Jump to content
Roaring_Twenties

Has Corey Johnson left Ripple?

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, 7Bs said:

Let's keep an eye on Vias' Twitter. If he leaves we're either in big shiza or individuals truly cannot be associated with the bridge asset XRP anymore because it's so big it needs an OPEC-like consortium.

I'm pretty sure if he's getting axed there will be some conditions around it i.e. don't announce anything until a replacement is found etc. I like Miguel, but I think XRP volume, adoption and liquidity were a bit of a fail in 2018, if I remember correctly even Miguel said probably 1.5 years ago that if the volume is the same an year later then that'd mean he failed. Well, the volume is probably 20-30 times lower than the one in Q4 2017 and Q1 2018. Not to mention the fact that the current volume is probably 80% wash trading from exchanges like ZB. The true valuable pairs have appalling volume e.g. usd/mxn on bitso is 50k.. Don't even want to go into Brad's statements about major banks using xRapid in production by end of 2018 - I guess at some point heads gotta roll. About Cory - I never really understood what exactly his position was so with or without him.. don't expect any change. Obviously, not very good image for Ripple when appointing someone and then sacking him less than 1 year later, but this stuff happens in big companies.

Edited by iLeeT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chief Marketing position, as a job, is never done. So I doubt that is why he is out. He and Ripple are and have been in a "If you can't beat'em, join'em" situation. Clearly, the over estimation of a little company from SF to overthrow the entire world's financial system just because they raked in 9 billion within a month has now hit rock bottom like the value of XRP. Cory was seriously never a qualified person for the job... ego in all the wrong places.

Ripple, is hopefully, joining forces with Gottfried (Swift) in an effort to more humbly transition the world of banking into a much more streamlined process without throwing the world into economic collapse. Kudos to Ripple if that's the case. There is no shame in "Joinin'em" considering what's at stake. I may even buy back some of the XRP I unloaded:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jag216 said:

My take on this is that we have already heard Dilip Rao state that for a long time, Ripple had to pursue banks and now that is no longer the case - banks pursue Ripple. In addition, I believe the signing of multiple production contracts on a weekly basis and the dedication of multiple months of time and human resources suggests that they have to pull resource from the marketing and public relations and put a lot more resources into buildout and integration timelines. It probably doesn't help to grow at a pace that is not reflected in an increase at price. It is possible they scaled rapidly in the anticipation getting more cooperation from the policy makers and regulators but now that we are still in a sideways market they are having to deliver aggressively on deployments - which means they can cut back on storytelling.

The introduction of the story of Ripple has been told, it's time to write history and that is a technical feat more than a PR feat.

You still need PR and marketing in every company, regardlsss of how much it grows. Using this logic, it would mean that companies such as Pepsi don’t need PR and Marketing anymore but just need to hire for growth. If Ripple is in a spot where they need to cut their PR face of the company to make more additional resources, we are screwed. We can’t just assume banks are coming to us. We still need people to tell the story, grow the ecosystem, and sign up some of the bigger banks. Then we need to convince them to use XRP and XRapid. We don’t have any true Xrapid usage yet so I doubt Ripple would consider his job done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, RobertStrong said:

Because of the change in market conditions

suddenly had a qüeer thought -- and believe me I'm on the sceptical side of this (my initial reaction was "bear market bad"!), but ok this one is more optimistic... here goes...

what if, what ripple meant by 'change in market conditions' was in fact for the better, i.e. that they've seen signs now that xrp isn't going to be under a microscope or labelled a security and they arent under so much pressure from regulations/lawsuits/etc?

if so, these favourable market conditions would mean that they wouldnt really need a spin artist proselytizing to the unbelievers anymore

probably boll0cks, but worth a 2 second thought mayhaps

Edited by zerpdigger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, zerpdigger said:

suddenly had a qüeer thought -- and believe me I'm on the sceptical side of this (my initial reaction was "bear market bad"!), but ok this one is more optimistic... here goes...

what if, what ripple meant by 'change in market conditions' was in fact for the better, i.e. that they've seen signs now that xrp isn't going to be under a microscope or labelled a security and they arent under so much pressure from regulations/lawsuits/etc?

if so, these favourable market conditions would mean that they wouldnt really need a spin artist proselytizing to the unbelievers anymore

probably boll0cks, but worth a 2 second thought mayhaps

They likely wouldn’t just let someone like Cory go. They’d likely use his talent and name in another role. However, it’s doubtful they’d make an official announcement and eliminate him/his position without something coming info effect first. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, KaaKaRmA said:

They likely wouldn’t just let someone like Cory go. They’d likely use his talent and name in another role. However, it’s doubtful they’d make an official announcement and eliminate him/his position without something coming info effect first. 

