Bittrex + XRP

[Anonymous No.10611287]

Bittrex is adding USD market for XRP.

They wouldn't dare fucking with unregistered security, therefore XRP not a security.

Strap in.

[Anonymous No.10611291]

https://support.bittrex.com/hc/en-us/articles/360012536412-Here-We-Go-Rolling-Out-More-USD-Pairs

[Anonymous No.10611358]

only retards would use this scam exchange.
enjoy your 5% fees and disabled account.

[Anonymous No.10611489]

Bittrex is fucking dead.
15 million volume on btcusdt and btcusd combined.

[Anonymous No.10611510]

>>10611287
They're adding USD for everything you fucking idiot

it doesn't make XRP not a security. XRP is still a security wheter you like it or not.
XRP was from an ICO done by the Ripple company back in 2013.

XRP IS A SECURITY.

DEAL
WITH
IT.

[Anonymous No.10611564]

>>10611510
When was the ICO held?

[Anonymous No.10611651]

>>10611564
The day they released the pre-mined coins to sell to investors. 2012

>The San Francisco-based company created billions of coins “out of thin air” and then profited by selling them to the public in “what is essentially a never-ending initial coin offering,” the class-action complaint filed Thursday in the Superior Court of California said. Ripple violated state and federal laws by offering unregistered securities to retail investors, the filing said.
>The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said in July that companies which raise money through the sale of digital assets must adhere to federal securities laws.

>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-04/ripple-hit-with-class-action-suit-over-never-ending-ico


>ICO is the abbreviation of Initial Coin Offering. It means that someone offers investors some units of a new cryptocurrency or crypto-token in exchange against cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum.

[Anonymous No.10611690]

>>10611651
They were giving XRP away initially, not selling them. It doesn't even fit the definition of ICO they gave in the article.

[Anonymous No.10611768]

>>10611690
>They were giving XRP away initially, not selling them.
Try to tell that to the SEC.

>The lawsuit also highlighted Ripple’s attempt to persuade some of the top U.S. crypto exchanges to list XRP. Bloomberg reported in April that the startup suggested paying financial incentives to the venues
Clearly this is nothing but a for-profit company that was selling it's premined coins to fund it's operations

How is this not a Security with regards to the SEC regulations?

>They were giving XRP away initially, not selling them
How much XRP were they 'giving away?
How much was sold?

These are questions the SEC will surely get the answer to one way or another. No matter how many wiki pages or quora questions the CTO can indirectly answer while ignoring the core question

[Anonymous No.10611786]

>>10611768
by that definition ETH was also doing ICO and is a security

stop the security FUD and let courts / SEC decide

btw. security or not we moon one day 100%

[Anonymous No.10611874]

>>10611786
idc about FUD
It's simple truth that will be brought to light one way or another in the future

ETH was not a company and/or a for-profit entity in the United of States.
XRP however, was.

[Anonymous No.10611887]

>>10611358
Bittrex used to be the shit.
If they can add USD for all shitcoins, then they might be able to make their comeback

[Anonymous No.10611941]

>>10611768
>Try to tell that to the SEC.
The SEC has made it clear that they are not going to comment on XRP specifically. It will be settled in court where Ripple is being defended by a former SEC chair against a bunch of underfunded ambulance chasers.

>Clearly this is nothing but a for-profit company that was selling it's premined coins to fund it's operations.
Offering a loan of XRP to get an exchange started trading is neither illegal nor immoral. I'm still confused why anyone has a problem with this. The fact that they are a for-profit company who sells a very small amount of XRP to fund their operations does not make it a security.

>How is this not a Security with regards to the SEC regulations?
This goes through all the main points.
https://twitter.com/scotty2ten/status/982588943806881792

>How much XRP were they 'giving away?
>How much was sold?

I believe Ripple initially gave away about 12 billion XRP (out of the 80 billion they were gifted by the creators of XRP), and they now hold 61 billion. That would mean they've sold or donated 7 billion since. You can read their quarterly reports where they detail exactly how much they sell.

