Jump to content

Basic question about XRP's medium and longterm value


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, mrhat75 said:

I fully agree. Bitcoin and Ethereum are absolute dogshit projects and I still can't wrap my head around the current garbage going on with ADA and DOT.  I hope this SEC farce settles soon and the crypto market as a whole stop being mental retards.  Even if Ripple dies, the tech behind XRP is miles ahead of anything else out there.

I agree Flare might well be a gamechanger, but I don't understand why you are so down on ADA and DOT?

In coming days ADA seem to be about to announce a very big real use project with the Ethiopian Government.  CH has a very practical and honest approach

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Julian_Williams said:

I agree Flare might well be a gamechanger, but I don't understand why you are so down on ADA and DOT?

In coming days ADA seem to be about to announce a very big real use project with the Ethiopian Government.  CH has a very practical and honest approach

 

I think both projects ADA and DOT have potential, specially DOT however I don't get why the deals developing countries governments are so significant. What do they even mean? I mean for all I care there's not more than 20 countries in which a deal with a government would be huge.

 

I have nothing against Ethiopia, but please tell me how many times did you hear any mention about Ethiopia in your daily life before getting into ADA. 

 

Sorry if I come up as rude, is not my intention, but since 2017 I keep seeing projects come up with so called deals with Ukraine, Ethiopia, Malta, etc, etc and I feel like they get you nowhere (not government related but kind of the Ripple/Euro exim bank partnership)

 

And btw I live in a developing country

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrrXRP said:

 

I think both projects ADA and DOT have potential, specially DOT however I don't get why the deals developing countries governments are so significant. What do they even mean? I mean for all I care there's not more than 20 countries in which a deal with a government would be huge.

 

I have nothing against Ethiopia, but please tell me how many times did you hear any mention about Ethiopia in your daily life before getting into ADA. 

 

Sorry if I come up as rude, is not my intention, but since 2017 I keep seeing projects come up with so called deals with Ukraine, Ethiopia, Malta, etc, etc and I feel like they get you nowhere (not government related but kind of the Ripple/Euro exim bank partnership)

 

And btw I live in a developing country

Same reason as Ripple are targeting ODL on countries like Vietnam, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, India.  It is far harder to disrupt established businesses in highly developed economies, but the  same companies will adopt your project when you help them reach into areas that the old systems fail to reach.  Look at Mpeso in Kenya.  Underdeveloped countries are enabled by blockchain and Africa will be the tiger economies of the next few decades. 

Edited by Julian_Williams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Julian_Williams said:

Same reason as Ripple are targeting ODL on countries like Vietnam, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, India.  It is faster harder to disrupt established businesses in highly developed economies, but the  same companies adopt your project when you help them reach into areas that the sold systems fail to reach.  Look at Mpeso in Kenya.  Underdeveloped countries are enabled by blockchain and Africa will be the tiger economies of the next few decades. 

Fair point B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ripley said:

In my opinion, XRP ledger’s community involvement has been muted because of FUD and lack of regularity clarity, and now regulators are using low community involvement as one of the excuses for treating sales as investment contracts (that XRP cannot develop without Ripple). A chicken and egg problem.

The real reason is because BTC and ETH and all the other POW systems allow you to earn by joining the network. In the early days individuals could mine, now groups or farms can do so - by participating, they gain $$$ - this is why ETH and BTC have such big communities even though they are not efficient networks.

XRPL on the other had gives you nothing directly. No incentive to be part of it, so very few devs bother. 

Flare introduces staking to try to draw people in - but as has been pointed out elsewhere - unless real world use cases are applied to the network - there isn't any reason for the token to have actual "value".

(Flare finance have very sadly introduced mining on their network - they want to pull in developers with an incentive - more fuel onto the ponzi scheme).

off topic:

ODL introduces the concept of value to the XRP token. By transporting value directly, it become valuable in its own right (even if nominally small by the volumes we've seen so far - and subsidized!) - and for it's direct use case it is highly overvalued - but undervalued for its potential.

Other tokens like ADA/DOT are massively overvalued for the "value" they actually represent in terms of real world use (which appears to be very little). (Does anyone other than gambling speculators believe that the Cardano network is worth $21billion?)

Edited by jbjnr
typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, brianwalden said:

You're right, but it's not quite a straight line. The XRPL never really took off because it couldn't get trusted gateways. This is both because of over-regulation, rules that didn't envision this emerging technology and smother it before it has a chance to grow, and the lack of regulatatory clarity you cited.

...

The hope of Flare is that you finally have a trustless gateway for the XRPL, anything that can be represented as a F-asset in Flare can be bridged over as an IOU on the XRPL using smart contacts. It can be done, but will people want to do that in practice?

Thanks for providing a better background around the problem. In terms of Flare, I suspect/hope that the possibility of exposure to DeFi will prove attractive to retail investors to bridge over their FXRP.

