A prominent crypto commentator known as Remi Relief has expanded on theories linking Ripple, SWIFT, and the global banking system to the long-term valuation of XRP.  His post on the social media platform X came in response to a discussion initiated by well-known analyst Paul Barron, who questioned whether Ripple’s strategy has always been to bridge the increasingly fragmented world of bank-issued stablecoins. The idea brings attention to XRP’s utility in facilitating liquidity between institutional networks, with Remi Relief noting that this could push the XRP price to $1,000. The Ripple/SWIFT Dual-System Theories Remi Relief proposed that the global payment structure could split into two interconnected systems where both ultimately rely on XRP for settlement and support the cryptocurrency’s price at $1,000. The first theory proposes a revamped version of SWIFT that would retain much of its existing framework but incorporate blockchain-based assets such as XRP, XDC, HBAR, and Chainlink to achieve faster transaction speeds and improved efficiency. Despite these upgrades, it would still face skepticism from some financial institutions due to it being weaponized in the past. Related Reading: Ripple CTO Stacks XRP Ledger Against Other Blockchains, What’s The Catch? The second theory is the setup of a new Ripple-based network built in collaboration with Thunes, which would function as a more trusted and independent channel for cross-border payments. This system would be much quicker, much cheaper and more trusted by countries. In Remi’s view, both models would coexist for a time, giving banks and governments the freedom to choose based on transaction scale, cost, and reliability. However, he believes that the Ripple-Thunes system will later gain dominance and overtake SWIFT as more and more banks use that system.  Regardless of which of the two theories prevails, Remi Relief pointed out that both have the potential to lead to a $1,000 XRP more quickly than most people think. Paul Barron’s Perspective On Institutional Stablecoins Paul Barron’s initial post that prompted Remi Relief’s response is based on the growing race among major banks to issue their own stablecoins. He pointed out that while SWIFT continues to promote neutral rails, banks like JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citi, and Wells Fargo are developing US-based consortium stablecoins. Similarly, European institutions such as ING and Deutsche Bank plan to launch euro-denominated versions by 2026.  Related Reading: High Liquidity At This Level Could Send The XRP Price Surging Soon Barron warned that this trend toward proprietary stablecoin systems would fragment the global financial network even further and create walled gardens where each bank’s stablecoin operates in isolation. In his view, such fragmentation will bring out the original purpose of XRP, and this might have been the plan of Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse all along. The plan has always been to use XRP as a bridge asset capable of allowing interoperability between otherwise disconnected financial ecosystems. This function aligns with Ripple’s long-standing vision for the XRP Ledger as a neutral settlement layer for easy cross-border value transfer between different digital and fiat systems. At the time of writing, XRP is trading at $2.41 and is a long way away from trading at $1,000. Featured image from Freepik, chart from Tradingview.comA prominent crypto commentator known as Remi Relief has expanded on theories linking Ripple, SWIFT, and the global banking system to the long-term valuation of XRP.  His post on the social media platform X came in response to a discussion initiated by well-known analyst Paul Barron, who questioned whether Ripple’s strategy has always been to bridge the increasingly fragmented world of bank-issued stablecoins. The idea brings attention to XRP’s utility in facilitating liquidity between institutional networks, with Remi Relief noting that this could push the XRP price to $1,000. The Ripple/SWIFT Dual-System Theories Remi Relief proposed that the global payment structure could split into two interconnected systems where both ultimately rely on XRP for settlement and support the cryptocurrency’s price at $1,000. The first theory proposes a revamped version of SWIFT that would retain much of its existing framework but incorporate blockchain-based assets such as XRP, XDC, HBAR, and Chainlink to achieve faster transaction speeds and improved efficiency. Despite these upgrades, it would still face skepticism from some financial institutions due to it being weaponized in the past. Related Reading: Ripple CTO Stacks XRP Ledger Against Other Blockchains, What’s The Catch? The second theory is the setup of a new Ripple-based network built in collaboration with Thunes, which would function as a more trusted and independent channel for cross-border payments. This system would be much quicker, much cheaper and more trusted by countries. In Remi’s view, both models would coexist for a time, giving banks and governments the freedom to choose based on transaction scale, cost, and reliability. However, he believes that the Ripple-Thunes system will later gain dominance and overtake SWIFT as more and more banks use that system.  Regardless of which of the two theories prevails, Remi Relief pointed out that both have the potential to lead to a $1,000 XRP more quickly than most people think. Paul Barron’s Perspective On Institutional Stablecoins Paul Barron’s initial post that prompted Remi Relief’s response is based on the growing race among major banks to issue their own stablecoins. He pointed out that while SWIFT continues to promote neutral rails, banks like JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citi, and Wells Fargo are developing US-based consortium stablecoins. Similarly, European institutions such as ING and Deutsche Bank plan to launch euro-denominated versions by 2026.  Related Reading: High Liquidity At This Level Could Send The XRP Price Surging Soon Barron warned that this trend toward proprietary stablecoin systems would fragment the global financial network even further and create walled gardens where each bank’s stablecoin operates in isolation. In his view, such fragmentation will bring out the original purpose of XRP, and this might have been the plan of Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse all along. The plan has always been to use XRP as a bridge asset capable of allowing interoperability between otherwise disconnected financial ecosystems. This function aligns with Ripple’s long-standing vision for the XRP Ledger as a neutral settlement layer for easy cross-border value transfer between different digital and fiat systems. At the time of writing, XRP is trading at $2.41 and is a long way away from trading at $1,000. Featured image from Freepik, chart from Tradingview.com

