This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Stress Test on Banks’ Earnings Facing the Veritaseum UltraCoin Value Transaction Platform
My last post on the topic of disintermediation during a paradigm shift was Wall Street Should Be First To Invest In Reggie Middleton's UltraCoin, Much Of It Won't Be Here In 10 Years! I clearly illustrated the potential for growth of Bitcoin related companies and cited statistics for the transformation of the financial industry as we know it today.
This post introduces long form research from the analysts at Veritaseum, the same team that brought you the hard hitting BoomBustBlog research. The first page of the report says it all - "Stress Test on Banks’ Earnings Facing the Veritaseum UltraCoin Value Transaction Platform".
Excerpts from deeper into the report...
And of course the inevitable... What happens when a less expensive product is introduced into the market with similar or superior attributes? Margin Compression! We analyzed three big Wall Street banks, starting with the "Riskiest Bank on the Street" (time permitting, reference our hard hitting, prescient research from early 2008).
I invite all to download the free Veritasuem Research Report for July 2014. I also invite all to meet me for the soft beta launch of Veritaseum's UltraCoin Value Trading Platform in my suite at the Drake Hotel in downtown Chicago, the evening of Saturday July 19th (this is also the weekend of The North American Bitcoin Conference in Chicago, where I will be speaking on the topic of money center bank disintermediation.
You will get to touch, play with and trade value via UltraCoin. Below is a screenshot of UltraCoin running on a Mac. I will also be taking applications for large scale beta testers and entities who wish to have customized value trading solutions created for them.
- advertisements -
If you are a careful reader of ZH, then you are aware that the big banks stopped making profits off commercial banking decades ago. This was the primary motivator for eliminating regulations like Glass-Stiegal. Classic fractional reserve banking has been left to regional banks, while big banks moved their credit creation activities into the shadow banking arena, out of view of regulators. The normal person's experience with shadow banking is money market accounts, which were a new-fangled rage in the 1980's. These essentially create a double claim on a normal bank deposit: two people think they own the same money. This takes the ethereal credit money in FRB, and super-charges it. More recently, we have been pushed into sweep accounts, which are a sleazy way combine the double credit of money markets with FDIC protection. Margin accounts are also shadow credit creation.
The big banks are now operating in the high risk investment banking world where they delve into the global shadow banking system with all kinds of fractionally sercured collateral, most of which are financial assets, not real collateral. FX, sovereign bonds, commercial paper metal bars in chinese ports (and anything else they can think of) are all the basis for rehyothicated collateral chains, where multiple parties think they own the same secured position. These aren't dominoes waiting to fall, they are already leaning on eachother, waiting for the end one to go.
For the time being this is where the big money is. I suppose they imagine themselves fleecing the world in support of US imperialism.
Anyway when you say you're going to replace the trditional banking system, you're a couple of decades late, they already did it.
Cyber currenices are not backed by anything except the scarcity of a set of numbers. Since there are an infiite number of prime numbers, there are potentially an infinite number of cyber currency systems. So hyperinflation won't happen within one system. but across thousands or even millions of systems. You say: people won't do that! But it only takes on guy (CIA?) to create a progarm that creates new currency systems automatically, say a couple systems per day. Pretty soon the whole idea collapses because no system is intrinsically any better than anyother. At this point, it is obvious what will happen: a government will establish one system for it's own legal tender, and that will replace their anonymous paper money (not bank credit). They will be able to record transactions, and confiscate "criminal" proceeds etc., at will. This is Orwellian but inevitable. ANyone who thinks they can play in the cyber currency sandbox at will, is sadly mistaken. The big boys will take everything.
.
Naa , not for me. Bitcoin is a Ponzi Tulip.
For me , The Future of Money and Value Transfer:
Buy a boat , buy a load of gold & silver , buy some diving gear , go and bury your gold and silver in the bottom of a lake.
Then , when the Feds come , they wont be able to find it.
Problem is , when the entire grid goes down your GPS wont work either , and shit , you won't be able to fill up those air bottles either. Better off just getting back down into that damp bunker and reading the next chapter of 'How to Survive when the government shuts down the AC grid and the Internet - to stop Bitcoin'.
You will find your guide just next to the candles , damp matches and your nice cold can of 25 year old Prepper food.
"'How to Survive when the government shuts down the AC grid and the Internet - to stop Bitcoin'."
At least you're knowledgeable enough to know what length's .gov will have to go to in order to shut down bitcoin :-)
Oh yeah, men have been sailing for tens of thousands of years without GPS, and all of sudden in just the last 15 years or so, it's impossible to navigate without it? This generation is packed with wussies and wimps :-)
Reggie, ZH is just collectively mad at you because you saw value in cryptocurrencies. It shows here, even now, with the US Marshal Service auctioning Bitcoin off, providing even more legitimacy to the market - which is now rallying and likely to surpass 650 in short order.
