Why Companies Fancying XRP Custody Are Like Untrained Cats Chasing Mice 🐭

by

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a company in possession of XRP must be in want of a headache-or so declares the esteemed Mr. Vincent Van Code, a gentleman of considerable repute in the bewildering world of crypto. With the rise of treasury companies, he has taken it upon himself to elucidate why corporations ought to refrain from the folly of self-custody, lest they find themselves entangled in a web of regulation more intricate than a debutante’s social calendar. Instead, he advocates for the far more sensible approach of acquiring exposure through ETFs and other regulated contrivances.

The Perils of Playing Banker 🏦

In a missive upon the platform known as X (formerly Twitter, for those who recall such antiquities), Mr. Van Code declared that any company daring to self-custody its XRP would, by the stroke of midnight, transform itself into a bank, a security firm, and a regulated financial institution-all without the slightest intention of doing so. The consequences, he assured, would be as severe as a dowager’s disapproval, and the bill for such imprudence would be nothing short of “massive.”

The gentleman further observed that many enterprises labor under the delusion that holding their own crypto tokens is akin to keeping sovereign currency in a bank account-a notion as absurd as expecting a country dance to proceed without scandal. Custodying XRP, he insisted, is among the “most complex, expensive, compliance-heavy things” an organization might undertake, requiring more paperwork than a marriage settlement.

To self-custody at scale, he explained, is not merely a matter of safeguarding a seed phrase-oh no! It is to operate a regulated asset environment, complete with annual audits, SOC2 controls, and cold storage infrastructure. One must also contend with key ceremony documentation, segregation of duties, and the ever-present specter of insider threats-enough to make even the stoutest CFO take to their fainting couch.

A Costly Affair 💸

Mr. Van Code, ever the bearer of grim tidings, further elaborated that companies embarking upon this fool’s errand would require incident response teams, compliance officers, risk teams, internal policies, board oversight, and a veritable battalion of legal safeguards-all to be maintained with the diligence of a governess overseeing unruly charges.

The expense, he lamented, would be enough to make a duke blanch. A proper crypto custody program could easily demand seven figures annually, with external audits alone costing between $250,000 and $500,000-a sum sufficient to fund several seasons of London’s most extravagant balls. And let us not forget the necessity of SOC2 Type II, penetration testing, cyber insurance, regulatory reporting, and chain-of-custody reviews-each more tedious than the last.

Should misfortune strike-whether by technical mishap, regulatory inquiry, or auditor’s displeasure-the burden of liability would rest squarely upon the company’s shoulders, much like the weight of an ill-advised bet at the races.

A More Elegant Solution 🎩

Mr. Van Code, ever the voice of reason (or doom, depending on one’s perspective), asserted that the true path to widespread XRP adoption lies not in legions of companies clutching their tokens like nervous debutantes at Almack’s, but rather through regulated wrappers such as spot XRP ETFs and institutional treasury firms-Ripple’s own Evernorth being a prime example.

These vehicles, he argued, absorb the compliance burdens, audit woes, operational risks, and infrastructure costs, permitting companies to enjoy XRP exposure without the indignity of becoming a bank. If mainstream enterprises are ever to embrace the token on a global scale, he concluded, it shall be through such civilized structures-not the chaotic, DIY custody operations that threaten to collapse beneath their own absurd complexity.

Read More

2025-11-15 14:54