Schwartz stated that Ripple could “sell the right to receive the tokens released from escrow” or even sell the accounts that the escrows complete into. He added that “the XRP still can’t circulate until their release dates.”

The statement was shared by crypto commentator John Squire (@TheCryptoSquire). It is notable because it comes directly from one of Ripple’s most senior figures, lending credibility to a funding model that has circulated largely as speculation.

RIPPLE PLAYBOOK

David Schwartz hints at selling rights to locked XRP before release.

That means Ripple gets capital now while institutions secure future supply off market.

Not selling pressure, just strategic positioning.

UTILITY ALWAYS WINS. pic.twitter.com/p1OFP4e8fy

— John Squire (@TheCryptoSquire) April 10, 2026

How the Mechanism Works

The structure is straightforward. Ripple holds a significant portion of XRP in escrow, with tokens released on a scheduled basis. Rather than waiting for those release dates to monetize the holdings, Ripple can sell the rights to receive those future tokens now.

Buyers secure a guaranteed future supply of XRP at agreed terms. Ripple receives capital immediately. The tokens themselves do not enter circulation until the escrow matures, so there is no direct selling pressure on the open market.

This is a meaningful distinction. Critics of Ripple’s escrow holdings have long pointed to the scheduled releases as a source of potential downward price pressure. This mechanism separates capital generation from token circulation entirely.

The Amazon Rumor and What It Represents

An unconfirmed report of a 5 billion XRP deal between Ripple and Amazon involving escrowed tokens has circulated for years. Neither Ripple nor Amazon has confirmed this. What Schwartz’s statement does establish is that deals of this nature are structurally possible.

If deals like this exist or materialize, the effect on institutional adoption could be significant. An institution that secures rights to a future XRP supply has a direct financial incentive to integrate XRP into its operations before those tokens arrive. Adoption becomes part of the transaction itself.

We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1

— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025

Utility as the Foundation for Institutional Interest

Squire highlighted Schwartz’s comments as evidence of strategic positioning rather than selling pressure. His point is that XRP’s utility as a payment asset is what makes these arrangements attractive to institutions in the first place.

Ripple has not made any formal announcements about specific escrow deals. Whether confirmed deals emerge publicly or not, the mechanism is real. Institutional interest in future XRP supply, combined with Ripple’s ability to monetize that interest without immediate market impact, positions the company to expand its operations on its own terms.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on X, Facebook, Telegram, and  Google News

The post Former Ripple CTO Drops Truth Bomb On Billions of XRP in the Escrow appeared first on Times Tabloid.

David Schwartz, former Chief Technology Officer at Ripple, reignited discussion after reacting to new claims from investigative journalist John Carreyrou. Carreyrou stated that his 18-month investigation had finally identified Bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator, a claim that immediately triggered renewed debate across the digital asset community.

Carreyrou’s 18-Month Investigation Gains Attention

Carreyrou reported that his research points to Adam Back, a British cryptographer and early cypherpunk contributor, as the strongest candidate for Satoshi Nakamoto. Back also invented Hashcash, a proof-of-work system that influenced Bitcoin’s design.

The investigation reportedly relied heavily on stylometric analysis of historical cypherpunk mailing list posts. Analysts examined thousands of archived messages, focusing on linguistic markers such as British spelling patterns, hyphenation habits, recurring technical phrases like “bug fix,” and shared ideological positions on decentralization and monetary systems.

Finally we have the definitive answer that will certainly end the debate forever. https://t.co/VceyJjip0U

— David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz (@JoelKatz) April 8, 2026

Carreyrou’s findings suggest that these combined patterns narrow the field of potential candidates, with Back emerging as the closest stylistic and philosophical match.

Adam Back Rejects the Identification Claims

Adam Back has consistently denied any connection to Satoshi Nakamoto. He has rejected linguistic comparisons as unreliable and warned that such methods risk confirmation bias. Back maintains that stylistic similarities do not constitute evidence of authorship.

