Bitcoin Forum

Banks are the cause of millions of crypto project failures


Banks are the enemies of governments and the main actors in wasting government capital, Banks are fools who only increase their capital and people get poorer, Dollar competes only with Euro, Yuan, Yen etc whose market value is fixed the reason for this is bonds/bills and unsound financial structure, While on the other hand, the banks are not paying attention to the millions of cryptocurrency projects that have failed, It is surprising that banks only consider it necessary to prefer dollars against euros or fiat currencies against fiat like pound, yen, yuan or other currencies, While each currency created on the blockchain is a counterpart to another currency, Which means it is an exchange of Euros and Dollars along with other fiat currencies, Banks can print new USDs/Euros to exchange them against the cryptocurrencies, furthermore banks can provide liquidity services to new projects whether it is a Meme or Pump Dump token. This service of banks could have saved millions of failed projects from failure, Due to which common people are losing hundreds of billions of dollars every year, While cryptocurrency exchanges have become alligators to support cryptocurrency projects, Banks are well aware that printing dollars or euros creates deflation rather than inflation against the cryptocurrency projects on the Blockchain platform, Because it reduces the volume of dollars or euros in public circulation to support cryptocurrencies, On the other hand, trading in cryptocurrency increases public benefit, The saddest part is that banks are not providing any services to list cryptocurrency projects on centralized exchanges, For which banks can issue new loans as well as create their own exchanges, These loans can help many failed projects, pump and dump tokens to list on cryptocurrency exchanges, For which no verification is required and people remain anonymous, Because banks can take their share in the form of tokens while issuing loans,  the share portion can be equivalent to the loans they issue to such projects along with this to help them to get listed on exchanges, banks can support economies by providing liquidity to such projects by continuously issuing loans too.

Say that you're right about that, but there's about a hundreds of thousands if not millions of crypto projects over the years that are offering the same solution to the same problem, you wouldn't think that some of them aren't going to fail? If they all do the same thing then it's bound to happen that the project that's going to have more people using it will have more survivability because compared to their other competition that's offering almost the same thing, that's one of the reasons why a lot of crypto projects failed, they were destroyed by their competition and there's really not a lot of stuff that they're offering besides the same solution, now if only they're creative and are dedicated to their works, they might be an industry standard right now.

Another reason for a lot of failures is that there's a lot of rug pull and scam crypto projects out there and the people that run this projects are making bank which makes it lucrative for them to just do scam projects instead of a legitimate one.

Where's the law banks need to funds, give loan, and helping shitcoins?
Banks will not accept shitcoin as the collateral since they don't have any value, why should the banks need to risk themselves?

Both banks and shitcoins are definitely scam, but they're not working together except the shitcoins' issuers are the government.

Banks aren't the cause, but those projects were created with an intention to exit scam when they're successfully earn some money from the investors.

the OP is wrong about two main things
firstly. banks cannot "just print" and spend.. they have contracts that allow them certain reasons to print. they cant just magic money out of nothing and buy an asset. its actually created via loans.. even a bond is a loan

secondly it wont create deflation because buying into a project or buying a coin does not burn the fiat.. instead the project manager/coin seller gets the fiat. so fiat still ends up in circulation so its still inflation

So the shitcoins, which you yourself acknowledge to be:


They do not fail because they are shitty projects designed to enrich very quickly those who create them by trapping a mass of unwary people who think they are going to get rich with the money they invest, and in the end end up losing it, no, the fault lies with the banks because they do not give them more money to finance projects that are one step away from bankruptcy.

There is no sense in what you are saying, no matter if you use a wall of text to express it.

its simple OP has no money but wished he could create a crapcoin. market buy it for pennies using a loan(his bank obviously said no to him).
try and then give it some fame and viral FOMO fluff.. where he hoped to pump his dream and sell at a profit. leaving a bag of crap on victims

so reality of rejection hit him, so he cant pump and dump his own crap coin to profit.. and he wants to blame the banks for not fronting him the money to scam others in a pump and dump

---

economics lessons 1,2,3

1. dont invest more the you fear to lose
2. dont use debt
3. dont invest time/labour/emotion or money in a coin/project that doesnt have longevity

That's normal and rational if we see Maybe the OP's response is just to express frustration at the many negative problems that often happen to banks which are detrimental to many investors and customers. So in my opinion it is normal if you look at the banking system itself and they are not immune to fraudulent practices or detrimental behavior.

