Three questions I have for you Brad. 1. If XRP was designed to provide bridge liquidity, why should dollar transactions that could use XRP instead be considered economically irrelevant to XRP holders when they are settled in RLUSD? 2. If RLUSD replaces XRP in certain payment corridors, shouldn't Ripple acknowledge that it is competing for transaction volume and liquidity? 3. How much of RLUSD's growth actually generates additional XRP demand beyond tiny transaction fees and account reserves? The most important takeaway: We should not measure XRP's success by how busy the XRP Ledger becomes. We should measure how much economic activity actually requires XRP. That is a very different measurement. @bgarlinghouse @JoelKatz @ZachRector7

@bgarlinghouse You have been dishonest with the XRP community. RLUSD vs. XRP: Why They Are Competitive Assets, Not Simply Complementary Assets The central point of your argument is this: RLUSD and XRP can serve different purposes, but they also compete for the same economic activity: moving dollars from one place to another. That distinction is important. Just because two assets can coexist on the same network does not mean they are not competitors. Let's break it down in a way that Ripple, Brad Garlinghouse, and the XRP community should have to address. 1. What does a competitive asset mean? A competitive asset is an asset that competes with another asset for the same use, customer, transaction, market share, or economic opportunity. Two assets do not have to be identical to compete. For example: Two payment systems can compete even if they use different technology. Two currencies can compete for the same payment. Two financial products can compete for the same customer, even if they offer different benefits. The key question is: Can one asset perform a transaction or fulfill a financial purpose that otherwise could have been fulfilled by the other asset? If the answer is yes, there is competition. 2. How RLUSD and XRP compete Consider a simple example: A financial institution needs to move $1 million from the United States to another institution. There are two possible approaches:

Should have bought quant ? https://t.co/BRvQMn2nvQ

THE QUESTION XRP HOLDERS SHOULD BE ASKING Ripple created a payment ecosystem in which XRP was designed to serve as a bridge asset. Now Ripple has introduced RLUSD, a dollar-backed asset that can perform many dollar-to-dollar payment functions without requiring XRP as the bridge. Why does this matter? Because RLUSD creates an opportunity for Ripple to earn recurring income from reserve assets, while XRP holders do not receive that income. XRP can still be used. XRP still powers the XRP Ledger. XRP can still provide bridge liquidity. But those facts do not mean RLUSD adoption creates meaningful demand for XRP. A successful Ripple business does not automatically mean a successful XRP investment. That is the distinction investors need to understand.

XRP holders know the difference. RLUSD used on the ledger creates small burns. Using XRP the token instead of of RLUSD creates utility and volume. Never forget XRP was designed for this and ripple replaced it with RLUSD for Dallas to dollar payments https://t.co/al1MYHHXfn

Why is crypto crashing? Leverage long liquidations. 1.3 billion . https://t.co/fFnas1cJIo

Ok @bgarlinghouse your statement that RLUSD foe not compete or take away payments transactions for XRP is disingenuous! You did not need RLUSD. XRP can make dollar to dollar payments. How many payments is XRP being left out on because RLUSD is being used? This chart exposes your false statement

You are a a two headed snake @bgarlinghouse you have no intention of using XRP at scale. RLUSD will be used for 90%!or higher for payments. You will use the ledger but you will not use XRP token even close to scale. https://t.co/bfAmUkeGiQ

Ripple statement about XRP and RlUSD. Is disingenuous. If RLUSD did not exist XRP would have been used for all payments. Read below. Ripple’s core plan from the start (company founded 2012, XRP Ledger launched 2012) was to use XRP as a bridge currency for cross-border payments. This was the foundation of products like On-Demand Liquidity (ODL, formerly xRapid), which converted fiat → XRP → destination fiat to avoid pre-funding nostro accounts. ODL went commercial around 2018–2019 (e.g., MoneyGram partnership). RLUSD, Ripple’s USD stablecoin, was not launched until December 2024—more than a decade later. Ripple has since described the two as complementary, but the original and long-standing payments strategy centered on XRP. That payment standings shifted to RLUSD! Partially true, but not a full replacement. Ripple’s payments platform has expanded so that many flows now settle in RLUSD (or other stablecoins/fiat) rather than requiring XRP as the bridge asset. New institutional deals (e.g., with Arf, Cross River, and others) frequently specify RLUSD for settlement and liquidity, especially for dollar-denominated or stable-value use cases. Ripple Payments cumulative volume is approaching $150B, and RLUSD has grown to a ~$2.6B market cap. However, Ripple (including CEO Brad Garlinghouse at Swell 2026) maintains that this is not a shift away from XRP. Official statements describe the two as complementary: • RLUSD is preferred for stable USD settlement. • XRP is still used as a bridge for cross-currency liquidity (especially less liquid corridors) and remains the native asset of the XRP Ledger (required for fees and reserves). Garlinghouse has repeatedly said the company “will never give up on XRP” and will not pursue actions it believes harm the XRP ecosystem. The strategy evolved from the earlier “all roads lead to XRP” positioning to a multi-asset platform that includes RLUSD as a major option.

Does anyone know what crawled up crypto retails ass. No rate hike! Market should be relieved. https://t.co/Gkk8CHcoq0