SEC Guidance Gives Ammo To Lawsuit Claiming XRP Is Unregistered Security (#GotBitcoin?)
A new amended complaint against Ripple draws on the SEC’s framework for digital assets to outline how XRP might be a security – likely the first federal case to do so. SEC Guidance Gives Ammo To Lawsuit Claiming XRP Is Unregistered Security (#GotBitcoin?)
The filing also cites California advertising law, in addition to federal securities law, to argue that investors were misled by Ripple’s promotion of XRP.
While the case is a year old and has not yet received class-action status, the new complaint is the first that Ripple must respond to with a substantive answer.
Ripple Has Until Mid-September To File Its Response
Investors in the cryptocurrency XRP have filed a new complaint against Ripple that marshals the Securities and Exchange Commission’s own words to argue that the startup illegally sold unregistered securities.
The amended complaint, filed Aug. 5 in a year-old lawsuit against Ripple, includes several new arguments and may be the first federal case to cite the SEC’s guidance for applying existing law and regulation to crypto tokens.
It also marks the first filing to which Ripple must directly respond by addressing the facts of the case. Four previous complaints were filed in California state court, but the company successfully moved to have these cases consolidated and shifted to federal court. Ripple has until Sept. 19 to file a response.
“That filing will be the first time in the already-long history of this litigation that Ripple will substantively respond to the allegations around XRP,” said Jake Chervinsky, general counsel at crypto lending startup Compound Finance.
The company has been in the legal crosshairs since May 2018, when investor Ryan Coffey filed the first of several lawsuits seeking class-action status against Ripple Labs, subsidiary XRP II, CEO Brad Garlinghouse and other individuals. XRP, which Ripple periodically sells, has “all the traditional hallmarks of a security,” Coffey claimed.
Investors Vladi Zakinov, Avner Greenwald and David Oconer filed similar suits shortly thereafter. The lawsuits were combined and moved to federal court in November.
While the suit has not yet been certified as a class action, law firms Susman Godfrey and Tayler-Copeland Law were appointed as co-lead counsel at the end of June, with investor Bradley Sostack being appointed as lead plaintiff. (Zakinov, Oconer and Greenwald were denied their own motion to be appointed as lead plaintiff.)
The new amended complaint lays out “a strong case against Ripple,” said Chervinsky, noting that Susman Godfrey is “one of the best plaintiff’s law firms in the U.S.” In particular, he highlighted that the complaint claims XRP is a security under both federal and California state law.
“This is important because California uses the ‘risk capital test’ in addition to the [federal] Howey test to determine whether a transaction qualifies as a security,” he explained. “The risk capital test is broader than the Howey test, meaning the plaintiffs could lose their federal securities claims and still win their state securities claims.”
The plaintiffs’ complaint is trying to tie the XRP Ledger, the distributed network underlying XRP (and therefore the cryptocurrency’s price), back to Ripple, said Rebecca Rettig, a partner at the law firm of Fisher Broyles, which is not involved in the case.
Ripple And Susman Godfrey Declined To Comment
Perhaps the most important difference between the new complaint and its predecessors is the citation of the SEC’s framework for analyzing whether a digital asset qualifies as a security.
“The Complaint reads like a love letter to the SEC,” Chervinsky said. “Although the SEC’s Framework is technically only non-binding guidance, the Court will likely give it significant weight in deciding how to apply the Howey test to the facts of this case.”
Rettig agreed, telling CoinDesk that “this is the first time we have seen the SEC’s Framework applied in a case in federal court.” She added:
“Although the framework on its own doesn’t have precedential value – meaning the court is not required to follow it – it will be very interesting to see how the court handles the utility of the framework in moving forward in determining whether XRP is a security.”
The SEC published the guidance in April, providing for the first time a specific roadmap for how it might assess digital assets.
Over the course of 11 pages, the amended complaint details how the plaintiffs believe XRP is a security based on the framework, stating that “XRP purchasers made an investment of money in a common enterprise”; “XRP investors had a reasonable expectation of profits”; and “the success of XRP requires efforts of Ripple and others”.
