Jump to content

Western union offers to buy moneygram


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It is clear why Western Union wants Moneygram. Let's start with what they don't want. They don't want the Moneygram +/- $ 878 million debt. They don't want some of the old school managers and outdated

False, when a company is dying and hurting like Moneygram is, is precisely when you buy it for pennies on the dollar and take over the whole market since WU is #1 and MG was #2. They are buying their

Keep in mind that ODL promises to improve capital efficiency, with shorter "inventory turnover cycles" it requires less cash inventory to support the same amount of demand for liquidity. That mea

Posted Images

This is interesting. I wonder would they buy Ripple out of MoneyGram or does Ripple keep it's portion.

With regards to ODL, Western Union has claimed that they do not need Ripple's product. Therefore, if Western Union is taking over MoneyGram, they could possibly be trying to strong-arm Ripple out of a large piece of money transfer services for the time being. This would give Western Union even more control over the money transfer service market and provide even less of an incentive to use Ripple's ODL.

Edited by AlejoMoreno
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Frisia said:

If a company is dying the last thing you would is buy it. Just wait and let it die...

False, when a company is dying and hurting like Moneygram is, is precisely when you buy it for pennies on the dollar and take over the whole market since WU is #1 and MG was #2. They are buying their customer base, their locations, etc etc for peanuts.

Edited by LetHerRip
Link to post
Share on other sites

  

3 hours ago, cryptoxrp said:

If a merger or takeover becomes a reality than we'll see a faster roll-out of ODL across the globe. You are seeing the birth of SWIFT 2.0 in front of your eyes.

If a merger or takeover becomes reality you can probably kiss ODL's only  "real" use case down the drain. Ripple is left with nothing.

WU have tested Ripples products and have decided not to use them.

https://fortune.com/2018/06/13/ripple-xrp-cryptocurrency-western-union/

Ripple would gladly pay WU (as they do MG) for them to use Ripple products, but even so they don't want to use it. So If WU takes over, the MG-Ripple partnership will most likely be canceled.

What WU wants is MG, if they wanted Ripple software or products they would already have had them and been paid to do so at the same time.

Edited by LetHerRip
Link to post
Share on other sites

^^

And their trained staff, their local knowledge, their assets (incl software).  WU said Ripple didn't work with their systems.  MGI has obviously made it work with theirs, the software package and practices as a whole system (of which ODL will be a fraction) may be of interest to them.  Looking forward they're probably thinking more about competing with the online money transfer providers as well as grabbing more market share in the cash market as a priority with technology gains from the acquisition being a nice to have.

Edited by PlanK
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LetHerRip said:

False, when a company is dying and hurting like Moneygram is, is precisely when you buy it for pennies on the dollar and take over the whole market since WU is #1 and MG was #2. They are buying their customer base, their locations, etc etc for peanuts.

Not necessarily. When buying a company, you take the good with the bad. And the bad can come in many different forms. Typically, dying companies have a lot of debt and other liabilities. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, LetHerRip said:

False, when a company is dying and hurting like Moneygram is, is precisely when you buy it for pennies on the dollar and take over the whole market since WU is #1 and MG was #2. They are buying their customer base, their locations, etc etc for peanuts.

They would also be buying the current debt of 850+ million dollars of which they become liable for and has to be solved. If a company is dying, and has that much debt you let it die, and then receive their customers anyway.

So there is something else in it for them that they want to do it now. And no, I'm not saying Ripple/XRP.

This is however an interesting article and depicts how far most remittance companies are behind on their digital offering.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielwebber/2020/05/28/how-money-transfer-companies-squeezed-four-years-of-digital-growth-into-just-two-months/#398abb2aa7b6

Edited by Caracappa
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Frisia said:

If a company is dying the last thing you would is buy it. Just wait and let it die...

It's better to buy them then letting someone else buy them. If someone else buys them then that keeps MG in the game competing against WU.

If WU buys them then not only does this eliminate competition but WU can absorb the good parts that MG has been investing in recent times and that's the digital front. This is what WU lacks and is falling behind against its peers. MG on the otherhand has been investing heavily in their digital front where they saw a lot more growth then the rest of their business.

It makes sense for WU to buy a dying MG because each have what the other lacks. Edit: By this I also mean where MG is in debt but WU is cash rich. 

Will this deal happen though? Probably not. If WU has made an offer then there's probably other suitors out their who have also made offers.

Edited by GrayFox
Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps they see MG's growth in the digital part of their business and they extrapolate that growth, over time that looks like a possible threat to some market share. 

Would they be able to muscle ripple and xrp use out of the deal? Maybe, but that doesn't seem to make sense. I believe that if they truly didn't see MG as a threat they would have let them die as others have said, MG (until recently) haven't been a threat - so why choose now to take over? I think it's because they want a piece of that sweet digital transfer pie? They want it now, they want it before the growth means in the future it's more expensive. Their long term plan is probably to go all ODL, but for now they want to keep their current model of ripping off customers, and milking that for as long as possible, then they make a switch as more pressure is applied by customers and regulators to lower their cross border fees. 

Not fact, just my opinions

Edited by Xrpdude
Minor errors
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.