A 2021 Citibank paper that used the phrase “Regulated Internet of Value” is at the center of a recent XRP debate after researcher Jesse of Apex Crypto Insights argued that the phrase was later moved to “Regulated Accountability Network” because the connection to Ripple was too obvious.

He says this paper trail, along with years of feeble price action, points to: sign which may be withheld for reasons more crucial than normal market trading.

A price that will not change

The first thing Jesse points to is the XRP chart. The token hit $3.84 during the 2018 bull run and later hit $3.60 earlier in the cycle, yet it has moved sideways for most of the last decade while Bitcoin has climbed much higher.

Jesse called this mismatch tough to explain under normal market conditions and stated, in his opinion: damping is one possible answer.

The claim is not presented as evidence. Jesse frames this as his opinion, but connects it to a broader argument about how the financial system could change if XRP begins to play a deeper role than regular payments.

Master’s thesis on the Internet of Values

Jesse argues that XRP should be viewed as part of the “internet of value” and not just another crypto asset. He combines this idea with that of Ripple Inter-Accounting Protocolwhich he believes is intended to convey value in the same way that the Internet conveys information.

In his opinion, the trail leads through several documents and speeches of the institution. According to Jesse, Citibank’s Tony McLaughlin described Regulated liability network and the idea of ​​a common ledger is the same concept and he claims that the Bank for International Settlements has also talked about a unified ledger that could replace correspondent banking and even Swift.

The researcher’s case rests on this chain of reference. He argues that if vast banks are preparing a recent settlement system, the prices of assets associated with that system cannot be allowed to fluctuate wildly because volatility would be a problem for anything intended to function as a reserve or settlement layer.

What is still missing from the theory

Jesse offers no strenuous evidence of manipulation. His argument relies on interpretation rather than any public evidence of coordinated price controls, and ultimately leaves the issue unresolved, without drawing any definitive conclusions about market behavior.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView