Ripple Pivoted Their XRP SALES STRATEGY, But WHY?

Follow me on Twitter: @moonlamboio

DISCLAIMER: I am not a financial adviser. None of what I have communicated verbally or in writing here should be considered financial advice; it is not. Do your own research before investing in any digital asset, and understand that investing in any cryptocurrency is inherently risky. If you do, you need to be prepared to lose your entire investment.

Hello this is Matt on the moon family Sedan Channel I've got two topics to Share with you in this latest Moon Family sedan room temperature Jam uh the First story I'm going to cover comes From attorney Bill Morgan who of course Is a member of the xrp community now um Ripple has pivoted their xrp sale Strategy and that dates back uh you know This may it'll be three years actually But why did they pivot well there's some Additional in-depth Insight shared by Attorney Bill Morgan that I've been Looking forward to sharing with you and In a separate story that I finally got a Little bit of time to look forward to it Actually was uh hot a couple days ago It's on this topic of Sam bankman freed Uh potentially having bail revoked but While that's interesting in and of Itself because I wouldn't mind that in The least there's something strange Going on as pointed out by an attorney Who is uh just participating on crypto Twitter and what's happening in in terms Of sbf's treatment and protection even From the prosecuting side he says it is Not normal and because the judge like I'll just tell you this at the outside Of the video the judge is saying it's Just like kind of dumbfounded the way he Comes across he's like but look at all Of these things look at all these things That he's done and how he's trying to

Engage in secretive communication and What he shouldn't have bail revoked the Judge acknowledges it's actually still a Possibility but before going further I Do be clear I do not have a legal or Financial background of any kind I am Not offering legal or financial advice And you definitely should not buy or Sell anything because of anything I say Or right I'm just an Enthusiast who Enjoys making YouTube videos about Crypto related topics but just as a Hobby and just for fun all right so uh This first topic I want to share with You I got kicked off on Twitter by Attorney Bill Morgan member of the xrp Community and he tagged uh he tagged me Along with some others in the community So thank you very much attorney Morgan Uh for tagging me and I find uh his Insight here to be rather thoughtful Because honestly I like the ideas that he has on this I I Haven't seen seen cited by anybody else So check this out The SEC States in its summary judgment Motion memorandum of law that ripples Counsel Andrew cerezny met with Hinman In September 2019 and was advised to Register offerings of xrp or stop Offering them so let's pause to note Andrew ceresny that's one of Ripple's Attorneys Andrew ceresny formally worked At the SEC and so I'm sure most of you

May recall that there are at least I Can't remember how many at least a few Attorneys uh that the upper echelons of The SEC who upon leaving the SEC went Into private legal practice and that's Who Ripple hired which is awesome in and Of itself and so you have former SEC Official Andrew cerezny representing Ripple at that point and meeting with Bill Hinman in September of 2019 at and At that point Andrew ceresny was advised Uh to register offerings of xrp or stop Offering them and then attorney Morgan Continues excuse me up to that time According to the SEC Ripple had sold xrp In programmatic sales so let's pause let Me just pause that too I've never seen The actual definition of what Programmatic sales are and I've read uh Every xrp markets report from Ripple I Think it's just every sale that isn't Specifically directly related to On-demand liquidity transactions it's Anything else any other potential firm I Don't know if that means it could have Been a cryptocurrency exchange it's not Engaging in on-demand liquidity or a Hedge fund that wants to invest if there May have been stuff like that I'm just Making stuff I don't have specific Examples but I'm saying anything that's Not on demand liquidity and so the Programmatic sales had stopped here so That's what Bill Morgan is exciting here

So again he says up to that time According to the SEC Ripple had sold xrp In programmatic sales the SEC alleges Ripple did not know who were on the Other side of these programmatic blind Bid slash ask trans actions in any event It seems Ripple stopped such sales in September of 2019. Was this connected to the September Meeting with Hinman Ripple alleges it has essentially only Sold xrp to odl customers since May of 2020. so this means we're talking about Positioning xrp as a bridge currency Purely for utility so these are partners That are using it for a specific purpose Unquestionably not as some sort of Investment because it lasts for two to Five seconds okay that's each Transaction so clearly not for Investment purposes which clearly Disqualifies it from you know satisfying The Howie test meaning obviously if it's Not satisfied how it does not a Securities transaction and so he shared This screen grab from Ripple's attorneys Which reads his files Since May 2020 essentially all of Ripple's sales of xrp With full disclosure to the SEC have Been to on-demand liquidity customers Who have sourced xrp directly from Ripple for cross-border transactions end Quote

