Ripple CTO Once Said $1,000,000 Per XRP Is More Practical Than $1. Here's why

A resurfaced comment from Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, has drawn renewed attention following a tweet from crypto investor XRP Governor.

The tweet references Schwartz’s Quora response from several years ago, in which he argues that a high market price for XRP is beneficial for its use in large-scale payments, rather than a hindrance to adoption.

This claim is rooted in Schwartz’s original remarks addressing concerns that a finite and potentially high-priced XRP could obstruct mainstream adoption by banks.

@media only screen and (min-width: 0px) and (min-height: 0px) { div[id^="wrapper-sevio-6a57f7be-8f6e-4deb-ae2c-5477f86653a5"]{width:320px;height:100px;} } @media only screen and (min-width: 728px) and (min-height: 0px) { div[id^="wrapper-sevio-6a57f7be-8f6e-4deb-ae2c-5477f86653a5"]{width:728px;height:90px;} }

The concern, posed by a Quora user, suggested that if XRP cannot be mined and must be purchased, financial institutions might prefer the asset to remain low-priced to avoid increased costs. Schwartz rejected that view by explaining the underlying economic mechanics of high-value digital assets and their correlation with liquidity.

David Schwartz’s Response on Asset Pricing and Liquidity

Schwartz’s argument centers on the relationship between asset pricing, liquidity, and transaction efficiency. He stated clearly that to make a $1 million payment, one would always need $1 million worth of XRP, regardless of the unit price of the asset.

According to Schwartz, the concern about high prices deterring adoption overlooks a critical dynamic: higher prices generally imply greater market liquidity, which makes it easier and cheaper to execute large payments without disrupting the market.

To illustrate his point, Schwartz used the historical example of Bitcoin. He described a scenario in which a person attempted to use Bitcoin priced at $100 to buy a $1 million property.

Such a purchase would have required buying a massive amount of Bitcoin, significantly moving the market upward during the purchase, and then driving the price downward again when the recipient attempted to convert it. Schwartz noted that this volatility and slippage would have rendered such a transaction impractical.

He contrasted this with the state of Bitcoin when it surpassed $10,000. At this higher valuation, one could acquire $1 million worth of Bitcoin using a far smaller portion of the total circulating supply, reducing the impact on market price and ensuring a smoother transaction.

Schwartz concluded that this same principle applies to XRP. He wrote that “a higher priced asset is a better vehicle for payments, at least if you’re targeting high value payments.”

XRP Governor Emphasizes the Practicality of High XRP Valuation

XRP Governor’s tweet emphasized that these views were not speculative comments from an outsider but came directly from the CTO of Ripple and one of the original architects of the XRP Ledger.

By highlighting the quote about $1 million per XRP being more practical than $1, XRP Governor framed Schwartz’s past remarks as validation for the long-term potential of XRP to reach high valuations, provided it becomes an asset used globally for large-scale cross-border payments.

The tweet also included the statement “KNOW WHAT YOU HODL,” reinforcing a narrative that long-term XRP holders should consider Schwartz’s liquidity argument as part of their rationale for holding the asset. The suggestion is that mainstream utility of XRP at a high unit price is not incompatible with adoption, but rather may be an enabler of it.

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.*