No investigation has produced cryptographic confirmation linking Back—or any other individual—to Satoshi’s private keys. This absence of verifiable digital proof remains the strongest counterargument to any identity claim.

David Schwartz Adds Commentary to the Debate

Schwartz responded to Carreyrou’s report with a sarcastic remark suggesting that the investigation had finally produced a “definitive answer” that would end the long-running debate. His comment quickly circulated across crypto social channels, where users interpreted it as commentary on the repetitive nature of Satoshi identity claims.

We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1

— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025

His reaction reflected a broader sentiment within the industry that the debate often cycles through new theories without producing conclusive evidence. Many observers viewed his statement as highlighting skepticism rather than endorsing the claim.

Crypto Community Reacts to Renewed Claims

The crypto community responded with a mix of skepticism, humor, and renewed analysis of past Satoshi theories. Some users revisited earlier candidates, while others emphasized that Bitcoin’s architecture deliberately separates identity from protocol integrity.

Experts and commentators repeatedly pointed out that Bitcoin operates independently of its creator’s identity. They argue that even credible stylistic matches cannot replace cryptographic proof, which remains absent.

An Unresolved Question Persists

Despite renewed attention from Carreyrou’s investigation and Schwartz’s reaction, the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto remains unverified. The discussion continues to highlight a core tension in crypto culture between narrative curiosity and technical proof.

For now, the mystery persists, and the Bitcoin creator’s identity remains one of the most enduring unsolved questions in digital finance.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News

The post Former Ripple CTO Finally Finds Answer to End Debate Over Bitcoin’s Satoshi Identity appeared first on Times Tabloid.

The post, including a screenshot of a reply from David Schwartz, presents a direct response to skepticism about whether banks would adopt XRP given Ripple’s significant holdings of the digital asset.

David Schwartz Just Shut Down The Most Asked XRP FUD in One Savage Line!!

Why would global banks adopt XRP & pump the price when Ripple holds ~34B tokens? (Making Ripple insanely valuable?)

David Schwartz just nailed it:
“Yeah, this makes business sense for us… but we… pic.twitter.com/DsIZokGv1r

— Stellar Rippler (@Stellar_Rippler) April 2, 2026

Core Question Around Bank Incentives

In the X post, Stellar Rippler highlights a concern frequently raised by critics. The argument suggests that banks may hesitate to use XRP if doing so significantly increases the value of Ripple’s holdings, estimated at around 34 billion tokens.

According to this line of thinking, institutions may avoid contributing to the financial strength of a single company, even if the technology itself offers efficiency gains.

The attached image shows a user questioning why banks would adopt XRP under such conditions. The concern extends further, suggesting that widespread adoption could elevate Ripple into one of the most valuable financial entities globally.

The user also argues that banks, after conducting extensive due diligence, would likely weigh these implications before integrating a cryptocurrency into their operations.

Schwartz’s Direct Rebuttal

In response, David Schwartz offered a concise statement that Stellar Rippler emphasized in the post. Schwartz wrote: “Yeah, this makes business sense for us to do and would make us money, but we don’t want to do it because it also makes this other company money.”

Stellar Rippler interprets this reply as a clear dismissal of the concern. The post asserts that financial institutions are unlikely to reject a tool that improves efficiency and profitability simply because another company benefits. According to this view, banks prioritize operational advantages such as reduced costs and faster transaction times over competitive considerations tied to third-party gains.

The argument presented in the X post maintains that if XRP provides measurable benefits in cross-border payments, institutions will adopt it regardless of Ripple’s position. It emphasizes that banks routinely engage with external service providers and technology partners, even when those partnerships generate profits for both sides.

We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1

— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025

Broader Claims and Regulatory Context

Beyond Schwartz’s response, Stellar Rippler includes personal commentary addressing the historical reluctance of banks to embrace XRP. The post attributes this hesitation to regulatory pressure during the administration of Joe Biden, alleging that government actions constrained innovation within the cryptocurrency sector.

The commentator further claims that regulatory agencies, particularly the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, targeted Ripple due to its perceived impact on the financial system. These assertions reflect a broader narrative within parts of the crypto community regarding regulatory influence on adoption trends.