“Lead Plaintiff and the Class invested fiat and other digital currencies, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, to purchase XRP. As explained in the SEC Framework, investment of both fiat and digital currency meets the first prong of Howey,” the filing says.
Ripple and its affiliated parties are the common enterprise, the complaint alleges, saying that any profit the potential class might see “are intertwined with the fortunes of Ripple.”
The price of XRP is dependent on Ripple’s efforts, the lawsuit alleges. Investors would have expected the value of their holdings to grow based upon the efforts of the company.
The Complaint Goes On To Say:
“Lead Plaintiff and the Class have entirely passive roles vis-à-vis the success of the XRP Ledger and XRP. Rather, as Defendants’ own marketing makes clear, the success of the XRP Ledger, and the profits the Class reasonably expected to derive from investing in XRP, are dependent on the essential technical, entrepreneurial, and managerial efforts of Defendants and their agents and employees.”
Rettig noted that “each of the [factors in the SEC Framework] are based on underlying federal case law, so the litigants will likely rely upon these underlying cases and not simply the framework [itself].”
Tweets As Evidence
Like past complaints, last week’s filing points to public statements made by Ripple executives such as CEO Brad Garlinghouse and CTO David Schwartz to bolster its argument.
For example, Garlinghouse said in a 2017 CNBC interview that “people are looking at the success Ripple has been having as a company, and I think that’s increased the value of XRP,” according to the complaint.
Elsewhere, the complaint says Garlinghouse “conceded” that Ripple’s own self-interest is tied up “with building and maintaining a healthy XRP market.”
“The Complaint emphasizes Ripple’s own statements to prove that XRP investors had a reasonable expectation of profits flowing from Ripple’s managerial efforts,” Chervinsky noted. “This is similar to how the SEC framed its own Complaint against Kik,” the messaging app company that the SEC alleges violated securities laws when it raised $100 million during a 2017 token sale.
Beyond interviews, the complaint cites tweets that the plaintiffs believe demonstrate that Ripple indicated XRP’s price would rise due to work the company was doing.
Roughly 40 tweets are referenced in the filing, including tweets from the company, executives and other employees discussing exchange listings, Ripple’s XRP reserves and other marketing efforts. The complaint also references a Garlinghouse quote-tweet of a Motley Fool tweet which said companies using Ripple’s tools “could be a big deal for Ripple’s XRP cryptocurrency” as an example.
“I’ve never seen so many citations to Twitter in a complaint before,” Chervinsky said.
(The suit also notes that Digital Currency Group, which holds a stake in Ripple, is also the parent company of CoinDesk, and cites a 2017 article on this website reporting that XRP’s price had risen above $1 for the first time ever as “one of many instances in which Ripple would promote XRP price movements.”
For the record: CoinDesk operates independently from the parent company, working in separate offices and maintaining strict policies on editorial independence and transparency.)
Beyond simply promoting XRP, the complaint hints that Ripple may have gone as far as to mislead the general public about which of its various products were being adopted.
“On April 26, 2017, Ripple tweeted a link to an article on its own site, proclaiming: ‘#Ripple welcomes 10 additional customers to our #blockchain #payments network.’ Neither this tweet nor the article it linked to informed readers that the blockchain payments network did not refer to the XRP Ledger, but rather Ripple’s xCurrent enterprise solution,” the complaint said, adding in the next paragraph:
“Just days later, on May 3, 2017, with the price of XRP continuing to rise, Ripple tweeted: ‘#Ripple adoption is sparking interest in XRP ‘which has had an impressive rally in the last two months’ via @Nasdaq.’”
Securities law aside, the lawsuit also adds new claims that have not appeared in previous filings in the case, Chervinsky noted.
“For the first time, the plaintiffs now claim that Ripple violated California’s false advertising and unfair competition laws by making fraudulent statements about the genesis, circulating supply, and adoption of XRP,” he said.
The fact that this complaint is in federal court may have helped the plaintiffs. Chervinsky explained:
“Interestingly, the plaintiffs probably couldn’t have alleged those claims on behalf of a global ‘class’ — all persons or entities who purchased XRP — if Ripple had left the case in California state court instead of removing it to federal court.”
