Jump to content

SEC case getting interesting, personal finance...


 Share

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, RobertHarpool said:

If they committed a crime, what was it? ... and why didn't the SEC charge them? 

They didn't sell a promise. XRP hasn't been as widely or as quickly adopted because of this very issue ... lack of clarity. How could a bank ever hold XRP on its accounts without the legal clarity and the legal framework to do so? 

Many bought XRP because of the superiority of the technology, not because of CL, BG, or Ripple. The other 'investors' were just dumb money chasing greed without performing adequate due diligence. 

BG and CL legally owned their XRP and they sold them. How many XRP does one have to own/sell before they're a criminal to you? ... Clearly a few hundred million. But what about 10 million? or 1M or 50K? Where are you drawing your line to distinguish "dumping XRP" in order to "earn on the backs of normal people." 

The crime was not to say to the public: be aware that we sell at price below market and those we sell to cannot and don't want to hold their stack and resell to you. So you think xrp is going up but it cannot because there are waggons of xrp that will be sold.

This is fraud. If you don't see it it means one of the following:

1 you are paid by them and defend them

or

2 you have not opened your eyes and own a huge amount of xrp hoping it will go up. But I can tell you that it will NOT go up until at least 80% of the max supply will be spread amond the poor naive investors that will buy it from MM. And at that point maybe in 5 years those who had the initial stack will have left the business with full pockets and won't care anymore of any ODL or fancy stuff like that because they will be so rich that you will not even imagine it and you will be still waiting for xrp to go up. So if you want to help xrp you have to leave it and price has to go to 0 (zero) in order to avoid that the criminals can become rich without really having interest in making the use case become true.

I really ask myself how can there be so blind people here.  No, you can't be honest if you do not understand that point. I am sorry. Don't be offended. Offense if what xrp hodlers live every day. That is offence. And they should task a lawyer to defend them but against Ripple and those criminals. That's the truth.

 

wake up! XRP is the only coin which did not go up during this bull run. WAKE UP!

Edited by JJJ2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, RobertHarpool said:

If they committed a crime, what was it? ... and why didn't the SEC charge them? 

They didn't sell a promise. XRP hasn't been as widely or as quickly adopted because of this very issue ... lack of clarity. How could a bank ever hold XRP on its accounts without the legal clarity and the legal framework to do so? 

Many bought XRP because of the superiority of the technology, not because of CL, BG, or Ripple. The other 'investors' were just dumb money chasing greed without performing adequate due diligence. 

BG and CL legally owned their XRP and they sold them. How many XRP does one have to own/sell before they're a criminal to you? ... Clearly a few hundred million. But what about 10 million? or 1M or 50K? Where are you drawing your line to distinguish "dumping XRP" in order to "earn on the backs of normal people." 

A crime is stating that 51bln xrp are circulating while the truth is that those xrp owned by BG, CL JC and the other original founder are NOT circulating. They have been created and put in their wallets without going through a market process of sale and buy. So they are NOT circulating and therefore supply is still lower then it is stated. This way they let people think that much more xrp have benn sold than they actually are. and this IS FRAUD.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, RobertHarpool said:

Many bought XRP because of the superiority of the technology, not because of CL, BG, or Ripple. The other 'investors' were just dumb money chasing greed without performing adequate due diligence

I bought XRP because BG said dozens of bank will use XRP in 2019, 2 household names, and due to other shilling Ripple created. Could you tell me what execs were doing meanwhile?

 

39 minutes ago, RobertHarpool said:

BG and CL legally owned their XRP and they sold them. How many XRP does one have to own/sell before they're a criminal to you?

It is not about them selling XRP, they are rightful to do so. However, they should have been transparent about it. Not because they are legally obliged to, but rather because they have information we do not have and because their bragging how Ripple is transperent. 

I mean, we have been listening for years how RIpple is transparent and how they call out others to be the same. And what do we get? We get both execs secretly dumping 500m dollar on retail investors. Geez, they have even email correspondences where they discuss how to create a speculation.

Both of them played dumb and I hope the karma f***s them up.

Edited by Kiwi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, JJJ2 said:

A crime is stating that 51bln xrp are circulating while the truth is that those xrp owned by BG, CL JC and the other original founder are NOT circulating. They have been created and put in their wallets without going through a market process of sale and buy. So they are NOT circulating and therefore supply is still lower then it is stated. This way they let people think that much more xrp have benn sold than they actually are. and this IS FRAUD.