Attorney Morgan continues another means Of sales were sales made to Sophisticated institutional and Accredited investors which the SEC Alleges Ripple knew was a conduit to Resell to retail purchasers in public Markets at a profit and which did not Use xrp as a currency The is oh so let me just pause Uh that's what that's right what he's Saying of course but the allegations the SEC are making are complete and utter Nonsense because then even if you're Talking about the programmatic sales you Still get to this question of like even If those were in a specific transactions That the SEC were trying to Target and Even if they were literally in violation Of the wall and I'm not seeding that Point I'm just saying even if That doesn't change the fact that Whoever received them from Ripple you Know sell it to whoever they want that's Secondary market sales as the judge Found in the secv library case secondary Market transactions are not a piece of This that has nothing to do with it and If you go back To all case law dating back to the Howie Test go back to 1946 there are no court Cases zero zip zilchnada that found that You know the security that uh that Secondary Market transactions uh Were Somehow in any way related are to be

Considered under any sort of ruling from Any any casel that had been set so Secondary Market transactions not a part Of anything It settled law in terms of precedent It's set but still SEC be doing what SEC Be doing attorney Morgan continues the SEC alleges these sales continued to the End of 2020 although if Ripple is Correct there were no such sales that Were not to on-demand liquidity Customers after May of 2020. the SEC Alleges these sales to on-demand Liquidity customers were also conduits To public markets the SEC is aware the On-demand liquidity transfers are quick And that the on-demand liquidity Customers holds xrp for mere seconds The questions I have are number one Whether Ripple stopped sales other than To on-demand liquidity customers because Of the September 2019 meeting with Hinman and the SEC investigation so I'll Pause the note that is an excellent Question and attorney Morgan is the First person I've ever seen posit that Question and the timing is such that it Makes you go hmm doesn't it I mean isn't it it's very reasonable to Speculate that that meeting Andrew Ceresny and Hinman Directly resulted in Ripple changing Strategy And up to that point I imagine they felt

Pretty good about what they were doing Especially after the bill Hinman Ethereum free pass speech in which he Was talking about how decentralization Of a uh you know a you know A blockchain would be a leading you know Determined leading factor and Determination of whether or not there Was some sort of infringement when it Came to Securities laws so Ripple Probably feeling pretty good up to that Point and then Bill Henman is like says This thing that's just outside the scope Of even his own damn speech stupid ass Speech in 2018. uh and then Ripple Pivots right at that exact moment in Time probably not coincidence that'd be My fourth one guess anyway and then Bill Morgan says uh too so a second question Here what does this imply about Ripple's Internal risk assessment about Programmatic sales Or sales to institutional investors who Intended to resell for profit and not Use an on-demand liquidity given sales To on-demand liquidity customers aren't To customers who wish to invest you know The SEC own memorandum of law admits They are held for mere seconds and who Wish to exchange the xrp which is Consumptive Number three Is this why the SEC did not seek an Injunction to stop Ripple's on-demand

Liquidity xrp sales continuing after the Lawsuit started because it knows they Cannot be investment contracts Equals no investment of money no Expectation or profit no common Enterprise between on-demand liquidity Customers and ripple now pause I hadn't Heard that from anyone else either but You can see once your brain starts going In that direction how all it makes Perfect sense because how many times Have we all been sitting around asking If if what is being done is so wrong and So illegal why has the SCC not sought an Injunction to prevent ripple from doing What they're doing and selling xrp Well the reason is because they know They'd the injection would fail That's why They know they're on the losing side of This damn thing at least for that Portion in terms of on-demand liquidity So so what so if they know that they're Going to lose on that But they maybe they're confident more so On the programmatic side is there Actually going to be some sort of Penalty against Ripple even if they did Something wrong and illegal that won't Allow for the legal portion which would Be the on-demand liquidity sales Don't you think like duh This is why I just I I really appreciate The perspective here it's just really