The post also references the proposed Clarity Act, suggesting that clearer regulatory guidelines could encourage institutional participation. According to Stellar Rippler, such legislation would remove uncertainty and allow banks to evaluate XRP purely on its utility.

Overall, the X post centers on the idea that economic incentives remain the primary driver for institutional decision-making.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on X, Facebook, Telegram, and  Google News

The post David Schwartz Shuts Down The Most Asked XRP FUD in One Savage Line appeared first on Times Tabloid.

In a detailed exchange on X, David Schwartz, the former Ripple Chief Technology Officer, addressed these concerns directly while responding to a post by Mason Versluis. Versluis questioned whether global banks would adopt XRP if Ripple’s large token holdings could benefit disproportionately from price appreciation. Schwartz used the discussion to challenge the assumption that institutional decision-making depends on issuer enrichment concerns rather than operational utility.

Institutional Adoption and Economic Incentives

Mason Versluis argued that global banks would likely perform extensive due diligence before adopting XRP and may hesitate if they believe adoption could concentrate excessive value in Ripple as a company. He suggested that institutions might reject the proposition if retail speculation and ownership narratives complicate risk assessment.

Schwartz countered this logic by stating that financial institutions adopt technologies based on cost efficiency, settlement speed, and operational benefit. He argued that banks evaluate whether a system improves payment infrastructure rather than whether it increases the value of a particular company’s holdings. In his view, utility drives adoption, not secondary market equity effects.

You're thinking about it from the point of view of an XRP holder. When I said "XRP cannot be cheap" if you're talking about this post, that was talking about it from the point of view of using it for payments.https://t.co/Vkk1C9b7jh

— David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz (@JoelKatz) April 2, 2026

Stablecoins Versus Crypto Assets in Payments

The conversation expanded when Naïve Bae questioned XRP’s relevance in an environment increasingly shaped by stablecoin adoption. Schwartz acknowledged that stablecoins perform well in environments that require predictable value transfer and minimal volatility.

However, he highlighted structural limitations in stablecoin design. He noted that stablecoins remain tied to a single fiat currency, which reduces efficiency in cross-border systems involving multiple jurisdictions. He also emphasized that issuers retain control mechanisms such as freezing or clawing back funds, which introduces counterparty risk that does not exist in decentralized cryptocurrencies like XRP or Bitcoin.

Schwartz further explained that cryptocurrencies can outperform stablecoins in scenarios where users prioritize autonomy, censorship resistance, and potential upside optionality over strict price stability. He stressed that no single instrument fits all financial use cases.

We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1

— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025

Reframing “XRP Cannot Be Cheap.”

Schwartz also revisited his widely cited statement that “XRP cannot be cheap,” originally made in a 2017 discussion. Responding to Lisa Prager, he clarified that the comment referred to payment efficiency rather than speculative valuation.

He explained that extremely low unit pricing can create inefficiencies in large-scale settlement systems because it increases the number of tokens required for transactions. He argued that a higher unit value can streamline payment mechanics by reducing friction in liquidity movement. He emphasized that the statement addressed functional design rather than price prediction.

Utility Over Narrative in Institutional Finance

Across the discussion, Schwartz consistently separated technological utility from market speculation. He positioned XRP as a settlement optimization tool rather than an asset whose value depends on issuer enrichment narratives.

The exchange underscores a persistent tension in digital asset markets between infrastructure-driven adoption and retail-driven valuation expectations. Schwartz’s comments reinforce the argument that institutional adoption depends primarily on performance efficiency, regulatory compatibility, and operational utility rather than speculative concerns about who benefits from token appreciation.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News

The post Ex-Ripple CTO David Schwartz Explains Why He Said XRP Cannot Be Cheap appeared first on Times Tabloid.

Pumpius (@pumpius), a veteran crypto pundit, highlighted the situation, emphasizing Coinbase’s gatekeeping role and the potential consequences for other tokens.

