Jump to content

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, Sporticus said:

At the very least Garlinghouse and the others should just keep their  traps shut and quit with the securities yammering and hyping the XRP.

This certainly sounds like a man with no axe to grind about Ripple.   :) 

Share this post


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

 Ripple never pushed xrp to replace US dollar. What is your basis for saying this non-sense? 

Ripple’s Chief Market Strategist, Cory Johnson, echoed Larsen’s sentiments in discussing the global payments dilemma at Cryptonite World earlier this week.

“The average time it takes to use SWIFT, the dominant methodology to move money for financial institutions, is 3–5 days at 500 basis points. For the Middle East it’s 900 basis points with a 600 basis error rate. If it costs 9% to move money and you have an 8% net profit margin, it’s not worth doing business globally.”

“There’s $27 trillion laying in NOSTRO accounts around the world that is not being used to grow commerce because countries and companies are pre-funding payments. Amazon alone has $1 billion in NOSTRO accounts for when they need to pay vendors and payroll.
 
“If the U.S. doesn’t get its act together and create clear lanes for commerce for blockchain companies to exist, those entrepreneurs will get on a plane for Singapore tomorrow or Switzerland or Lichtenstein or Malta.”
https://hackernoon.com/ripples-quest-to-unleash-trillions-in-global-payments-192b195b2084

This has been discussed many times in the past  conferences by Brad Garlinghouse. 

One of the principal claims made by Ripple for XRP is that it would free up $5tn that is “sitting dormant” in bank nostro/vostro accounts around the world. In a blogpost, Ripple says that this “ties up capital that could be used in more productive ways.” Using a digital asset such as XRP as a bridging currency for foreign payments could, according to Ripple, enable banks and payment providers to “free up the assets that would normally be committed to funding nostro accounts around the world.”

There’s only one problem with this. It’s not true.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2019/02/10/there-is-no-such-thing-as-dormant-funds-in-banking/#389814135aef

image.png.53073824b6dee90ded9e8ba7eb258b7d.png

And Ripple never “issued” the  token

 In the second quarter, we sold only a tiny amount of XRP to fund our business, $140 million, that’s less than 1% of the trading volume. 

 https://hackernoon.com/ripples-quest-to-unleash-trillions-in-global-payments-192b195b2084

Guide to Definitions of Terms Used in Form D - SEC.gov 

Jul 14, 2017 - The term "issuer" means every person who issues or proposes to issue any security; except that with respect to certificates of deposit, voting-trust certificates, or collateral-trust certificates, or with respect to certificates of interest or shares in an unincorporated investment trust not having a board of directors ...https://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/formddefinitions.htm 

There are few points of error that makes your whole argument sound delusional.  

de·lu·sion·al

characterized by or holding idiosyncratic beliefs or impressions that are contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.

based on or having faulty judgment; mistaken.

 

 

 

 

 

 

image.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look Sparticus one of two things will happen. The SEC will either declare xrp a security and you will be on here with the I told you so why everyone weeps of their loses and tries to figure out the next move in order to not be fined for the improper purchases of securities or you will be wrong in which case we will more than likely never here from you again.

I guess since you are so damn sure it is a security I would suggest working with legislation to layout laws that govern the distribution methods of tokens in order for there to be absolute clarity. Once that occurs Ripple Labs can adhere to those rules. Then Ripple can either buyback every single unregistered security that they sold or they can follow the distribution method laid out by legislation in which xrp would not be deemed a security.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Sporticus said:

 

image.png

For me, The reply confirms your argument is decisional from misinformation.

Xrp is not meant to replace dollar and it was never issued from Ripple.  This has been argued many times in the past. You are just a misinformed guy. That’s all. Your argument  is nothing new.

 

“Garlinghouse and Larsen believe that cryptocurrencies have the opportunity to “complement” fiat currencies like the U.S. dollar and “not replace them,” and that the U.S. has the chance to lead in the space.”

https://www.theblockcrypto.com/tiny/ripple-ceo-writes-open-letter-to-congress-over-regulatory-uncertainty/

 

Edited by quan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

How can XRP be considered a security when it was created or came into existing before Ripple as a company existed?

Ripple does not sell XRP directly to people. Speculators buy it from exchanges, not Ripple. Ripple has shares that are unrelated to XRP. 

To me it's quite simple. It isn't a security. Then why not fill out the form mentioned above? Heck, I would understand if Ripple was stringing things along to find out who is financing these lawsuits... because these speculators can't possibly be doing it. 

Share this post


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

This certainly sounds like a man with no axe to grind about Ripple.   :) 

Great to see you're still around tiny. 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, peanut56 said:

Look Sparticus one of two things will happen. The SEC will either declare xrp a security and you will be on here with the I told you so why everyone weeps of their loses and tries to figure out the next move in order to not be fined for the improper purchases of securities or you will be wrong in which case we will more than likely never here from you again.