According to the filing, Sostack and his fellow plaintiffs are looking for Ripple to reimburse them for their losses.
For the lead plaintiff, those losses total $118,100, according to the complaint, but the full size of the losses allegedly incurred by the class has not yet been calculated.
More significantly, the plaintiffs want the court to declare that XRP is a security, which could have an impact on Ripple’s ability to continue selling XRP from its reserves, as well as potentially limit who can acquire the token.
Other prayers for relief include the plaintiffs wanting Ripple to pay for all legal fees and have the court award any other damages that might be warranted.
Ripple now has 45 days from August 5 to answer the complaint, and could file a response (like Kik Interactive did to the SEC) or a motion to dismiss.
SEC Is Bringing ‘Thor’s Hammer’ Against Ripple, Warns Tone Vays
Ripple is coming under fire from a serial Bitcoin (BTC) proponent this week after news emerged a lawsuit against the company has intensified.
Ripple will feel U.S. regulators’ wrath, says Vays
Ripple, which notionally controls the token known as XRP, is currently being taken to court by an investor, Bradley Sostack, who claims the company engaged in selling unregistered securities.
As Cointelegraph reported, the stakes increased this week, after Sostack amended his original claim to include fresh guidance from the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
According to reports, the SEC’s latest pronouncements lend weight to Sostack’s argument, and a filing now shows Ripple must respond to the accusations next month.
Commenting on the events meanwhile, Tone Vays, the veteran trader and host of the Bitcoin Law Review podcast, levelled harsh criticism at Ripple.
“The SEC is bringing Thor’s Hammer,” he wrote on Twitter Aug. 14, openly calling XRP a scam token. Vays promised to debate the lawsuit in the next episode of the podcast.
Controversy surrounding both Ripple and XRP has been almost constant in recent years. Conflicting statements about the company’s relationship to the token, along with the notorious behavior of their social media supporters, have earned the third-largest cryptocurrency an unenviable reputation.
In a separate development this week, cryptocurrency exchange Beaxy announced it had stopped trading after a coordinated attack on Ripple saw a huge sell-off on its order book, driving down XRP prices by 40% on the exchange.
XRP/BTC is currently trading at its lowest level since November 2017.
XRP Community Is Threatening A ‘Takeover’ If Ripple Execs Keep Dumping
Anger about the negative market consequences of Ripple selling XRP to its clients is prompting token holders to conceive of ever-more ingenious means to fight back.
In a tweet published on Aug. 26, Twitter user @CryptoBitlord quipped to his 102,000 followers about his latest scheme for a community effort, writing:
“I’m thinking about forking $XRP so we don’t have to deal with the founders dumping. — This will be a community effort. Retweet if you’re in.”
Crypto Bitlord’s anger has spilled over beyond witticisms; 3 weeks ago, he started a change.org petition entitled “Stop Ripple dumping,” which has secured almost 2,500 signatures by press time.
“We Will Stage A Community Takeover”
Earlier today, Crypto Bitlord tweeted to Ripple’s CEO and CTO:
“Brad Garlinghouse, Joel Katz, you now have 60 days to stop dumping XRP or we will stage a community takeover. If it’s a decentralized network like you say, we have the power to do it.”
As previously reported, Ripple’s quarterly reports have consistently revealed the high number of XRP tokens the company is selling to fund its investments in different firms that have the potential to grow the XRP ecosystem and to fund its operations.
The most recent, published late July, revealed a quarter-to-quarter increase of XRP sales of around 48%. Ripple, however, noted at the time that it had decided to temporarily pause programmatic sales and put limits on institutional sales. It also pledged to decrease future token sales substantially.
As XRP’s Value Continues To Sink, This Has Done Little To Calm Investors.
Garlinghouse was today prompted to respond to what he characterized as the FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) surrounding the project, attributing it to questionable sources. He added:
“XRP sales are about helping expand XRP’s utility — building RippleNet & supporting other biz building w/XRP ie Dharma & Forte. Reality is we DECREASED our sales by volume Q/Q and since then the inflation rate of XRP circulating supply has been lower than that of BTC and ETH.”
