The Final Part of An 8 Part Exposé
Retail investors have been the backbone of XRP's price stability, largely due to the speculative hype around potential of wide scale adoption and the IPO and ETF approvals. Once retail investors start seeing through this veil of deception, it will likely herald the final countdown to the final countdown of the collapse of XRP and the repercussions will be severe. The inevitable collapse of XRP and Ripple will ensue.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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 Inevitable 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 8
THE FINAL COUNTDOWN.
The Risk of a Price Collapse
The cryptocurrency world is no stranger to dramatic rises and falls, but the unfolding saga of Ripple and its digital currency, XRP, might just eclipse any previous debacle, including the infamous collapse of FTX. Ripple’s strategy to keep retail investors hooked, amidst allegations of market manipulation and lack of transparency, suggests that a devastating collapse could be on the horizon.
Retail investors have been the backbone of XRP's price stability, largely due to the speculative hype around potential of wide scale adoption and the IPO and ETF approvals. Once retail investors start seeing through this veil of deception, it will likely herald the final countdown to the collapse of XRP and the repercussions will be severe. The current situation parallels the spectacular collapse of FTX, a once-dominant cryptocurrency exchange that fell apart due to internal fraud and lack of transparency. FTX’s downfall sent shockwaves through the crypto world, but the potential implosion of Ripple might be even more catastrophic given its wider implications for the legitimacy of the cryptocurrency market as a whole.
Key Factors Contributing to the Risk.
Speculative Hype and Reality Mismatch: Ripple has fostered an environment of speculation regarding future IPO and ETF approvals. Brad Garlinghouse and David Schwartz have not decisively debunked these rumors, allowing retail investors to cling to the hope of significant future gains. However, the regulatory and operational transparency hurdles make these financial developments highly unlikely in the near term.
Opaque Market Practices: Ripple’s market practices, particularly around liquidity sourcing and XRP sales, have been less than transparent. Despite David Schwartz’s statements denying market manipulation, his language suggests otherwise. For instance, programmatic sales on exchanges and market-making activities have been presented as neutral actions, but they likely influence market dynamics more than admitted.
Regulatory Scrutiny and Legal Outcomes: The SEC’s ongoing lawsuit and Judge Torres’s ruling have already created an environment of uncertainty. Institutional investors, wary of the regulatory landscape and Ripple’s opaque operations, have not shown strong interest in XRP, further increasing the reliance on retail investors .
Institutional Hesitation
Ripple’s appeal to institutional investors has also been lukewarm at best. Institutional investors typically demand a higher level of transparency and regulatory compliance, something Ripple has struggled to provide. The recent ruling by Judge Analisa Torres, which requires Ripple to register XRP as a security, adds another layer of complexity. Ripple has shown little interest in complying, likely because registration would necessitate significant disclosures about its operations and potentially expose its market manipulations.
Institutions are also wary of the legal risks associated with holding an asset under regulatory scrutiny. This hesitation from institutional investors means that Ripple can no longer rely on them to support XRP’s price, leaving retail investors as the primary bulwark against a price collapse. However, retail investors are also the most likely to panic sell when they realize the true state of affairs, making a collapse even more likely.
Ripple stands at a crossroads where embracing transparency could potentially avert the Inevitable collapse of XRP and the implosion of Ripple Inc. By voluntarily disclosing critical information about its operations, Ripple could restore investor confidence and stabilize its market position. The benefits of transparency are obvious, but may not align with Ripple’s market strategy.
The Ripple Quandary. Registration of XRP. Heads I Win, Tails You Lose!
The immediate implication from Judge Torres' ruling is that Ripple should have been racing to register XRP as a security with the SEC if it hopes to draw institutional investors. Funnily enough, there has been no sighting of Ripple at the door of the SEC with an application in hand. This surprising disinterest raises eyebrows and prompts speculation about Ripple's motives. Could it be that registering XRP as a security would necessitate significant disclosures about Ripple's operations, particularly the management of its On-Demand Liquidity (ODL) service? The registration process could impose significant regulatory burdens on Ripple and impact its operational flexibility.
It is more than plausible that Ripple is reluctant to provide such transparency, especially since these disclosures will expose market manipulation activities. By avoiding registration, Ripple can continue to operate without the scrutiny that SEC oversight would entail. This opacity benefits Ripple by allowing it to maintain control over XRP supply and liquidity, thereby safeguarding the substantial profits derived from these activities. The silence from Ripple speaks volumes, suggesting an unwillingness to pull back the curtain on practices that will undermine its lucrative position in the cryptocurrency market.
Ripple’s Strategy and the SEC.
Ripple's reluctance to fully disclose its market operations could be seen as a strategy to maintain its current market advantages. However, this strategy is fraught with risk. The SEC's civil suit, which has focused on regulatory violations, has not demanded extensive disclosures about Ripple’s internal practices. This has allowed Ripple to continue its opaque operations relatively unchallenged.
The handling of the Ripple case by both the SEC and Judge Torres could have catastrophic consequences for retail investors.
The dropping of criminal charges and the likely settlement imply a lack of accountability for Ripple’s executives, sending a message that regulatory enforcement can be negotiated away. Ripple’s ability to manipulate the price of XRP through its On-Demand Liquidity (ODL) and Automated Market Making (AMM) systems remains unchecked, potentially leading to continued artificial price stability that does not reflect true market conditions.The SEC's approach has primarily targeted the classification of XRP as a security rather than delving into the deeper issues of market manipulation and transparency. This has left retail investors particularly vulnerable, as they continue to operate under the illusion created by Ripple's speculative hype. While seeking $2 billion in damages is substantial, questions remain about whether Judge Torres will sanction such a high fine and how this fine will benefit investors: The general expectation is that Judge Analisa Torres will recommend a much smaller quantum, as is expected by Gary Gensler and Ripple and which is the orchestrated battle cry of Ripples army of influencers.
Typically, fines collected by the SEC are deposited into the U.S. Treasury. There is often a lack of direct compensation to the defrauded investors, which raises the issue of how the penalty benefits those harmed by the alleged misconduct. While large fines can deter future violations, they do little to directly address the financial losses suffered by individual investors.
Conclusion
The future of XRP hinges on Ripple's ability to shift from opacity to transparency. While the immediate gains from maintaining the current strategy may seem advantageous, the long-term risks could be catastrophic. If retail investors lose faith in XRP, the resulting price collapse could be devastating not only for them but for Ripple as well. By embracing transparency and voluntarily disclosing critical information, Ripple can stabilize its market position, rebuild investor trust, and potentially influence more favorable regulatory outcomes. The SEC, on its part, should focus on enforcing disclosures that protect retail investors and ensure a fair trading environment.
Unlike FTX, Ripple still has a chance to avert disaster by embracing transparency and voluntary disclosures. By coming clean about its operations, liquidity practices, and the actual utility of XRP, Ripple could rebuild trust with both retail and institutional investors. This could prevent a mass exodus and stabilize XRP’s price, ensuring the company’s survival.
Comments