Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Bruhne said:

Ripple’s wasteful expenses (Snoop, Counting Crows, Ellen, etc).

Ripple struggles to attract top talent, so associating the company with these famous entities puts them in a favorable light. It's a strategic purchase.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RippleFan4124 said:

Ripple struggles to attract top talent, so associating the company with these famous entities puts them in a favorable light. It's a strategic purchase.   

Then they need to struggle their tales off until they can bring in the talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I do not agree with you although I appreciate your point of view.  Some people who suddenly get rich retain their frugal instincts others become wasteful.  I am pretty sure the same can be said of companies.  One of the best indicators of Ripple going wasteful would be seen in their offices, cars and salaries; are they wasting money on having plush offices, expensive cars and huge bonuses and salaries.  Swell, with speeches by Bill Clinton, look a bit a bit lavish?

No way of knowing about their salaries or bonuses (David Swartz recently sold a lot of his XRP to "de-risk", this seems to indicate he does not get a huge salary and huge bonuses? ).  So we are left with the looking at their offices and cars (has anyone noticed Brad in a super expensive car, are their offices unnecessarily large, showy and expensively located?).  My uniformed impression is they are setting up a network of offices where they are needed.  The offices look neither frugal or wasteful, but I am willing to be corrected.

About funding projects, marketing budgets and giving away to charities; it is really difficult to judge if they are spending their money effectively.  Mistakes will be made with budgets this large in a such a small nascent industry.  Moneygram might not work out like they expect, but it looks like a good investment.  XPring initiatives will go wrong but some will succeed (we hope, the returns on success stories could be huge).  Coil looks like an intelligent stab at being first into the cross border streaming of micropayments; if it works it could be bigger than XRapid and banks. Investing in providing payment facilities for gaming platforms looks like a very good idea because these games are used by young people who often lead in adoption of new trends.  Setting up offices strategically in financial centres looks a good move.  Ramping up employees in India and S America looks like a response to demand.

You mention BTC.  To me this is where your criticism seems to fall down.  BTC wastes nearly every cent of the new investment money that comes into their community on paying lavish electricity bills for miners, and what remains goes into the pockets of miners as profits to be spent on lavish live-styles (mostly in China).  One of the big attractions about XRP is that the new money coming in is spent on growing the XRPecosystem.  What's not to like?

 

Edited by Julian_Williams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm not exactly sure what to call it , but there is a paradox here.

In the long term, it would seem to benefit all of us for XRP to be as widely disseminated as possible, or at least widely disseminated among potential xRapid users.

So how does that happen? They could give it away. Since I paid a higher price than today's price, I don't see that as necessarily fair-minded...although I could endure it if it led to widespread adoption.

Selling it into the market seems to be what is keeping XRP price stuck in this range...or it's at least part of it. In their favor, Ripple has responded to complaints about that already and promised to sell less....well see, I guess.

Getting a majority of XRP into non-Ripple hands would seem to be the best way to deal with allegations that XRP is a security, so that makes a good reason to sell as much as possible as quickly as possible, from a Ripple corporate perspective. And it might be best for hodlrs in the long term....even though the short term pain is significant.

I do have some concerns about XRP losing first mover advantage as the premier digital asset in existence....but frankly, you can thank the banks for that. I think the banking cartel has been stonewalling XRP adoption in the US, using their tremendous clout.....I have a strong suspicion this is why regs here are delayed while every other country in the world figures them out.

There is one other piece to this, unrelated to any of the above....the vast majority  of alt coin projects (and I'm talking about the good ones) have been hard hit this year...and it has everything to do with a blatantly manipulated bitcoin market and the behavior of the BTC whales who have figured out how to make us hodlrs their whipping  boys. You can't blame that on Ripple.

XRP, considering the huge supply, has done better than several other coins I like nearly as much.

I feel your pain. All of us want to make some money, and none of us wants to see XRP be eclipsed by the fierce completion in this space. It's a risky market...no guarantees of massive returns, although they are still possible, in my view. Not sure Ripple can make that happen by going "lean and mean"

 

Edited by dr_ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sporticus said:

 

It has been suggested that XRP is a security issued by Ripple and that the company is engaging in a forever ICO. Ripple denies this. Ripple has been sued and that case is slowly making its way through the court and is being delayed by procedural impediments Ripple throws in the way of the Plaintiffs.Ripple could very easily resolve any questions about what the SEC position is on the security status of XRP.  The company could do the honest thing, put up or shut-up, pay the paltry filing fee and allow the SEC to give a no action opinion on the securities status of XRP. 

