XRP bull run

The judge was wrong, even courts make mistakes. :rolleyes:

Garlinghouse, Hoskinson, Vitalik etc are all going to the Whitehouse to press their claim that the US government should buy their privately issued, premined tokens solely in order to financially gain at Treasury's expense. None of them have use cases that benefit the public and therefore qualify as a strategic reserve that can't be provided by not-for-profit blockchains eg smart contracts built on BTC.

Pigs in a trough.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
The judge was wrong, even courts make mistakes. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Based upon what? It was litigated for years. I think it went through higher courts and appeals. So it would have been more than one court / judge.

mmm....shiney! said:
None of them have use cases that benefit the public and therefore qualify as a strategic reserve
Click to expand...

Apart from ETH, the others have more banking and financial use cases than BTC does. Mostly due to the ability to transact volume at high speed.


mmm....shiney! said:
smart contracts built on BTC.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about Bitcoin Script? There's a reason that never took off as a basis for building smart contracts, it's simply too limited. I've played around with it myself, I've also written ETH smart contracts. ETH is turning complete, bitcoin isn't, ETH provides much better smart contract features. However it's still too slow, and expensive to transact.

Other Bitcoin based smart contracts require sidechain or off-chain solutions. Both have drawbacks which make them impractical.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
Except next to no bank uses them.
Click to expand...

There's literally more than 100 banks and financial institutions using XRPL right now. Link

Bank of America now conducts 100% of its internal transactions using XRP.

SBI bank in Japan is using XRP. They have a consortium of 50 Japanese banks who are all implementing XRP during 2025.

mmm....shiney! said:
L2 projects.
Click to expand...

I've been monitoring layer 2 bitcoin projects for many years. There's been no real adoption. You'd have to be very optimistic to think this will one day be used by banks and financial institutions.
 
Here's a SBI bank ad.

https://x.com/_Crypto_Barbie/status/1824806297000161575

And here's some of their internal news about how they're using XRPL.

Gip1IPRXgAAFn5v
 
Last edited:
mmm....shiney! said:
...
Most altcoins are securities IMO.
Click to expand...

Austin Campbell said:
...
Not Understanding what a Ledger Is

This is perhaps the most obvious, most odious, and most simply dumb thing the SEC did. They looked at a blockchain and said "ah, okay, obviously everything recorded on a blockchain is a security". For those of us who understand what a blockchain is, this raises a lot of questions. For those who don't understand what a blockchain is, I'm going to tell you what it is, and then you're going to have the same questions:

A blockchain is an electronic ledger.

Yes, there's more to it than just that, but honestly? Not that much more. It's an electronic ledger with some special properties about how you write entries and how we agree things exist on the ledger, but it is just a ledger in the end. So if you are re-reading that previous statement and going wait, does that mean the SEC essentially said "Everything recorded in Microsoft Access is a security" if you know to replace one type of ledger with another ledger then what I say to you is this: yes, literally that.

The correct understanding is obviously that the core economic substance of the thing is what determines if something is a security. There cannot and should not be a way for me to take Apple (AAPL) shares and put them on a different ledger and desecuritize them, nor a way for me to take a literal physical Apple and record it on a ledger and turn it into a security. The ledger is not the important part here. AAPL is a security and a literal apple is a food. The ledger is not the important part!

This colossal mistake naturally leads to a lot of totally broken outcomes if this is the place you start with. You can see this in Gensler's own Congressional testimony, where when confronted by @RitchieTorres on this exact issue regarding Pokemon cards, he actually answers under oath that yes, it's possible recording a Pokemon card on a blockchain makes it a security and needs more information.

I want to be clear: this was the actual, literal belief of the SEC that they were operating with for four years. That if I tokenized a rock, or a pokemon card, or a painting, it somehow magically transformed into a security. ...
Click to expand...

https://x.com/CampbellJAustin/article/1893069308747497658
 
pmbug said:
There is no proof for this claim. It's been reported as fact based upon hearsay.
Click to expand...

I'm only repeating what I saw on a FOX news segment. I haven't really looked into it beyond that.

