Crypto enthusiast BankXRP shared a post stating that Brad Garlinghouse expects Bitcoin to reach $180,000 by December 31, 2026. Attached to his tweet was a video of the CEO making this prediction at the ongoing Binance Blockchain Week in Dubai. His message was brief but clear, emphasizing the exact figure and date. That level of specificity quickly attracted comments from members of the XRP community, with many trying to interpret how much weight the forecast should carry.
Ripple Brad Garlinghouse.
Predicts Bitcoin $180,000
December 31 2026 pic.twitter.com/pKj9KCA9zf— 𝗕𝗮𝗻𝗸XRP (@BankXRP) December 3, 2025
Supporters View the Comment as a Meaningful Signal
Some readers saw the prediction as more than a casual estimate. X Finance Bull argued that Garlinghouse would not give a figure like that unless strong developments were happening behind the scenes. According to that view, senior industry leaders often make such statements only when market infrastructure, liquidity, or institutional interest appears to be moving in a supportive direction. For these supporters, the forecast is seen as a potential indication of real activity shaping up in the background.
Others Call for Data and Careful Evaluation
A different segment of the community urged a more cautious approach. User mystik4l06 noted that predictions without supporting evidence should be treated carefully. They emphasized relying on data-driven research, balanced reasoning, and confirming information independently before accepting any long-term price target. This perspective reflects a common stance among traders who prefer analysis grounded in metrics, past performance, and clear reasoning rather than standalone forecasts.
We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1
— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025
Past Accuracy Becomes Part of the Debate
Not everyone viewed the prediction positively. XRP Nation pointed to earlier forecasts from Garlinghouse, including a previous market-cap estimate that did not materialize. They argued that his predictions have been incorrect more often than correct. This response introduced the question of credibility, suggesting that past outcomes should be considered when evaluating new claims.
How Market Participants May Interpret the Prediction
The range of reactions shows how differently the community processes statements from high-profile figures. Some treat them as signals, others see them as opinions requiring evidence, and some judge them based on past accuracy. For market watchers, the most practical approach is to treat specific price-and-date claims as one viewpoint rather than a definitive expectation. Independent research remains essential in forming a balanced outlook.