2026-01-21 18:20:35

A research report from ten years ago has recently been brought up again. It discussed how traditional banks are adopting blockchain technology. Taking Germany's Fidor Bank as an example, they were experimenting with using Ripple's protocol for interbank clearing and settlement. What was the result? Direct connection without going through a bunch of intermediary institutions, and the money could arrive in real-time.

This may seem simple, but there is a pain point behind it: traditional cross-border remittances are painfully slow and extremely costly. Ripple aims to solve this problem—by using a decentralized network to enable direct connections between institutions, with XRP serving as a liquidity bridge, making international payments faster and cheaper.

Interestingly, this idea was recognized by major institutions ten years ago. Although the adoption speed wasn't as fast as imagined, the direction was correct. Looking back now, such technological solutions are still evolving and worth continued attention.

XRP2,83%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

memecoin_therapy

· 7h ago

It's been ten years still talking about Ripple. Can this guy finally get real? XRP as a liquidity bridge sounds great, but banks are still slow as ever. The Fidor example is good, but why haven't other major banks followed suit? Solutions that truly address cross-border pain points should have been widely adopted long ago, but they're still in the experimental stage. Banks say yes, but in their wallets, they still bypass you.

View OriginalReply0

DeFiDoctor

· 7h ago

Ten years of clinical observation show that the Ripple solution has never truly solved the liquidity dilemma of banks—medical records clearly indicate that XRP, as a bridge asset, has always lacked practical adoption, and institutions still bypassed it.

View OriginalReply0

WalletsWatcher

· 7h ago

It's been ten years, and we're still talking about this. Why hasn't it been implemented yet?

View OriginalReply0

SolidityStruggler

· 7h ago

It's been ten years still talking about Ripple. Why hasn't this technology become widespread yet? Do the banks really want to reform, or are they just paying lip service? What happened with the Fidor incident later? Has anyone followed up? Listening to XRP as a bridge, it sounds good, but it seems like everyone is now using stables? Cross-border payments are indeed a pain point, but it seems Ripple isn't the one truly solving it. History repeats itself. Can this time be different? Are there any new developments in interbank blockchain settlement? Is Ripple still around? Ten years and the results are so poor. It's probably time to change the approach, right?

View OriginalReply0

TokenDustCollector

· 7h ago

It's been ten years and we're still talking about this. How many of Ripple's initial promises have been fulfilled? Honestly, I'm not that optimistic. Only a few banks truly embrace it. The XRP liquidity bridge sounds good, but how does it actually perform? This guy is right; the direction is correct, but implementation is difficult. We're still exploring. Hmm, ten years have passed and it's still evolving. Is this a technical issue or are policies holding it back? To be honest, I'm a bit disillusioned with Ripple. The hype and reality are so far apart. Interbank direct connection sounds great, but who dares to truly delegate authority to blockchain for managing money? Wait, what's the current status of Fidor Bank? Are they still using it?

View OriginalReply0