Currencies Direct to Complete Successful xRapid Pilot

Ripple's xRapid technology was used by British financial firm to successfully complete the cross-border payment
30 May 2018   1759

According to the project participants, Currencies Direct conducted direct transactions between previously selected organizations, which took a few seconds unlike the 3-5 days that are currently required. This test served as a technical proof that Ripple (XRP) as a means of exchange in comparison with traditional methods of payment has a high speed and degree of transparency. This is reported by Finextra.

With the help of xRapid, the financial institution directly connects to exchanges in the country of the sender and the recipient. The sender's funds are exchanged for XRP, and then for the destination currency. The transaction is fully monitored, and requires a few seconds to complete the transaction.

Our goal is to offer the best possible service. We believe that utilising cryptocurrencies in this way - as a transfer of value, rather than as a store of value - is the next logical step for our industry. It is, after all, the intended purpose of cryptocurrencies and we’re proud to be leveraging new technology to deliver the most convenient and seamless experience for our customers.

Brian Harris

Chief Product Officer, Currencies Direct

According to the senior vice president for product at Ripple Ashish Birla, xRapid is able to significantly reduce the costs and time required to make international payments. xRapid expands the capabilities of customers and allows payment service providers to gain a competitive advantage in the market.

Previously the provider of mobile payment solutions Uphold announced the completion of the integration of Ripple technology into its platform. This will allow application users to work with XRP tokens directly through the application.

US Crypto Companies to Support TON in Case With SEC

The Blockchain Association said Telegram taken sufficient measures to ensure that the Gram token offer met SEC requirements
23 January 2020   474

The Blockchain Association, which combines companies such as Coinbase, Circle, 0x and Ripple, issued an expert opinion as part of the ongoing proceedings of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) with Telegram.

Previously, the Digital Commerce Chamber launched a similar initiative. The blockchain association, however, was more straightforward and stated that Telegram had taken sufficient measures to ensure that the Gram token offer met SEC requirements. According to members of the organization, the actions of the SEC can damage not only Telegram, but the market as a whole.

The Court should not block a long-planned, highly anticipated product launch by interfering with a contract between sophisticated private parties. Doing so would needlessly harm the investors that securities laws were designed to protect.


The Blockchain Association

The Blockchain Association notes that for many years it has not been possible for SEC to obtain clear and unambiguous guidance for conducting activities in the cryptocurrency space, while the claims of the regulator make the current situation even more ambiguous. 

The SEC’s lawsuit also raises novel questions regarding whether companies are forbidden from raising funds from sophisticated U.S. investors, under well-established regulatory provisions, to build blockchain networks.


The Blockchain Association

They cite examples of startups TurnKey Jet and Pocketful of Quarters, in respect of which the regulator recommended not to apply legal measures, adding that such litigations inevitably involve high costs and do not guarantee industry participants that they will not be prosecuted in the future.

Telegram discussed its plans with SEC staff for a year and a half, provided copious information and responded to limited feedback by adjusting the design of its transaction. Yet, at the end, the SEC has sued, and the SEC’s briefs thus far say nothing about the substance of those discussions. 


The Blockchain Association

In conclusion, the group asks the court to “reject the SEC’s arguments that the not-yet-in-existence Grams were securities at the time of the Purchase Agreements.”