Connect with us

Crypto

The Ripple Effect: Is This Ruling a Turning Point for Cryptocurrency Regulation? | The Motley Fool

Published

on

The Ripple Effect: Is This Ruling a Turning Point for Cryptocurrency Regulation? | The Motley Fool

Learn what Ripple’s courtroom win against the SEC entails, who it benefits, and how it may reshape the future of digital currencies.

Once upon a time, I thought Brad Garlinghouse’s legacy would be the peanut butter manifesto. In a 2006 memo, Yahoo! vice president Garlinghouse wrote a memo explaining that the company was spreading itself too thin across too many business projects, stopping it from becoming truly great at anything. You know, like spreading peanut butter too thin on a slice of bread.

It was the best description of scatter-brained diworsification I’ve ever seen, and a memorable milestone in Yahoo!’s journey from online empire to fading historical footnote.

Well, Brad Garlinghouse wasn’t done setting standards after that memo. After bouncing around a few advisory and executive roles, he took the CEO office at Ripple Labs in 2015. The XRP (XRP 16.60%) cryptocurrency, often called Ripple like its underlying organization and global payments service, may have turned the page on American crypto regulations this week — still under Garlinghouse’s reins.

Image source: Getty Images.

Advertisement

The SEC vs. Ripple story so far

Let’s start with a quick synopsis. Every Ripple investor worth their salt is aware of the organization’s legal challenges. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) launched a lawsuit against Ripple Labs and a few key executive (including CEO Brad Garlinghouse) in December 2020.

In this suit, the SEC argued that the XRP cryptocurrency should have been launched like a proper security — stock, bond, investment contract, and so on — with SEC registration and other legal requirements. The Ripple team wanted their currency to be treated more like the dollar, the Euro, or the yen, a commodity with looser regulatory restrictions.

The steps forward and back in that process have set the tone for Ripple’s price chart ever since. District Judge Analisa Torres dismissed most of the SEC’s complaints last summer, placing Ripple in the commodity category as long as the organization was dealing with amateur investors of users of the RippleNet payments system.

The case moved on to a jury trial to settle how Ripple should be treated in relation to professional investors. The SEC asked for $2 billion in damages, based on the XRP launch collecting $723 million from “sophisticated buyers.” Ripple said it shouldn’t owe more than $10 million for committing a clerical error launching a new asset type in 2013.

What’s new?

That brings me to Wednesday, August 7 of 2024. Judge Torres issued a final ruling in the SEC’s remaining case, and it was far from the costly punishment the regulators had requested.

Advertisement

The verdict ordered Ripple Labs to stop selling any assets to professional investors without properly registering them as securities with the SEC, and to pay the court $125 million in civil penalties. That’s roughly 6% of the SEC’s suggestion and barely a slap on the Ripple Labs organization’s proverbial wrist.

As a private company, Ripple Labs doesn’t have to report its financial details and the size of its cash reserves. But the group has dropped a few hints about its financial health recently. Ripple bought back $285 million of its privately held shares earlier this year, at terms implying a total market value of $11.3 billion. At the time, Garlinghouse said that Ripple Labs has more than $1 billion of cash on hand alongside more than $25 billion in crypto holdings. And the XRP cryptocurrency’s total market value stands at $61 billion today, not including cash pools held in foreign countries as a functional piece of the border-crossing payments network.

So Ripple can easily bear this civil penalty and move on as a powerhouse in the area of international money transfers. Crypto investors were quick to embrace the verdict — Ripple’s price jumped 27% higher in a 90-minute sprint as this gavel bang echoed across the internet.

The implications of Ripple’s legal victory for all cryptocurrencies

More to the point, Judge Torres’ verdict should help regulators and investors firm up the legal framework for creating, selling, buying, and owning cryptocurrencies in general.

The $125 million fee won’t break Ripple’s bank, but it’s still a punishment for financial wrongdoing. Analisa Torres has classified XRP as a security in some cases (when dealing with professional investors and money managers) but not in general use (as in running the payments network or trading crypto coins on the public market).

Advertisement

I’m no lawyer and you shouldn’t take my analysis as legal advice on any level. And the SEC may very well appeal this unfavorable verdict, putting the lengthy lawsuit case through a few more years of legal wrangling. But as it stands, the dual nature of this ruling hints at a future where cryptocurrencies with different designs and real-world use cases could operate under different regulatory rules.