According to Schwartz, the exchange initially refused to list XRP despite its clear business potential. Coinbase has been accused of market manipulation, and this story takes its unfair practices to a new level.

EXPOSED: Coinbase's Greedy Gatekeeping on XRP – JoelKatz Drops the Bombshell!

Back in 2023, Ripple's CTO @JoelKatz spilled the tea on what really went down behind closed doors with @Coinbase and the $XRP listing.

Coinbase refused to list XRP. Even though it was screamingly… pic.twitter.com/crYfpUYSFF

— Pumpius (@pumpius) March 29, 2026

Coinbase’s Refusal to List XRP

Schwartz said he could not share the real details. He then presented what he described as a hypothetical version of events. He framed it as a made-up story before explaining how the listing process played out.

In that account, Schwartz wrote, “They ask Ripple for millions of dollars to list, and we refuse.” That refusal led to a months-long standoff, and the exchange did not list XRP.

Importantly, Schwartz revealed that the exchange agreed that it would have listed XRP if Ripple did not exist. This indicates that the refusal to list was tied directly to Ripple’s involvement rather than technical or regulatory concerns.

The Deal That Changed Everything

The standoff eventually ended when Ripple negotiated a deal. Funds were exchanged, and the exchange listed XRP. Schwartz revealed the immediate impact: XRP “immediately becomes 20% of the exchange’s revenue.” The token’s listing generated substantial income, reflecting the missed opportunities during the months of refusal.

Coinbase initially supported only a few major cryptocurrencies. When Coinbase Pro launched in 2018, it added several additional assets, yet XRP remained notably absent until February 2019, despite being one of the largest cryptocurrencies by market cap.

This clearly shows that XRP’s listing was delayed while other major tokens were added incrementally. Some have linked this move to a very early investment by Jeffrey Epstein.

This situation illustrates what Pumpius described as a form of gatekeeping by major exchanges. By controlling access to their platforms, exchanges could prioritize profit over market fairness.

We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1

— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025

Consequences for the Crypto Ecosystem

The case raises questions about other unlisted tokens. While Coinbase now sees XRP as an attractive asset, many other game-changing assets may have faced a similar fate.

Schwartz further addressed the impact of this move on the SEC lawsuit. He described how some facts from the listing scenario were used selectively to imply unfair practices. However, Schwartz made it clear that Ripple’s actions were to ensure its existence did not hinder XRP.

Pumpius’ commentary reinforces the broader concern regarding exchange control. The potential for other tokens to face similar barriers underlines the importance of transparency and full decentralization in the crypto space.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on X, Facebook, Telegram, and  Google News

The post David Schwartz: Coinbase Asked Ripple for Millions of Dollars to List XRP appeared first on Times Tabloid.

This discussion gained attention after former Ripple Chief Technology Officer David Schwartz responded to observations from XRPL validator Vet regarding rising transaction counts and fee behavior. Their exchange highlighted how network congestion, validator coordination, and throughput limits interact to influence transaction costs on the XRP Ledger.

Rising Activity Near Historical Throughput Levels

XRPL has recently approached activity levels near 200 transactions per ledger, a threshold rarely sustained in its operational history. Vet noted this increase while observing network conditions that reflected heavier-than-usual usage across applications and users.

As transaction volume rises, the network experiences higher load across nodes. This increased demand can lead to longer processing times and elevated fees, particularly when more users attempt to submit transactions simultaneously. These conditions often trigger discussions about scalability and efficiency within the ecosystem.

Dynamic Fee Adjustment Under Demand Pressure

David Schwartz explained that XRP Ledger fees respond directly to network demand. When transaction requests exceed the network’s ability to process them comfortably, the system increases fees to regulate throughput.

Schwartz clarified that even a small excess in demand above the network’s capacity can trigger noticeable fee escalation. If the network can process approximately 200 transactions per second, fees adjust to a level where only that number of transactions—or fewer—remain willing to pay. This mechanism ensures that the network maintains operational stability without exceeding its processing limits.