At the very least Bank Of America is using XRPL at some level. I think that much is true.
 
Re: the Campbell Austin piece.

There's a few errors in his logic, but I'll just address the core argument ie a ledger is not a security. He's right.

Now, the SEC is only concerned with public investment securities not institutional. Ripple didn't sell the ledger to the public on exchanges, it sold tokens. And the public bought those tokens on offer not because they were going to use them to create their own ledgers to enable quick cross-border payments but with an expectation of profit based upon the efforts of others ie the institutions that were going to use the ledger to enable quick cross-border payments. Therefore under the rules of the Howey Test, they constitute a security.

Microsoft sells a ledger as part of its Microsoft 365 suite. It's not selling tokens, it already sells shares to the public. If Austin tokenises a rock, then sells those tokens to the public who have an expectation that they will profit from any of Austin's effort's rather than their own, then Austin hasn't sold a ledger, he's sold a security.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
the public bought those tokens on offer not because they were going to use them to create their own ledgers to enable quick cross-border payments but with an expectation of profit based upon the efforts of others ie the institutions that were going to use the ledger to enable quick cross-border payments. Therefore under the rules of the Howey Test, they constitute a security.
Click to expand...

Step 3 of the Howey Test.
  • The investment of money is in a common enterprise
Click to expand...

If there's multiple institutions where you state "profit based upon the efforts of others ie the institutions", then it wouldn't be a common enterprise.
 
A common enterprise is a business venture where multiple people or entities work together to achieve a shared goal. The parties involved share the risks and rewards of the venture.
How does a common enterprise work?
  • The fortunes of the investors are linked with those of the promoters
  • The investors' profits depend on the success of third parties
  • The investors' profits are dependent on the management of the operation
Click to expand...
 
XRP buyers are not directly investing in Ripple the company, meaning it does not fit the traditional definition of a "common enterprise."
XRP holders do not share directly in Ripple's business profits or losses.
XRP holders do not share directly in other institutions' (i.e. that those that use XRPL to enable quick cross-border payments) business profits or losses.
 
willrocks said:
XRP buyers are not directly investing in Ripple the company, meaning it does not fit the traditional definition of a "common enterprise."
XRP holders do not share directly in Ripple's business profits or losses.
XRP holders do not share directly in other institutions' (i.e. that those that use XRPL to enable quick cross-border payments) business profits or losses.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to be direct investment in the company, only the product on offer.

So why do people buy XRP?

In order to profit.

What will drive the price of XRP higher?

Demand due to expanding use cases in the banking sector.

If it looks like a duck...
 
mmm....shiney! said:
What will drive the price of XRP higher?

Demand due to expanding use cases in the banking sector.
Click to expand...

It may be multiple factors which drive the XRP price higher. It many not even be banks. Could be tokenization of assets, products, production line, real estate, financial assets ... etc. It could be speculation, inflation, the removal of capital gains tax in the US, or the US crypto reserve. There is no single factor, or 'common enterprise' which will drive the XRP price higher.
 
Because your "common enterprise" definition is faulty, your conclusion is wrong.

Ripple tokenised their ledger, they released that token, the tokens were bought by investors with intent to profit due to demand by institutions for Ripple's technology.

Pretty straightforward.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
Because your "common enterprise" definition is faulty, your conclusion is wrong.

Ripple tokenised their ledger, they released that token, the tokens were bought by investors with intent to profit due to demand by institutions for Ripple's technology.

Pretty straightforward.
Click to expand...

I think our disagreement is precisely why so many in the crypto industry want regulations that are fit for purpose. Not some test from 1946 that doesn't factor in blockchain technology. I think even Bitcoin maximalists want better regulations.

It reminds me a bit of this:

 
pmbug said:
SEC drops it's case against Ripple. The "XRP (all cryptos) are securities" argument dies on the vine:
Click to expand...

No.

The appeal has been dropped, there's still a fine to be paid.

The judge's original ruling stands, XRP is considered a security but it's not a security.

So nothing has changed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top