I guess since you are so damn sure it is a security I would suggest working with legislation to layout laws that govern the distribution methods of tokens in order for there to be absolute clarity. Once that occurs Ripple Labs can adhere to those rules. Then Ripple can either buyback every single unregistered security that they sold or they can follow the distribution method laid out by legislation in which xrp would not be deemed a security.

I have been working on legislation like you refer to on behalf of tribal government clients and we are in contact with the SEC as well as a couple of state securities departments.  Unlike Ripple one of my client's has  a  payment and tracking system that has an actual use case and no tokens can be used outside their system, and it is $USD asset backed and conforms to Turn Key Jet memo.   I would not dream of advising a client on launching a token without a no action letter. Anyone who invests or buys your token deserves to know that the SEC will not shut you down. The way you limit third party risk is with a no action position in advance of operations. 

I know quite a few people in crypto from conferences and working with investors,  other lawyers and developers.  Many of the people whom I have met are not ethical and they are in it to con the public, clients  or investors for a fast buck.  But there are a few who get the opportunity to actually find beneficial applications for blockchain tech. 

 Ripple  has a problem as a first mover and has a model that simply does not comply with the securities laws. The class action suit is very well written and accurate and everyone should read it who is exposed to risk of loss.  Ripple did not thoroughly investigate the legal ramifications of its actions from inception.  It began to be seen early on  with the problem involving FinCEN and not getting a money services business license. Anyone with any good sense or financial experience knows that you must comply with AML and KYC and make SARs. Ripple is careless and reckless like Facebook and thought that the new tech allows it to disregard the laws,. It will be finding out this is not the case and those who are invested in XRP need to grab their ears and yank their heads out of G-House behind. 

If XRP had the actual use case which Ripple has promoted for the last several years, then there would be a consistent rise in utility  volume, but that has not happened.  Ripple hyping XRP and using XRP to fund itself is illegal per se under the Howie Rule. Everyone here is an investor and expects a profit without any effort and   the value of XRP is influenced by Ripple. That is a security under Howie.

Facebook agreed to pay a $5 B fine and its  customers' data  mining model for income is in jeopardy.  Now it is pivoting to Libra to monetize ads and that is causing wider scrutiny by government. The FB  pivot to crypto has caused policy makers to take notice and even Trump has tweeted that cryptos will not be allowed to compete with the dollar.  US Congress has been investigating crypto too. This has all been happening lately at the same time I have been working with regulators and I have noticed  their posture has become more rigid and they are less interested in the innovative aspects of distributed ledger tech. Bitcoin is constantly implicated in crime, national security issues and is a waste of energy.   USDT is a fraud.  Now Ripple is being sued and the law suit is factually and legally sound.

I think blockchain can be a truth machine, but the charlatans that are running most of these platforms are less than trustworthy and that includes Ripple. 

They need to be bulldozed aside and ethical systems which are amenable to law and public protection will invariably displace the anarchy of wild west crypto.

I have been trading since 2013 and I thoroughly believe in the tech for a variety of applications, but i think that companies like Ripple are not the answer and we have been the guinea pigs in the emerging industry.  

 

Share this post


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

Unlike Ripple one of my client's has  a  payment and tracking system that has an actual use case 

See this kind of biased and antagonistic bs is why your whole thesis is undermined.  There’s only two possibilities:

  1. If you really think that Ripple does not have a use case then your analytical skills are somewhat suspect.  
  2. If, on the other hand, you do realise that yes,  they do have a very valid use case, and yet you say stuff like the above...  then it’s clear that you are a biased and antagonistic poster with an anti-Ripple agenda.  

There are no other options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Sporticus said:

I have been working on legislation like you refer to on behalf of tribal government clients and we are in contact with the SEC as well as a couple of state securities departments.  Unlike Ripple one of my client's has  a  payment and tracking system that has an actual use case and no tokens can be used outside their system, and it is $USD asset backed and conforms to Turn Key Jet memo.   I would not dream of advising a client on launching a token without a no action letter. Anyone who invests or buys your token deserves to know that the SEC will not shut you down. The way you limit third party risk is with a no action position in advance of operations. 

I know quite a few people in crypto from conferences and working with investors,  other lawyers and developers.  Many of the people whom I have met are not ethical and they are in it to con the public, clients  or investors for a fast buck.  But there are a few who get the opportunity to actually find beneficial applications for blockchain tech. 