Pundit Elaborates On Ripple/SWIFT Theory That Will Send The XRP Price To $1,000

2025/11/03 23:30

A prominent crypto commentator known as Remi Relief has expanded on theories linking Ripple, SWIFT, and the global banking system to the long-term valuation of XRP. 

His post on the social media platform X came in response to a discussion initiated by well-known analyst Paul Barron, who questioned whether Ripple’s strategy has always been to bridge the increasingly fragmented world of bank-issued stablecoins. The idea brings attention to XRP’s utility in facilitating liquidity between institutional networks, with Remi Relief noting that this could push the XRP price to $1,000.

The Ripple/SWIFT Dual-System Theories

Remi Relief proposed that the global payment structure could split into two interconnected systems where both ultimately rely on XRP for settlement and support the cryptocurrency’s price at $1,000. The first theory proposes a revamped version of SWIFT that would retain much of its existing framework but incorporate blockchain-based assets such as XRP, XDC, HBAR, and Chainlink to achieve faster transaction speeds and improved efficiency. Despite these upgrades, it would still face skepticism from some financial institutions due to it being weaponized in the past.

The second theory is the setup of a new Ripple-based network built in collaboration with Thunes, which would function as a more trusted and independent channel for cross-border payments. This system would be much quicker, much cheaper and more trusted by countries.

In Remi’s view, both models would coexist for a time, giving banks and governments the freedom to choose based on transaction scale, cost, and reliability. However, he believes that the Ripple-Thunes system will later gain dominance and overtake SWIFT as more and more banks use that system. 

Regardless of which of the two theories prevails, Remi Relief pointed out that both have the potential to lead to a $1,000 XRP more quickly than most people think.

Paul Barron’s Perspective On Institutional Stablecoins

Paul Barron’s initial post that prompted Remi Relief’s response is based on the growing race among major banks to issue their own stablecoins. He pointed out that while SWIFT continues to promote neutral rails, banks like JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citi, and Wells Fargo are developing US-based consortium stablecoins. Similarly, European institutions such as ING and Deutsche Bank plan to launch euro-denominated versions by 2026. 

Barron warned that this trend toward proprietary stablecoin systems would fragment the global financial network even further and create walled gardens where each bank’s stablecoin operates in isolation.

In his view, such fragmentation will bring out the original purpose of XRP, and this might have been the plan of Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse all along. The plan has always been to use XRP as a bridge asset capable of allowing interoperability between otherwise disconnected financial ecosystems. This function aligns with Ripple’s long-standing vision for the XRP Ledger as a neutral settlement layer for easy cross-border value transfer between different digital and fiat systems.

At the time of writing, XRP is trading at $2.41 and is a long way away from trading at $1,000.

Ripple
Market Opportunity
Suilend Logo
Suilend Price(SEND)
$0.2334
$0.2334$0.2334
-1.35%
USD
Suilend (SEND) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
USDC Treasury mints 250 million new USDC on Solana

USDC Treasury mints 250 million new USDC on Solana

PANews reported on September 17 that according to Whale Alert , at 23:48 Beijing time, USDC Treasury minted 250 million new USDC (approximately US$250 million) on the Solana blockchain .
Share
PANews2025/09/17 23:51
US S&P Global Manufacturing PMI declines to 51.8, Services PMI falls to 52.9 in December

US S&P Global Manufacturing PMI declines to 51.8, Services PMI falls to 52.9 in December

The post US S&P Global Manufacturing PMI declines to 51.8, Services PMI falls to 52.9 in December appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The business activity in
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/12/16 23:24