I'm not sure Ripple quite changed its focus to Interledger. Stefan certainly explored that path, and there's no way the Interledger initiative has a chance of succeeding there without significantly higher liquidity and lower volatility. It'll take years. To my knowledge, using XRP as a bridge asset for cross-border currencies was always going to be the initial use-case, after Brad helped make the decision of picking payments over smart contracts. The products may have been called various things (xRapid, ODL, etc.) but using XRP as a bridge asset was always the precursor for more complex uses, including Interledger. 

Most XRP holders certainly are just holders. I hope Flare changes that. I'd note that most <INSERT CRYPTO HERE> holders are just holders. Most may call themselves 'hodlers', 'maxis', 'investors', or even 'traders' but most of us are really gamblers. Groups of crypto go up and down in synchronization. The market doesn't and for a while won't make sense. There's a lot of fraud, and FUD. There's only a small % that actively engage, much less build, with blockchain systems. These are really early days. I personally believe Ripple was right to go after enterprise use-cases. Retail will come later.

At a personal level, I have had a very clear plan on how to leverage XRP for a while now. Of course, the lawsuit may well put the kibosh on that. Once volatility goes down (say 5 years from now), XRP was going to be where I hold my liquidity. Holding cash doesn't make sense any more, Gold ETFs aren't necessarily backed by physical gold yet, and so XRP would be my programmable treasury. To be converted to and from fiat, equity/bond/other assets, for estate management, and so on. 

If the lawsuit doesn't go Ripple's way, I'm sure there'll be another asset that takes XRP's place. I really hope there's a settlement that allows Ripple to continue building XRPL though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Julian_Williams said:

I agree Flare might well be a gamechanger, but I don't understand why you are so down on ADA and DOT?

In coming days ADA seem to be about to announce a very big real use project with the Ethiopian Government.  CH has a very practical and honest approach

I think ADA is a good project, I shouldn't have said that exactly, its value is fair in and of itself.  I just think XRP is still miles ahead in its use case and value proposition and believe it should be significantly higher given ADA being where it is currently.  I'm really just tired of being treated as the red headed stepchild in this space.  Bashed all around, targeted by the SEC almost a decade after doing something bad apparently.  On merit we should be #1 in marketcap and it shouldn't be close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mrhat75 said:

I think ADA is a good project, I shouldn't have said that exactly, its value is fair in and of itself.  I just think XRP is still miles ahead in its use case and value proposition and believe it should be significantly higher given ADA being where it is currently.  I'm really just tired of being treated as the red headed stepchild in this space.  Bashed all around, targeted by the SEC almost a decade after doing something bad apparently.  On merit we should be #1 in marketcap and it shouldn't be close.

It's definitely a struggle to come around to the idea that not too much matters in this market except speculation. I've spent more time over the past couple of months reading about various coins/projects than ever before - just out of curiosity as I watch the prices soar. And almost all of them I come away scratching my head like: "Well you just used a bunch of the same buzzwords as coin xyz, which used the same buzzwords as coin abc and so on. But what is any of this being used for?"

So I'm not old enough to recall the .com bubble, but I assume this looks a lot like it. 

And then I come around the other way and tell myself that here is a still completely immature market, only just touching $1T market cap. And money is only just starting to move out of conventional markets. And the idea of distrusting your fiat is only growing. And the stock market is at ATHs. So with all that being said, there is still a TON of runway for the crypto market cap to expand. I don't know exact numbers, but what is the value of NYSE + NASDAQ something like $40T right now? If that corrects 10%, then you've got $4T looking to move to the next thing. **I know a 10% correction does not mean that all that money shifts to crypto.** I am just illustrating where crypto stands currently. 

And then I go back around the other way and say: "what the hell are any of these coins actually doing besides making founders and a few good/lucky gamblers rich on monopoly money? 

What a time to be alive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @ianrobertdouglas, I'll take a stab at question from a slightly different, if obvious, angle.  I think XRP's primary value in the short and medium terms are almost exclusively tied to the speculative market and have little to do with what it is actually good for.  It excels as a medium of exchange and is being used that way, but not to a degree that affects price much or overrides general market sentiment.  Without mining or staking, it can only generate value via usefulness that makes it desirable and so far this has not seemed to happen as much as its usefulness suggests to many of us.  Resolving the SEC case should help but underscores the long-term nature of the value to me.  Until then, I think it more or less follows the market at best.  

(Also, welcome to our little demos, the irony of being forced into the role of parrhesiates is not lost, cheers)

Edited by WrathofKahneman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WrathofKahneman said:

the irony of being forced into the role of parrhesiates is not lost

That makes me smile. Thank you.

Telling the truth at a risk to oneself.