Maybe....just maybe.... they're about to flip the switch on something :secret:

Share this post


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

Cory’s last year at Ripple was a success in representing the company to investors, press and regulators. Cory helped Ripple with strategy internally and overall industry education. But due to changes in market conditions, we’ve chosen to eliminate the role of Chief Market Strategist

Cory’s last year was also his first, lol.

 I’m very familiar with how ( and why!) big companies communicate changes at Exco level. 

I really have a hard time to give a positive spin to both the fact itself as the way this is communicated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ripple-Stiltskin said:

Cory’s last year was also his first, lol.

 I’m very familiar with how ( and why!) big companies communicate changes at Exco level. 

I really have a hard time to give a positive spin to both the fact itself as the way this is communicated. 

I think too much was left up to interpretation (see my post about we're screwed or this is the new oil, no in between). After the year this market had and the uncertainty moving forward just say look it didn't work 'with him' in some phrasing, don't use 'change in market conditions.' That phrase is 'change in market conditions' is the most significant wording we've been faced with as XRP holders in a while and I don't think I'm overthinking it. It's an event because it's a non-event, if that makes sense.

I want the truth and I can't handle it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ripple-Stiltskin said:

Cory’s last year was also his first, lol.

 I’m very familiar with how ( and why!) big companies communicate changes at Exco level. 

I really have a hard time to give a positive spin to both the fact itself as the way this is communicated. 

They are keeping it as neutral as possible. Whether we gove it a positive or negative spin is up to us. 

The best approach when you just dont know and when opinions vary(with both ends same quality logic), is to choose the middleground. Therefore, I am also neutral on this development. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Plikk said:

They are keeping it as neutral as possible.

Exactly! And that’s a red flag for me.

Positive changes at Exco level are usually communicated in a different way:

- wait with the communication until there’s clarity about the new position of the leaving exco member and/or:

- stating explicitly that everything is discussed in good harmony and/ or

- giving explicit details about his succes ( deals or other concrete milestones).

- giving explicit details about why exactly this role ( CMS) isn’t needed anymore ( preferably spinned very positive).

TLDR: when a separation is somewhat negative, this is exactly the vague way big companies communicate the facts. 

But just my opinion ( based on years of experience of first hand, but could be very wrong nevertheless).

 

Edited by Ripple-Stiltskin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Ripple-Stiltskin said:

Exactly! And that’s a red flag for me.

Positive changes at Exco level are usually communicated in a different way:

- wait with the communication until there’s clarity about the new position of the leaving exco member and/or:

- stating explicitly that everything is discussed in good harmony and/ or

- giving explicit details about his succes ( deals or other concrete milestones).

- giving explicit details about why exactly this role ( CMS) isn’t needed anymore ( preferably spinned very positive).

TLDR: when a separation is somewhat negative, this is exactly the vague way big companies communicate the facts. 

But just my opnion ( based on years of experience of first hand, but could be very wrong nevertheless).

 

A red flag for me would be if it was one of the prominent employees or management functions that would have been dismissed. Cory only worked at Ripple for a year, not that significant imho. He was OK to have in the team, but not more than that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ripple-Stiltskin said:

- stating explicitly that everything is discussed in good harmony and/ or

Maybe Cory just overestimated his own price. Big deal. That happens everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Plikk said:

A red flag for me would be if it was one of the prominent employees or management functions that would have been dismissed. Cory only worked at Ripple for a year, not that significant imho. He was OK to have in the team, but not more than that. 

Ok. But he was prominent enough to make a public statement about it ( and I think Ripple knows very well what his leaving and the statement about it can cause in crypto overhyped crazy land). So I think they considered not communicate at all ( bad), communicate with a positive spin ( apparantly not possible) or communicate neutral ( which this is. And vague).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lucky said:

Maybe Cory just overestimated his own price. Big deal. That happens everywhere.

True. And thats why I have a hard time to give it a positive spin, like I stated. ( people overestimating their price and are forced to leave isn’t exactly very positive). But yes, it happens every day, true.

Share this post


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...