Even if you're willing to operate fully in the "tradfi" system, your counterparty might not be, and you still want their business.

There is no requirement to use the tradfi ramps. It is merely offered as an option. But as it pertains to banking in the USA, a couple differentiating qualities I will offer before the goalposts will inevitably be shifted yet again to damn my response

1) Settlement time (wires only sporadically free in US, plus usually settle slower)

2) Irreversibility.

3) The tradfi ramps, if used, only have to be OK with crypto ramp, rather than the whole host of underlying transactions. It is conceivable some banks will tolerate crypto while not tolerating, say, directly handling a particular transaction.

4) Lowered friction for international transaction

5) One or both sides can be unbanked.

> (potentially) lower transaction fees

<transactionFeeDiscussion>

Citation needed. I'm looking at the transaction fees for lightning network and they are in the range of FedNow or RTP.

For Bitcoin it's not even close.

</transactionFeeDiscussion>

I sent a transfer from the UAE to Spain and another one to the Netherlands. They took 5 days and 7 days respectively. The same transfer takes 10 minutes in Bitcoin. You don't do transfers to pay for stuff at the grocery store, the same way you would not pay using the Bitcoin network. You would use lightning network, which takes less than 2 seconds finality.

Worst for whom?

Lack of chargeback risk seems nice for businesses.