It's slightly ugly where I am, and that's not a comment on anyone else here. It's more a confession. Like hackers are useful to seal gaps, cryptographers likely dream of a decentralised world of self-actualisation, perhaps unaware that the State has opened the path to the same for the last 300 years.

Orwell was both right and wrong. Centralisation/decentralisation is not a binary, when it comes to political technology.

So I'm not a crypto evangelist, in any meaningful sense of that phrase. Worse, I'm here for base interests, and I'm riding on the horse that on an intellectual and even ethical level probably sets into greatest relief my own hypocrisy and corruption.

Yay, go bankers!

Yay, go XRP!

But I arrive because bare survival is now on the table. I didn't create this undeclared global state of emergency.

I think you're probably right about XRP. But in an hour I'll see a different analysis that convinces me a massive breakout is possible this year. I wouldn't care if things at deep levels weren't profoundly moving, and my guess is not to our favor. I'm one of the slave class.

What I do find naive and risk intensive, relative to my goals, is when I hear of Ripple execs talking about the company becoming a "lender of last resort."

Seriously?

The State reserves for itself the province of monopoly in all strategic matters. A digital vault (BTC), okay. But currency, and lender of last resort? You're dreaming.

It concerns me that despite all the meetings, the sharp suits, and the jokes and the handshakes, Ripple's stated goal is pie in the sky. Great tech fails all the time.

A while back I saw a clip of Garlinghouse and IMF deputy general counsel Ross Leckow discussing blockchain in Singapore in 2018. It was the part that Leckow was put on the spot, presumably (we don't see it in the clip) because XRP's logo goes up on the screen behind them.

Garlinghouse is having fun with this moment, but Leckow is visibly uncomfortable.

It's very cringe-worthy.

My inner voice was saying to Garlinghouse: 'Do you have any ******* idea what you're dealing with?'

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ianrobertdouglas said:

It concerns me that despite all the meetings, the sharp suits, and the jokes and the handshakes, Ripple's stated goal is pie in the sky. Great tech fails all the time.

My comments below are unrelated to Ripple.

You're right to be skeptic, but don't underestimate technology companies. 

Governments, to this day, don't understand the nature of the internet or the blockchain. Hell, most CEOs don't. Media doesn't. They don't understand that consumers willingly go to these so called "internet-monopolies" and you cannot just stop those companies with traditional anti-trust rules.  

Yes, great tech fails all the time. That's a feature, not a bug. Silicon Valley thrives on fast failures. Great tech succeeds all the time too, and when it succeeds, it disrupts entire industries instantly. 

  1. Tesla disrupted a multi-trillion dollar industry around the conventional gasoline engine. No one thought it possible. The entire vehicle industry thought electric cars were a joke until Tesla proved otherwise. Now they're all ditching gasoline engines entirely. What, in a span of 5 years since the first Tesla S model came out ? Disrupting several decades of incumbents ?
  2. Social media disrupted mainstream media. It's dead. They don't know it yet.
  3. SpaceX disrupted entire Government programs to go to space. 
  4. U.S. defense is heavily reliant on Taiwan Semi Conductor Manufacturing for its sophisticated chips. This is a case where a private company singlehandedly is a significant defense risk for the worlds most powerful country.
  5. Kamikaze drones built by small startups (relative to Raytheon and the likes) just handed (the much smaller) Azerbaijan their victory over (the much more powerful) Amernia late last year. This was a watershed moment that caused large countries to suddenly s**t their pants because large militaries mean nothing anymore. 

No. Great tech aims for the sky and disrupts incumbents all the time. And Governments will do what they do best. Wait for the disruption to happen, and then regulate it in a way that lets them tax their people. That's the best way to foster innovation and while there can be distractions once in a while, they eventually reach this steady state. They have no choice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed.

Though governments are one thing, and the State is another. The latter never needs to flip the kill switch. Mobilisation has been the modus operandi since Frederick the Great. For hundreds of years, the private sector has been fully integrated, and fully serves state ends, if viewed from enough distance. But I always remember that below the law is the state of emergency. And behind the police is the army. Blockchain does present the question of whether a kill switch is even possible. That said, and despite patent geopolitical fractures, and even an undeclared hemispherical war, globalisation is so rooted now that no one really even needs to talk about it. This mass-level unification does have domestic consequences, offsetting older concerns around domestic rebellion, regardless of what we might think about recent social upheaval. Blockchain really is a leap forward in that direction. Decentralisation is globalisation by another word. So I very much see full adoption coming. I'm just not sure who will be offered the role of steward and flag man. On the other hand, I'm blockchain has attracted the best cryptographers and system architects of this generation. And it does have the appearance of an emerging class of engineers. So probably older power centres can't catch up if they tried. Nonetheless, they will demand no diminution of their privileges.

I think those that interpret the SEC action as targeting the escrow are probably right.

