Jump to content

And we're in 2021 now LOL "Our XRP strategy cant wait that long" David Schwartz back in 2018


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

It is not just the 110 million that Brad took out of the market to put into his personal account (on top of his wages as CEO), but also the other 500m that CL took out of the market too.  Together this money would have added another 50% to the Ripple income available for investment in rolling out XRP and the XRP ecosystem.    I am told I take this matter much "too personally" and see it as a "betrayal".

SEC is a big problem, but it will be resolved quite quickly if both sides roll up their sleeves and sit down and discuss a way forward in a spirit of mutual respect.  Unfortunately the collateral damage of the revelations about amounts of money Brad and CL were taking out of the market have huge reputational ramifications for Ripple.  These separate allegations are a serious impediment for trust and respect across that negotiating table.   

ODL seems to have been halted by the SEC case, and sales of XRP halted by the Tetragon case.  Ripple is bleeding.  Time and acting decisively are so important during these difficult times.  Announcing a top team of lawyers to fight SEC does not resolve the reputational disaster Brad has created through his behaviour.   It makes no sense that Brad is still CEO and that nothing is happening to restore public confidence in Ripple's management structures.  

Well said.  I find it a bit sad that the "XRP community" are largely supporting BG/CL.  I bought back into XRP (much smaller holding), but I'm thinking of selling the lot and being done with it...and I'll buy back in again  only if BG/CL are meaningfully punished, where they cannot merely say a mea culpa and then get back on with their selling on the quiet.  The punishment would need to be a garnishing of their entire holdings and an escrow burn.  It probably won't happen. It's more likely the case that they will be punished lightly by the SEC or even settle.  In that case, it's the retail trader who paid the price, not BG/CL.  And yet, if we get that result, the "XRP community" will predictably celebrate.  It might even mean a price pump to 50c or 60c.  My advice is to GTFO of XRP if that's the case.  I just see more of the same - inorganic pumps and dumps.  In summary, the SEC scrutiny and court case "punishment" may well simply be "the cost of doing business" for BG/CL and they say mealy-mouthed words and the XRP community forgive them, and it's another 3 to 5 years of bag-holding and broken promises while they continue to sell on the quiet. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Many folks don't like a nuanced view, which I have too. They just want it to be "SEC bad!" or "Ripple/XRP bad!" as if both can't be both right and wrong about various issues here. It's not a straightf

It is not just the 110 million that Brad took out of the market to put into his personal account (on top of his wages as CEO), but also the other 500m that CL took out of the market too.  Together thi

We can quibble about the interpretations, but I think we all expected better things to have happened by now.

10 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

 Announcing a top team of lawyers to fight SEC does not resolve the reputational disaster Brad has created through his behavior.   It makes no sense that Brad is still CEO and that nothing is happening to restore public confidence in Ripple's management structures.  

And he's at the WEF this week LOL.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

It makes no sense that Brad is still CEO and that nothing is happening to restore public confidence in Ripple's management structures.  

Ripple is not retail oriented so I don't think they give a flying fork. They don't need retail for success or adoption.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, SquaryBone said:

Ripple is not retail oriented so I don't think they give a flying fork. They don't need retail for success or adoption.

What do you think other institutions think about BG, CL and the company that supports them? Exactly the same that many of us think about them. They aren't trustworthy (avoiding even worse adjetives). Companies are not gonna touch Ripple with a ten-foot pole unless many things change and maybe it is already too late for that. 

I am sure they are losing all customers as we speak.

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

What do you think other institutions think about BG, CL and the company that supports them? Exactly the same that many of us think about them. They aren't trustworthy (avoiding even worse adjetives). Companies are not gonna touch Ripple with a ten-foot pole unless many things change and maybe it is already too late for that. 

I am sure they are losing all customers as we speak.

Well I partly disagree. If XRP is not a security he didn't do anything wrong. That's the part where regulations are good for the space. I understand you don't hold on to all those XRPs forever (BG, CL, AB, ... are very much aware the XRP does not go to 589 EOY 2018). But to me it's weird that a CEO, which has inside information, can just sell XRP based on that information. So it would be logical to me that this information should be public. On the other hand reducing your XRP holdings would spook the markets. I wouldn't be mad if they did spook the market though. XRP has been overpriced for a long long time now and still is.

