Jump to content

Western Union is Still Testing Ripple and is Open to Signing a Deal Per CEO


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I got the impression he has been pushing for a deal on unreasonable terms and now he's a wee bit worried.

He's definitely full of s***. There is no rational reason to continue testing for that long if you've already decided there are no savings or process optimisations to be had. So his rhetoric is coming

There's absolutely some subtlety in his demeanor. I feel like his comment about their system already being "ok" and "extremely cost efficient" might be a bit exaggerated. He also stated that "it is fi

He's definitely full of s***. There is no rational reason to continue testing for that long if you've already decided there are no savings or process optimisations to be had. So his rhetoric is coming from somewhere else - either he genuinely is too arrogant to accept recommendations from the people running the blockchain labs, or he is bad mouthing Ripple publicly to try and force a better deal on licensing fees, or something. 

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

He's definitely full of s***. There is no rational reason to continue testing for that long if you've already decided there are no savings or process optimisations to be had. So his rhetoric is coming from somewhere else - either he genuinely is too arrogant to accept recommendations from the people running the blockchain labs, or he is bad mouthing Ripple publicly to try and force a better deal on licensing fees, or something. 

I got the impression he has been pushing for a deal on unreasonable terms and now he's a wee bit worried.

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

He's definitely full of s***. There is no rational reason to continue testing for that long if you've already decided there are no savings or process optimisations to be had. So his rhetoric is coming from somewhere else - either he genuinely is too arrogant to accept recommendations from the people running the blockchain labs, or he is bad mouthing Ripple publicly to try and force a better deal on licensing fees, or something. 

Its not uncommon for institutes of WU size to run multi year trials with a product more as a "benchmark" of internal systems vs a product they actively want to purchase. Within my teams I have always tried to maintain 1-2 vendor based solutions to benchmark our performance against. If I was in WU position I would be doing this.

WU is more uniquely positioned than most in this area given the massive brick and mortar / agent network, this cannot be easily replicated and I doubt anyone would try to in this age of technology. However, most remittance corridors are generally heavy outflows from reasonable wealthy nations (where the technology can easily support it) to countries / regions / users where technology cannot support. An example of this would be Philippines or Vietnam and say AU / US corridor it is easy to onboard users within AU/ US under almost any technology platform. However, for the receiving party it is not easy to onboard the user onto a digital platform (mainly due to regulation and subsequently challenging KYC). This is easier to manager via agent / brick and mortar.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Pointbreak said:

Its not uncommon for institutes of WU size to run multi year trials with a product more as a "benchmark" of internal systems vs a product they actively want to purchase. Within my teams I have always tried to maintain 1-2 vendor based solutions to benchmark our performance against. If I was in WU position I would be doing this.

WU is more uniquely positioned than most in this area given the massive brick and mortar / agent network, this cannot be easily replicated and I doubt anyone would try to in this age of technology. However, most remittance corridors are generally heavy outflows from reasonable wealthy nations (where the technology can easily support it) to countries / regions / users where technology cannot support. An example of this would be Philippines or Vietnam and say AU / US corridor it is easy to onboard users within AU/ US under almost any technology platform. However, for the receiving party it is not easy to onboard the user onto a digital platform (mainly due to regulation and subsequently challenging KYC). This is easier to manager via agent / brick and mortar.

All true, but....

I know he's full of s***. I just haven't figured out his motive.

Edited by OzAlphaWolf
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OzAlphaWolf said:

He's definitely full of s***. There is no rational reason to continue testing for that long if you've already decided there are no savings or process optimisations to be had. So his rhetoric is coming from somewhere else - either he genuinely is too arrogant to accept recommendations from the people running the blockchain labs, or he is bad mouthing Ripple publicly to try and force a better deal on licensing fees, or something. 

I think you hit the nail right on the head  He's no fool but Ripple has called his bluff with the MG move and now it's time to put your chips in or tap out.  With MG all in if they decide to get real aggressive with implementing XRP they can eat up WU's market share fast.  The thing about the business of money people are more loyal to savings than a name.  if MG's fees come in dramatically cheaper and WU has not made a move things will escalate for them quick in terms of loosing market share.  I would not be surprised if we don't hear a huge announcement of some sort from WU within the next month or two, because right now silence is detrimental for them as their major competitor has threw down the gauntlet.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's absolutely some subtlety in his demeanor. I feel like his comment about their system already being "ok" and "extremely cost efficient" might be a bit exaggerated. He also stated that "it is five times more expensive being with a cryptocurrency, with a stable currency, like Ripple". What throws me off there is if it truly is 5x more expensive (even after this long of testing?), why even continue pursuing any crypto if it makes your business bleed money?

I would also love to know what numbers he's referring to. 'Cause, I highly doubt the cost comparison is for the transfer of funds. Instead, he's possibly bundling in the cost of integrating and signing on with xRapid, but that's the cost needed to save money in the long run and compete with those who are stepping forward.

2 hours ago, ScroogeMcDuck said:

I got the impression he has been pushing for a deal on unreasonable terms and now he's a wee bit worried.

I try my hardest to avoid bias and attempt to read people based on their language choices, but I truly believe his phasing is right on track with what you're saying. He's trying to pass off the inability to come to a deal on Ripple. However, Ripple has the product that they need. So, they don't have the advantage of trying to force a better deal. Would we benefit from having another major world-wide service that people use every day? Of course! Does Ripple need to undersell their product to get them asap... not a chance.

I commend Ripple for taking in MoneyGram and almost indirectly saying "We move with or without you."

Edited by Xrylite
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2019 at 9:05 PM, yxxyun said:

Didn't xRapid need hold fund on exchanges?  It similar to nostro/vostro.

Not necessarily if xCurrent is used to reassign ownership of the fiat from payer to exchange.

On 6/19/2019 at 10:10 PM, yxxyun said:

So how to buy XRP use fiat from bitstamp then send XRP to bitso ?  if you don't hold fund on exchanges,  deposit fiat first ?  how much time it will take about the deposit fiat ?

Even if they do have to hold fiat on exchanges the idea is that the amount in nostro account would be less because they could consolidate nostro accounts holding different currencies into a since account holding one currency that is liquid with other currencies via XRP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Pointbreak said:

WU is more uniquely positioned than most in this area given the massive brick and mortar / agent network, this cannot be easily replicated and I doubt anyone would try to in this age of technology.

They can be easily replaced by ATM network and I think this is the reason why Euronet recently joined Ripplenet. You can even make a deposit in cash into ATM in one country and withdraw in another just by using of mobile app. You dont need to maintain branches with the people sitting there. WU cant compete with this.

Edited by Spartaksus
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spartaksus said:

They can be easily replaced by ATM network and I think this is the reason why Euronet recently joined Ripplenet. You can even make a deposit in cash into ATM in one country and withdraw in another just by using of mobile app. You dont need to maintain branches with the people sitting there. WU cant compete with this.

This is what disruption does.  It is like moving out of shipping into the airline business.  No shipping company did it!  Bricks and mortar has worked well for WU and continues to work well, building a whole new system that scraps the replaces all the old infrastructure including staff is going to be resisted within the company.  Much easier to start a new company than adapt an old one that is resisting to work in new ways.

Edited by Julian_Williams
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.