 

This is simple boys and girls.  Ripple has good securities lawyers on staff and on retainer.  They all must know this because they have SEC revolving door counsel representing them.

But because Ripple obviously does not want to seek the truth, or have the public know the truth,  their executives and lawyers continue to delay, obfuscate and falsify the facts and law  about the securities status of their golden egg.  

But the results are easily determined with a simple substitution  of terms in the Turn Key Jet memo, which I have done below.  If you do not belieeve me, I supplied the links.  

 

As Cointelegraph reported today, the SEC has published a framework to help market participants ascertain whether or not a digital asset is deemed to be an investment contract, and therefore a security. https://cointelegraph.com/news/us-sec-releases-no-action-letter-confirming-turnkey-jet-ico-tokens-are-not-securities

 

Ripple aligning its tokenomics to comply with the current SEC position on ICO's as announced in the SEC  Turn Key Jet no action memo of April 2nd 2019 would moot all the issues of dilution and the propsect of a securities action or the class action suit succeeding.  

 

So why is Ripple delaying the ascertainment  based on the SEC  framework released in April?

 

Ripple should tell us why they have not asked for a no action position from the SEC to back up their claims of not being a security.  The burden is on Ripple to have their securities issuance operation vetted by the regulatory authorities and not to do so is fraudulent conduct continued.


The issue of the nonsecurities characterization of XRP would take RIPPLE out of any conttroversy and XRP could rise organically based on use case and healthy and non-manipulated speculation.   

The issue of Ripple's securities violations could very easily be solved were Ripple to act like any other law abiding and prudent entity whose digital assets were scrutinized as securities. 

RIPPLE MUST APPLY FOR A NO ACTION POSITION FROM THE SEC ASAP IF IT WOULD MAKE AN HONEST CLAIM TO BEING REGULATED!

THE TEXT BELOW IS TAKEN OUT OF THE TURN KEY JET NO ACTION LETTER AND ONLY THE NAMES OF RIPPLE AND XRP HAVE  BEEN SUBSTITUTED 

RIPPLE will not use any funds from XRP sales to develop the Ripple Platform, Network, or App, and each of these will be fully developed and operational at the time any XRP are sold;

XRP will be immediately usable for their intended functionality (bridging international transactions) at the time they are sold;
 

RIPPLE will restrict transfers of XRP to RIPPLE Wallets only, and not to wallets external to the Platform;
 

RIPPLE will sell XRP at a fixed price throughout the life of the Program, and each XRP will represent a RIPPLE obligation services at a fixed value.;
 

If RIPPLE offers to repurchase XRP, it will only do so at a discount to the face value of the XRP that the holder seeks to resell to RIPPLE, unless a court within the United States orders RIPPLE to liquidate the XRP; and
 

The XRP is marketed in a manner that emphasizes the functionality of the XRP, and not the potential for the increase in the market value of the XRP.the Tokens will be immediately usable for their intended functionality (bridging international transactions) at the time they are sold;
RIPPLE will restrict transfers of Tokens to RIPPLE Wallets only, and not to wallets external to the Platform;

https://www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin/cf-noaction/2019/turnkey-jet-040219-2a1.htm

 

DEMAND RIPPLE APPLY FOR A NO ACTION POSITION.

 

 

Well said.  I’ll go back and give it another read when I free up some time.

Share this post


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

I do not agree with you although I appreciate your point of view.  Some people who suddenly get rich retain their frugal instincts others become wasteful.  I am pretty sure the same can be said of companies.  One of the best indicators of Ripple going wasteful would be seen in their offices, cars and salaries; are they wasting money on having plush offices, expensive cars and huge bonuses and salaries.  Swell, with speeches by Bill Clinton, look a bit a bit lavish?

No way of knowing about their salaries or bonuses (David Swartz recently sold a lot of his XRP to "de-risk", this seems to indicate he does not get a huge salary and huge bonuses? ).  So we are left with the looking at their offices and cars (has anyone noticed Brad in a super expensive car, are their offices unnecessarily large, showy and expensively located?).  My uniformed impression is they are setting up a network of offices where they are needed.  The offices look neither frugal or wasteful, but I am willing to be corrected.

About funding projects, marketing budgets and giving away to charities; it is really difficult to judge if they are spending their money effectively.  Mistakes will be made with budgets this large in a such a small nascent industry.  Moneygram might not work out like they expect, but it looks like a good investment.  XPring initiatives will go wrong but some will succeed (we hope, the returns on success stories could be huge).  Coil looks like an intelligent stab at being first into the cross border streaming of micropayments; if it works it could be bigger than XRapid and banks. Investing in providing payment facilities for gaming platforms looks like a very good idea because these games are used by young people who often lead in adoption of new trends.  Setting up offices strategically in financial centres looks a good move.  Ramping up employees in India and S America looks like a response to demand.