These guys are stuck in the past, holding on to their "stacks" and hoping desperately that the whole crypto-coin movement will just "go away". But it won't, and most likely, it will start to creep into their lives, through major payment processors and banks that are flexible enough to adapt to the forces remolding finance.
Keep on doing what you are doing, by building a platform you are putting out your claim on the largest sea-change that the financial world has ever seen, even if the myopic stackers and preppers here can't wrap their heads around it.
The future belongs to those willing to take calculated risks, and I'm sure you'll benefit from taking yours.
This generation is FULL of wussies and wimps. They cannot help thelselfs. Anything new comes along they grab straight onto mummies apron strings , boo hoo , I don't understand that shit , it's either a Ponzi Scam , a Dutch Tulip Bubble , some other Scam I cannot understand - Well Wussies - Crypto will very shortly - completely and utterly disintermediate the entire Old World Order financial system. They should simply go and haul their asses back down to the lake ,
WARNING! WARNING! PIMP ALERT!!!!!
As I understand, it - and maybe there are too many big SAT words in play for me to really make sense of it as it was thesauritacally intended - is that we have a new (cheaper) intermediary offered to replace the old intermediary, but because this intermediary offloads the processing burden onto a separate voluntary network (of bitcoin miners or whatever), and as a competitive angle to undermine the current, costly, intermediaries, we have a much cheaper way (for the end user, not the workhorses/miners), to intermediate.
Ultimately, it's just capital flowing into different pockets at presumably lower rates, but new intermediary same as the old intermediary.
Almost completely correct. The only error is that the new intermediary is close to non-existent. It's a near fully P2P system that does not direct 60% plus in revenues to salary and bonuses.
Other than that, you hit it on the head.
oBE-Fone Kenobi, you're our only hope!
Hey, is that a shark?
We've got a jumper!
"Only physical allowed: Please deposit your paper-investment in the receptacle outside before entering."
Keep shuffling through a computer for anything other than transactions and the day of disappointment will arrive for your wealth.
As for banks.....we know how they suck life out of anything, that's why they hate me as I use them only as a check account.
Do what this guy did, use them as a porta-potty!
http://rt.com/news/169396-poo-protest-barclays-bank/
A mad pooper has struck Barclays..
Yes, but you are comparing fees for actual investment services which are not similar in nature to what you are offering. Those investment services you are comparing with can also be had for much, much lower fees then you quote. They also are not self service oriented which is what you must be going for in this article. It would be more likley that anyone using this service would be using it from a fianncial intermediary which makes the fee argument go right out the window. Makes it all look like a baseless justification for your idea.
I see your point, but I don't see it as valid. The investment services cannot be had cheaper from the banks that are discussed in the article. The article is about margin compression in big bank business models, not investment services. This is clear on its face. Look at the title, the intros, the headings and the report itself.
I'm comparing earnings drivers from the big banks to those that would use the software, whether it be end users who use the software themselves, or advisors who would use the software on behalf of end users.
You are couching the argument as if I'm selling competing investments.
Where many end users would normally rely on pricy bank services, I foresee the performing said services themselves on a peer to peer basis or using 3rd party advisors on the P2P platform at a fraction of the price they are currently paying.
Aww, its a little baby ponzi. Theyre so cute when they're young.
I announce the ability to trade value peer to peer without banks who gorge their clients on excessive fees and you call it a baby ponzi. Hmmm... Bank fodder, muppet mayhem... give me a minute to think of something a bit more creative.
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator, an individual or organization, pays returns to its investors from new capital paid to the operators by new investors, rather than from profit earned by the operator. Operators of Ponzi schemes usually entice new investors by offering higher returns than other investments, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent. The perpetuation of the high returns requires an ever-increasing flow of money from new investors to sustain the scheme.
I'm glad you posted this. Now, tell us what it has to do with trading system software that has lower fees than the money center banks.
There is no "pays returns to its investors from new capital paid" component. There is no "profit earned by the operator" promised to investors. As a matter of fact, there is no communication concerning investors or investment mentioned. This is software that lowers barriers and costs for trading value, not an investment.
There is no "offering higher returns than other investments". There are no "short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent". As a matter of fact, there are no returns mentioned, offered or promised.
I bet there will be no admitting the error in your ways, either...
Similar to yourself not admitting shorting RCL was a career ender.
Errrr - what?
ULTRACON!!!