Ripple’s AMM/ODL integration in the context of XRP and its ODL service creates a unique scenario for market manipulation. It is the ultimate market manipulation tool. Ripple has managed to convince the SEC and Judge Torres that if you call it “market making” then it’s not market manipulation!
Part 4 Of An 8 Part Exposé
How Ripple surreptitiously changed the fundamental nature of XRP after investors had already committed funds. Contrary to popular belief market forces DO NOT play a significant role in the price of XRP. Ripple, almost exclusively, shapes the price of XRP.
Brad Garlinghouse and David Schwartz have artfully dodged disclosing critical information about its liquidity sourcing practices, control over XRP supply and so much more.
Ripple and it’s influence-rs repeatedly make the deceitful claim that there is now clarity that XRP is not a security. The deceit is by omission and deflection. Brad Garlinghouse, David Schwartz and their lackey influence-rs resolutely fail to mention that the Judge had CLEARLY ruled that XRP WAS A SECURITY when sold to institutional investors.
Part 4: Ripple’s Double Talk - The Truth Behind Ripple’s AMM/ODL Integration
While AMM is a common mechanism used by exchanges, Ripple’s integration of AMM with its large reserves of XRP via its ODL service creates a unique scenario for market manipulation. Unlike typical exchanges that rely on user-provided liquidity, Ripple can directly inject liquidity from its own reserves. The ability to control liquidity is a form of market manipulation.
Coming Soon
Part 5: Judicial Bias? There is Something Seriously Amiss in the NY Judicial System.
Judge Torres concurred with the SEC that Ripple had violated securities law when it sold XRP to institutional investors, privately. So, why did Gary Gensler and the SEC abandon criminal indictments, WITH PREJUDICE? Why did Judge Torres readily sanction the capitulation? Was there a sidebar to induce the SEC and Judge Torres to gratuitously surrender to Ripple?
Part 6: The Mystery of Institutional Silence.
Why haven’t institutional investors filed claims against Ripple for selling them unregistered securities? Because Ripple and institutional investors are “the whales” secretly transferring large amounts of XRP as part of settlement agreements “off the exchanges”; in full view of, and possibly, with a silent nod from Gary Gensler and Judge Analisa Torres.
Part 7: Ripple's IPO and ETF Mirage: The Truth Behind the Hype.
Ripple's strategy hinges on keeping retail investors invested in the potential of XRP. The deceitful idea of a forthcoming IPO or an ETF approval serves as a powerful motivator for these investors, many of whom are already deeply invested and hopeful for significant returns; which Ripple knows will elude them and is actively making sure it does not happen.
Part 8: The Imminent Collapse of XRP and Implosion of Ripple Inc.
Retail investors have been the backbone of XRP's price stability, largely due to the speculative hype around potential wide scale adoption and IPO and ETF approvals. Once this illusion is shattered, the crash of XRP and the catastrophic effect it will have on the crypto market and the crypto industry as a whole, will pale in comparison to the FTX debacle. Sam Bankman-Fried can perhaps look forward to at least 3 members of the fraternity to share his lodgings with.
Part 4
Ripple Executives' Double Talk
The Truth Behind Ripple’s Market Manipulation Denials
Ripple's AMM/ODL is the ultimate market manipulation tool. Brad Galinghouse & David Schwartz have publicly admitted that Ripple manipulates the market for XRP - employing carefully crafted doublespeak denials. Ripple’s AMM integration in the context of XRP and its ODL service creates a unique scenario for market manipulation. Ripple has managed to convince the SEC and Judge Torres that if you call it “market making” then it’s not market manipulation!
Automated Market Making (AMM) In The Context Of XRP.
Automated Market Making (AMM) is a mechanism used by decentralized exchanges (DEXs) to facilitate trading by automatically providing liquidity. Unlike traditional order book-based exchanges, where buyers and sellers place orders that get matched, an AMM uses smart contracts to create liquidity pools. Traders can trade against these liquidity pools instead of waiting for another trader to match their orders.
While AMM is a common mechanism used by exchanges, Ripple’s integration of AMM with its large reserves of XRP and its ODL service creates a unique scenario for market manipulation. Unlike typical exchanges that rely on user-provided liquidity, Ripple can directly inject liquidity from its own reserves. The ability to control liquidity and stabilize the market is a form of market manipulation. If Ripple uses its reserves to adjust the supply of XRP, it can influence the price, which has significant implications for market transparency and investor trust.