You mention BTC.  To me this is where your criticism seems to fall down.  BTC wastes nearly every cent of the new investment money that comes into their community on paying lavish electricity bills for miners, and what remains goes into the pockets of miners as profits to be spent on lavish live-styles (mostly in China).  One of the big attractions about XRP is that the new money coming in is spent on growing the XRPecosystem.  What's not to like?

 

Bitcoin is doing a much better job serving as a store of value than Ripple is satisfying its objectives for XRP.  Nonetheless, we’ll said.  I look forward to giving it another read when I free-up some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I guess I'll post the entire Turnkey Jet, INC page.

Why did you leave out important information? (What was left out was underlined)

 

Securities Act of 1933
Section 2(a)(1)

April 3, 2019

Response of the Division of Corporation Finance

Re:

TurnKey Jet, Inc.
Incoming letter dated April 2, 2019

Based on the facts presented, the Division will not recommend enforcement action to the Commission if, in reliance on your opinion as counsel that the Tokens are not securities, TKJ offers and sells the Tokens without registration under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act. Capitalized terms have the same meanings as defined in your letter.

In reaching this position, we particularly note that:

TKJ will not use any funds from Token sales to develop the TKJ Platform, Network, or App, and each of these will be fully developed and operational at the time any Tokens are sold;
 

the Tokens will be immediately usable for their intended functionality (purchasing air charter services) at the time they are sold;
 

TKJ will restrict transfers of Tokens to TKJ Wallets only, and not to wallets external to the Platform;
 

TKJ will sell Tokens at a price of one USD per Token throughout the life of the Program, and each Token will represent a TKJ obligation to supply air charter services at a value of one USD per Token;
 

If TKJ offers to repurchase Tokens, it will only do so at a discount to the face value of the Tokens (one USD per Token) that the holder seeks to resell to TKJ, unless a court within the United States orders TKJ to liquidate the Tokens; and
 

The Token is marketed in a manner that emphasizes the functionality of the Token, and not the potential for the increase in the market value of the Token.

This position is based on the representations made to the Division in your letter. Any different facts or conditions might require the Division to reach a different conclusion. Further, this response expresses the Division's position on enforcement action only and does not express any legal conclusion on the question presented.

Sincerely,

Share this post


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

I'm not exactly sure what to call it , but there is a paradox here.

In the long term, it would seem to benefit all of us for XRP to be as widely disseminated as possible, or at least widely disseminated among potential xRapid users.

So how does that happen? They could give it away. Since I paid a higher price than today's price, I don't see that as necessarily fair-minded...although I could endure it if it led to widespread adoption.

 Selling it into the market seems to be what is keeping XRP price stuck in this range...or it's at least part of it. In their favor, Ripple has responded to complaints about that already and promised to sell less....well see, I guess.

Getting a majority of XRP into non-Ripple hands would seem to be the best way to deal with allegations that XRP is a security, so that makes a good reason to sell as much as possible as quickly as possible, from a Ripple corporate perspective. And it might be best for hodlrs in the long term....even though the short term pain is significant.

I do have some concerns about XRP losing first mover advantage as the premier digital asset in existence....but frankly, you can thank the banks for that. I think the banking cartel has been stonewalling XRP adaption in the US, using their tremendous clout.....I have a strong suspicion this is why regs here are delayed while every other country in the world figures them out.

There is one other piece to this, unrelated to any of the above....the vast majority  of alt coin projects (and I'm talking about the good ones) have been hard hit this year...and it has everything to do with a blatantly manipulated bitcoin market and the behavior of the BTC whales who have figured out how to make us hodlrs their whipping  boys. You can't blame that on Ripple.

XRP, considering the huge supply, has done better than several other coins I like nearly as much.

I feel your pain. All of us want to make some money, and none of us wants to see XRP be eclipsed by the fierce completion in this space. It's a risky market...no guarantees of massive returns, although they are still possible, in my view. Not sure Ripple can make that happen by going "lean and mean"

 

It's a tough problem. Giving XRP away would lead to dumping and upset everyone who paid for their coins. Selling a significant amount would suppress the price. The only reasonable solution I've heard was Bob Way's description of using Ripple's XRP to directly incentivize market makers who provide liquidity for xRapid transactions, which in theory wouldn't put downward pressure on the price. Sadly I don't believe we've heard a word about it from Ripple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Bob Way's solution. Unfortunately I think we are waiting on regulation. The interesting thing/big ole this is going to take a while is that market makers have to meet regulation in country A with country B. So liquidity maybe great from Brazil to Philippines, but then if either of those country's reg's are not in place a black of hole of waiting commences.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, peanut56 said:

Well I guess I'll post the entire Turnkey Jet, INC page.

