Parag.hl

I don’t see how the stablecoin thesis actually makes any sense outside the crypto closed loop. TLDR no1 in a real world value chain is actually incentivized to mint stables, so how can they grow? Someone has to lock up real dollars and Circle/Tether mints an on-chain stable. They then capture the interest on those reserves. A good business for them, not so much for the party that locked up the dollars. Crypto works because Market makers and traders need on-chain liquidity, so they happily mint stables to facilitate trading. MMs internalize that cost because they profit on bid/ask spreads and inventory turnover covering the cost of capital. But in the IRL economy it just doesn’t make sense. From suppliers to distributors, merchants to consumers, there’s no party that benefits enough to shoulder the cost of capital required to mint stables at scale. Everyone gains if someone else mints, but the minter eats the funding cost. The spread any individual party would make (eg. saving Visa or SWIFT fees) isn’t enough to cover their capital costs. It’s a classic free-rider problem. Everyone will rely on someone else to do the heavy lifting, resulting in no1 doing it.

🇺🇸 LATEST: Nasdaq-listed Eyenovia raises $50M to launch $HYPE token treasury strategy, becoming the first US public company to hold $HYPE in treasury.

You asked. We shipped. 4H candles are now live on Coinbase Advanced. Weekly and monthly are in the works - stay tuned.

You asked. We shipped. 4H candles are now live on Coinbase Advanced. Weekly and monthly are in the works - stay tuned.

🇺🇸 ETF FLOWS: Around 889 $BTC were sold and 5,410 $ETH were bought on May 13. BTC ETFs saw $91.4M in net outflows. ETH ETFs saw $13.5M in net inflows.

I would never hire someone that likes their own tweets 🤮