The Security Classification Hangover
In addition to responding to allegations of purported dumping, Garlinghouse also alluded — but refrained to comment in detail on — recent amendments to an ongoing class action suit against Ripple, in which an investor has alleged that the firm sold XRP as an unregistered security in violation of federal law.
The new filing notably cited guidance issued by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to corroborate its claim that XRP counts as a security.
Garlinghouse briefly responded, stating that “SEC guidance isn’t issued by the Commission and isn’t law, rule or regulation,” and noting that the United Kingdom and others have come out clearly against a securities classification for the token.
Ripple Avoids XRP Question As It Moves To Dismiss Securities Lawsuit
Blockchain network Ripple has filed a controversial motion to dismiss a lawsuit accusing it of selling unregistered securities.
Ripple: Securities Ruling Beyond Scope Of The Court
In a court filing uploaded by Fortune on Sept. 20, lawyers representing the company against investor Bradley Sostack dismissed the claims.
Part of an ongoing legal battle, Sostack says Ripple’s sales of XRP in 2013 constituted an unlawful securities offering.
Ripple denies this, but the case has thrown up wider concerns over the legality of Ripple’s operations regarding XRP. As Cointelegraph reported, executives have refused to acknowledge the company’s relationship to the token, despite their huge personal holdings and continuing sell-offs.
“Court Need Not Resolve Whether XRP Is A Security”
Now, fresh suspicions are swirling after the lawyers’ motion to dismiss failed to address the securities aspect of XRP at all.
“Because of the multiple, independent grounds for dismissing this action, the Court need not resolve whether XRP is a security or currency for purposes of this Motion, which assumes Plaintiff’s allegation that XRP is a security,” a section reads.
The substance of the filing attracted attention from crypto-focused lawyer Jake Chervinsky.
“They make twelve separate arguments for dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims. Not a single one squarely addresses whether XRP is an unregistered security,” he summarized on Twitter on Friday.
The latest developments appeared to have little impact on XRP markets — with the token continuing to trade flat over the past 24 hours at just under $0.30.
Blockchain Firm Ripple Fuses xRapid, xVia And xCurrent Into RippleNet
Ripple, the blockchain firm behind crypto asset XRP, fused three of its services into features of its RippleNet offering.
Industry news outlet CryptoNews reported the change in Ripple’s product offering on Oct. 9.
Little More Than The Names Changed
Per the report, a company’s spokesperson explained that now, “instead of buying xCurrent or xVia, customers will connect to RippleNet — on-premises or through the cloud — and instead of buying xRapid, clients will use On-Demand Liquidity.” The Ripple representative also said:
“Other than the names of the product, very few things have changed and will not affect our customers.”
More Than A Software Suite
The company reportedly believes that moving from a suite of services to offer a network to its customers is a natural evolution of its strategy due to the growth of its user base and development of its standard. He concluded:
“RippleNet Is More Than Just A Suite Of Software.”
As Cointelegraph reported yesterday, alluding to the spate of controversies that have beset the project, Ripple CEO, Brad Garlinghouse, argued that Ripple’s “transparency has opened us up to attack.” He said that there is a “bunch of misinformation” out there, but claimed that this is in part because Ripple is “ten or a hundred times more transparent than anyone in the crypto community.”
Ripple Files Last Bid To Dismiss XRP Securities Lawsuit Before Court Meeting
Even if XRP were a security, the investors suing Ripple brought their case far too late for it to proceed, the company said in a new filing.
Further, subsequent arguments made by the plaintiffs contradict their original claims, Ripple said in the Dec. 4 filing with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
It’s the latest document filed in the back-and-forth since a federal court appointed Bradley Sostack the lead plaintiff in the ongoing case. Sostack filed his initial amended complaint in August 2019. The plaintiffs claim the company sold XRP as an unregistered security to retail investors.
