRapid expands the distribution of XRP will increase. As far as we know, banks and central banks are already holding digital assets.  Just dumping/selling-off XRP is not a strategic distribution/utilization of the digital asset in my opinion. This fear of Ripple dumping XRP on the open market has already been acknowledged and rectified via the Escrow of XRP. I think Ripple's distribution process for XRP is spot-on.   

Plus, funny enough, if there is any meat to the argument of decentralization because of one large holder, I trust Ripple more than I do the Fed or the IMF!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, VanHasen said:

well then, i dont think its accurate to call developers "the market". right?

Great point. If the internet was a product, it's unlikely we would consider the developers of the internet "the market". That is, where the price of the internet is determined and the internet is distributed. It is the end consumer, or purchaser of the product if it's an intermediate good, that we typically think of as "the market". What is being developed here is more like infrastructure I imagine, so, saying we're going to use markets to determine which infrastructure is developed itself is non-sensical, markets don't lead to the development of infrastructure, infrastructure leads to the development of markets. 

Anyway, the developers would be the developers of the product itself, which is then taken to "the" market for price determination and allocation. The capital market (investors funding projects), initially, and the labour market (developers choosing to develop one product over another), both chose Ethereum over Ripple. The infrastructure so far produced by Ripple (xRapid) has not been selected for use by any market participants, while Ethereum has (despite its flaws!). It's important to mention, we are discussing infrastructure for a monetary system, and all monetary systems are imposed (by government), so the phrase "let the market decide" is more of a marketing slogan than a valid argument.  

If I can be more succinct, investors sought out projects with skilled developers, developers don't choose Ripple, and projects without developers don't exist. So what we're discussing is one project: the base Ripple infrastructure; and many projects: the base infrastructure layer of Ethereum and the many projects built on top of it.     

Today, Ripple no longer requires capital market funding and subsequently has acquired many developers of their own through XRP sales, given that XRP can be sold to fund Ripple's operations, so the comparison may be difficult to make, especially when many "valueless" tokens have a non-zero price (another indicator of markets' abilities to allocate resources). But if you were to compare the distribution of resources towards a given platform through the capital and labour markets, I am under the impression that Ripple does not compete with the resources allocated to Ethereum, prior to the ability of Ripple to self fund, and that applies to both the infrastructure layer plus projects on top of it. And if you compare the distribution of users of products and services on the infrastructure layer, I think Ripple isn't winning here either (despite the drawbacks of PoW!).

Most importantly, despite Ripple's self-funding, independent developers still do not choose Ripple for developing their projects and appear to be fervently opposed to Ripple--even developers at Kraken, surprisingly. So the "let the market decide" argument Ryan puts forth is better understood as "give us more time to use our resources to force the market to use our infrastructure layer".            

 

Quote

lets assume this is true (im no developer btw) - i dont think xrp's success is depending on more developers in the first place - it's usecase is clear and besides ripple, r3, sbi etc pushing it's main usecase, coil is a great and powerful addition to the xrp ecosystem overall. what developements on ethereum are really groundbreaking in your opinion (besides the ico-boom from 2017)?

Well, Coil is Ripple, so "Ripple is a great powerful addition to Ripple" is what you mean, as the project is both staffed and funded by Ripple itself.

The use-case of Ripple is as a means of settlement of liabilities, which is the same use-case as every other cryptocurrency token, even though no one wants to acknowledge that simple fact and a great deal of marketing resources goes into convincing people of broad differentiation in the space. And, the associated products and services, creating and destroying liabilities and associated assets, depends on developers, just as the internet depends on developers. 

The last demo I saw of a project on Ethereum was document verification, where a digital document was input to produce a hash and the hash was used by the client to verify whether or not another digital document was in fact the original. The service was available online for free and anyone could use it. The demo'er was a Prof of Finance from Basel. A very simple project, which may eliminate notaries as a profession from our economic system.     

 

Quote

i'd like them more to be laserfocussed on the main usecase(s) than spreading the peanut butter too thin

Yes that makes sense, as a firm. And we're discussing the allocation of resources to projects, right? 

 

Quote

Biggest Ethereum Development Firm, ConsenSys, May Lay Off 50~60% of Firm’s Workforce

https://www.newsbtc.com/2018/12/20/ethereum-consensys-lay-offs/

I think what's funny here is you seem to believe, a priori, that markets produce good, or even the best, outcomes. They don't! So if you want to continue down this path the irony of Ryan's statement has two sides: he argued that markets make the best decisions (which if demonstrably false! The 2008 collapse is a market outcome), and he argued that markets should be allowed to choose (they already did, and they continue to not choose Ripple--despite the drawbacks of other platforms). 

 

Quote

they do not like ripple the company? or XRP? or both?

and what are they saying why they dont like it? is it the source code of xrpl or is it that they just hate (like most eth and btc maxis) what ripple is doing in the space?

I'm not sure here, as when I bring it up the vitriol and dismissive language and tone suggests to me it is a distribution problem--why work to enable a system that is even more unequal than the system which currently exists? Other platforms at least purport to support equality, when in fact they don't, but Ripple is in your face: you are a peasant. Who wouldn't seek to punish that level of inequality, and from a behavioral economics perspective we would expect to see exactly that, unequal outcomes draw punishment from participants even when the punishment leaves everyone worse off.  

 

 

Quote

no because the question still stands - are you invested in xrp? if yes, why? if not, why are you here?

I'm here because I'm free to be here and I want to be here--did you want to put up a gate around your forum? :sarcastic:

Or better, if I'm not invested in the German stock market, then clearly I shouldn't be permitted to discuss issues about Germany!

How terribly democratic of you @VanHasen 

Edited by Wandering_Dog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×