In theory, if demand continues to rise without a sufficient supply of transaction capacity, fees can increase significantly until equilibrium is reached between demand and throughput.

Validator Consensus and Clearing Rates

Schwartz also emphasized that validators collectively determine the network’s clearing rate. The XRP Ledger does not rely on a central authority to set transaction speed. Instead, validators coordinate through consensus to agree on how many transactions the network can process at any given time.

He explained that the network requires at least a majority of validators to reach agreement, with some configurations requiring up to roughly 80% consensus, depending on the negative Unique Node List (UNL) setup. This consensus model ensures that no single validator can unilaterally influence network performance.

We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1

— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025

The system also avoids extremes. It does not operate at the pace of the fastest validator nor slow down to match the slowest. Instead, it balances performance across the validator set to maintain consistency and reliability.

Infrastructure Limits and Network Stability

Schwartz noted that validator infrastructure plays a critical role in overall network performance. If a server operates near its maximum capacity under normal conditions, a sudden increase in transaction volume can cause it to fall behind.

When consensus rounds extend—sometimes reaching durations around 12 seconds—validators may adjust their transaction targets and modify the fee curve. These adjustments help stabilize the network and prevent overload during periods of high demand.

Balancing Throughput, Fees, and Reliability

The XRP Ledger’s fee mechanism reflects a careful balance between scalability and stability. If fees escalate too early, the network may unnecessarily restrict throughput. If they activate too late, the system risks congestion and degraded performance across nodes.

Schwartz’s explanation highlights how the XRP Ledger continuously adapts to changing conditions. Through validator consensus, dynamic fee adjustments, and infrastructure constraints, the network maintains equilibrium even as demand fluctuates.

As activity on XRPL continues to evolve, understanding these mechanisms provides important context for interpreting fee spikes and network behavior.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News

The post Ex-Ripple CTO Reveals Why XRP Fees Can Suddenly Spike Without Warning appeared first on Times Tabloid.

This idea connects directly with comments from former Ripple CTO David Schwartz, whose view on market pricing helps explain how large investors approach assets, such as XRP, over the long term.

CRAZY: Ripple's David Schwartz says, “If investors truly believed in $100 $XRP, billionaires would already be buying aggressively.”

They aren’t. pic.twitter.com/0SuMs42f7f

— STEPH IS CRYPTO (@Steph_iscrypto) March 21, 2026

Steph’s Market Observation

Steph’s point centers on how major capital moves markets. Billionaires, funds, and large institutions can move prices when they build positions. If a strong belief existed that XRP would soon reach very high valuations, large buyers would accumulate aggressively. Such an accumulation would push the price higher as demand increases.

This does not remove the current growth around XRP. Institutions are using XRP for payments and liquidity. Whale activity remains visible on-chain. Spot XRP ETFs continue to attract attention from market participants. These factors show expanding participation and infrastructure around the asset. However, price levels still reflect the collective expectations of the largest market participants today.

Schwartz Explains Market Logic

Schwartz explained this market behavior clearly. He said crypto prices are “mostly rational over the long term.” He also explained that if investors believed an asset had a very high probability of a major price rally, the price would already move to reflect that expectation. He used Bitcoin as an example and explained that large investors act when they see a bright future.

His point applies to all liquid assets, including XRP. Large investors deploy capital based on probability, risk, and expected return. When conviction rises, infrastructure grows, or utility expands, capital follows. Markets respond to these factors over time.

Institutional Activity Continues Around XRP

XRP continues to build its institutional presence. Payment corridors, liquidity solutions, and financial partnerships continue to expand. Spot XRP ETFs also represent another step toward traditional market access. Whale transactions also show that large holders remain active in the market. These developments show a market that is growing through infrastructure, usage, and financial integration.

However, the billionaires have not joined the market. Building on Schwartz’s comments, Steph noted that if the largest players truly believed XRP could reach $100, they would be buying aggressively.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on X, Facebook, Telegram, and  Google News

The post Ex-Ripple CTO: If Billionaires Truly Believe XRP Can Reach $100… appeared first on Times Tabloid.

