Did the ‘Cramer Curse’ Just Signal the End of Crypto as We Know It?
Article source, here.
TL;DR
Have you heard of the 'Cramer Curse'? The idea is simple: if CNBC’s Jim Cramer, says something is going to happen - the opposite will take place.
In a recent CNBC segment, Jim said that the SEC “may not win” against Ripple and XRP. If you believe the curse, that suggests the SEC will win its case against Ripple.
If that happens it will give the SEC purview over regulating XRP.
Company's selling securities (e.g. stocks) need the name/ID of all of their shareholders, but that's almost impossible to do reliably with cryptocurrency.
Plus, if the SEC wins this case, they'll most likely use the legal precedent to go after every other major crypto project out there (except maybe Bitcoin). Let’s hope the curse fails.
Full Story
Today we're talking curses.
Not swear words - curses.
(The things your sister and her strangely quiet friend used to put on people that were mean to them in middle school).
Theories of 'curses' pop up all over the cultural landscape.
In Baseball, there was the 'Curse of the Bambino.'
Where, after trading Babe Ruth to the Yankees in 1918, the Boston Red Sox didn't win a world series until - get this - 2004!
In combat sports, there's the 'Drake Curse.'
The theory that if a fighter interacts with Drake, they'll lose their next fight.
And in finance, there's the 'Cramer Curse.'
The idea is simple: if CNBC’s Jim Cramer, says something is going to happen - the opposite will take place.
The phenomenon is so widely embraced, that someone even started the 'Inverse Cramer' index on Twitter.
It's a feed that "tracks the stock recommendations of Jim Cramer so you can do the opposite."
...here's their latest post:
Why're we telling you all of this?
Because in a recent CNBC segment, Jim said that the SEC “may not win” against Ripple and XRP.
And if the Cramer Curse is to be believed, that suggests the SEC will win its case against Ripple, proving that its XRP token is in fact a security, and giving them purview over regulating it.
Which would throw a huge spanner in the works.
Company's selling securities (e.g. stocks) need the name/ID of all of their shareholders (or in this case 'token holders').
...but that's almost impossible to do reliably with cryptocurrency.
Centralized crypto exchanges collect the ID's of each of their customers, but once the crypto is moved onto a self-custody wallet, there's no way of tracking who the new owner is.
(Moving tokens to a self-custody wallet is the crypto equivalent of taking cash out of the bank and hiding it under your bed).
In a vacuum, this only effects XRP holders.
But if the SEC wins this case, they'll most likely use the legal precedent to go after every other major crypto project out there (except maybe Bitcoin).
Let's hope the Cramer Curse craps out this time around...