I have been involving myself a little bit with Ripple, XRP and other cryptocurrencies and have some questions regarding a certain use-case that seems to come up quite a bit that has a component to it that seems to elude my understanding, perhaps the overwhelm of new information is clouding my ability to deduce it and am therefore humbly requesting some of you experienced redditors’ advice.
I understand the concept of nostro accounts, current swift limitations and the overall complexity of cross-border payments. I find Ripple and its various technologies/services to be well positioned in the market in comparison to other cryptos that may have similar or more advanced abilities as a currency. However, the point of Western Union (WU) has come up often and I can’t quite put two and two together.
When WU tried to utilize XRP or Ripple (I’m not 100% sure which one they used) to settle transfer of money between branches, they determined the benefits were not significant enough for them to continue to adopt it. Comments from XRP supporters indicated this was because they saw it as a threat and that they didn’t want to build up their competition.
Even if this was true, and I’m not 100% convinced that XRP would make things easier or cheaper for them. And how would WU, or anyone for that matter, solve the problem of actual physical movement of cash?
Example: an Indian colleague gets his payment in Singapore dollar (SGD) and sends it back to his family in India, presumably in their native currency Indian Rupee (IRP). When he currently deposits it at the WU, they list it in their system and distribute the funds at the other end cross-border. Cash stays in one vault and leaves the other.
This system is an Internalized Ledger (IL) and would seem to me much more effective than an Inter-Protocol Ledger (IPL, for this document’s sake).
Wouldn’t a competitor such as what moneygram is doing now have an impossible time to compete if they didn’t have all those branches aroun...