TheCryptoBasic recently highlighted commentary from David Schwartz, who addressed this topic from a rational market perspective. Rather than dismissing optimism outright, he explained how investor expectations typically influence current prices, not just future projections.

The Scale of a $100 XRP

XRP currently trades around $1.45, which means it would need to rise approximately 6,796% to reach $100. Such a move would require an extraordinary increase in market capitalization, driven by sustained demand and large-scale capital inflows.

This level of growth would likely depend on widespread institutional adoption, deeper integration into global payment systems, and significant expansion in overall crypto market liquidity. While long-term growth remains possible, the scale of this target places it far beyond typical short-term expectations.

#Ripple CTO Emeritus Speaks on the Chances of $XRP Reaching $100.

The XRP community has repeatedly discussed the prospect of XRP reaching the $100 mark, which remains ambitious, given current market realities.

With XRP currently trading for $1.45, the crypto asset would need to… pic.twitter.com/lto6GXxjFx

— TheCryptoBasic (@thecryptobasic) March 20, 2026

How Markets Price Expectations

Schwartz’s core argument rests on market efficiency. Investors do not wait for outcomes—they act on expectations. If market participants genuinely believed that XRP had a high probability of reaching $100 within a specific timeframe, they would accumulate aggressively.

This behavior would push the price higher, well before the target becomes reality. The fact that XRP remains at current levels suggests that the market does not assign a strong probability to such an outcome in the near term.

He applies the same logic to Bitcoin and other liquid assets, noting that rational investors deploy capital based on risk-adjusted returns. When opportunities appear highly favorable, markets typically reprice quickly.

The Role of Institutional Capital

Large investors play a decisive role in shaping price movements. Their ability to allocate significant capital allows them to influence market trends, especially in assets with high liquidity.

We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1

— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025

Schwartz suggests that if these participants strongly believed in extreme price targets, their buying activity would already reflect that conviction. The absence of such aggressive accumulation indicates a more measured outlook among sophisticated investors.

Balancing Vision With Reality

XRP continues to maintain strong fundamentals, particularly in cross-border payments and liquidity solutions. These use cases support long-term growth and reinforce its relevance in the evolving financial landscape.

However, extreme price projections require equally extreme adoption scenarios. Achieving a $100 valuation would likely demand a fundamental transformation of global financial infrastructure, a process that would unfold over many years.

A Rational Perspective for Investors

Schwartz’s analysis offers a grounded framework for evaluating XRP’s potential. He does not deny future growth, but he emphasizes the importance of aligning expectations with market behavior.

For investors, the key takeaway remains clear: focus on adoption, utility, and capital flows. While ambitious targets can inspire confidence, sustainable growth depends on measurable progress rather than speculation alone.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News

The post Former Ripple CTO Speaks On the Possibility of XRP Reaching $100 appeared first on Times Tabloid.

In a post shared on X, David Schwartz, Ripple’s CTO Emeritus and co-architect of the XRP Ledger, disclosed a remarkable historical detail from February 2013. He revealed that the first email he ever received mentioning “XRP” came from developer Vinnie Falco, who reached out to request tokens so he could explore the technology. This brief interaction captures the spirit of XRP’s earliest adoption phase.

Fun fact: The first email anyone ever sent me that had the word "XRP" in it was from @FalcoVinnie asking for some back in February of 2013. pic.twitter.com/XZqGnsqLHp

— David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz (@JoelKatz) March 18, 2026

Early Curiosity and Open Access

In 2013, the XRP Ledger remained a new and largely experimental network. Developers who wanted to explore its capabilities often relied on direct outreach rather than formal onboarding systems. Falco, identifying himself as a member of the Bitcointalk forum, demonstrated initiative by contacting Schwartz and requesting XRP to begin his investigation.

The request did not face delays or bureaucracy. Instead, it led to immediate action. On the same day, 1,000 XRP reached Falco’s wallet, reportedly facilitated by early contributor Alex Kravets. This swift response highlights how accessible and community-driven the ecosystem was during its formative stage.

