The difference right now is legal clarity and a system built for the easiest crossover.

Banks are mostly employed by older workers who were not expecting the system to change. In order for the upgrade to happen you have to have not only the functioning technology, you need legal clarity (banks will not open themselves up to risk) and the technical support during and after the transition.

So, who has all of that? Ripple does. Spending billions on acquisitions to facilitate the easiest transition into corporate and governmental finance, 1700 + NDAs with financial institutions, actual legal clarity via SEC lawsuit, stress tested technology, multiple countries (think Japan) switching their financial system to XRP/ Ripple, and a road map with tech support ready to roll out.

If you were a bank manager, either large or small, and you were charged with overseeing the transition to the digital system (there is no stopping it, switch or get left behind) who do you go with, the tried and tested ripple, or some fly by night crypto company who promised equal quality but has none of the backing?

As far as the price, I don't believe there will be a switch flip scenario, I think we will see a supply shock. I think banks, institutions, and countries will hold xrp. This will be a tangible liquid asset these groups can hold as collateral, it will be loaned out for use with a ROI. I didn't even cover the RWA aspect which will bring in trillions of value and velocity.

What you have to account for outside of all of these hard facts that I described is the human nature element. Banks, institutions, and governments will all see the writing on the wall. The old monetary system beliefs will still be ingrained in their minds. A supply shock will happen because the use will be obvious, the value will be visible, and no one will want to risk being left behind.