President-Elect

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

Hold XRP? Here's food for thought.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@DaddySouth42763 @XrpUdate You have it reversed. He sold Bitcoin around $1000 and bought XRP with it. He has since sold all of his crypto except 1M XRP. He chose Ripple equity over XRP for compensation and thus bought his own.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@Edward_767 @GuntherEagleman You wouldn't know, its obvioua you have no idea what you're talking about and yet decided to play armchair quarterback on the internet to make it sound like you know how to fly more than a crew with, at a minimum, thousands of hours in the air combined.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

As well, you can't really say "respect for the crew" when you've just armchair quarterbacked their response to an obvious emergency.

The notiont that you thinkbyou know better than a pilot who has thousands of hours of turbine time under his belt (PIC insurance requirements require this amount of experience) is embarassing. Opining on the internet that this guy chose to land on grass over a runway because he didn't know better and not because he was forced to, is frankly insulting.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@ecuataylor @95_Annice @kiwicropduster @GuntherEagleman That doesn't change the properties of burning jet fuel nor the melting point of steel.

These aren't opinions, they are chemical and physical facts.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

They reported engine failure. If it was a single engine failure, they aren't landing like this. You think a G200 stays in the air for minutes at low altitude with zero thrust?

And yes, I'm a professional ATP pilot. What are your credentials when you cant even recognize that the gear was in fact down for this soft field attempt?

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

Because there is no reason to do an emergency landing like this if you still have at least one operating engine, especially when you have zero payload.

They were full on fuel, which means they likely experienced this failure on takeoff and had seconds to turn back to the runway and attempt a power off landing in an aircraft designed for generating lift at high airspeeds, a situation that is almost always fatal.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@DannyMintys @GuntherEagleman After a dual engine failure on takeoff? You realize fuel jettisoning takes minutes that they didnt have, right?

Which equipment do you fly, Sully?

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@Edward_767 @GuntherEagleman It wasnt a gear problem, it was a dual engine failure. They were lucky to make it back to the runway environment at all.

If you believe you know better than two gulfstream g200 pilots, you don't.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@tafoer @GuntherEagleman The only reason this aircraft is making an emergency landing like this is because of a dual engine failure just after takeoff. I assure you, they did not have the time.

Thanks for the expert commentary though.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@staceymcca40139 @GuntherEagleman Unless you dont have time to. Nothing like an armchair pilot with hindsight here to give their opinion on a tragedy.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@95_Annice @kiwicropduster @GuntherEagleman Jet fuel burns at 1000-1500 F while steel melts at 2500-2800 F. That's why your statement is incorrect.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@Jenny_Solstice My thesis is that you are an engagement farming bot who will say any retarded thing you can to get a reaction.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@luistonytaylor @kendrahillxrp You're talking to an engagement bot.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@Mvbuztc @GigaChadRizzGod @_Crypto_Barbie Bot or weaponized autism?

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@TestTes81280306 @Gemini @UpholdInc @tyler @cameron @RobinhoodApp @vladtenev @coinbase @brian_armstrong I have, and the fee is still ~$0.00. If you were trying to be ironic, it didn't work out. If you're actually complaining about a sub cent fee, I pity you.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@TestTes81280306 @Gemini @UpholdInc @tyler @cameron @RobinhoodApp @vladtenev @coinbase @brian_armstrong You know a ~ means approximately right? The fee is a fraction of a cent.

You really feel the need to die on this hill?

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

@buuvva_ @Eko18228519 You're talking to a paid FUD account by the way.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

First, show any evidence that Schwartz stepped down for a difference of vision. He is still on the board of Ripple.

Second, David chose at the beginning to be compensated in Ripple equity rather than XRP. The 26 million XRP he ever owned was bought by him after selling BTC at $1000. He has a history of selling several cryptos early because he is highly risk averse. Even then, his only crypto is 1M XRP, which is again, XRP he bought with his own money.

If youre going to spread FUD, at least do some research.

[President-Elect @CaptStuff]

I don't care how many books someone has behind them as they calmly repeat tired arguments, they are still tired arguments.

In the same breath this guy acknowledges the escrow release schedule, he also claims the supply is not fixed. Of course, in all this blathering, he never bothers to differentiate between circulating and total supply, and I imagine that is either done maliciously, or ignorantly. If XRP went to $10, Ripple can sell into that strength, as could we all, but the release schedule limits that sell off to 1B maximum per month. While this may momentarily affect supply and demand, it is also not a mechanism that can be done forever. The total supply IS fixed and the escrow distribution phase will not last forever. As it is, about 300M of the 1B release actually stays on the market while Ripple locks the rest up back in escrow. Even then, that escrow is down to about ~36B of 100B. If Ripple starts releasing the full 1B per month due to a demand that can support that, the escrow is gone in 3 years, and that assumes they keep zero XRP on their spreadsheet.

As far as RLUSD goes, this man is obviously ignoring Evernorth's recent explanation on what roles RLUSD and XRP serve. RLUSD is suitable for some transactions and XRP is suited for others. RLUSD will be a stable option for txs that are pegged to a dollar representation while XRP allows for the bridging of value between quite literally any two forms of value you can pair in the world. RWAs are a perfect example of digitized value sums that are not directly pegged to the dollar that will be allowed to be seamlessly traded as if they were. RLUSD will not accomplish this, but XRP can. As we are at the early onset of RWAs, it is obvious why RLUSD is being used for dollar backed transactions at this moment. Stables are allowing banks to use blockchain friendly tokens that represent dollars to test and execute trades with this new technology. This does not mean that the current state of real world finance on chain will not evolve into one that will need to trade digitized commodities and assets that have nothing to do with the dollar in the future. Without a bridge, we would never be able to trade fractional ownership in digitized real estate for other digitized real estate, or gold, or oil.

TLDR, this guy is obviously trying very hard to be taken seriously with his approach, but his talking points are extremely outdated and lack nuance. If the entire thesis is that XRP supply and demand mechanics will have XRP stuck below $10 in perpetuity, all he uses to support that thesis are two very old very common XRP FUD talking points as he relies on his explanation style and a bunch of books behind him to make it seem like he isn't just parroting nonsense.