A Culture of Collaboration

This moment reflects more than a simple transaction. It illustrates the collaborative culture that fueled XRP’s early development. Developers, contributors, and enthusiasts worked closely, shared resources, and supported one another’s efforts to build and test the network.

We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1

— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025

Falco’s involvement did not end with that initial request. He became an active contributor to the XRP Ledger, helping to strengthen its infrastructure over time. His journey mirrors that of many early adopters who transitioned from curious participants into key builders within the ecosystem.

From Grassroots Beginnings to Global Impact

XRP has evolved significantly since those early days. What started as an experimental blockchain project has grown into a globally recognized digital asset network known for fast transactions and low fees. Today, the XRP Ledger supports a wide range of use cases, including cross-border payments and decentralized applications.

Schwartz’s revelation serves as a powerful reminder of how innovation often begins. Small, direct interactions can spark long-term impact when they occur within an open and collaborative environment. XRP’s journey from a simple email request to a mature blockchain ecosystem underscores the importance of community-driven development in shaping lasting technological progress.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News

The post Ex-Ripple CTO Makes Fresh Historic Revelation About XRP appeared first on Times Tabloid.

Repurchased Company Shares

Recently, Ripple announced that it had repurchased approximately $750 million worth of company shares, valuing the firm at around $50 billion. The move revived longstanding arguments about the relationship between Ripple’s corporate finances and the market value of XRP. Some observers believe the company’s activities primarily benefit shareholders, while token holders see little direct advantage.

One of the most vocal critics has been Zach Rynes, who is associated with the Chainlink community. Rynes argued that XRP investors effectively provide funding for Ripple’s operations without receiving ownership rights in the company.

Are you being deliberately dumb? It's good for holders because it made the price of XRP go down when they bought it.

A constant factor that is known and understood does not affect holders because whatever effect it has on price, it has equally when they buy and when they sell.

— David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz (@JoelKatz) March 16, 2026

According to this view, Ripple sells portions of its pre-mined XRP reserves to raise capital, which can then be used to finance acquisitions or share buybacks that benefit the firm’s equity holders rather than the broader XRP community.

Schwartz rejected this interpretation and presented an alternative perspective. He explained that critics often claim Ripple’s sale of XRP could place downward pressure on the token’s market price. However, he noted that if this assumption is accepted, it also implies that market participants may have opportunities to purchase XRP at lower prices as a result of those same actions.

Transparency and Predictability 

From Schwartz’s standpoint, the key issue is transparency and predictability. If market participants are aware of a factor that consistently influences price movements, that factor affects everyone trading the asset in the same way. Buyers and sellers operate with the same publicly available information, meaning the impact is not selectively harmful to one group of market participants.

Rynes dismissed this reasoning and described it as an attempt to portray price suppression as beneficial to investors. In his view, suggesting that lower prices caused by Ripple’s actions should be welcomed by token holders ignores the broader issue of how value generated by the company ultimately flows to shareholders rather than to holders of the digital asset.

We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1

— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025

The debate also prompted responses from members of the XRP community who believe the criticism misunderstands the nature of cryptocurrencies. One commentator noted that digital assets generally do not grant holders equity or profit-sharing rights in the organizations that contribute to their development. 

As an example, owning Ethereum does not provide investors with a financial stake in Consensys, and holding Solana does not entitle users to earnings generated by Solana Labs.

Supporters of XRP argue that the token functions in a similar manner. In their view, its value is determined by market demand and network utility rather than by ownership claims over Ripple itself. As a result, evaluating XRP as though it were a corporate stock leads to conclusions that do not accurately reflect how most cryptocurrencies operate.

The exchange highlights a broader issue within the digital asset sector, which is the relationship between blockchain tokens and the companies that help build their ecosystems. While critics maintain that Ripple’s financial strategy prioritizes equity investors, others argue that XRP should be assessed independently of the company’s corporate structure.

Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News

The post David Schwartz Says This Ripple Action Is Good for XRP Holders  appeared first on Times Tabloid.