 

I wish I could help you. You seem to missing a couple pieces to this. Or perhaps you have all the pieces, but you haven't put them together correctly yet. 

Clearly you're very upset about it tho. And people only get upset when they have a vested interest. I can only speculate what yours is. 

I am certain though that you will agree that anyone who legally owns something has the right to sell it. After that ... caveat emptor ... i.e. "the buyer alone is responsible for assessing the quality of a purchase before buying". -Webster's Dictionary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JJJ2 said:

A crime is stating that 51bln xrp are circulating while the truth is that those xrp owned by BG, CL JC and the other original founder are NOT circulating. They have been created and put in their wallets without going through a market process of sale and buy. So they are NOT circulating and therefore supply is still lower then it is stated. This way they let people think that much more xrp have benn sold than they actually are. and this IS FRAUD.

 

It must be wonderful living in such a oversimplified world and hanging everyone by the neck on your own truths.

I disagree with the large portions the founders gave themselves, but it happened and now that problem exists. I do prefer they sell it while its in the cents rather than in the dollars as burning would not be a good example. You believe price will never go up because of this. I believe it will and allready did multiple times in the past.

Practically every digital asset has this 'founders stash'problem, from the #2 to #5000 spot. Just like money, essentially everything that has value is held for 99% by the 1%, just like BTC. You believe therefore something can never go up. I believe the 1% holding 99% of something is the whole reason things go up.

We will see who was right in just a couple of months luckily, as the bullmarket began, and alt season seems around the corner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Kiwi said:

I bought XRP because BG said dozens of bank will use XRP in 2019, 2 household names, and due to other shilling Ripple created. Could you tell me what execs were doing meanwhile?

 

Would you define that as thorough due diligence prior to making an investment? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RobertHarpool said:

Would you define that as thorough due diligence prior to making an investment? 

What are you talking about? This came from the mouth of the execs, not some youtube moonboy retard. What kind of research should I have made based on that? Ask BG to take a polygraph?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JJJ2 said:

1. The crime was not to say to the public: be aware that we sell at price below market and those we sell to cannot and don't want to hold their stack and resell to you. 

2 own a huge amount of xrp hoping it will go up.

3. But I can tell you that it will NOT go up until at least 80% of the max supply will be spread a

4.I really ask myself how can there be so blind people here. 

5. That's the truth. wake up! XRP is the only coin which did not go up during this bull run. WAKE UP!

1. If you buy a big amount OTC, it is very common to get a discount because you take on risk with vesting. That discount shares the risk between buyer and seller.  Basic stuff.

2. Here you described basically everyone holding crypto not actively developing. 

3. Looking at the facts: Ripple hasn't actually been selling XRP on the market for a year.  XRP flowing in the market through odl is net zero.

4. It's called confirmation bias.  You show exactly the same qualities, but steer your emotions to the other side of the coin.
 

5. The truth is a: XRP was participating fine in the bullrun before SEC ruined it, and b: bull market or not, XRP will melt faces once this SEC debacle is settled or Ripple decides to move to Asia.   

Try to get some nuance in your thinking bro.

Edited by Gepster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jetbrzzz said:

I don't see how Ripple would be forced to hand over the keys to the Escrow. It's on a time-lock, unless they have some fail-safe that overrides the escrow rules.

For the remote case where RL feels forced to revisit their decision to stay in the USA...

I recall Jungle Inc speculating that the U.S. could construe the token stockpile as unrealized capital, and extract a heavy tax on its "exportation." I have not hence seen this notion neither confirmed, nor dispelled...

Hopefully, Ripple will have no cause to change their commitment to stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, JJJ2 said:

Dear Julian I do not agree with you this time.

It's the behaviour of Larsen and Garlinghouse together with JC that is to be condemned. Exactly because of the behaviour of those people xrp will not go up. They are criminals that deserve to be closed in jail for their entire life. They are defrauding poor naive investors. They have been selling a promise which was and is not supported by facts (ODL not spreading at all). But they became rich by then dumping xrp on those who believed them. 

So, very good hting that SEC asked for those information in order to show how much money they have earned on the backs of normal people. 