The filing largely reiterated arguments Ripple made in an earlier motion to dismiss the case: that the amended complaint filed in August missed a legal deadline to pursue claims after an event; that the lead plaintiff still hasn’t been able to show that he bought XRP from any of the defendants (or during an initial offering); and that the claims that XRP is a security conflict with the plaintiff’s claims under California’s state consumer protection law.
As such, Ripple once again has sidestepped the most important question the case poses for the digital asset industry: whether XRP, the third largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, is a security under U.S. law.
“XRP is not a security, but that is irrelevant for purposes of this motion. Even if XRP were a security, Plaintiff’s claims still fail as a matter of law,” the filing said (emphasis from the original document).
The filing is the last before the parties meet in court next month to argue over the motion to dismiss.
Ship Has Sailed?
Despite the plaintiff’s claims that Ripple’s engaged in an ongoing offering of securities, the filing said, Ripple first began selling XRP in 2013, meaning any case brought after the three-year statute of repose should be dismissed.
“The Court’s passing reference to the statute of repose running ‘from the defendant’s last culpable act (the offering of the securities),’ … does not upend the ‘first-offered’ rule,” the filing said, referencing a number of other court cases which supported this argument.
The statute of repose argument was successfully used by defendants in a number of mortgage-backed securities cases several years ago, Rebecca Rettig, a partner at FisherBroyles, previously told CoinDesk.
Ripple reply also took aim at a line in the plaintiff’s response, filed Nov. 4, which said “Ripple issues new XRP from escrow for the first time each month for sale to the public.”
According to the Dec. 4 filing, this argument contradicts the plaintiff’s original amended complaint, which said “all 100 billion XRP were created out of thin air by Ripple in 2013, prior to its distribution to investors.”
(A bullet point in the new filing further claims that the modifications plaintiff alleged changed XRP were actually made to “Rippled,” the software underpinning the XRP ledger.)
The filing also takes aim once again at claims that Ripple sold the XRP to the plaintiff, claiming that there was a “one-in-ten-thousand chance” that this could have occurred.
According to the filing, “Ripple’s alleged exchange sales of XRP accounted for .095 percent—less than one-tenth of one percent—of the total volume of XRP sold on exchanges” during the time period Sostack said he bought XRP.
The parties will meet in court on Jan. 15, 2020.
Messenger Giant Line’s Crypto Exchange To Delist XRP This Month
BitBox, the Singapore-based cryptocurrency exchange operated by internet messaging giant Line, announced that it will delist XRP on Jan. 16.
Cointelegraph Japan reported BitBox’s decision earlier today. The announcement published on the exchange’s website on Jan. 6 read:
“We keep a constant watch on all coins that are being traded on BITBOX. If a coin does not meet our standards based on its performance, reliability, liquidity, or law and regulatory requirements, it will be delisted from our exchange. To protect your assets and interests, we provide sufficient notice before delisting.”
The crypto asset in question will be delisted at midnight on Jan. 16 together with XRP trading pairs with Bitcoin (BTC), Ether (ETH) and Tether (USDT).
BitBox recommended that its users cancel all their trades before the delisting takes place. After XRP is delisted, BitBox’s customers will have until midnight Feb. 16 to withdraw the coin.
Reasons Behind Delisting Unclear
As of press time, BitBox has not answered Cointelegraph’s request for clarification regarding its decision to delist XRP, the third-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization at $9.4 billion.
Looking at CoinMarketCap’s BitBox volume data, only 0.02% of the exchange’s volume came from XRP trading.
BitBox was launched in June 2018 by Line, the firm behind a major Japanese social messaging app. The firm started facilitating crypto trading globally with the exclusion of the United States and Japan at first, but obtained a crypto exchange operating license from Japan’s financial regulator in September last year and expanded its operations as BitMax.
Brad Garlinghouse, the CEO of the blockchain firm behind XRP, recently answered concerns that the company could control the crypto asset’s price due to the significance of its holdings. He claimed that the firm does not want to “dump” its associated XRP cryptocurrency despite selling huge amounts of it and strongly denied the company could influence the XRP price.
What Impact Would A Ripple IPO Have On XRP Price?