Why did you leave out important information? (What was left out was underlined)

 

Securities Act of 1933
Section 2(a)(1)

April 3, 2019

Response of the Division of Corporation Finance

Re:

TurnKey Jet, Inc.
Incoming letter dated April 2, 2019

Based on the facts presented, the Division will not recommend enforcement action to the Commission if, in reliance on your opinion as counsel that the Tokens are not securities, TKJ offers and sells the Tokens without registration under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act. Capitalized terms have the same meanings as defined in your letter.

In reaching this position, we particularly note that:

TKJ will not use any funds from Token sales to develop the TKJ Platform, Network, or App, and each of these will be fully developed and operational at the time any Tokens are sold;
 

the Tokens will be immediately usable for their intended functionality (purchasing air charter services) at the time they are sold;
 

TKJ will restrict transfers of Tokens to TKJ Wallets only, and not to wallets external to the Platform;
 

TKJ will sell Tokens at a price of one USD per Token throughout the life of the Program, and each Token will represent a TKJ obligation to supply air charter services at a value of one USD per Token;
 

If TKJ offers to repurchase Tokens, it will only do so at a discount to the face value of the Tokens (one USD per Token) that the holder seeks to resell to TKJ, unless a court within the United States orders TKJ to liquidate the Tokens; and
 

The Token is marketed in a manner that emphasizes the functionality of the Token, and not the potential for the increase in the market value of the Token.

This position is based on the representations made to the Division in your letter. Any different facts or conditions might require the Division to reach a different conclusion. Further, this response expresses the Division's position on enforcement action only and does not express any legal conclusion on the question presented.

Sincerely,

Peanut:

 

YOU HAVE NOT EXPLAINED WHY RIPPLE HAS NOT APPLIED FOR AN SEC "NO ACTION" POSITION LETTER>

The operative issue is, why Ripple has not sought a NO ACTION position from the SEC? 

Share this post


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

Peanut:

 

YOU HAVE NOT EXPLAINED WHY RIPPLE HAS NOT APPLIED FOR AN SEC "NO ACTION" POSITION LETTER>

The operative issue is, why Ripple has not sought a NO ACTION position from the SEC? 

Oh ok...   it’s clearly become suddenly serious once we start writing in red and underlining.

slap hit GIF by Ovation TV

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bruhne said:

I’m long-term all the way...  and it’s not about me getting rich.  I’m more interested in Ripple stepping up their game and implementing xRapid.  But it seems they keep adding to their product line before they even execute on their primary purpose.  I feel they’re losing focus and need to get back in scope.  It’s causing excess dilution, which results in diminished sentiment.

Initially, this was their one and only primary focus. However, they realised that the banks were just not coming quick enough (despite their PR of signing 2 banks a week) so started branching out to other use cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the red ink describes how Ripple could come clean and stop their charades and avoiding burning the XRP Hodlers: the SEC will tell them  and us if XRP is a security or not and the Turn Key Jet No Action letter is the standard the SEC announced which it now uses in its securities determination. 

Ripple should step right up and back up their claims that they are not a security in the manner that this is done. apply for a "no action" letter. 

The  more Ripple puts off the inevitable, the more Hodlers are burned and the worse the result will be for the company and everyone else.

 

The class action law suit in the Northern District of California will be determined based upon the SEC's April 2nd,  Turn Key Jet no action position .The securities investment contract test the SEC uses  is likely to become more restrictive as it has become over the past two years. The California test is even more sever and involves the risk capital test.  Ripple conducts its business in California and that is the test applicable.  No wonder the company wanted to get out of the California courts, But the federal court will also apply the California law under the Erie doctrine. 

Ripple should just destroy the remaining tokens and stop their securities scam.  otherwise, the result is not likely to be pretty. 

The bed rock use case and the  whole notion that XRP will replace the $USD and SWIFT is simply not well thought and is ill considered. The way the United States sanctions countries is to deny them access to SWIFT.  

Just ask the keepers of the H bombs and aircraft carrier groups who took down Qaddafi and Hussein, what they want to do with those who challenge the USD hegemony like  Kaiser Zucchini Burger for daring to replace the dollar. 

 

Martha Stewart took a hike for something considerably less offensive.

 

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...