Banks have 'No Intention' to use Ripple's XRP token

[Gnosis7777]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhieGgf219Y



Bloomberg News confirmed that it has spoken to various multi national banks, who all had the same thing to say:

'We have No Intention of using the XRP token for Bank Transfers.'


It appears, Prima Facia, that 'some' Banks may have agreed to 'Test' certain 'Network Features' of Ripple's new network, but Bloomburg couldn't find a single bank that would be using the publicly traded XRP token to initiate bank transfers.


Of course, this is logical, why would a bank agree to use a publicly traded security token that may swing in value exponentially on a daily basis to move private, secure, customer funds?


Answer: They wouldn't.


At best, the XRP token is a security that would be traded by Banking Brokerages or Clearing Houses on demand for customers akin to a stock order.


A bank would NEVER, legally, or even morally, engage in risking customers pecuniary account values on a publicly traded, wildly oscillating security which could potentially jeopardize clients funds values.


Sorry to anyone who may have bought the hype, but it appears Ripple may have been engaging in Marketing Fraud with claims that banks would be using the publically traded XRP token to initiate private bank transfers.


If someone can prove Bloomberg wrong, and can provide an actual, official statement from a BANK, and not just a talking point from a Ripple press release, then we'd love to see it.


Until then: It seems Ripple is BUSTED.

[1715080051]

1715080051

[1715080051]

1715080051

[1715080051]

1715080051

[Renzarra]

I wan't be so sure. Bank system will change in future and it will be more acceptable for banks to adopt the Ripple and any other kind of coin.
Coalition of banks and crypto is not an easy task, but where is the profit everything is possible.

[Gnosis7777]

I wan't be so sure. Bank system will change in future and it will be more acceptable for banks to adopt the Ripple and any other kind of coin.
Coalition of banks and crypto is not an easy task, but where is the profit everything is possible.

No bank, by law, is able to use a volatile security such as Ripple for clients monetary transfers.

This kind of asset class would require a securities brokerage license and is not elligable for FDIC coverage, which all major banks are required to comply with.

https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-500.html#fdic65001005.3
§ 1005.3  Coverage.

(c)  Exclusions from coverage. The term "electronic fund transfer" does not include:
(4)  Securities and commodities transfers. Any transfer of funds the primary purpose of which is the purchase or sale of a security or commodity, if the security or commodity is:
(i)  Regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Sorry but no bank is going to be using XRP for money transfers. This is simply false and illegal.

[stretcharmstrong]

The banks are already developing their own crypto, what they require is the blockchain technology, they are not interested in adopting a coin.

I know that IBM are working with a number of big firms to roll out block chain payment capability.

[Febo]

Bloomberg News confirmed that it has spoken to various multi national banks, who all had the same thing to say:

'We have No Intention of using the XRP token for Bank Transfers.'


It appears, Prima Facia, that 'some' Banks may have agreed to 'Test' certain 'Network Features' of Ripple's new network, but Bloomburg couldn't find a single bank that would be using the publicly traded XRP token to initiate bank transfers.


Of course, this is logical, why would a bank agree to use a publicly traded security token that may swing in value exponentially on a daily basis to move private, secure, customer funds?


Answer: They wouldn't.

Bitcoin is used. Monero is used. ETH is used for issuing tokens for ICOs. That is all what is crypto used. All the rest is just bla bla.  It is all fine they exist and they are developed. But not being worth 100 billions like biggest corporations on the world.

[richan]

If this news is something to go by then it means ripple is riding on the waves of speculations by banks to fulfill its relevance in the crypto currency market. Ripple is known and traded by people for the hopes that banks will give it recommendation sooner or later but yet nothing is seen in the banking community about ripple development. I don't even think Western Union and Monygram duopoloy will allow ripple to overtake them in money remittance.

[CryptoAlphaStar]

This is the second source I hear it. I didn't believe the first time, but I am giving it much more attention now. Bank wouldn't want to let so much control in the hands of a third party. Especially a third party associated in any way with the crypto world.
I believe banks will create their own blockchain.

[Acguy]

People have been saying ripple is being used by banks years ago but nothing has changed just all talk.

[Feralaz]

why all the partnerships though? i guess if none of these partners would be using XRP, then yes ripple is busted. I also talked to my brother about this topic, because he is working in a bank. He said as long as cryptos arent regulated, they are not even thinking about adopting the technology. So I guess a big, for banks to adopt XRP and other cryptos, it needs to be regulated.

[alani123]

Banks are complicated organizations. If you ask their spokspersons and executives if they plan to introduce x into their set of services, they will most likely answer with a no, because introducing x to their services isn't as simple as it sounds. I think that Bloomberg asked the wrong question, really. Banks could work with ripple but their is no reason to have it at their front desks as a service, providing accounts with it etc.

What ripple has now is the coincheck hack I think.

[lsd400]

Buy on rumors sell on the news. FOMO pushed XRP price quite a lot. So has any bank ever used XRP for actual fund transfer? If banks refusing to use it what other use cases for XRP?

[Gnosis7777]

Here's an example of ripple's marketing fraud technique.

Ripple often likes to site a supposed partnership with 'SBI' as evidence of Banking Institutions using the XRP token for money transfers.

If anyone bothered to read the actual document they would find that this is patently false.

SBI is NOT using XRP for 'wire transfers'.

http://www.sbigroup.co.jp/english/investors/disclosure/presentation/pdf/170428presentations.pdf

In the 'SBI' Financial Reports, page 91, which many Ripple proponents spuriously cite as 'proof', is anything but; In fact, SBI claims that they will be investing as securities brokers into Bitcoin, Ripple, and ... wait for it, BITCONNECT, and... ergo initiating a crypto exchange where these token may be traded.

Again, SBI is NOT using XRP for 'banking wire transfers'.


This document being cited as evidence of Ripple bank adoption clearly says they aim to 'advance cooperation between virtual currency exchanges'

'Virtual currency exchanges, ala Gdax, Bittrex, Wex, Etc, not 'banking wire transfers'.


In other words the bank plans on creating their own Crypto Exchanger.



It's utterly pointless engaging Ripple shills as they choose to ignore the hoards of evidence contrarian to the wild claim of many of these Ripple Press Releases.


Note: there have been absolutely ZERO official statements by any Bank, let alone Western Union, that that the XRP token will be used for money transfers outside of running a 'test'.

As the news article notes, when contacted, Banks utterly deny having plans to use the XRP token. If someone has evidence to the contrary, provide it.

Indeed, some of these companies may have agreed to 'test' some Ripple network features, likely for use in developing their own private blockchains.

Further, As I've cited above, these tokens are, by their centralized nature, securities.

The SEC has been quite clear that ICO coins or centrally promoted tokens are securities.
Which, as I've proven above, cannot be used by any FDIC bank in America for money transfers.

https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/statement-clayton-2017-12-11
https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/ib_coinofferings
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2017-219
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2017-227
https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/statement-potentially-unlawful-promotion-icos


As noted above, by Law, these tokens are considered securities and are therefore any FDIC banking institution would be ineligible to use them for money transfers.

https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-500.html#fdic65001005.3
§ 1005.3  Coverage.

(c)  Exclusions from coverage. The term "electronic fund transfer" does not include:
(4)  Securities and commodities transfers. Any transfer of funds the primary purpose of which is the purchase or sale of a security or commodity, if the security or commodity is:
(i)  Regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Sorry but no bank is going to be using XRP for money transfers. This is simply false and illegal.

I can't walk into a bank and transfer a stock certificate's value to another customer. No, I'd have to first go to a broker, get the legal tender, then transfer it.

Bitcoin, as noted by the IRS, is considered a commodity, ICO coins or centrally promoted coins are considered securities.

Regulation is coming down this year whether you people want to acknowledge it or not.

Many of you are going to be surprised that none of this was as 'wild west' as you'd like to believe.

Laws are already in place, and the government will take their time to build solid cases against many of these companies.


Here's the latest from the SEC chairman, he is not amused:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/25/sec-devoting-significant-portion-of-resources-for-catching-cryptocurrency-scams.html






See also https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/77b ‘Security’: The term “security” means any note, stock, treasury stock, security future, security-based swap, bond, debenture, evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate, preorganization certificate or subscription, transferable share, investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit for a security, fractional undivided interest in oil, gas, or other mineral rights, any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities’

[AnonyMyPe]

The banks are already developing their own crypto, what they require is the blockchain technology, they are not interested in adopting a coin.

I know that IBM are working with a number of big firms to roll out block chain payment capability.

yes and they've a partnership with Stellar for that.

[iamTom123]

You can be right and I think we have the same conclusion. Now, for Ripple to be effective, maybe we need new banks on the blockchain though I am not so sure if this can be legally done. I have seen some ICOs purportedly establishing their own banks online with the use of the blockchain technology but I still have to see one which can claim to be operating in any capacity as a bank. Maybe this can happen in the future. What happened to Ripple was purely a big hype that is why it is now sadly retreating in value. So much for its ambition to be replacing Bitcoin then.

[tk808]

Banks will use their own scamcoins, not someone eles's scamcoin. It doesn't take a monkey to figure this out

[sumanto]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhieGgf219Y



Bloomberg News confirmed that it has spoken to various multi national banks, who all had the same thing to say:

'We have No Intention of using the XRP token for Bank Transfers.'


It appears, Prima Facia, that 'some' Banks may have agreed to 'Test' certain 'Network Features' of Ripple's new network, but Bloomburg couldn't find a single bank that would be using the publicly traded XRP token to initiate bank transfers.


Of course, this is logical, why would a bank agree to use a publicly traded security token that may swing in value exponentially on a daily basis to move private, secure, customer funds?


Answer: They wouldn't.


At best, the XRP token is a security that would be traded by Banking Brokerages or Clearing Houses on demand for customers akin to a stock order.


A bank would NEVER, legally, or even morally, engage in risking customers pecuniary account values on a publicly traded, wildly oscillating security which could potentially jeopardize clients funds values.


Sorry to anyone who may have bought the hype, but it appears Ripple may have been engaging in Marketing Fraud with claims that banks would be using the publically traded XRP token to initiate private bank transfers.


If someone can prove Bloomberg wrong, and can provide an actual, official statement from a BANK, and not just a talking point from a Ripple press release, then we'd love to see it.


Until then: It seems Ripple is BUSTED.

that you only get data from some banks only because there are other banks also seem to have glanced at the technology used by XRP and XRP seems to be good if they can cooperate with all the banks in the world then it will trigger to make XRP price increase.

[tdeannova]

it turns out my predictions have been true, that the issue of the bank yesterday just a ripple strategy to raise popularity and attract the attention of the world of crypto. we'll see in the year whether the ripple is more developed and can bring new innovations.

[jdbao]

My impression of ripple is:
This is the first coin accepted by the bank,
This coin is not decentralized,
This coin has risen many times.
So, anyway, I'd rather expect the ripple to develop better, after all, there are some scenario for this coin.

[imteaz]

I think Ripple was too much hype in December. Tons of people bought it blindly, even seen people bought in $2.50 per coin like crazy. Now look at the price, around $1.20 and it might go down even more. I knew bank will never use XRP coin neither coin base would add Ripple. That's why you see price is going even further down.

[Gnosis7777]

Sure enough, I've found the law that would prevent a bank from using an oscillating security such as Ripple for fund transfers, further codified in the CFR.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/12/1005.1

§ 1005.1 Authority and purpose.
(a)Authority. The regulation in this part, known as Regulation E, is issued by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) pursuant to the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1693et seq.). The information-collection requirements have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501et seq. and have been assigned OMB No. 3170-0014.

(b)Purpose. This part carries out the purposes of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, which establishes the basic rights, liabilities, and responsibilities of consumers who use electronic fund transfer and remittance transfer services and of financial institutions or other persons that offer these services. The primary objective of the act and this part is the protection of individual consumers engaging in electronic fund transfers and remittance transfers.

[ 76 FR 81023, Dec. 27, 2011, as amended at 77 FR 6285, Feb. 7, 2012]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/12/1005.3

§ 1005.3 Coverage.
(a)General. This part applies to any electronic fund transfer that authorizes a financial institution to debit or credit a consumer's account. Generally, this part applies to financial institutions.

(c)Exclusions from coverage. The term “electronic fund transfer” does not include:
(4)Securities and commodities transfers.

Using an oscillating security such as the publicly traded XRP token for Electronic Fund Transfers would be absolutely illegal in the US.