Jump to content

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, RipMcGillicuddy said:

Do you get the sense that banks will have to source all the trading through established crypto players like conbase, binance, grayscale, etc.? Or is Polysign possibly creating a solution to bypass those in a way that looks more attractive to the banks? 

I really don't know, but whichever services are ahead in regulation and ISO ready will have an advantage in servicing that market. And, with defi there are going to be methods of trading and accumulating directly off the Ripple Ledger and elsewhere, so perhaps something like exchanges hold and contribute to ODL and banks use ODL to bring retail to crypto from their bank accounts. Like ADingoAteMyXRP said, institutions could be tied into Polysign in that way too. I'm not a technical person, but the herd is coming! JP Morgan and other banks are going to do all they can to get their piece of the pie. However, most banks and countries inherently do not trust each other. They will need a neutral asset and an efficient rail to exchange with one another (the walled garden problem). There's no better solution than XRP the ILP and Ripplenet.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 22
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The lede is buried a bit in the business wire article, but the big thing we learned is that PolySign has not just built digital asset custody (and world-class encryption and access provisioning to boo

I am so intrigued by their every move.  https://twitter.com/PolySignInc/status/1389634304527933442 Edit: Farts, it didn't embed the tweet. 

Polysign is awake and now starting to stretch its legs...    

19 minutes ago, VanGogh said:

I really don't know, but whichever services are ahead in regulation and ISO ready will have an advantage in servicing that market. And, with defi there are going to be methods of trading and accumulating directly off the Ripple Ledger and elsewhere, so perhaps something like exchanges hold and contribute to ODL and banks use ODL to bring retail to crypto from their bank accounts. Like ADingoAteMyXRP said, institutions could be tied into Polysign in that way too. I'm not a technical person, but the herd is coming! JP Morgan and other banks are going to do all they can to get their piece of the pie. However, most banks and countries inherently do not trust each other. They will need a neutral asset and an efficient rail to exchange with one another (the walled garden problem). There's no better solution than XRP the ILP and Ripplenet.  

This is why you have clearing houses (e.g. ICE), trade organisations (e.g. ISDA) and working groups that then create a company (e.g. CLS group). 

If Ripple are to bring together a bunch of institutions to the table, to form a working group that has XRP at the heart of it then it is game on. However, based on Ripple's change in strategy it sounds like they've not been very convincing of bringing on board the large institutions. Personally, I think that is due to regulatory clarity. Can you imagine if the SEC lawsuit gives XRP itself the green light? It'll be INSANE. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ADingoAteMyXRP said:

The lede is buried a bit in the business wire article, but the big thing we learned is that PolySign has not just built digital asset custody (and world-class encryption and access provisioning to boot), but they have also built what sounds an awful lot like a P2P trade solution.

Companies (or governments?) using PolySign will be able to trade or sell their digital assets to one another, settling directly via the custody solution’s built-in escrowing capability without having to go through an intermediary, OTC desk or exchange.

But why would anyone want to do that? Aside from the ease of use angle, it bypasses middlemen and maintains high security standards.

It also enables an ODL path that is absolutely mind blowing.

Imagine if companies holding digital assets via Polysign could elect to participate in ODL as liquidity providers, by providing OTC style large block liquidity for high value transactions. This type of ODL path would bypass exchanges entirely, since it would effectively be facilitated by two P2P/OTC trades settled over Polysign.

The scenario:

Bank A wants to send $47M in value to Bank B... way too much for a standard ODL transaction at this point in time. But what if a liquidity provider in country A (LP1) has a PolySign account where they hold a large block of XRP. They sell XRP to Bank A, and that XRP is immediately dropped over Polysign escrow to a Liquidity provider in the Philippines (LP2) that also has a Polysign account. LP2 makes the final local payment to Bank B in PHP... and ALL of this happens atomically in about 60 seconds.

I don’t know if this is the plan, but I have a strong suspicion it is. Because this more or less solves the biggest problem in ODL today, which is low liquidity and slippage. OTC desks are designed specifically to reduce slippage costs... so why not use that same approach with ODL?

Why not? Because institutional custody solutions were not yet watertight enough to enable that kind of multiparty flow without risk. To dip their toe in that water, it was necessary to build something new, soup to nuts, to allow custody and automated trade in a way no major DA custodian had done before.

If this is really what they’re doing, it’s game over for SWIFT.

you just made sense of it all to me - thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@NMNR

Risk almost never disappears, but it can change forms / characteristics. 

The Decentralized nature of XRPL is a change in Counterparty risk, from a centralized clearinghouse (ICE), towards a decentralized fee denominated in XRP.

I've posted only a little bit about this, but realized it a few years ago. The "no Counterparty Risk" talking point just didnt set easily with me. That's like saying "we made Risk disappear", and there are very few examples of that actually happening. It's almost always true, that the Risk has changed forms, and is simply unrecognized in it's new form.

That said, I do think this recharacterization of the Clearinghouse's Counterparty Risk, from a Central Counterparty like (ICE) to a decentralized set XRPL Validators represents a diversification of counterparties which should be a systematic improvement of Counterparty Risk. + other aspects that reduce systemic risk, like multi-hop & atomic settlement.

Custody/PolySign is a sub-component or dependency of XRPL being a Counterparty.

Edited by KarmaCoverage
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, RipMcGillicuddy said:

Polysign is awake and now starting to stretch its legs...

 

 

“Also investing in the round were Blockchain.com, Race Capital, Sandia Holdings and PilotRock Investments.”

Race Capital — investor in Binance and Settle Network, Citcoin (seems like they could benefit from an institutional custody solution), and Solana for high throughput blockchain app scaling... I’d say they’re most likely to want to use this tech themselves

Sandia Holdings — Family investing arm for former hedge fund manager Ian McKinnon. Looks like he’s involved with several Cowen subsidiaries already so this may be passive capital?

PilotRock — “PRI is a family investment office focused on investing in public and private equities and real estate projects in Miami and Fort Lauderdale.” Another family office.

I have no idea how the VC world works but not shocked by these partners.

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.