What nonsense is this, since when did banks become enemies of the government? and how is it a waste of government money? And it's true that banks continue to increase their capital, but what does that have to do with people getting poorer? I don't understand what you're saying anymore.



Why also do banks need to pay attention to these scam projects? Isn't it the responsibility of the CEOs to be able to pay attention to their projects and arrange their own financing, why should banks pay attention to them?
There is also no benefit for banks paying attention to these half-baked projects because banks are also businesses and they need profit and clarity from the money they invest in a project. And since many crypto projects have no clear economics and are just following trends, there is no point in paying attention to them, especially as banks are restricted by regulations that do not allow them to deal with crypto.

This is the first time I have witnessed an individual's opinion condemning and criticizing baseless things for the main subject "Banks". The problem is that whatever exists cannot satisfy everyone, either you have to prove your ability to influence and change things that you feel are wrong, or you should like to think that things that are wrong with you are.

The banking system has many limitations, but to be more frank, we are not completely opposed. Let's know the balance between traditional tools and new things. And don't overemphasize the issue of crypto investment by borrowing through banks, because the main bridge is the person using the service. So instead of blaming anything, consider your own mistakes, and in the crypto space, we also have negative/positive things that are all created by ourselves.

You need to divide your topic into several paragraphs and address each paragraph separately so that we can understand what you want, what is the strange connection between banks, cryptocurrencies, Pump Dump, and the failure of these projects.
The relationship between banks and governments arises from the government’s need for banks because they are considered like arteries in the body that pump liquidity into the market in exchange for central control over the decisions of those banks and general direction of policies, directly or indirectly.
Even the relationship between the government and the central bank must be separate from subordination.
All of these relationships are generally separate from cryptocurrencies and from Pump Dump, which is considered a scam and has failed since day0.

OP, what are you even saying???

This is just the opposite, I don't know why you are mixing the world of banks/fiat with that of cryptocurrency. As a bank is a business, crypto projects are businesses for many others too. Now tell me, why would banks leave their own business to poke noses into the businesses of another? Of course, if those behind the crypto project have the necessary collateral, they could be helped by banks for loans and others. But you don't expect banks to be fully involved in the projects/businesses that is not theirs or have interest in, and neither should you expect them to market their projects for them.

I urge you to start from the basis by learning about this to see the difference in these sectors, maybe you will be able to retract your claims here because I can't imagine why they could have been conceived by you in the first place. And I believe that as with any other projects, if the government did not prevent banks from providing support, nothing is stopping them, however, they must be partners or have an interest in such projects.

Economically also, central banks and governments are not so interested in cryptocurrency if that is what you want, and you can't blame them because they can't oversight it, so it's not their fault. But you can't expect the central government and central banks to be so particular about cryptocurrency. The reason is clear, they can't just do that for non-centralized entities.

I personally have other thoughts about Banks. And I really don't understand the train of thought conveyed by the OP. Because you should know that nowadays, even many beginners are enthusiastic about investing in crypto by taking loans from banks. And many have succeeded in getting benefits from these loans. I remember in this forum there was a user who made a topic or post about himself taking a loan from the bank to invest in Bitcoin and he bought it for under 30k dollars of course. maybe around 22k or 25k. I forgot the details. But I'm sure that now he has made a lot of profit thanks to the help of the money he borrowed from the bank. However, this is indeed risky. But for that person the Bank loan must have made him a profit now. But that's not the crux of the problem. What I mean is that even though we may not like the centralized system used by banks. But actually, directly and indirectly, we have been helped by the current world banking and financial system, especially digitally. Maybe the emergence of Bitcoin is much more helpful and now I prefer not to save money in the bank. Except for my daily needs in using debit and credit cards. So I think we can't expect much from the Bank. But we also have to remember that the previous bull run of liquidity filling the crypto market was also the result of Central Banks printing money around the world to help people affected by the pandemic and quarantined. and many people used it to invest in crypto at that time.