Again, I could be wrong and SEC appeals might throw a bucket of digital spanners into the flexible crypto future I envision. If I’m in the right zip code as the actual future, crypto investors should enjoy a firm but friendly legal system in America, setting the tone for better regulatory crypto systems around the world. Beyond the direct impact on Ripple and its investors, leading crypto names such as Bitcoin and Ethereum would feel those tailwinds, too.

Investors detest uncertainty and this ruling is at least a small step in the direction of more transparency, confidence, and assurance across the cryptocurrency market. This newfangled asset class is growing up and figuring out what it actually is. The final answers are less important than the process of finding them.

That’s why Judge Torres’ final verdict is a big deal, and not just for Ripple investors. Future crypto owners may remember this Wednesday as a game-changing moment for the whole crypto market. Now I can stop thinking of Brad Garlinghouse as “that peanut butter guy.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Crypto

Residents question proposed crypto mining center

Published

on

Residents question proposed crypto mining center

STARKVILLE – Potentially higher utility bills and sound pollution topped the list of concerns raised by six residents who addressed the board of aldermen Tuesday about a cryptocurrency mining facility proposed for Industrial Park Road.

Vice Mayor Roy Perkins, who represents Ward 6, said he has fielded similar concerns from constituents following the board’s June 12 work session, during which members heard a presentation about the potential project.

“I know these things need to have full accountability, full transparency and different things,” Perkins said. “… Well you can rest assured the vice mayor is going to be on assignment. I’m going to do my part. I’m not going to do anything that’s going to negatively impact this community.”

The proposed facility would be a specialized type of data center designed to mine cryptocurrency, a digital currency that operates independently of government-backed financial systems. It is stored in digital wallets and fluctuates in value.

Advertisement

Mining facilities use specialized computers that draw large energy loads to secure the digital transactions that take place. The center proposed in Starkville would be much smaller than “hyperscale data centers” that store and process data for large tech companies.

Utility usage topped the concerns of most residents with Pam Jones, the first to speak, set the tone.

“I understand that this is on a smaller scale than the hyper-scale facilities, and I just wanted to be sure that we had ordinances in place that will count the noise, especially at night and that there will be water and power management,” Jones said.

Other residents took issue with what they see as a lack of transparency around the proposed project.

“I was quite disappointed to learn (the mining facility) was not an agenda item today,” said Eadie Keenan, a Ward 7 resident. “… Quite frankly, I have more questions than can fit in three minutes.”

Advertisement

Tiffany Womack, another Starkville resident, echoed Kennan’s concerns, adding utility usage and market volatility to her own list of issues.

“If (the center was) to go bankrupt or something like that, would that possibly fall back on the responsibility of Starkville citizens?” Womack asked.

Mayor Lynn Spruill did not answer each question individually, instead encouraging those with questions to watch the June 12 presentation. Due to the project’s early stage, she noted the board does not yet know answers to all the questions raised during Tuesday’s meeting.

“I brought (the center) to the board as an opportunity for us to begin that process of learning so we are nowhere near making a decision,” Spruill said. “Which is why it isn’t on the agenda and won’t be on the agenda for some time.”

Spruill said the proposed center is currently going through the staff vetting process. Once the process is complete, staff will make a recommendation to the board on whether to pursue the center. At that time, Spruill expects to be able to answer residents’ remaining questions.

Advertisement

Spruill said transparency is important to her and the board while going through the process of vetting the mining center.

“Nothing is being hidden. It’s all out there for everybody to see, and we’ll make decisions based on facts not on Facebook craziness,” Spruill said. “… We want facts, and we want all decisions to be made with facts. And so hopefully that will put some of your concerns (to rest), at least to the extent that this is nowhere near something that will be on the agenda.”

Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 24 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.

Advertisement

Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 24 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.

Continue Reading

Crypto

Jim Rickards Asked Robert Kiyosaki to Read One Manuscript, Then His View of Global Finance Changed

Published

on

Jim Rickards Asked Robert Kiyosaki to Read One Manuscript, Then His View of Global Finance Changed

Key Takeaways

Why Did One Manuscript Change Robert Kiyosaki’s View?

Robert Kiyosaki, the author of the best-selling personal finance book Rich Dad Poor Dad, said an advance manuscript of “The Entropy Trap” shared by Jim Rickards prompted him to rethink how he views global finance. Rickards is an economist, lawyer, and financial commentator known for writing about currencies, debt, and systemic market risk. Kiyosaki said the early reading changed his perspective on where the financial system may be headed.

The reaction was framed around a warning about financial change. The book, written by Mickey M. Maini, “blew my mind and opened my eyes to what & why global financial change is coming,” Kiyosaki described. His comments focused on what he described as a shift in the rules behind wealth, assets, and trust.

