My personal opinion is that, despite having a first mover advantage, no one company will dominate real-time worldwide transfers. There will be geographical pocket specialists and industry vertical specialists, but no one company will be ruling cross-border transfers.

It is no secret that cross-border payments are essential to any given economy. Politicizing them (as was the case with SWIFT and Correspondent Banking Relationship) as exercised by the United States has made others re-think about alternatives.

Seriously think. This includes Russia, India, China, France, Germany, Brazil, South Africa, the GCC (yes, all of them).

Ripple may have the first mover’s advantage, but it won’t have an edge on the competition.

Monetary standards and solutions do not behave the same way on the internet as data standards and solutions. We desperately want it to, but it has been shown, that they don’t. Had that been the case, we would have had the true Internet of Value a long, long time ago.

Because of the politics and alternatives, the world will see many cross-border, real-time payment systems and we will also have some seasoned form(s) of an inter-network-protocol (just like Ripple has put out an ILP – Inter Ledger Protocol).

Expect the market to have various players? Why? Because there are over 400+ types of payment transactions types. No one protocol is going to cover it and be efficient for it.

  • One solution would be good for correspondent banking
  • One will be for mass payments for freelancers
  • One for Letter of Credit Payments
  • One for stock exchange funds settlement around the world
  • One for the travel industry
  • One for the worldwide insurance industry
  • One for cross-wallet (inter-wallet transfer)
  • One for mobile money interoperability
  • One for the gift-card industry
  • Etc.

The competitors will survive and so will Ripple.