Banks are not main contributors for cryptocurrency projects' failures. They as projects have to be responsible for their success or failure. Banks if have problems like in 2023 with many bankruptcies can cause big problems for global economics so cryptocurrency projects will not be exceptions and can not avoid bad effects from bank collapses.

However, blaming everything on banks is not true because cryptocurrency projects (altcoins) can be created easily and mostly from scammers. With projects launched by scammers, failures will be those project's endings. Banks don't engage with those failures.

Dead Coins: How Many Cryptocurrencies have Failed? (https://www.coingecko.com/research/publications/how-many-cryptocurrencies-failed)
https://s3.amazonaws.com/assets.coingecko.com/app/public/ckeditor_assets/pictures/5184/original_Dead_Cryptocurrencies_JN_28_Nov_(2).png

In 2021, no big issues with banks globally.

I couldn't understand most of the nonsense you have posted. Money printing creates deflation? Really? ;D
Anyway, I just have a few questions.
Bitcoin/Crypto is supposed to be anti-bank. Why do you think that the crypto projects should rely on the banks for their own success?
Most of the crypto projects were doomed to fail(with or without banks). NFTs, ICOs, pump-and-dump shitcoins, memecoins, shady crypto exchanges, De-Fi, etc. Do you really believe that any bank could help financially a crypto project, that is doomed to fail?
Why do you expect that the banks are supposed to help an industry, that claims to be anti-bank(or the biggest alternative to banks)?
This doesn't make any sense.

Misleading.

Banks might contribute in a significant number of project failures by refusing to provide financing or by deplatforming the project because its doing something they don't like, but ultimately the number 1 reason why projects fail is because they do not achieve their goals. When that happens, you get a bunch of zombie protocols and coins wandering around on CoinMarketCap.

I am actually amazed that there has not been a single attempt to create a Bank for Crypto currency supporters, by large companies that are currently running huge Crypto companies? I know "Circle" did this in their early days, but they quickly stop supporting Crypto.. when they hooked enough clients for their business to run on it's own. (They did a complete 180 on their Bitcoin supporters)

Banks are slowly losing more and more customers, with their misuse of their power and their greedy behavior. Crypto currencies has given them some competition and it opened some people's eyes, by providing an alternative.  ;D

No they are not. The real culprit are those greedy team behind a crypto project that abandoned the development after spending all the funds gathered during ICO then slowly rugged all the investors. Bank doesn’t about about crypto projects because they are just giving liquidity to those who will ask for financial help.

The team itself is the one who do the decision making so they are responsible to the project failure. Most of crypto project that failed are planned to be short term and move on once there’s no more liquidity available for the team to drain. This is the sad reality on crypto investment.

Don't let's assume that banks are tge cause of many failed crypto projects, there are billionaires Investors among them who also move in money to make an Investment in them, if some of them get money from banks i think that's strictly for making business, the banks may be less concerned on what project they are embarking as well, just as you can also use your own reputation to get loan from the bank to engage doing any business of your choice, some projects developers are scammers right from time and were only taking the avenue for a new crypto launch to raise funds and pump the market then leave everything vulnerable all of a sudden.

Banks are the main partners of governments, as both of them work together to increase their own capital (profitability for banks and raise on wages, benefits and jobs spots for government's members), while average citizens get poorer due to losing purchasing power through a weak local currency and accelerated inflation.

Why would they do this? And why would central banks allow them to do this? As you said earlier, banks are only concerned about increasing their own capital. They would never risk their capital in something so volatile, unstable and potentially scammy like providing liquidity to a pump and dump meme token scheme. And actually, common people are losing money because they are fool, greedy or naive for investing in such tokens. It's not even bank's fault in this case.

So, the whole point is that you want to borrow money from banks to venture yourself into cryptocurrency trading world? It really seems you are looking for capital to invest, but in no ways it's advisable to borrow money to trade or gamble, because these are very risky activities which don't guarantee you any returns in counterpart, what means you are likely to end without any money and a big debt to be paid to the bank. Better to not mix those things for your own good...