In the context of Ripple and XRP, Ripple’s integration of AMM systems, is a euphemism for a system that uses it’s own XRP reserves and algorithmic adjustments to suppress the price of XRP. This is essential for Ripple’s On Demand Liquidity (ODL) service. Combine that with judicial indifference, the unrelenting hot-air from Ripple’s army of influence-rs, the deafening silence from institutional investors, the SEC’s ambiguous stance and we have a melding of factors and stakeholders that seem to be enabling market manipulation.
Opaque Admissions and Their Implications
Recent statements by Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, and CEO Brad Garlinghouse reveal a pattern of opaque admissions rather than outright denials of market influence. The truth behind Ripple’s market manipulation denials is that Brad Galinghouse & David Schwartz employ carefully crafted doublespeak in admitting that they are manipulating the market for XRP.
In February 2024, David Schwartz, Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, made a perplexing statement that has raised more alarm bells in the crypto community. While purportedly denying allegations of market manipulation through programmatic sales of XRP (another quaint euphemism that means Ripple has a rigged automated system (AMM) to sell their XRP inventory without directly communicating with buyers) Schwartz's carefully crafted language was in itself a cloaked admission.. As reported by Crypto News, Schwartz stated that Ripple’s programmatic sales are part of their market-making activities, intended to facilitate liquidity and smooth transactions, not to manipulate the market. Ok, so if you call it “market making” then it’s not market manipulation? He then proceeded with an assertion that these sales "tend to have a slight net effect of reducing Ripple’s XRP holdings" and are "not intended to manipulate the market price". Wow!
The Masters of Circuitous Language
David Schwartz
Schwartz’s statement is filled with nuanced language that can be interpreted in various ways. Breakingdown this self-negating hot-air we can conclude that:
"Tend to have a slight net effect of reducing Ripple’s XRP holdings": means the programmatic sales do have an impact on market price! This statement acknowledges that Ripple is actively selling XRP, which inherently impacts market supply and, consequently, the price. Schwartz simply admits market manipulation and obscures and sidesteps the true impact of these sales on the market – all in the same breadth, camouflauging it as a denial.
"Not intended to manipulate the market price": The intention behind Ripple’s programmatic sales can differ significantly from their actual impact. The statement shrouds the issue of actual market impact behind geek-speak. Essentially, Schwartz is saying, that he doesn’t intend to manipulate the market (which is a lie), but the system is programmed to do it and it’s the system’s fault. The cheek!
Brad Garlinghouse
Brad Garlinghouse, Ripple’s CEO, has often used similarly opaque language. In an interview with CNN in January 2020, Garlinghouse stated,
“Ripple is focused on the long-term utility of XRP. We don’t want to flood the market, and our sales are disciplined and transparent.”
Seriously Brad? “disciplined and transparent”? Why don’t you disclose the details of Ripple’s sales, how many private wallets Ripple maintains, the daily volume of XRP sales, where Ripple sources XRP from and so much more? Tell us Brad.
During a Q&A session at the 2019 Swell conference, Garlinghouse mentioned,
“Our goal is to support healthy and orderly XRP markets. We manage our XRP sales in a way that’s measured and considerate.”
How would we know if you don’t tell us how you achieve that goal Brad? Terms like “healthy and orderly” and “measured and considerate” are subjective Brad.
In another interview with Fortune in October 2019, Garlinghouse noted:
"We are not, in any way, trying to inflate the price of XRP." Oh goody Brad! So, you admit that you are manipulating the market with price stabilizing strategies? The emphasis on intent ignores the possibility of incidental effects, similar to Schwartz's phrasing.
The Broader Implications for XRP Investors
The bottom line is that for all the innovation Ripple Labs brings to the table, its market practices raise significant questions. The lack of regulatory scrutiny seems deliberate and is disconcerting. The SEC’s lawsuit against Ripple lacks a comprehensive approach to addressing Ripple’s deeper market strategies. By not demanding full disclosure of Ripple's liquidity practices, control mechanisms and financial gains, the SEC has either deliberately or inadvertently allowed Ripple to maintain critical strategic advantages.This omission allows Ripple to evade full accountability. The SEC and Judge Analisa Torres must broaden their focus to include comprehensive transparency and accountability from Ripple, ensuring a fair and trustworthy market for all participants.
Commentaires