[Anonymous No.10611973]

>>10611358
They're far safer than Binance though. I wouldn't ever trust a chink exchange in my entire life. If those "hacks" and downtimes weren't an indication of something screwy was going on, then I don't know what will.

[Anonymous No.10611978]

>>10611973

Fundsu are safu american piggu

[Anonymous No.10611988]

>>10611287
>They wouldn't dare fucking with unregistered security, therefore XRP not a security.
Lol
They've listed a bunch of ICO securities last year. Tron, Storm, Bancor, Monaco, TenX, etc.

Bill Shihara (CEO) said they were reviewing Ripple's legal status in an interview 2 months ago.

[Anonymous No.10612025]

>>10611941
>The fact that they are a for-profit company who sells a very small amount of XRP to fund their operations does not make it a security.

That's where it is a security. No one can do this operation without filing with the SEC and/or safeguarding the investors. If they did file it, then it shouldn't be an issue should it?
Wrong.

The fact that they did do this operation and the fact that they are constantly selling it on exchanges means it was never accounted for.
Thus, they not only have to pay penalty fines, but they might also possibly lose the law suit about XRP being a security because of the mishap of people losing their money in January.

Because it is a security due to their initial operation, and because they keep selling it on exchanges like nothing is wrong, this almost paints the big picture that this 'for-profit' company has been walking away from regulations while also buddying itself up with SEC lawyers and exchange CEO's

There's still things that are unknown, but the fact that the operation still happened (possibly, don't have a full source on it), almost forces this thing to be a security from the get-go

[Anonymous No.10612068]

>>10612025
This makes no sense at all. You are completely ignoring all the other criteria that determine whether it is a security and jumping to your preferred conclusion. You also appear to have ignored everything I've said about their "initial operation".

[Anonymous No.10612070]

>>10611978
topity kekity

[Anonymous No.10612399]

>>10612068
he is not going to use logic because he is a paid fudster

[Anonymous No.10612475]

>>10612068
what 'initial operation' are you talking about? You mean them selling a portion of the XRP to fund for the for-profit company of Ripple?

>You are completely ignoring all the other criteria that determine whether it is a security
No im not. I'm just pointing out to the fact that if you break rule #1, you're a security.
And they broke that rule long ago whilst selling to the public today

Will SEC ever say XRP is a security? Who knows?
But what is certain is the procedure that took place clearly made them a security. What happened afterwards doesn't matter because they broke the law at the beginning.

But did they really? ICO's wasn't a 'thing' apparently. Doesn't matter. They created it for the pure purpose of it being an investment contract. Not some token that can be used for anyone.

They specifically sold to certain buyers.

[Anonymous No.10612517]

>>10611874
government already said eth was a security issuance but they aint gonna prosecute, just don't do it anymore

[Anonymous No.10612580]

>>10612399

That guy is in every thread crying that XRP is a security when it's obvious that the SEC is giving Ripple space to distance themselves enough so that it can be publicly deemed not a security.

[Anonymous No.10612656]

>>10612475
So Rule #1 = a for-profit company selling an asset they own? I'll make sure to register with the SEC before I start my company to sell you potato chips.

>They created it for the pure purpose of it being an investment contract.
Completely wrong. They created the XRP Ledger to serve as a real-time gross settlement system that would allow you to trade in any currency you wanted. XRP wasn't particularly important in the beginning which is one of the reasons they were trying to find people who interested to give it away. The built-in exchange was their focus, and XRP was essentially a stamp used to pay transaction fees. You can find David Schwartz himself saying this on the old Ripple forums.

But just in case I'm wrong, do you happen to have a copy of this investment contract?

[Anonymous No.10612695]

>>10612580
I'm an xrp bull but this faggot makes me kek with some of these threads.

[Anonymous No.10612767]

>>10612656
You're misunderstanding how XRP was created and where XRP comes into play into all of this.
Them giving it away wasn't the problem. Them selling it on the pretext that XRP will go up for the investors is where they got it wrong m8.

Is XRP a full-blown security? They still have to prove that. But that is a fact is that they acted in those steps.

It's like making Bitcoin up and selling a bit to some folks so you can pay for your company, and while you're selling those 'bitcoins', you tell those 'investors' that it will go up.

Class A security.

[Anonymous No.10612792]

>>10612767
>But what* is a fact is that they acted in those steps.

[Anonymous No.10612899]

>>10611973
bittrex IS a chink exchange, have you ever seen who runs it? having a us office is not a good thing. they submit all your data to the irs and will not hesitate to freeze your account like they have already to thousands of people. bitcointalk has 1000's of pages of posts about how they have scammed people. could happen to you tomorrow, but keep paying those 10x higher fees than anywhere else cause getting raped makes you feel safe.

[Anonymous No.10612959]

>>10612767

>You're misunderstanding how XRP was created and where XRP comes into play into all of this.
XRP was created by David Schwartz and Arthur Britto, who then along with Jed McCaleb and Chris Larsen formed a company and gifted it 80 billion XRP. Ripple (Opencoin at the time) had no say in the amount of XRP created and did not decide on the distribution.

>Them selling it on the pretext that XRP will go up for the investors is where they got it wrong m8.
Except you have no actual evidence they did this. You're just assuming because it's convenient.

[Anonymous No.10613446]

XRP won't be classed as a security because it's a utility token. IF it was classed as a security, short-term it would get crushed, longterm it would be the best thing to happen to it.
Institutional money that everyone memes about isn't touching crypto until it's better regulated and grey areas like this are sorted out by the regulators. If XRP were classes as a security, it could be registered and added to regulated exchanges like any other security. Then the REAL money can openly invest in it. Not this trickle of pennies from amateur speculators.

Either way it's win/win long-term

[Anonymous No.10613725]

>>10611287
>wouldn't dare fucking with unregistered security
>wouldn't dare fucking

pajeet detected

[Anonymous No.10614832]

>>10611510

This is factually inaccurate

[Anonymous No.10614865]

>>10612959
>Except you have no actual evidence they did this.
Care to explain to me what they said to them as they 'gave them the XRP'? Clearly they just handed it over right. No contract was ever made
Laughable.


>XRP was created by David Schwartz and Arthur Britto, who then along with Jed McCaleb and Chris Larsen formed a company and gifted it 80 billion XRP.
This line doesnt make sense.
How does David Schwartz and Arthur Britto make XRP, but then Jed and Chris have 80 billion of it?
That makes no sense m8. Chicken came before egg and just donated eggs to Ripple?

[Anonymous No.10614875]

>>10614832
Prove me wrong.

I'll wait

[Anonymous No.10614988]

>>10614865
>Care to explain to me what they said to them as they 'gave them the XRP'? Clearly they just handed it over right. No contract was ever made
Laughable.

The agreement was signed between Jed, Arthur, and Chris (David was not included looking at it further). Ripple was not a party to the agreement as it did not exist yet.

>This line doesnt make sense.
How does David Schwartz and Arthur Britto make XRP, but then Jed and Chris have 80 billion of it?
That makes no sense m8. Chicken came before egg and just donated eggs to Ripple?

What I meant was David and Arthur did the actual development. They were the first two that Jed brought on board to work on the project. Chris joined later in the year, and then the agreement was signed a month later, followed by Opencoin being incorporated.

[Anonymous No.10615240]

>>10611489
I remember bittrex fuckin me on the Ignis airdrop. Since then its fuck these niggers! plus USA exchange and I don't want my info being given to the tax jews so Double Fuck these Kikes! ps. their ceo is a kike

[Anonymous No.10615250]

>>10611651
premined vs an erc20 token. oh me oh my another scam coin? reallllly. better sell me your bags fag

[Anonymous No.10615739]

>>10614988
>What I meant was David and Arthur did the actual development. They were the first two that Jed brought on board to work on the project. Chris joined later in the year, and then the agreement was signed a month later, followed by Opencoin being incorporated.

So who started with 100 billion XRP in the first place?!

[Anonymous No.10615748]

>>10615250
what