I don't get the point of what you are saying in this title. Do you mean that many cryptocurrency projects do not succeed because banks do not support new campaign projects here in the crypto space?

How will that happen? The bank is regulated and the cryptocurrency is not, and there seem to be only a few centralized cryptocurrencies as far as I know in this field. So I haven't seen a single bank that has supported a new project campaign in the crypto space; does anyone know OP?

I don't know where do you live, but from where I came from, most of the bank is government owned, so they work under the government, it's kinda impossible that those banks is the enemies of the governments. And seems like in here in your thread you are portraying bank as a very evil entity. Tho I do agree that they are slowing down crypto development (which is understandable because one of their job is to keep fiat stability) but they also has helping so many people starting their business, getting proper education, .etc, with interest of course because they need to make some profit.

why are you blaming the banks when it was the project managers' fault for not developing their projects properly which resulted in many of these crypto projects ending in bankruptcy?

banks are simply institutions that provide financial services to individuals or companies that need their help. it is not their responsibility to pay attention to these crypto projects because they have other responsibilities which are more important. they had a lot of customers and there was no way they would pay attention to things like that.

so instead of blaming banks, you need to find out the reasons why thousands of these crypto projects went bankrupt (that's not millions, but only thousands), then you can see that most of these projects were created just to scam people or just to get lucky from the trend in the crypto market .

again banks dont just create money for themselves and then invest it.. they cant.. so OP's premiss is wrong

however project managers do not go to banks for loans either.. most project managers go to the private sector for funding
things like crowdfunding and seed rounds

the reason crapcoin pump dumps cant get investment is because:
a. project sounds scammy
b. project manager thinks they are jesus and disciples will flock to them
c. project managers do not go out to the private sector and pitch for seed funding

I lost interest reading this right here. But I continued reading. Banks are not the of the government. They are allies. They have been plotting scams for a long time now. Together they do corruptions and rob people. What do you think happens when a bank goes bankrupt? They file the bankruptcy and the government prints more money out of thin air and starts inflation.

Now about the crypto project's failure. It's not about funds. It's about use cases, background, trust, faith etc. If you can create a safe environment where investors can have faith in and trust the project, it will become a success. Otherwise, people will think of it as a Ponzi scam and never look back at it. It's not about banks and they are not obligated to give out money for these things. And remember, as I said, the government and the banks are all related and the governments are against cryptocurrency. That's why they will never let that happen.

And speaking of goals. Maybe one of it is asking assistance to the banks? And there is a reason on why banks reject them. You already said it actually. If a project or company want something badly, they need to work hard on it and try their best. Banks main purpose must be for other things and not to support a project, and I think many project owners already knows this.

Therefore they should save money as much as they can, so that they can support their project on their own or if all fails. But in case they don't have it or they lack in budget and they are lucky that the bank allows to baby sit them, it's also better if they can ask them first about the moves that they will do.

many project managers of crapcoin ICO and pump&dumps are not legit businesses.. silly people think they can go to a bank and ask for a personal loan and not say how they want to repay it. or if they do find out they are describing a business which trigger banks to require business standards of applications, which scammer and schemers to not want to do. thus they will blame the bank for not handing over funds freely..

even fiat based project managers know. if all you have is an idea/prototype/plan but not yet a business. you dont go to a bank. you go to venture capital and promote the idea. not the "business". the venture capital then helps to put a board/chairman inplace to help organise the project into a legit business.

Let's start with the fact that the bank is a direct competitor to cryptocurrencies. And under no circumstances will banks allow cryptocurrency, because this will hit the banking system and turn everything upside down. I noticed that banks often become the main headache for crypto projects.

To be honest, I stopped reading after the first sentence. I don't see a difference between governments and banks, almost the same people (guys in suits) are doing to make rich people richer. Before everything, banks wouldn't be able to move a finger if there were no laws that protect them. What we saw is that when banks make a mistake governments bail them out. So there is no difference between banks and governments, one wouldn't exist without the other.

And many crypto projects fail because they are designed to be a scam, or they have some flaw in design... I don't blame banks & governments for many crypto fails, people who create them are the ones who need to be blamed.

Millions of failed crypto projects? Doesn't make sense I mean it can be in thousands but millions are way too much exaggerated number and what's evenmore surprise is that how can one expect banks to support crypto currency when banks are against it. Even I am being a crypto enthusiast I won't support these meme coins or pump and dump shit coins how can you expect bank to support them and why would they support shit coins? We shouldn't mix centralized and regulated things like bank with unregulated and decentralised cryptos.

You seem quite confused and angry, to come up with a wall of text like that - it's hard to decipher what you are rambling on about. I wonder if you know that most banks are in actual fact publicly listed on the stock market and anyone is free to buy up shares in them, to take a cut of the profits? They also have large portions owned by pension funds, which can make up most of the population, so we all indirectly own shares in them in that manner. But then, are you talking about the central banks of nations or private sector banks, because you have gone on such a rant it is hard to figure out what you're trying to say. Central banks can create more currency, but generally want to keep it stable, and private banks are able to leverage deposits at a ratio defined by the government.

First, try to space your post by using paragraphs so it becomes easy for people to read.

You don't expect banks to give loans to every crypto project that they come across. They're not a charity organization, they're there to make profit.
Also, how do you know that banks did not give loans to some crypto projects? Where does the funding of thise project come from?
Not every coins that collapses was due to lack of funding. Some of the coins are just shit and no amount of funding can save it. Some where created for that purpose because they're scam coins.
I know the kind of institution the banks are but they can't just go about giving loans to every project they see.

Despite the horrid tales of how and why banks caused the failure of millions of crypto projects,  they still remain the main financial issuing and holding institution for every country in the world that still uses fiat as a legal tender.

We just can't do without these banks as it may seem,  why should we think the banks would want their loyal customers of many years, probably since birth leave or adopt a new kind of currency that is of course Crypto with the potential to in coming years, diminish their value and importance?
Hence, why they instead discredit the use of cryptocurrency, don't support its purchase through their banking mediums and try as much with the introduction of CBDC, to show the competition in this case, that they can do or serve better than and are more sufficient than crypto currency.

No, this is not true, banks do not cause Crypto projects to fail, and again we do not have up to a million Crypto project out there. What is causing Crypto projects to fail is greed on the part of developers, there are many examples and has nothing to do with banks. I can also argue that banks is what helps Crypto to reach this current status it reached. The free money from banks is what is used to pump our bags

why would they? banks don’t care about cryptocurrency in fact they probably would prefer if cryptocurrency projects fail people are putting their money into crypto instead of in banks which means they are losing clients



i don’t know if you are aware but most people are still using fiat which is regulated by banks and the government fiat money is still and the only currency that the banks will care about most users of cryptocurrencies use it for the purpose of being anonymous making banks involved will go against this very sentiment

more precisely.. a bank branch in america cares about the dollar. it doesnt care about euro, yen, gold,bitcoin. its job is to cater to dollars
more precisely.. a bank branch in europe cares about the euro. it doesnt care about dollar, yen, gold,bitcoin. its job is to cater to euro
more precisely.. a bank branch in japan cares about the yen. it doesnt care about dollar, euro, gold,bitcoin. its job is to cater to yen

and all three if their regulators say certain activities will cause them more paperwork. like catering to scammers that use any alternative currency or their native currency, they wont allow it, they dont want the headache or the fines

You're seemingly rambling in this post. You could have gone straight to your point.

Anyway, why blame the banks? To hell with those crypto projects that failed. Are the banks the reason why they failed? Are they required to support those projects anyway?

Even if the banks saved those worthless crypto projects and their shitcoins and pump and dump tokens from total failure, what? What's next? Are they contributing to the improvement or adoption of crypto or are they just giving it a bad name? Poor crypto projects need to fail. They failed for a reason and the banks aren't to blame. They also don't care.

The concept that banks are the major cause of cryptocurrency project failures oversimplifies the crypto space's numerous issues. While the banks have restrictions, operate within a regulated system that maintains financial stability. Cryptocurrency initiatives frequently face roadblocks because to market speculation, a lack of transparency, and vulnerability to fraud. Blaming banks for failures ignores the need of prudent project management, investor education, and regulatory transparency. Although creative, the crypto ecosystem demands a more sophisticated strategy for long-term success.

