I’m a pretty convinced this thing is about to settle out.

[musclehog]

The social media twitter verse seems to think this is going to the judges decision. The sentiment is fully against settlement. 

I personally think they are wrong and this lawsuit is about to settle. 

The SEC proved with the emails they are not willing to risk precedent. This is just over emails…..so why would they risk an adverse outcome with a judge that will cause them to lose their grip on the entire crypto space. The emails is an insight into how the sec operates in litigation. When there is no other exit, they fold. This came fully down to the wire similar to the SJ decision.

I do not think the regulator is willing to risk this. They will settle in my opinion.

Brad postures on CNBC and the SEC postures by not communicating…..until it’s time to communicate. That time is now, everything is briefed and the sec cannot win on common enterprise with the evidence that has been put forward. 

They are NOT going to risk an SJ decision.
 

 

 

[PlanK]

If the SEC are gonna settle they'll most likely want to do it when there is some other bigger news story to hide behind, something like the SBF/FTX circus revelations or another DoJ announcement.

[musclehog]

17 minutes ago, PlanK said:

If the SEC are gonna settle they'll most likely want to do it when there is some other bigger news story to hide behind, something like the SBF/FTX circus revelations or another DoJ announcement.

Potentially. But a settlement with a record disgorgement is great news for the sec. 
 

BG at Davos looked like a man posturing from a position of power. I genuinely think this may be more one sided than people realise and that the SEC are really going to struggle at SJ. They fully fcked it by going after secondary market sales. 

It’s all aggression and posturing until it’s “alright let’s sort this out”. We are at the sort this out moment. 
 

 

[Julian_Williams]

I like your take, and it makes sense if Gensler were not a sociopath who would willingly take down SEC with him if he saw personal advantage to open the box. I am expecting everything, and predicting nothing.

[Julian_Williams]

YES I read BG behaviour as posturing and confident.  SEC should settle if they have any sense and good leadership, but many of their best lawyers have left, they are riddled with corruption and very badly led.  We will see.

[Malloy]

If Brad & co are ready to cash out...settlement it is...a little pump then another crypto winter...

But if Brad & co really want to change the monetary world...they need a win...anything else will just create uncertainty and the financial world hates that...they will never jump on the crypto wagon unless it's a clean win for Ripple...then we go full Bulls...

[BillyOckham]

30 minutes ago, Malloy said:

But if Brad & co really want to change the monetary world...they need a win...anything else will just create uncertainty

I don’t think that is correct.  A settlement with a clear statement from the SEC that XRP sales going forward are NOT securities would be total coverage and clarity for XRP.

Ripple would settle for that,  even if it had a big penalty fine for earlier.

Best case would also include clarity for other coins but not necessary for XRP and Ripple also to succeed.

 

[Malloy]

52 minutes ago, BillyOckham said:

...A settlement with a clear statement from the SEC that XRP sales going forward are NOT securities...

...if it had a big penalty fine for earlier.

 

If they are fined for "earlier" isn't it on the premise that they were selling securities...thus "going forward" means XRPs are securities?  

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Malloy said:

If they are fined for "earlier" isn't it on the premise that they were selling securities...thus "going forward" means XRPs are securities?  

XRP the token itself not being a security is what it would mean. They still sold XRP and made money; so they may need to pay a fine on eligible sales. It’s a win for both the SEC and Ripple.

[BillyOckham]

59 minutes ago, Malloy said:

If they are fined for "earlier" isn't it on the premise that they were selling securities...thus "going forward" means XRPs are securities?  

Irrespective of how the SEC fashion their crooked claims, if, as part of the settlement deal, the SEC say that current and future sales of XRP by any party are NOT securities then it IS then a legal certainty and will allow institutional interactions.

 

So nah,  they could say ‘early sales were, but later decentralisation means they are not securities’ or ‘certain institutional sales by Ripple were securities but all XRP sales now are not’, or any number of variations and inventions for scamming Ripple of a nice fine to fund their greedy operation.

 

Ripple have indicated they don’t mind a cash hit if it means no legal clouds over XRP.  They also say they would like clarity for other crypto coins too, but I doubt they will go too far out on the ice to risk their own settlement.

 

[Rutski]

John Deaton spoke at the LBRY case. He got the judge and SEC to say tokens in the secondary market ARE NOT securities. This will will help in the Ripple/XRP case. Lots of momentum for ripple and XRP holders. Below is John talking about the LBRY case yesterday.