I don't know enough to foresee what arrangement could be proposed. But as blockchain, XRP and XRPL and other projects for global use align with the overall globalising tendency, it's hard to imagine the project being destroyed. Maybe a change of guard at the top of Ripple will suffice.

All idle and probably ignorant speculation of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2021 at 7:37 PM, ianrobertdouglas said:

I think there's more than one plan, and while some are out in the open and talked about, it's unclear whether or not they are warning shots, candid declarations, or weather balloons. Nonetheless, there is a confluence happening that is rare, spurred by the pandemic. And let's not even mention Event 201. The big goal has always been 2030, which interestingly coincides — according to a large number of expert projections — more or less with arrival of the singularity: general artificial intelligence. Conspiracy is such a cheapened word, and especially in this context. So easy to throw out, and people eat it up and take positions to guard against further questions. I'm old enough that I've seen the same mechanism repeat several times. To me, this is a dangerous time. And that horizon is a large part of the reason why I'm here: both that longer timeline, if even we get there, and this very year. So, to speak frankly, I don't have time to burn on some bullshit that won't move. The paper of Mitchnick and Athey linked above in this thread was published in June 2018, updated from a draft started in 2017. One might think that demand on XRP would really be expressed in the market so much more obviously if any of the promises truly had a foundation. Forget retailers. The potential would already be in the price. Instead, we're supposed to believe that a leap from 0.45 to $10, $20, $100, or more is entirely conceivable.

I wonder why Saylor is not holding XRP if it's truly tee-ing up to capture the liquid economy as opposed to digital gold.

Is Ripple too big to disappear? I don't think so. Would XRP survive without Ripple to develop on it? Yes, but with no value. Or pushed into a tiny case use.

Ironically, I don't think XRP is at all a security, so there's nowhere we can go but the mirror if it fades, shrinks or becomes irrelevant as newer protocols arrive, or global institutions take the blueprint and copy it with their own version.

My goal is not XRP. It's independence and security as fast as possible.

yes to all of this. I'm always going back and forth on it. as of now xrp is one of the cryptos that is the closest in being ready for prime time. the main thing is are people who hold xrp allowed to talk about it at the level of say a micro strategy or tesla etc because of the court case and the idea that its still in litigation basically. at the moment all they have clarity on in the space is pretty much bitcoin. there's no clarity including ethereum as well. i do think if its gets clarity 10$ is more than possible just given the run up in 2017 to almost 4$ with half the amount of participants in retail than there is now. so if it made it to almost 4$ i think it could hit 10$ with ease obviously if we get any sort of clarity. i think what will happen is they will say "ripple used this as a sort of security in the beginning even though it wasn't a security it was used like one by ripple, so they owe us a huge fine" then they will conclude that it is in fact decentralized enough and is not a security. but it not being a security and ripple using it like a security are two different things. end of day i hope ripple just tries to get this over with and stops dragging it out. if they drag it out i think it drops to sub .20 or lower because it will be a very long wait to get answers at that point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wolves said:

if they drag it out i think it drops to sub .20 or lower because it will be a very long wait to get answers at that point.

Yes.

Yesterday I saw a logarithmic chart analysis that had two possibilities on a time series of 2017 to pretty much the end of this year: $0.04 or $180.

My eyes nearly popped out of my head.

IMG_5064.thumb.jpg.8fd1032080cecf172ad21f1692268fa7.jpg

It sounds crazy to imagine 0.48 to even previous ATH. But the chart suggests much, much more.

Or flatline / near zero until or after a court case.

On the other hand, KIN lost their case completely. But in the wake they still saw 960% growth over 7 days, and 3000% growth over 65 days.

Hold!

That seems the only rational option, win or lose with the SEC.

But amid the opportunity costs — not to mention the possibility of cashing out even at 0.30 and recycling in at 0.04, if a breakout down is confirmed, and which we might see at the end of this month — it's really white knuckle stuff.

But again: what do I know.

I'd never heard of XRP until the beginning of this year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2021 at 10:13 PM, ianrobertdouglas said:

My eyes nearly popped out of my head.

hahaha yep this is my frustration/hope with xrp. its either nothing or everything. its by far the hardest and most frustrating of all crypto to hold and always has been. even during the 2017 run it was still frustrating 95% of the time. at this point it just all comes down to the SEC news and thats pretty much it. i think it will climb the next few days as 2/22 court date gets closer for those fomo'ing in. but if they drag it out and say "we didn't settle and have no intention of finding a way to settle without trial" then people will abandon it and find other investments until those next court dates get closer then they will buy in again. its either settled or we wait 9 months - 2 more years to get clarity. thats just the reality of the situation at the moment. they could settle at any time after this 2/22 date but they seem to have been pretty vocal about drawing this thing out.

Link to comment
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
 Share



×
×
  • 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.