What are you talking about? How can they exactly prove that banks are one of the reasons why it's a big reason why crypto projects fail. Of course they're not immune to fraud, but banks have a way to be able to detect them and find them and that's not even the point of this post anyway. How exactly is it normal that there's a lot of projects that fail?

Free money, doesn't last. The teams behind these crypto projects are the ones that will either bring negative or positive results about their projects, some are brought into the space to cause competition which is clearly stated out, a user will not defile the rules just to please the artists. Crypto projects doesn't fail due to the existences of banks, rather they crumbled and fold up because there's enough barriers that holds most of them back, there are challenges these crypto projects faces and one is the originating during the heavy bearish season.

While banks are guilty of a lot of things, blaming them for the failure of shitcoins does not make sense, bitcoin the first and the best coin in this market did not require from the support of banks, why coins these days require the support of banks when Satoshi neither needed it or wanted it?

For what I can tell this is just a very weak excuse to try to explain away why the majority of shitcoins collapse, when in fact the reason is right in front of us, and that is that shitcoins are worth nothing and they do not deserve to receive a single cent.

Here's how banks are to blame if crypto projects fail? And how can they support crypto where it is illegal in almost every country around the world i don’t understand it. Banks work with their national currency why would they support crypto which has no regulation board.
A lot of scams happen here and being decentralized it cannot be identified so no way to banks support crypto project.

Why do you blame the banks?
Why not blaming the start up to go to a bank and calculating a too slim margin?

I don't really get this, Crypto bank? isn't it counter-intuitive? Crpyto and Bank? Bank is not only meant to store assets, I think that's what you are referring to, but banking is a business which might be suitable with crypto, we already know this.

I don't see any statistics that banks are losing customers, and this doesn't open a huge door to cryptocurrencies as it is not widely accepted in most places but yeah there are a few who accepts it. Still there are a lot of people who uses banks not only to store their money or assets but also uses bank products and services. Search how many bank transfers are happening within the day, compare it to 10 years or more and you'll see it gotten multiply each year.

While some banks may offer loans for crypto-related ventures, this doesn't necessarily equate to endorsement or responsibility. Banks, like any business, prioritize profitability, and their involvement is driven by potential financial gains. This doesn't imply they're blindly supporting every project that comes their way; they conduct their due diligence and assess the risks involved.

Instead of assigning blame solely to banks or developers, it's more productive to acknowledge the shared responsibility of all stakeholders within the crypto ecosystem. Investors need to be more discerning in their choices, developers should prioritize building genuine projects, and regulatory bodies should implement appropriate frameworks to protect consumers.

It is worrisome at were the welfare of the masses is not a considerable problem to the government else every venturous productions either by a private sector such as Bitcoin would be encouraged by the government of the people to make life easy but yet the government itself is deprived selfless adherence accounts in frustrating and making lives uneasy to the people at even when an opportunity is introduced otherwise, the are likely to stand against it.
@ OP, I think the bank is the government and the government is the banks that they works incorporationally in a governing system.
We don't have to expect the government (bank) to give flexible chances to gain value volumes of Bitcoins against it's fiat currencies.
Government rules the world and they governs and takes authoritative decisions over the banks on the operations of the fiats which provides them with the power to staying on top of the World of enrichment. The Fiat had been in existence before the introduction of the Bitcoin digital currency which is on no governing authorities by the government in the sense that the Bitcoin is a decentralized non-custodial currency which has a 100% abortion of the government towards it.
So the government is surely mad at the technological invention of such technology because it serves a threat to them the government (bank).

Hence, let's not forget that Bitcoin is not only limited to serve as alternative means of payments but also am assets which is a program that is to stand against the economical downturns in the global sectors as a whole which has brought about a unique financial global economic system.
Yeah. you don't expect your oppositions to do you one of a favour that is hint you about the ability to throw them overboard. This is the fear and mindset of the government (bank) towards the inventory technology of Bitcoin.
Yet the King and the unifiable currency (Bitcoin) takes the lead to enhancing and maintaining its potentials abilities to stand still firmed and solidly reliable against the value of the governments fiats.
The thing is that Bitcoin stands a threat to the fiat while the fiat stands a barrier to enhance more values to Bitcoin yet Bitcoin stands to take the leads

  You know, I honestly don't understand if you are talking about regulated banks or crypto banks. Also, I don't seem to remember or know if there are any banks that support crypto projects here in the crypto space.

