Did Ripple's Early Architect Deceive Investors with Past Price Remarks?

▲ 데이비드 슈워츠(David Schwartz), X, 엑스알피(XRP)/챗GPT 생성 이미지 ©

Ripple (XRP)'s early architect has been embroiled in controversy, accused of deceiving investors with past price-related remarks. He has now directly refuted these claims, stating that his comments were merely an explanation of market liquidity, not a price prediction.

According to crypto media outlet CryptoNews on April 27 (local time), David Schwartz, Ripple's former Chief Technology Officer, recently faced strong criticism from the community on social media platform X regarding a post he made in 2017. A user accused him of misleading the community and instilling false hope by mentioning XRP's liquidity and price levels in the past, demanding a clear explanation.

In the controversial 2017 post, Schwartz argued that for XRP to handle large-scale global transaction volumes, its price could not be cheap. He illustrated the need for liquidity with a simple example: if XRP traded at $1, 1 million XRP would be needed to send $1 million, but if the price were $1 million, only one XRP could transfer the same value.

In response, Schwartz pointed out that many investors misunderstood the post as an assurance of XRP's future value. He drew a line against speculation, stating that his past remarks were merely an explanation of how the market works, not a guarantee of a target price. He also explained that he left the old post intact because deleting it would remove the context and potentially cause greater confusion.

This controversy intensified recently when he deleted a post defending Arbitrum's decision to freeze 30,000 Ethereum (ETH) linked to the KelpDAO exploit. While he explained that he deleted the post because he confused Arbitrum with another network, this incident has heightened holders' skepticism and demands for verification regarding his past statements.

This debate clearly demonstrates that even remarks made years ago still significantly influence public opinion within the XRP community. Schwartz firmly maintains that his past statements focused on liquidity, transaction capacity, and market depth, not price prediction.

*Disclaimer: This article is for investment reference only, and we are not responsible for any investment losses based on it. The content should be interpreted for informational purposes only.*