Thought-provoked anyway so question Number four from attorney Morgan What is the relevance of 2013 through 2017 sales compared to post 2017 sales I Keep seeing as determining the fine Ripple may be ordered to pay if it is uh If it is unsuccessful the analysis Should perhaps focus on the type of sale Not when it happened This again points to the rod the SEC Made for its own back trying to argue There is a single continuous offering And all sales of xrp are investment Contracts not focusing on specific sales Or types of sales so folks pause a note Here this is another situation where They're uh Ridiculous argument all-encompassing Argument which is clearly a tremendous Overreach far beyond their jurisdiction This is another instance where it looks Like this you know if we get a you know Adjust ruling here it's going to come Back to bite them in all likelihood it's Another instance of why and then Attorney Morgan says cannot see that the SEC has explained how the category of Sales to on-demand liquidity customers Meets the Howie factors And then number five Is is this why there is no settlement Ripple wants to go back to institutions And programmatic sales but these sales Not sales to on-demand liquidity

Customers continue to be at risk now That would be interesting What if in the talks and we're not privy To this But what if I I don't know the Probabilities but what if the SEC would Have been able to see the point like the The back room Communications see the Seed okay you can do on-demand liquidity But not programmatic and then for ripple That's a hard no because they want to be Able to do both of them I don't know I don't know how much is Going to come out in the coming you know Weeks months and years ahead you know in Terms of uh you know stuff that you know We typically wouldn't be privy to But At least at the minimum obviously Everything's gonna be fully transparent In terms of the the Judgment coming down From uh judge annalize Torres in terms Of the rationale for whatever conclusion She comes to at least we're going to be Privy to all of that Interesting stuff indeed so attorney Bill Morgan thank you very much for Tagging me I appreciate the thoughtful Thread here now on to the next topic and I'm going to try to be brief on this one But uh here it's covered all over crypto Media and mainstream media this one's From Yahoo finance Judge warns ftx's bankman freed your

Freedom can be revoked and so I came Across this from Um a lawyer on crypto Twitter here meta Lawman who had the following to say About this article Which I'll touch on he said prosecutors Continue to argue against sending SBF to Jail even though the judge believes Quote there is probable cause he Attempted to commit a felony while on Pre-trial release end quote this is not Normal Folks did y'all hear that prosecutors Are arguing against sending SPF to jail While the judge is like okay but you Know he might might have committed a Felony What are you kidding me this is wacky Stuff so I was like okay I gotta cover This Former FTX CEO Sam bakeman Freed's Freedom was on the line during a court Hearing on Thursday as Government Attorneys and lawyers for the indicted Crypto entrepreneur argued over further Restricting his access to electronic Communication During a hearing in Manhattan Federal District Court Following weeks of negotiation between The parties U.S District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan tabled a decision on the Prosecution's request to cut off banquin Freed's internet access and continue to

Express skepticism over the defendant's Access to encrypted communication Services it isn't clear when judge Kaplan will rule on the request or why He afforded the lawyers more time to Work out the dispute though the extended Bankman Freed's bail conditions ordered On Wednesday He asked banquin Freed's lawyers to Consider hiring a technology Guru who Could provide the court with Device Monitoring expertise and asked that the Defendant be prepared to address his Lingering concerns by February 24th Quote why am I being asked to turn him Loose on this Garden of devices end Quote judge Kaplan asked during the Hearing during which U.S Assistant Attorney Nicholas Roos proposed cutting Off bankman Freed's cell phone tablet And computer access as well as his Access to Smart TVs and online video Games In essence the government argued that Bankman freed should be prohibited from Accessing the internet in order to allay Concerns that he may use self-deleting Messaging apps in Virtual private Networks or vpns to communicate with Potential trial Witnesses following his Arrest bankman freed messaged the FTX U.S general counsel over signal and Email as well as other current and Former FTX employees he later used a VPN

On January 12th which his lawyers Contend was to view the Super Bowl Quote we are dealing with somebody who Has done things that show there is Probable cause he attempted to commit a Felony while on pre-trial release end Quote and that's from Judge Kaplan Ah but he just gets to continue to be Out on bail huh well maybe not we'll see We'll see what the judge says but it's Just so freaking wacky I just I just Wanted to at least spend a a couple Minutes just sharing this with you in Case you miss it So is what it is folks everything in Crypto is weird and crazy though Whatever I'm not a financial advisor you Should not buy or sell anything because Of anything I say are right that would Be a very very very bad idea until next Time to the Moon family sedan

You May Also Like