The central claim is that wealth could move away from people relying on traditional financial assumptions. Kiyosaki asserted:

“The informed will be tomorrow’s ULTRA RICH. Todays uniformed operating by the old rules of money… will become the new poor.”

The Warning Behind the Claim

The warning centers on assets that depend on trust, including U.S. bonds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and mutual funds. Kiyosaki framed those instruments as vulnerable under the financial shift he says is coming, placing commonly held investment products at the center of the risk.

That claim is severe, but he presented it as a warning rather than a proven outcome. He also pointed to large bondholders, including Japan, saying they have already started dumping U.S. bonds. He did not provide supporting data in the statement.

The acclaimed author shared:

Advertisement

“Message from book… ‘All assets that require trust, assets that most people have… such as U.S. bonds, ETFs, mutual funds will be flushed down toilets, all over the world.’”

The broader conflict is whether traditional financial assets remain reliable under the conditions Kiyosaki described. His framing divides investors between those preparing for a changed financial system and those still operating under assumptions he says may no longer hold.

What Still Needs to Be Proven

A planned August study session could clarify the warning Kiyosaki described. He said his study team would examine the message and that Rickards may join, though the evidence behind the claims has not yet been laid out.

For now, the warning rests on Kiyosaki’s account of a manuscript that changed his view. He urged readers to prepare, writing:

“I want you to be one of the world’s new rich.”

What remains unknown is whether market data, policy moves, or investor behavior will confirm the risk he described.

His recent commentary has focused on what he describes as fragility in the global monetary system, particularly around the U.S. dollar. He has pointed to rising debt, central bank policies, and inflation as risks that could trigger a sharp market downturn.

Advertisement

Alongside those concerns, he has repeatedly highlighted bitcoin, gold, and silver as alternative stores of value. In his view, those assets may help reduce exposure to traditional financial instruments during periods of currency weakness and market turbulence.

Continue Reading

Crypto

Strategy Is No Longer Just Going to “Inoculate the Market,” Selling Crypto May Be Much More Common. Here’s What That Could Mean for the Stock | The Motley Fool

Published

on

Strategy Is No Longer Just Going to “Inoculate the Market,” Selling Crypto May Be Much More Common. Here’s What That Could Mean for the Stock | The Motley Fool

When Strategy (MSTR 0.69%) sold a modest amount of Bitcoin earlier this year, it was a noteworthy development given that the company’s business has centered around buying up as much of the cryptocurrency as it can, and vowing to never sell. And it often boasts of being the largest corporate holder of the digital currency.

The company brushed off the sale of 32 Bitcoins, with management saying it simply wanted to “inoculate the market.” Well, now it appears that Strategy is doing much more than just that, and there could be more significant cryptocurrency sales in the future.

Image source: Getty Images.

Strategy unveils a Bitcoin monetization program

On June 29, Strategy released a framework going forward that it says will “enhance liquidity, preserve long-term Bitcoin exposure, and support long-term value creation for shareholders.” Among the notable components is its Bitcoin monetization program.

Within that program, the company says it may sell some of its cryptocurrency holdings for multiple reasons, including to fund a USD reserve, fund dividends or interest expense, or to fund repurchases of digital credit securities or common stock.

Advertisement

While the company says it remains committed to Bitcoin for the long term and it’s the company’s “primary treasury reserve asset,” it’s a significant change of course for Strategy, which was previously heavily against ever selling the digital asset.

Strategy Stock Quote

Today’s Change

(-0.69%) $-0.69

Current Price

$100.08

The stock is as risky and volatile as ever

Whether or not Strategy buys or sells Bitcoin doesn’t change the fact that this is a highly risky and speculative stock to own. While crypto fans may be disappointed in the company’s change in strategy, selling Bitcoin will likely not be enough to make the business any better or worse as an investment.

In just the past 12 months, the stock has plummeted a whopping 75% as volatility in digital assets has drastically weighed on its earnings, with the company incurring $12.8 billion in losses over the trailing 12 months, on revenue of $490 million.

That’s not likely to change significantly, even if Strategy offloads some of its crypto holdings, because with such a large exposure to Bitcoin, how the cryptocurrency performs will inevitably impact the company’s bottom line in a big way. This year, the leading cryptocurrency is down 28% as investor excitement around it has largely cooled off, which has proven disastrous for Strategy’s stock as well. And at this stage, there’s little reason to anticipate a recovery anytime soon.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending