I disagree with all these supposed benefits
1. Cyclists are already enabled to correctly, often more correctly, position themselves to the left of right turn lanes without the bike specific lane stripes.
2. Stripes don't change the level of 'conflict' as there will be the same number of crossing paths with or without stripes.
3. The path only provides guidance to cyclists and motorists of where some planner thought the only preferred travel path is. But in practice this path will vary greatly as do traffic conditions and travel direction desires of cyclist.
4. It only leads to expectations of where cyclsts and motorists should be. This worsens conditions for cyclists who for safety or practical reasons chose a different path. Because motorist expectations will not match reality this makes the cyclists movements less predictable. Those who follow the path need to assume motorist travel movements match expectation.
5. Motorists should be alerted by the presence of a cyclist and the signals that cyclists is giving not by a stripe or color on the ground.
6. The appropriate place to merge is where it can be done safely and legally.

More to the concern about points 4-6 is the designed path and traffic flow puts the full control of cyclist safety in the assumption of correct merging actions by the motorist. The cyclist traveling on this 'preferred' path can only hope the motorist follows 'their' path and yields at the crossing zone. Cyclists need to be managing their safety, not relying on others to do it for them.