Jump to content

SWIFT sees success with instant cross-border payments through Singapore’s FAST


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Finesse said:

No savings to be had compared to swift that is really funny to me.

Not only is it wayyy cheaper to use xrp (fractions of a penny) compared to swift

the other positive is it allows banks to free up funds locked away in nostro/vostro accounts and instead utilize on demand liquidity that settles in seconds allowing those trillions to instead be invested in other areas not deflationary currencies.

If your bank didnt pursue the system with obvious savings, less friction, on demand liquidty means nothing to me. I have my money where i think the future is. And that is DLT and specifically XRP as it is a finished product ready today.

I told a manager at blockbuster one time that redbox/netflix could threaten their business model and asked if he was worried hed be out of a job. He scoffed at the time. 

Im sure i will see more blockbusters, maybe your bank will be one of them ?

I have posted openly what it costs to transact via SWIFT. It is not anywhere near expensive as you think.

Banks are there to make profit. A 4 cent transfer for the bank will still cost the customer $10+.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So either this platform uses Ripple... Or every major Ripple partner decided overnight to join a new platform, and NO non-Ripple partners decided to do so. One of those hypotheses tests cred

I've already concluded those payment systems will be enhanced by a settlement system offered by a company called Ripple.

Holy. Moly. All of those are either openly RippleNet members, members of Ripple's Global Payments Steering Group, or rumored partners.  I don't have time to dig up the articles for all of th

Posted Images

I remember Blockbusters. Doesn’t seem that long ago either. Used to have the remains of one down the street for years after they went out of business. I only went in there maybe twice before they went out of business. Nobody ever moved into it after they went out of business. 

It stayed a relic until hurricane Michael made them clean up the remains.

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

I have posted openly what it costs to transact via SWIFT. It is not anywhere near expensive as you think.

Banks are there to make profit. A 4 cent transfer for the bank will still cost the customer $10+.

oh my god are you serious here, i understand you work at a bank, i do as well.

Im almost certain you are not responsible for foreign transactions.

Swift is a messaging platform the real cost comes from settlement.

Every bank or stop makes the transaction more costly more prone to error, requires oversight which requires overhead costs to run.

Not to mention having to keep liquid cash stored in other countries accounts to settle which is deflationary and could instead be used to make profit or lend, maybe keep in a more stable currency.

The current system most certainly locks out some countries from having corridors, the really volatile currencies.

You are either not informed enough of the process or being misleading.

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

I have posted openly what it costs to transact via SWIFT. It is not anywhere near expensive as you think.

Banks are there to make profit. A 4 cent transfer for the bank will still cost the customer $10+.

This is what people don’t realize. Banks need to profit. They’ll pass on the costs anyway they can.  Everyone likes to use the “their not using XRP or they’d save more” excuse. Reality is banks will be hesitant to invest heavily into something few others are using.  Add on training on top along with keeping current system and it’s a large headache for most banks.  Ripple is building a lot of partnerships but has yet to produce any significant xrapid or XRP usage. It seems more clear many are utilizing their other software solutions. 

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

This is what people don’t realize. Banks need to profit. They’ll pass on the costs anyway they can.  Everyone likes to use the “their not using XRP or they’d save more” excuse. Reality is banks will be hesitant to invest heavily into something few others are using.  Add on training on top along with keeping current system and it’s a large headache for most banks.  Ripple is building a lot of partnerships but has yet to produce any significant xrapid or XRP usage. It seems more clear many are utilizing their other software solutions. 

Yes disruption sometimes causes headaches, and those not willing to deal with it will eventually cease to exist. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, VanGogh said:

Yes disruption sometimes causes headaches, and those not willing to deal with it will eventually cease to exist. 

Yeah, but the big players are not going to be troubled by the likes of Moneygram and Western Union which are small fry.

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

This is what people don’t realize. Banks need to profit. They’ll pass on the costs anyway they can.  Everyone likes to use the “their not using XRP or they’d save more” excuse. Reality is banks will be hesitant to invest heavily into something few others are using.  Add on training on top along with keeping current system and it’s a large headache for most banks.  Ripple is building a lot of partnerships but has yet to produce any significant xrapid or XRP usage. It seems more clear many are utilizing their other software solutions. 

Every business aims to make a profit, not just banks. They will try to maximise their profit margins but that does not mean that they are always able to remain profitable (by passing costs down to consumers) or rake in the profits that they have targeted to earn. Banks are subject to market forces just as any other non-monopoly is. In the face of competition, market participants have to push fees down to remain competitive, or to put it even more bluntly, just to remain relevant. The disruption of any sector forces profit margins down and the participants will start to cannibalise one other (no matter how big they are or how chummy they once were) as the going gets tough.

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

Yeah, but the big players are not going to be troubled by the likes of Moneygram and Western Union which are small fry.

Maybe not in lending or other stuff, but in cross border remittances speed and cost are king. Capitalism will flush out those not able to compete eventually. Including the old guard banks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Babelly said:

Can you expand on that thought why? 

While not said otherwise this has nothing to do with Ripple. This means that banks that were Ripple's partners just did a successful trial with Ripple competition. If one day they say it was through Ripple then I will celebrate, meanwhile it is bad news. 

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

it amazes you because you didnt know every bank in this group was a ripple partner did you?

A lot of stuff must amaze you when you don't do your homework or have a mental condition. 

There are two Chinese banks which aren't for starters. Bank of China had one unsubstantiated tweet that it was thinking about it but no other news saying it was part of Ripplenet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Finesse said:

Maybe not in lending or other stuff, but in cross border remittances speed and cost are king. Capitalism will flush out those not able to compete eventually. Including the old guard banks. 

Australia's Big 4 aren't going anywhere, anytime soon. Even without Ripple.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Finesse said:

oh my god are you serious here, i understand you work at a bank, i do as well.

Im almost certain you are not responsible for foreign transactions.

Swift is a messaging platform the real cost comes from settlement.

Every bank or stop makes the transaction more costly more prone to error, requires oversight which requires overhead costs to run.

Not to mention having to keep liquid cash stored in other countries accounts to settle which is deflationary and could instead be used to make profit or lend, maybe keep in a more stable currency.

The current system most certainly locks out some countries from having corridors, the really volatile currencies.

You are either not informed enough of the process or being misleading.

Or lying even a customer advocate at a bank would have some what of a clue on how this works but I digress.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Freaky said:

Australia's Big 4 aren't going anywhere, anytime soon. Even without Ripple.

Australia's big 4 aren't going anywhere but their cross border remittance market share might.

Australia's big 4 are probably being taken to the cleaners by the banks that make a profit controlling cross border remittance settlement like JPM for example.

Ripple and xrp is superior to the current system in cost & speed so the market will naturally be disrupted if they don't adapt/adopt. I expect money-gram and similar companies to take over cross border remittances and trigger bank fomo.

I just bought some more xrp during this dip.

We believed in the project when it was 1$+ and i believe in it still at .32

 

Edited by Finesse
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.