Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JohnnyRippleSeed

Same 'ol XRP use case FUD... or legit "insider" warning?

Recommended Posts

Aloha everyone....  would appreciate as much feedback as possible on this recent ****-talking on Reddit (yeah, I know), but is it just typical internet opinion of the same old tired anti-XRP bashing, or is this person really onto something (i.e. really has an "insider" view)?

https://www.reddit.com/user/thegtabmx/comments/   (their comments re:  "XRP is going after a market of 27 TRILLION dollars in tied-up capital with zero competition. Think about that for a second.")

 

Specifically:  (apologies for long copy/paste; extracted here so no need to wade thru post & comments)

"I work at one of the larger banks, on blockchain and DLT projects. What the community thinks it's irrelevant, it's what is actually happening. I have meetings with IBM and R3 regularly, for many projects. R3 is not focusing on derivatives, they are focusing on way more, including local and international value transfer and settlement. This is obvious from their press releases and their conference presentations. They are in direct competition with Ripple, except they are covering more use cases and a laundry list of banks have invested in them directly, and thus are self-incentivized to work with them.

Ripple is competing with SWIFT and R3. R3 is not focused purely on mainly on derivatives. Where you got that idea is beyond me.

Second, even if you think banks wanted to use Ripple's tech, you have to consider 2 other things. One, it does not need to be the main public instance, they can spin off an instances of a network just for participating banks. Two, XRP will not be involved in the settlement in any way, not even through middlemen. To believe the contrary is both naive and born out of a lack of real information."

 

"It's because some people in the community Ripple and the Etheruem community (those that think EEA is here to prop up the public chain) are clearly out of the loop of private info of what is actually happen, and I keep seeing these posts making the projects out to be something they are not, in order to prop up the public coin.

People need to stop giving their opinions as if they are informed facts.

I do agree with the use of the word "****". Can't argue there. I can't always be nice I guess, ;)"

 

          XRP provides both the cheapest and the fastest solution for cross border payments

A gateway/bank can accept another gateway/bank's IOU token, which moves across the network at the same speed as XRP. I don't think you realise that Ripple has made a significant amount of technical and business decisions to allow the public network and other instances to be used without XRP. Also, it isn't the cheapest since there is volatility risk.

        so you are wrong to say that XRP won't be used

Your unsubstantiated, weak, and ill-informed argument does not render me wrong.

       once banks become more comfortable with digital currency, they will use whatever method provides the cheapest solution

Yes, and the cheapest solution also is the one with least volatility risk. It's also the solution that doesn't involve going through a currency that a single entity holds the majority of. Furthermore, your understanding of how banks move money and what regulations they face is incredibly immature and naive. They will use the cheapest, least volatile, and most regulated asset.

      for the simple reason that Ripple has too much self-aligned interest in XRP for it to go any other way

I'm sad for the common XRP investor, who is not privy to what Ripple is doing in business meetings behind closed doors. Ripple has pivoted substantially. They are focusing on using the tech, and XRP is an irrelevance.You can keep telling yourself what you want, I won't and can't stop you. I can only try to warn you about the differences between what you think XRP will be used for, and what banks and Ripple are actually planing and testing."

 

"I am not commenting on my involvement, discussions, or lack thereof, with Ripple. I am merely saying that this community's perception of how XRP is going to be used it outdated, inflated, and naive on many levels.

The fact that Ripple has been focusing more and more on the tech for banks and less and less on XRP, is public information. They are pivoting in plain sight and XRP investors refuse to see it. Look at all their and their partnering bank's press releases. They never mention XRP.

Do you think Ripple is having open-door conversations with banks? Do you think Ripple is trying to get the banks to buy and use XRP? Do you think Ripple wants banks to use their tech and network? Do you think Ripple wants banks to hire them to build out their solutions?

Think about these questions, and try to imagine what makes sense for Ripple and the companies they deal with.

Understand that the possibility Ripple is having private conversations with companies and banks is possibly greater than zero. And understand that the possibility Ripple wants to sell services and a network rather than fight a potentially impossible road to get banks to buy XRP so XRP holders can profit, is possibly greater than zero."

 

"Sure. Whatever suits you. Like I said, those who know Ripple's goals and XRP's usefulness (or lack thereof) to achieve those goals are (as /u/interexchange11 stated) subject confidentiality agreements. I'm in the group of people who might be privy to that information (although I cannot confirm or deny). I can only give you food for thought, you can make your own decisions.

Just understand this: if information is out there that Ripple is trying to work with banks to solve various "movement of money" problems without the public Ripple network or without XRP, it is likely sealed behind NDAs. Ripple does not work for the XRP holders.

But carry on, I guess."

 

"To ask someone to prove it would be asking someone to break a potential NDA that Ripple has asked them to sign. You realise that Ripple is a for profit company who's shareholders are not all the XRP holders.

If I had access to this information, I would likely be subject to NDAs, by Ripple and my emplpoyer, to not disclose it. That would be Ripple and their banking partners' decision to have an NDA or not. Perhaps you should ask Ripple to provide details on how they and a bank are reaching an agreement to actually use XRP to accomplish their goals.

Ripple would be hiding this information from you; they don't work for XRP holders."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will add this also, I'm starting to use XRP to move my money between exchanges since it's faster and cheaper than BTC and liquidity is good enough. People can be as close minded as they want, but if at the end of the day they are saving money by using XRP they will use XRP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, JohnnyRippleSeed said:

Two, XRP will not be involved in the settlement in any way, not even through middlemen. To believe the contrary is both naive and born out of a lack of real information.

One word: SBI. 
I wanted to stop reading right there, but went on. Well, good luck to that guy and his R3 implementation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people spend time commenting on something they don't believe in? Are they really trying to save us from ourselves? I don't follow or write about things I'm not interested in or don't believe in, so it amazes me when I read this stuff. I can't help but wonder about what motivates such a person. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

He seems to have a very specific agenda in convincing people that XRP is worthless. It's the convincing part that make me sceptical... why did he try so hard to construct an argument against XRP instead of just informing people of the information in his possession, and letting them make up their own minds? I don't trust people who go out of their way to push an agenda in regards to my interpretation of data.

Does any one have a less... aggressive corroboration of his information?

Edited by Fnord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He seems to have a very specific agenda in convincing people that XRP is worthless. It's the convincing part that make me sceptical... why did he try so hard to construct an argument against XRP instead of just informing people of the information in his possession, and letting them make up their own minds? I don't trust people who go out of their way to push an agenda in regards to my interpretation of data.
Does any one have a less... aggressive corroboration of his information?


Don't worry, sjoelkatz is on his case and the OP is running out of words for rebuttal... Quite entertaining to read the thread, actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stupid thing is.. XRP has good tech behind it.. regardless if it's not adopted as a means of bank transfers etc, it has a stability attached to through the tech.. and that alone is enough to keep XRP viable as a currency standalone ... there are many other cryptos with less , it has good volume and cap and as soon as more exchanges get on board or will surely get some extra boost ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OP from Reddit is basing a premis on XRP investors believe that banks themselves need to invest in XRP.  OP could not be more wrong. 

$180 trillion In payments made per year using outdated technology and costly nostro/swift systems.  Round that up to approx $225 billion per day. That means that XRP liquidity would look like a stable price of $5.92 per XRP.  With the XRP Ledger a 60% savings in costs could cause the $180 trillion in payments today to increase to $288 trillion per year putting XRP close to $20 per coin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×