Jump to content
xiaoipower

Is this FUD or true? Alleged discrepancy between Ripple quarterly sale and escrow

Recommended Posts

"The “escrow queue” is implemented differently than announced, leading to a faster future release of escrowed funds compared to the announced schedule"

I see this as a positive development, it suggests that they are expecting that resources are needed earlier than anticipated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have no contract with you....the xrp belong to ripple....Problem with transparency is it makes it easier to criticize. Favorite video I saw was when brad asked how much etherium Someone owned on stage at a conference....his comment....”no comment” literally that’s what he said....so don’t see a minor change as a big deal when compared to the constant yet under criticized conflicting interest in the space....ie CMC dropping Korean markets etc with undisclosed amount of assets etc....the space is riddled with it......I hope with regulation you will see/ mandate better consumer clarity across the board....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe they are correct in their assessment....   my original understanding of the escrow plan is that they would have had varying amounts being released after the initial 55 months.  As it turns out they have opted to keep the escrows topped up to a billion for each new escrow.

Given that it is:  their own plan, on their own schedule, and totally their own business,  I think it’s perfectly reasonable to keep the supply at a steady rate.  Perhaps not perfect optics, or communication, but they are pretty much damned if they do and damned if they don’t when it comes to market communications.  So I can understand them just quietly doing their thing and keeping a low profile.

That steady supply is overwhelming now,  but I can easily imagine a time in the near future,  (after Institutional fomo has set in, and a log curve of uptake starts to take effect),  that the monthly release will be swallowed by demand and insufficient for the OTC market.  I can’t wait...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ripple didn't put every single coin they had at the time in an escrow account, they have put only 55 billion. At that time, if I remember correctly they had around 4 billion or a little bit more on a separate account which can account for the differences over time, they have never suggested that they would be sending only from escrow accounts.

Second, the article is misleading in title suggesting that Ripple somehow releases more than the escrow queue enables. In reality Ripple has utilized only a very minor share of what the planned Escrow function allowed it to release. Out of a potential 15 billion XRP being released to the market (1 billion per month), they have only distributed about 2.3-2.4 billion or 16% of overall potential releases that Ripple could have done. They could have released 15 billion over 15 months and that would be within their Escrow schedule. So, I call this article a FUD which is what it exactly is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, xiaoipower said:

does anyone know how to verify this?

All the information is publicly available. Collect all the quarterly reports. Audit all the escrow transactions. If your findings match, it's verified. That would be the only way. Depending on someone else to do the work would likely not be sufficient. 

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Posted (edited)

Is there any chance CL's pledge a couple years back totaling a few B XRP could be used for an 'IMF-type' donation? We still don't know where those Bs are going. The escrow release schedule isn't at a monthly level that would delineate XRP on a mass scale for a sudden major shift in global monetary policy prior to a button being pressed. The escrow solution always seemed to be aimed at financial institutions for pricing certainty.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Vvittin said:

Problem with transparency

 

3 hours ago, Vvittin said:

better consumer clarity

Ehhhh what ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The escrow solution always seemed to be aimed at financial institutions for pricing certainty."

I agree with you and after thinking long and hard about it, the lower the volatility the lower the perceived risk that would be associated with an asset. You don't go jump into to ten plus foot surf your first time on a board (unless you're an idiot like me and wind up being washed on to the beach after damn near drowning, I swam right back). I assume most people and institutions would rather touch their toes in the water to make sure they can get out if need be.

Share this post


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

I believe they are correct in their assessment....   my original understanding of the escrow plan is that they would have had varying amounts being released after the initial 55 months.  As it turns out they have opted to keep the escrows topped up to a billion for each new escrow.

 

To be honest that's how I understood the system to be,the idea of putting the remains of a month  into a new month without topping up the last currently planned  month to 1b just seems insane 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they lied in their (rather lame) 'report' - their claims are

1) They state that ripple changed their policy on escrow release and re-escrow. When the escrow was announced, we assumed that each month's unused xrp would go into a new escrow month, but in fact they top up the previous one first before starting a new one. This isn't news, everyone who reads xrpchat knew about this over a year ago because as soon as the second re-escrow took place we wrote about it here (in the escrow thread if I recall). It was a surprise at first, but it makes sense to do it this way and it doesn't appear to have been motivated by any malicious intent on the part of ripple.

2) Ripple misrepresented how much they are releasing into the market - as noted David Schwartz pointed out that it's just a calendar month issue on the dates of transactions. Who cares? I for one do not, and I doubt many others here do either. I don't think anyone else noticed to be honest so at least they spotted something.

3) Someone else is using escrow. Wow. We guessed that ripple sold some xrp to someone and had conditions of release attached to it, other than that we know nothing about the mystery 200m xrp that were escrowed last year. No news here.

INHO the report was an excuse to drum-up clicks on their website to generate interest in their 'product'. If that's the best they can do with their 'product' then those of us who do it in our spare time will not be out of work for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just an update to my previous post

I read the report quite carefully as I have been documenting escrow sales myself.

They write : "Two quarterly markets reports under-reported the number of XRP released from escrow by a total of 200 million XRP ($84 million at current prices)"

This is not really a lie, it's just that ripple state in their report "In Q1 2019, three billion XRP were again released out of escrow (one billion each month). Additionally, 2.30 billion XRP were returned and put into new escrow contracts".

If you plot the numbers by calendar dates (as I did in my last escrow release update - and that's probably where they first spotted the discrepancy!), you see that during Q1, ripple actually re-escrowed 2.2 billion, not the 2.3 they wrote. (please add up the numbers (in millions) below)

| 2019-Jan |           800 |
| 2019-Feb |           800 |
| 2019-Mar |           700 |

This is really just a calendar adjustment because the release from march goes back in April. Nobody cares!

I do consider their report to be a kind of FUD, but not for xrp price manipulation, but for creating a sensationalist reaction to bring clicks to their website and help shill their product. Anyone considering giving them money, please feel free to contact me and I'll compile better reports much more cheaply! (joke - please don't).

Edited by jbjnr
typo/clarity

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...