Blockchain payment network Ripple launching an initial public offering (IPO) could, in fact, devalue the cryptocurrency in which it holds a majority stake.
According to several market participants interviewed by Cointelegraph over the weekend, Ripple going public has potential implications for the fate of altcoin XRP.
Ripple IPO: Boom Or Bust For XRP?
The company’s CEO, Brad Garlinghouse, last week hinted an IPO may occur within the next year.
In the face of flagging XRP prices, the impetus behind a major fundraising event is clear for commentators, but whether it would reverse the token’s fortunes is not at all clear.
“Though Ripple is making inroads, it is yet to disrupt the global money transfer system in a major way,” regular Cointelegraph contributor and analyst Rakesh Upadhyay said. “Initially, after the IPO, the market participants might be patient but they will soon seek results. When the results don’t come through, it will hurt prices.”
For Upadhyay, Ripple’s lack of progress despite its various deals with major banks and other businesses means harder times are still to come.
A telltale sign that liquidity remains problematic is Ripple’s mass selloffs of XRP. As Cointelegraph reported, these were bigger in 2019 than ever before. Even the IPO announcement failed to move XRP/USD significantly higher.
“A sharp fall in price will make it difficult for Ripple to raise money. It has been selling tokens, which shows that it is not making enough money to fund its operations. But unlike before, after the IPO, Ripple will also not be able to sell tokens without announcing beforehand. When announced, this will again hurt prices.”
A Different Kind Of Selloff
The idea of an IPO becoming a straightjacket for Ripple was echoed by the head of Cointelegraph Markets Allen Scott.
For him, the IPO would be a litmus test for buyer appetites already under scrutiny after the XRP selloffs.
“Many see Ripple selling XRP regularly as a recurring ‘IPO’ already sans shareholder rights,” he said.
“So this might actually hurt Ripple — it would put into question not only its operational costs and business model of dumping on the market but more importantly, the existence of XRP.”
By contrast, for fellow contributor and ex-eToro analyst Mati Greenspan, an IPO could allow Ripple to strengthen its position vis-a-vis XRP.
“My feeling is that it would be positive. Additional funding for Ripple would mean less reason to sell off tokens,” he summarized.
Perhaps predictably, prominent XRP investors share even less of the sense of foreboding. Michael Arrington, the founder of TechCrunch and hedge fund Arrington XRP Capital, told followers to “disregard FUD” around the IPO.
“It’s healthy, and awesome if/when it happens,” he tweeted on Jan. 24 in the wake of Garlinghouse’s announcement.
Financial Firm SBI Holdings To Offer XRP Cryptocurrency As Shareholders’ Benefit
Japan’s crypto-friendly financial services company SBI Holdings will give shareholders the option to receive the XRP cryptocurrency as a benefit.
SBI announced on Friday shareholders could either take the benefit in XRP or another product offered by health food and cosmetics subsidiary SBI Alapromo.
Under the scheme, new shareholders on the company’s registry as of the starting date of March 31 can accept XRP to the value of 2,000 yen (around $18), while those who’ve been shareholders for over a year will receive 8,000 yen ($73.50) in the cryptocurrency.
The Alapromo alternatives include cosmetics, health supplements and brown rice powder. All shareholders are being given a 50-percent discount on supplements and cosmetics sold by the subsidiary.
There is caveat for those who would take the XRP benefit: they must be resident in Japan and have an account at SBI’s cryptocurrency exchange VC Trade, which launched in 2018 as the first crypto trading platform backed by a bank.
SBI has been one of the most active corporations in crypto and blockchain. As well as the exchange, it has a crypto mining division that recently was reported to be involved in potentially the world’s biggest bitcoin mine under development in Texas.
The firm has also formed a joint venture with Ripple, which is involved in the development of XRP, to offer a cash transfer app called Money Tap. That project has seen participation from a number of Japanese banks.
It has further teamed with blockchain consortium startup R3 to market R3’s Corda platform in Japan and the region. Also announced by SBI on Friday, Japanese bank Sumitomo Mitsui agreed to join that venture with a view to potentially using Corda technology.