 Ripple  has a problem as a first mover and has a model that simply does not comply with the securities laws. The class action suit is very well written and accurate and everyone should read it who is exposed to risk of loss.  Ripple did not thoroughly investigate the legal ramifications of its actions from inception.  It began to be seen early on  with the problem involving FinCEN and not getting a money services business license. Anyone with any good sense or financial experience knows that you must comply with AML and KYC and make SARs. Ripple is careless and reckless like Facebook and thought that the new tech allows it to disregard the laws,. It will be finding out this is not the case and those who are invested in XRP need to grab their ears and yank their heads out of G-House behind. 

If XRP had the actual use case which Ripple has promoted for the last several years, then there would be a consistent rise in utility  volume, but that has not happened.  Ripple hyping XRP and using XRP to fund itself is illegal per se under the Howie Rule. Everyone here is an investor and expects a profit without any effort and   the value of XRP is influenced by Ripple. That is a security under Howie.

Facebook agreed to pay a $5 B fine and its  customers' data  mining model for income is in jeopardy.  Now it is pivoting to Libra to monetize ads and that is causing wider scrutiny by government. The FB  pivot to crypto has caused policy makers to take notice and even Trump has tweeted that cryptos will not be allowed to compete with the dollar.  US Congress has been investigating crypto too. This has all been happening lately at the same time I have been working with regulators and I have noticed  their posture has become more rigid and they are less interested in the innovative aspects of distributed ledger tech. Bitcoin is constantly implicated in crime, national security issues and is a waste of energy.   USDT is a fraud.  Now Ripple is being sued and the law suit is factually and legally sound.

I think blockchain can be a truth machine, but the charlatans that are running most of these platforms are less than trustworthy and that includes Ripple. 

They need to be bulldozed aside and ethical systems which are amenable to law and public protection will invariably displace the anarchy of wild west crypto.

I have been trading since 2013 and I thoroughly believe in the tech for a variety of applications, but i think that companies like Ripple are not the answer and we have been the guinea pigs in the emerging industry.  

 

SEC have said more than once that a crypto may start as a security and morph out of being a security.  The wording looked like it was deliberately targeted as a green light towards Ripple. My impression is that the situation has being drifting from Grey to black and white, and the more time passes, the more XRP is adopted, the more XRP is free from this security label.   

If I was SEC I would not fine Ripple, instead I would ask them to put 90% of the XRP they own into some sort of fund for the benefit of growing the XRP ecosystem and administered by a third party.  As you write Ripple were first mover, the laws are getting sufficiently clear now to act on scams before these sorts of situations arise.

That the UK have given the green light to XRP indicates to me that the US SEC agency is coming under strong international pressure to end this regulatory ambiguity.

Edited by Julian_Williams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Julian_Williams said:

SEC have said more than once that a crypto may start as a security and morph out of being a security.  The wording looked like it was deliberately targeted as a green light towards Ripple. My impression is that the situation has being drifting from Grey to black and white, and the more time passes, the more XRP is adopted, the more XRP is free from this.   

If I was SEC I would not fine Ripple, instead I would ask them to put 90% of the XRP they own into some sort of fund for the benefit of the XRP community administered by a third party.  As you write Ripple were first mover, the laws are getting sufficiently clear now to act on scams before these sorts of situations arise.

That the UK have given the green light to XRP indicates to me that teh US SEC agency is coming under strong pressure to end this regulatory ambiguity.

XRP  is not the problem, Ripple is the company that has flagrantly violated the US securities laws and has   tried to convince others that it has not so that they will keep on making purchases..  Judging by the zombie posts I have seen,          Ripple has been very successful at misleading the public that XRP is not a security.

. The laws of the UK are not operable in the US. Whatever violation of the securities laws by Ripple in the US  have occurred to this date are not capable of being dissolved or mitigated  by legislation. There is a prohibition in the US Const against ex post facto impairment of contracts. 

The problem in all of this is having businessmen and technologists decide how to proceed without considering first or heeding  the law.  

The first time I heard about an ICO in 2016, I knew it was unlawful and a scam. 

XRP should  be allowed to exist, but Ripple will need to get out of the validator node controlling position and should be required to disgorge illegally obtained assets. 

If its software business is viable, then it should be able to succeed with that. But it has succeeded mostly in a bait and switch conflating the software successes with the token XRP to hype the market.

I am not going to post any more, it is really no use and a waste of my time, like trying to teach pigs to sing opera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sporticus said:

it is really no use and a waste of my time, like trying to teach pigs to sing opera.

It becomes a problem when people actually believe they are superior to majority...

Sorry pall, that majority here won't bite into your agenda. But thank you for dropping by and the attempt to save us from ourselves!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sporticus said:

I am not going to post any more, it is really no use and a waste of my time, like trying to teach pigs to sing opera.

LOL you're just an obtuse person

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...