Jump to content

Happy Valentine's Day from JP Morgan


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Freaky said:

These big players and consortiums like SWIFT and Co are a big boys club that have been around for ever.

The power they yield is immense, if they want Ripple to fail, they will make it happen.

A small software company is no match for them.

You are initially stating the obvious except that your conclusion is wrong.  

If every big player ever, was always able to stop the little guy, then there would be no such concept as a ‘disrupter’.

There are lots of examples of the big guys being unable to hold ground against the little guy disrupter.

Whether Ripple can pull this off is unknown.  I bet they can.   But even if they were to fail there are other use cases than cross-border remittance payments.  

I’m wondering why so much angst when nothing happening here was surprising.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Did you read that 100+ post thread in the 2 minutes since I pointed you to it?  That's my "newbie" objection. We've done this.  I showed you where.  You don't want to read it, you want to teach us all

No Commercial bank or Stablecoin will ever be able to maintain a "first mover advantage" over Central Bank issued CBDC. There is a difference between... "money in the bank", aka bank liabilities.

1)  Anytime some newbie says "let's examine our collective biases" (apropos of me not asking), that's flag #1. 2)  Anytime some newbie says, implicitly, in their opening statement, "if you don't

Just now, Trickery said:

Exactly! but the trouble is their way is the old way and the old way is where the problem is.

This really is a David and Goliath battle. The game is really starting to heat up.

 

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

You are initially stating the obvious except that your conclusion is wrong.  

If every big player ever, was always able to stop the little guy, then there would be no such concept as a ‘disrupter’.

There are lots of examples of the big guys being unable to hold ground against the little guy disrupter.

Whether Ripple can pull this off is unknown.  I bet they can.   But even if they were to fail there are other use cases than cross-border remittance payments.  

I’m wondering why so much angst when nothing happening here was surprising.

How on earth can you know that my conclusion is wrong ?

I don't have any angst. If anything this is a great wake up call to all that thought Ripple would "kick ass".

Yeah I get the fact the little guy can win sometimes.

However in this game, the big players hold considerable power in their big boys club.

If you think a small software company can overthrow a consortium of the biggest players on the planet and change the whole remmittance landscape used by 33,000 banks. Good luck.

 

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tinyaccount said:

So were you previously thinking that every company would just roll over and let Ripple have it all?  And now you see that isn’t true you think it’s bad?

Nothing new or changed here at all.  This has been known, and even done before, and was fully expected.  If it shocks or alarms you then you either haven’t researched this enough,  or there is some other agenda going on.

Yeah, if companies feel like the cost outweighs the benefits to compete with Ripple, they wouldn't sink millions into developing their own tech. Pretty simple logic.

Enough with the FUD accusations. No agenda here, I'm just not blindly dismissing potential threats to the future value of my investment. I'm in the top 1.6% of accounts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all comes down to the price.

Cheaper solutuion will win the battle eventually. 

Jpmc is costly to maintain.  If Jpmc’s transaction fee is higher than xrp which is almost zero, then it’s just a matter of time before JPM lose it’s customers. 

Ripple called checkmate

 

And the call is still valid.

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

It all comes down to the price.

Cheaper solutuion will win the battle eventually. 

Jpmc is costly to maintain.  If Jpmc’s transaction fee is higher than xrp which is almost zero, then it’s just a matter of time before JPM lose it’s customers. 

Ripple called checkmate

 

And the call is still valid.

If banks can perform remittance cheaper, they will not pass this on to customers. They are there to make profits. They will charge the same to customers and pocket the difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Freaky said:

How on earth can you know that my conclusion is wrong ?

For exactly the reason you just stated...    “ Yeah I get the fact the little guy can win sometimes.”

So if you claim Ripple will inevitably loose then you must be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tinyaccount said:

For exactly the reason you just stated...    “ Yeah I get the fact the little guy can win sometimes.”

So if you claim Ripple will inevitably loose then you must be wrong.

I didn't conclusively say they will lose.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Freaky said:

How on earth can you know that my conclusion is wrong ?

I don't have any angst. If anything this is a great wake up call to all that thought Ripple would "kick ass".

Yeah I get the fact the little guy can win sometimes.

However in this game, the big players hold considerable power in their big boys club.

If you think a small software company can overthrow a consortium of the biggest players on the planet and change the whole remmittance landscape used by 33,000 banks. Good luck.

 

Jpm customers are not committed to Jpm.

They will change the service provider if they find a better rate to send money directly to the destination without going through other intermediary banks.

You don’t seem to get the point of the business model of ripple.

 

As a matter of fact, JPM’s cumstomers hate to work with JPM. They are with JPM at the moment because it has the biggest nostro account in the world for now.  If there is another option that is cheaper and efficient, JPM’s customers would change the service provider at a heart beat. 

Edited by quan
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tinyaccount said:

Yes it is.  So why does it surprise and alarm you?  Did you think there were no entrenched players?

JPM was already "entrenched" in the crypto asset industry before they announced JPMC? Nope, I don't think so. They had Quorum but they just announced JPMC.

They were already entrenched in banking and will continue to be entrenched. The fact they're looking to move into crypto legitimizes the digital asset space, sure. You still haven't even acknowledged the fact that an "entrenched" player in the financial system moving in to compete in the digital asset space where there are already established players like Ripple is worrisome. Any rational person would be worried. You aren't being rational because of your familiarity bias, endowment bias, and status quo bias. 

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

Jpm customers are not committed to Jpm.

They will change the service provider if they find a better rate to send money directly to the destination without going through other intermediary banks.

You don’t seem to get the point of the business model of ripple.

Yes, they are committed. Banking is all about relationships. Banks will lend to companies at a more favorable rate if they think that they can generate millions in advisory fees down the line. Relationships matter in banking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jheff said:

Yes, they are committed. Banking is all about relationships. Banks will lend to companies at a more favorable rate if they think that they can generate millions in advisory fees down the line. Relationships matter in banking.

What reason the customer of JPM have to keep the remmitance business with JPM

when the remmitance becomes free? 

The genie in the bottle is out and there is nothing banks can do about it. The value moves without friction and that’s the new world order, get used to it.

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

You still haven't even acknowledged the fact that an "entrenched" player in the financial system moving in to compete in the digital asset space where there are already established players like Ripple is worrisome.

No it is not unexpected...   and doesn’t need to be “acknowledged”.  It already is.  And that is my point.    We have always known that at least one or some of the larger banks would try this.

Brad wrote a blog about this two years ago and many many others have discussed this endlessly before and since.

And yet to you it is “worrisome”.  

This has been a known risk all along.  It’s likely not going to be as a big as you seem to think because of all the arguments made against Stablecoins.   The market is huge and it was never imagined that there would only be Ripple,  the one remaining player

As for your allegations that I suffer from a number of biases... sure since I’m human probably I do.  That’s why I try and see around them them.  You don’t think I manage that...   fair enough, believe what you will.

I’m still surprised that anyone who knows anything about this space can be alarmed that a bank has decided to create a bank coin. Perhaps you do have no agenda...  that just makes it more surprising.

 

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.