<\/p>\n
YouTuber Andrei Jikh questioned why Ripple\u2019s banking partnerships are yet to translate into meaningful on-chain activity.<\/p>\n
Ripple\u2019s lack of adoption came under scrutiny on July 30 as its long-time supporter Andrei Jikh, a finance-focused YouTuber with over 2.6 million subscribers, questioned why Ripple<\/a>\u2019s extensive banking partnerships haven\u2019t yet translated into any meaningful on-chain activity.<\/p>\n \u201cI know people are VERY opinionated about this, but I\u2019ve been following XRP since 2014 and I still have not found the answers to these questions […] Ripple has 300+ bank partnerships, but after 13 years, shouldn’t there be billions in daily on-chain volume?\u201d Jikh wrote<\/a> in an X post. <\/p>\n He also challenged the logic of transacting in XRP<\/a>, given its price volatility compared with stablecoins, and questioned why users would actually hold XRP if it mainly acts as a \u201cbridge currency.\u201d<\/p>\n Additionally, Jikh wasn\u2019t buying the argument that bridge currencies will remain necessary once stablecoins cover more currency pairs, and wondered why financial giants like BlackRock<\/a> would pick the XRP Ledger for tokenization instead of building their own blockchains, like Robinhood, which recently announced plans<\/a> to leverage Arbitrum, an Ethereum Layer 2<\/a> solution.<\/p>\n It didn\u2019t take long for Ripple\u2019s Chief Technology Officer, David \u201cJoelKatz\u201d Schwartz, to join the conversation and offer lengthy responses<\/a> intended to defend Ripple, though some doubts still remained.<\/p>\n On the slow growth of on-chain volume, Schwartz noted that institutions have \u201chistorically preferred to use digital assets off-chain rather than onchain.\u201d He acknowledged adoption \u201chas been very slow\u201d but attributed it partly to compliance, pointing out that \u201cEven Ripple can’t use the XRPL DEX for payments yet because we can’t be sure a terrorist won’t provide the liquidity for payment.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201c[…] generally decentralized exchanges on public layer 1’s don’t give you any control or knowledge of who your counterparties are. Logically, I don’t think it should matter, but regulations aren’t always totally logical,\u201d Schwartz explained in another X post<\/a>.<\/p>\n Regarding XRP\u2019s volatility, Schwartz argued that there may be \u201cuse cases where volatility isn’t a minus, or is even a plus,\u201d adding that some investors believe \u201cthe upside [is] worth more than the downside,\u201d implying that transacting in XRP is not necessarily a disadvantage.<\/p>\n On incentives to hold XRP as a bridge currency, Schwartz explained that \u201cA bridge currency only works if someone is holding it so that you can get it precisely when you need it,\u201d noting that it might be cheaper to hold the dominant bridge currency when the next needed asset is uncertain.<\/p>\n Looking ahead to the future of bridge currencies, the Ripple CTO said that if one stablecoin<\/a> were to dominate, it could become the sole bridge currency. However, he argued that because stablecoins are tied to specific fiat currencies and jurisdictions, a multi-stablecoin environment will likely persist, keeping bridge assets relevant for tokenized securities and loan portfolios.<\/p>\n\u2018Volatility Isn\u2019t a Minus\u2019<\/h2>\n
\u2018Obviously Silly\u2019<\/h2>\n