As for Ripple selling XRP at serious discounts: yes that doesn't send a very good signal. Loosing those customers is basically irrelevant since they don't use XRP though. :D 

Edited by SquaryBone
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 2ndtimearound said:

Well said.  I find it a bit sad that the "XRP community" are largely supporting BG/CL.  I bought back into XRP (much smaller holding), but I'm thinking of selling the lot and being done with it...and I'll buy back in again  only if BG/CL are meaningfully punished, where they cannot merely say a mea culpa and then get back on with their selling on the quiet.  The punishment would need to be a garnishing of their entire holdings and an escrow burn.  It probably won't happen. It's more likely the case that they will be punished lightly by the SEC or even settle.  In that case, it's the retail trader who paid the price, not BG/CL.  And yet, if we get that result, the "XRP community" will predictably celebrate.  It might even mean a price pump to 50c or 60c.  My advice is to GTFO of XRP if that's the case.  I just see more of the same - inorganic pumps and dumps.  In summary, the SEC scrutiny and court case "punishment" may well simply be "the cost of doing business" for BG/CL and they say mealy-mouthed words and the XRP community forgive them, and it's another 3 to 5 years of bag-holding and broken promises while they continue to sell on the quiet. 

I think the word "punishment" is wrong.  It is deep within our nature to want to see wrongdoers suffer consequences such as being punished, but that emotion is a distraction.  What we must concentrate on is seeing the damage this person's behaviour has done (is doing) rectified, which means they should be removed from their management positions and replaced by new managers who play with a straight bat (and I agree this news alone might be enough to pump XRP) . After they are removed it is better to forget about them because life is too short to waste on thinking about retribution. 

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

I think the word "punishment" is wrong.  It is deep within our nature to want to see wrongdoers suffer consequences such as being punished, but that emotion is a distraction.  What we must concentrate on is seeing the damage this person's behaviour has done (is doing) rectified, which means they should be removed from their management positions and replaced by new managers who play with a straight bat (and I agree this news alone might be enough to pump XRP) . After they are removed it is better to forget about them because life is too short to waste on thinking about retribution. 

Will BG and CL being removed from their position give them the same freedom and selling capabilities as Jed? Because if so, I would like them to stay at Ripple and restrict them from selling alltogether :p

Anyway, I imagine a settlement is still the best outcome. Fighting this in court for years does not seem beneficial for anyone. As has been said many times, being a security is a snapshot in time. XRP being sold by Ripple and it's founders (in the early days?) can be a security and could be fined, but us selling/buying XRP on an exchange today should not be. So banks using the ODL corridors for liquidity is no security either.

What I'm interested in mostly is whether BG and CL will fight this in court for years, in essence defending their own ego's and have Ripple being killed in the collateral or will they settle, be fined and let the usecase for Ripple and other parties such as Flare go on. I can not imagine the Board of directors at Ripple will let the company die to save the founders.

Summarized, I think settling is best and hope that will be the outcome as the other option will only produce losers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I also want to add is that many people on the forum speak as if BG and CL are allready convicted and what they are doing is a no no.

We knew they had holdings. It would be weird to expect they would not sell. I rather they sell in bearmarkets than when it would be in the multiple dollars. Also the complaint from the SEC that they were monitoring the markets during their sells sounds scary, as if they wanted to manipulate. But would it not be logical to have market makers track the markets to prevent their sells having too much of an impact. Left or right, they have to get rid of the XRP's.

The discussion whether the founders should have so many XRP's is a whole other one and I wish they did not. But bottomline is, they have them because of choices they made in the early days when it costs fractions of cents. And those need eventually to be distributed to build more and more liquidity in the market and lower the percentage of Founder/Ripple holdings. The time for giveaways have passed as JK mentioned... so what else can they do. CL donated $25mln to universities in 2018. But the more they donate the more selling charities there are. So whatever they would do, we will be angry with every choice they make.

Ofcourse burning them would be a solution but I think it would be a bad one also.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Caracappa said:

What I'm interested in mostly is whether BG and CL will fight this in court for years, in essence defending their own ego's and have Ripple being killed in the collateral or will they settle, be fined and let the usecase for Ripple and other parties such as Flare go on. I can not imagine the Board of Directors at Ripple will let the company die to save the founders.

 

It appears Chris and Brad have hired yes man to fill roles in the Board of Directors, rather than people who make decisions and vote in best interest of Ripple and their stakeholders.  Chis and Brad are both on the Board of Directors and were responsible for most of the the Board of Directors being hired. The other Board of Directors most likely feel they have an obligation to agree with Chris and Brad.

If they have already have let this go on to this point with all the lawsuits, including SEC and Tetragon; they will most likely not step in unless forced.  My prediction is, the other Board of Directors will only step in if the SEC requires them to step in.

Edited by wogojump
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Caracappa said:

Will BG and CL being removed from their position give them the same freedom and selling capabilities as Jed? Because if so, I would like them to stay at Ripple and restrict them from selling alltogether :p

Anyway, I imagine a settlement is still the best outcome. Fighting this in court for years does not seem beneficial for anyone. As has been said many times, being a security is a snapshot in time. XRP being sold by Ripple and it's founders (in the early days?) can be a security and could be fined, but us selling/buying XRP on an exchange today should not be. So banks using the ODL corridors for liquidity is no security either.