  But I'm not sure. Anyway,  I just know that in these times, most banks in our country are still not really open to Bitcoin or cryptocurrency, except for the Union Bank that is here. Then the rest of the banks closed their systems to the concept of bitcoin, or cryptocurrency.

Banks have no hands in cryptocurrency and in most of the countries, cryptocurrencies already have a lot of restrictions which includes the non involvement of banks in cryptocurrency related transactions and I still maintain my ground that the motive behind a project is what actually determine the success and failure of that project and most of the projects especially with altcoins are mostly the pump and dump hence the greed of the developers as well as their selfish interest is really high.

Banks are not government enemies, but government partners.
Banks are not the cause of the failure of millions of crypto projects.
The enemy of the bank is bitcoin because the Bitcoin system cannot be controlled by a third party.
The failure of the crypto project was due to the party from the project itself.

You are wrong in looking at the bank on these two things.
People who trust banks cannot be blamed because they do not know how to manage their deposit money. If the general public knows how the bank works, their trust in the bank will decrease.
The bank does not have money and money stored in a customer's bank. From the savings of the community they make a turnover of money by giving loans to people who need the percentage of interest charged.

While banks certainly have financial interests to pursue, isn't their entry into the cryptocurrency space a clear indication of blockchain's immense potential? They understand that blockchain technology is the future of finance and are not just toying with the idea; rather, they are strategizing. Indeed, their prudence is understandable, but their participation gives credibility to the cryptocurrency space - a reality that we as enthusiasts want to support and celebrate

However, Investors need to step it up, both in terms of their discernment and their support for the revolutionary potential of blockchain. Developers need to move beyond "genuine projects" to ones that are revolutionary and upend the established order. And those in charge of regulation? Beyond mere protection, they must cultivate an atmosphere that allows blockchain to flourish rather than just endure. This is about more than just managing risk—it's about taking advantage of a chance to completely change the way that finance is done

The thing about banks is that they are sort of like exchanges, they do not care about the price of bitcoin, they do not care about the success of the investors neither, they only care about how much money they are going to make. If bitcoin price going up means more money to a bank, they will support bitcoin going up, if it means more money when bitcoin goes down, they will do everything in their power to make it go down.

A bank doesn't collapse, how many banks have you seen bankrupted? They just get money from the government or taken over by a bigger bank and continue existing, they just prefer it that way. I get that it would not be all that simple, but that's how it works and that's how they make money on the long run.

The problem with banks, as we know them at this point on the historical timeline, is that they're now fully centralized. Almost all the ills throughout history, have come from some form of centralization; whether it be governments, and/or banks. Centralization is a blight upon humanity. BTC is the medicine for this blight.

You can tell TPTB want to push a CBDC, and will be trying to leverage the garbage economic conditions (that they also created) to get there.

BTC is the way.

The biggest issue is the ignorant user of those banks, and Crypto.
Many if not all are just after Fiat, Crypto being a way to get rich quick.

In this paradigm, it would be more correct to state - the culprits of all unsuccessful projects are people :)
Wrong planning, forecasting, implementation, ....
Banks don't grab project managers by the arms. they don't break the code, and they don't interfere with project creation. So the slogan "Banks are the cause of millions of crypto project failures" - sorry, but doubtful....
If we talk about confrontation, it is more correct to say that the world financial system is not very happy about competition, and not controlled. And here at the level of governments and regulators - yes, they can create certain difficulties.

I think the bank has nothing to do with various projects failing. Because bank management predates the history of cryptocurrencies. What is the job of a bank? Depositing their customer's money in a specific account and assisting the customer with various loans. Where no risk exists between holding money and lending. But if you look at cryptocurrency, you will understand that it is a decentralized currency. which has no control. Moreover, cryptos are highly volatile which can cause your assets to increase or decrease significantly at any time. So I think the bank has no direct involvement with the crypto project failing.