I have no time for Brad G because basically I  agree with you.  He put his greed before his job, which was to develop and safeguard the interests of his company, his company's reputation with its customers and his company's products.  Instead he prioritised selling his personal stock and taking out a fortune of over 100 million in a bear market with insider knowledge.  He should have been removed from his job immediately this came out.  I do not think CL crimes are as heinous, but again he should be suspended from the board whilst this case is being fought.

The lawyers have told us BG will probably get charges against him dismissed on technical grounds.   He did not break the law and however bad BG behaviour was, it is no longer relevant the case. 

The SEC case that remains is about Ripple's sales, and whether they were security contracts.  SEC's case that Ripple should have known that XRP is a security in SEC's eyes is now very, very weak because SEC under Clayton gave out so much conflicting advice and never gave clear guidelines to Ripple, Ripple's customers and partners.  What started off are a strong case against Ripple and the management of Ripple has disintegrated into an argument about SEC's mishandling of crypto regulations. SEC's mishandling probably goes back to Clayton's mis-management of his brief as chairman of SEC.   The case, which started with a scandal about BG and CL personal sales has become a scandal about SEC mis-regulation of crypto.

XRP owners have been hurt by both of these scandals, and the first priority of the courts should be to stop this case continuing so that the new Gensler administration can start clearing up Clayton' mess and provide the US crypto industry with clear guidance.  This a major national security and political issue for the US. 

For myself I would like to see ICO's managed by regulatory authorities so that bad actors like BG are never again allowed to have huge numbers of tokens given to them and then allowed to sell behind the backs and against of the ecosystems they are setting up and have have controlling influence over.  I would also like to see founders share of the tokens limited to perhaps 1% max, with rules that disallow them selling the free tokens until after the ICO is successfully completed.  But getting this to happen has nothing to do with the case SEC have made and are fighting.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, RobertHarpool said:

I wish I could help you. You seem to missing a couple pieces to this. Or perhaps you have all the pieces, but you haven't put them together correctly yet. 

Clearly you're very upset about it tho. And people only get upset when they have a vested interest. I can only speculate what yours is. 

I am certain though that you will agree that anyone who legally owns something has the right to sell it. After that ... caveat emptor ... i.e. "the buyer alone is responsible for assessing the quality of a purchase before buying". -Webster's Dictionary

This is not quite true.  Sometimes there is a conflict between the interests of the company, its shareholders and customers, and the right of the CEO to sell his/her shares and in this case tokens.  There are issues of insider information and selling against the market the CEO is supposed to nurture and represent. 

Edited by Julian_Williams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, JJJ2 said:

A crime is stating that 51bln xrp are circulating while the truth is that those xrp owned by BG, CL JC and the other original founder are NOT circulating. They have been created and put in their wallets without going through a market process of sale and buy. So they are NOT circulating and therefore supply is still lower then it is stated. This way they let people think that much more xrp have benn sold than they actually are. and this IS FRAUD.

 

About this I think you are factually wrong.  Everyone knew about the founders holdings and how many were in escrow, so the amount in circulation has never been hidden.  Coin Market Cap choose to include the founders allocations in the "in circulation " figures.  I expect that the BTC owned Satatoshi N are included as in circulation, and I would guess that almost every founder of an ICO owns some tokens that are included in the "in circulation" figures.  I agree that it would be more honest if organisations like Coin Market Cap isolated out the founder's stakes and let us know status of those tokens.  It is the sort of regulation I would like to see imposed by organisations like SEC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, jetbrzzz said:

I don't see how Ripple would be forced to hand over the keys to the Escrow. It's on a time-lock, unless they have some fail-safe that overrides the escrow rules.

If they were smart, they set it up as  "our keys, and our crypto"; Ripple definitely multi-signs all their billion XRP addresses, with like 4/8 signers typically.  If the USA doesn't like it, then they'll move of out its jurisdiction, which they kinda threatened to do already, if not 1/2 jokingly.

It seems more likely that Ripple will have a serious say in what happens to the escrow, regardless of the SEC lawsuit.  The US government can't just confiscate it, even if it wanted to. 80% of XRP business happens outside the USA already too so that's a thing.

Man I am from the old skool world of coding where every coder or group of coders puts a fail safe in somewhere you just have too, and also if Ripple refused to do anything I am sure the government has a way to get what they want just ask Apple. I am pretty sure there is a way to circumvent the rules built around the escrow programmatically. 

Edited by RikkiTikki_is_Back
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.