What I'm interested in mostly is whether BG and CL will fight this in court for years, in essence defending their own ego's and have Ripple being killed in the collateral or will they settle, be fined and let the usecase for Ripple and other parties such as Flare go on. I can not imagine the Board of directors at Ripple will let the company die to save the founders.

Summarized, I think settling is best and hope that will be the outcome as the other option will only produce losers.

Given their past record there is little reason to believe they will act in the best interest of their company.

Edited by Julian_Williams
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Julian_Williams said:

Given their past record there is little reason to believe they will act in the best interest of their company.

The distrust will have to be rooted out for Ripple to continue successfully and I'm sorry for those who like Brad and CL they are a big part of that distrust.  If Ripple as a company.  This all boils down to mismanagement, again as I have stated before, just because the police don't pull you over when they initially see you speeding doesn't mean you keep doing 120 down the road as if they won't eventually stop you.  The fact that the SEC did nothing for 7 years is irrelevant. As I said I am waiting to see what happens to BG and CL if turns out to be literally nothing and I am speaking from a Ripple perspective not the SEC, then I know this is trouble and I need to get out.  No way in hell should they remain in their positions with this going down.  Also they don't have to be Ripple employees to restrict their sales of XRP if that XRP was gained unlawfully.

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

I think the word "punishment" is wrong.  It is deep within our nature to want to see wrongdoers suffer consequences such as being punished, but that emotion is a distraction.  What we must concentrate on is seeing the damage this person's behaviour has done (is doing) rectified, which means they should be removed from their management positions and replaced by new managers who play with a straight bat (and I agree this news alone might be enough to pump XRP) . After they are removed it is better to forget about them because life is too short to waste on thinking about retribution. 

I don't really care what happens to these guys as "retribution", I just hope that the "punishment" benefits retail traders i.e. prevents BG/CL from abusing their position i.e. the penalty is their XRP holdings burned, escrow burned - this benefits retailer traders.  The whole point of this court case is to protect retail traders after all.    I personally don't trust Ripple now (as a whole) with the escrow - they can live off that for the next ten years while blowing smoke up our collective asses pretending that a mega-deal is "just around the corner", or they announce some contrived lame duck ODL "partnership" that's entirely propped up by Ripple (see: MG).  The enthusiasm from the "XRP community" knows no bounds, they lap it all up (as I did...before) - I reckon the retailers could prop up the price for years to come, we'll see some inorganic pumps followed by the usual dumps...always jam tomorrow, meanwhile other tokens are actually delivering on their promises and their prices are going up in an organic way (not dumping back to square one every time).

Link to post
Share on other sites

a little bird told me, the jury is being made up of the majority posters on xrpchat.

a rigged jury? guilty as charged?

20 minutes ago, RikkiTikki_is_Back said:

The fact that the SEC did nothing for 7 years is irrelevant

the sec should have acted 7years ago if it deems xrp an unregistered security being sold by the founders.

tThe fact it has waited for ripple to be rich in assets & cash shows their malevolence and incompetence in not acting in the interests of investors, they had the information all the time & there were various security related actions with shareholders, partner companies/institutions that they should have acted/prevented at the time of notifications.

on another note 

you dont know what BG & CL AB have done whith the proceeds,  They may be funding something very beneficial to the community for all you know,  they are rich before coming to ripple you surely must know that.

once they started OTC sales was enough to muddy the waters,and that was a long time ago. & everyone was ok with that.

Edited by paym8
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Caracappa said:

What I also want to add is that many people on the forum speak as if BG and CL are allready convicted and what they are doing is a no no.

We knew they had holdings. It would be weird to expect they would not sell. I rather they sell in bearmarkets than when it would be in the multiple dollars. Also the complaint from the SEC that they were monitoring the markets during their sells sounds scary, as if they wanted to manipulate. But would it not be logical to have market makers track the markets to prevent their sells having too much of an impact. Left or right, they have to get rid of the XRP's.

The discussion whether the founders should have so many XRP's is a whole other one and I wish they did not. But bottomline is, they have them because of choices they made in the early days when it costs fractions of cents. And those need eventually to be distributed to build more and more liquidity in the market and lower the percentage of Founder/Ripple holdings. The time for giveaways have passed as JK mentioned... so what else can they do. CL donated $25mln to universities in 2018. But the more they donate the more selling charities there are. So whatever they would do, we will be angry with every choice they make.

Ofcourse burning them would be a solution but I think it would be a bad one also.

Imagine all the faux outrage if they did all their selling at higher prices to crash the market and put themselves on the Forbes Richest list. 

Like you said, they had so many because of early decisions, and from that point on they were basically in a lose lose situation in terms of outsides looking in. 

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.