Ripple Co-founder Jed McCaleb Sold a Billion XRP and Has 4.7B Left
Analysis by blockchain monitor Whale Alert suggests that Ripple co-founder Jed McCaleb sold off more than one billion XRP between 2014 and 2019.
In a Medium post published on Feb. 6, Whale Alert estimated that McCaleb has another 4.7 billion XRP left to sell, equating to around 5% of the total supply. At today’s prices, the hoard is worth more than one billion U.S. dollars, dwarfing the $135 million Whale Alert estimates he has made via XRP sales to date.
McCaleb sold another 19 million, or $4.13 million worth last month — and Whale Alert believes the rate may increase this year as the agreements limiting his XRP sales expire. Specifically:
“At the current rate it would take him around 20 years to sell all of it, however, his activities have been limited by the settlement agreement with Ripple, which is likely to expire sometime in 2020.”
The news alarmed some XRP holders on Twitter.
“We didn’t want to alarm people, but I hope they now have a better view of what’s going on,” Whale Alert told Cointelegraph.
Whale Alert monitors blockchains and issues notifications on Twitter and Telegram about large movements of cryptocurrency.
90,000 transactions analyzed
Whale Alert posted the addresses it had identified as belonging to McCaleb, which it traced via the information on his blog, forum posts and the public ledger.
“By analyzing over 90,000 transactions we were able to track around 8 billion XRP to Ripple, a settlement account and his personal accounts from which he actively sells.”
It said he sold off the 1.05 billion XRP almost exclusively through Bitstamp.
Whale Alert was unable to determine if McCaleb’s sales had affected the price of XRP but said: “because he is exclusively selling XRP, he is adding to the net amount available.”
MoneyGram Reveals Real-Time Remittance Tech, Based On Visa Not Ripple
Remittances giant MoneyGram announced a new service allowing real-time money sending, but the solutions of its blockchain partner Ripple are not involved.
MoneyGram recently announced FastSend, a new service that allows its customers to send money in real-time to a phone number via a dedicated website or mobile application. Still, the firm’s answers to Cointelegraph’s inquiries revealed that surprisingly MoneyGram’s latest product does not make use of Ripple’s technology.
You Don’t Need Blockchain For Real-Time Settlements
Kamila Chytil, MoneyGram Chief Operating Officer explained to Cointelegraph that FastSend uses Visa’s Direct Original Credit Transaction to deliver funds to bank accounts through Debit card deposit.
While DLT is not involved, the dedicated website and app make use of an open source cloud-based micro services. Chytil also pointed out that while Ripple is not involved in this service, the firm uses blockchain-based extensively in other areas:
“Today, MoneyGram is utilizing Ripple’s On Demand Liquidity product which allows MoneyGram to trade FX at a corporate level using XRP. It’s a back-end treasury function that’s not consumer facing. The technology is helping to solve the most expensive and time consuming aspect of the current process by reducing the amount of money the company needs to park around the world, which will eventually reduce working capital needs.”
Furthermore, Chytil said that MoneyGram is also evaluating other use cases “where blockchain could help solve data privacy and regulatory obligations through distributed ledger technology.” Overall, she spoke highly of DLT and cryptocurrencies, noting that the firm believes blockchain to be the future of global cross-border payments and money transfers.
Chytil also praised the cryptocurrency market for being always active — unlike traditional markets — and the ability of crypto assets to shorten the delivery times of the currency. Lastly, she said that MoneyGram is looking at multiple use cases to maximize the use of Ripple’s tools and is integrating with the latest version of Ripple’s service suite to offer cash-out service to all network members.
Ripple is seeing increasing adoption among financial institutions as a provider of DLT services. This month, Bangladesh-based Bank Asia — which holds over $3.4 billion of assets — has joined Ripple’s RippleNet blockchain-based financial services network.
Ripple’s crypto asset XRP, also recently hit a 7-month high of $0.33 as Cointelegraph reported yesterday. Still, over the last 25 hours to press time the cryptocurrency later lost about 7.82% of its value.
SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,SEC Guidance Gives Ammo,