Impact of USDC - Circle - & other Stable coins. Dangerous.

[timotron]

What is with this double and triple posts mate? Couldn't you just sum up your comments in a single post?
Stablecoins are dangerous only if there is a condition like "bank rush" (or coin rush?) because I'm pretty sure they also implement the "fractional reserve" system.
For every USDT, USDC, etc., they won't back it 1:1 otherwise they won't get any profit.

Go it, Will try to resume comments. Sorry if this was annoying for you.

For me, it does not really make a difference if they back the stablecoins or not.

Backed by a non-limit printed dollar ?? makes 0 sense for me.

inflation welcome in crypto!

[1713560453]

1713560453

[1713560453]

1713560453

[1713560453]

1713560453

[1713560453]

1713560453

[1713560453]

1713560453

[jseverson]

Backed by a non-limit printed dollar ?? makes 0 sense for me.

inflation welcome in crypto!

Well the general idea is that these stablecoins are far easier to trade than actual USD. Dealing with fiat balance can be tricky for some exchanges, so they would prefer to keep your fiat and track your balance with altcoins instead. This way, they're also technically not keeping your money for you. These are basically strictly for trading purposes and have little use otherwise, meaning inflation isn't an issue.

The issue has always been that they can simply be printed out of thin air without repercussions (if they're pegged to the USD, their supply and demand won't dictate their value), unlike actual fiat, if operated without transparency. If Tether had been transparent and open to audits, their reputation would be far better.

[stompix]

Backed by a non-limit printed dollar ?? makes 0 sense for me.

inflation welcome in crypto!

These are basically strictly for trading purposes and have little use otherwise, meaning inflation isn't an issue.
~

Well, it was supposed to not be an issue, although if you're pegged to a currency that experiences inflation it will also be affected. But in reality, because nobody was taken tether, people were trying to sell it at 90% of the value, just like Venezuelans do each day with their bolivar, offering more and more because nobody is selling goods in exchange at yesterday's prices. Imagine what is going in the heads of those that we're avoiding a bitcoin drop by holding tether on Monday

If Tether had been transparent and open to audits, their reputation would be far better.

If that would have happened we wouldn't have tether around anymore  
 

I guess a lot of people where moving their assets to other stablecoins like TUSD

Oh, we have another stablecrapcoin out there?

[timotron]

Backed by a non-limit printed dollar ?? makes 0 sense for me.

inflation welcome in crypto!

Well the general idea is that these stablecoins are far easier to trade than actual USD. Dealing with fiat balance can be tricky for some exchanges, so they would prefer to keep your fiat and track your balance with altcoins instead. This way, they're also technically not keeping your money for you. These are basically strictly for trading purposes and have little use otherwise, meaning inflation isn't an issue.

The issue has always been that they can simply be printed out of thin air without repercussions (if they're pegged to the USD, their supply and demand won't dictate their value), unlike actual fiat, if operated without transparency. If Tether had been transparent and open to audits, their reputation would be far better.

Yeah, the use case is there. But, Sorry, my intention with "inflation" was, in some way, referred to how, now we have a door open into the crypto sphere, more control, a cane of power. Indirectly the "money printer" now have an easy access to trading. Do you trust them?

Why do we HAVE TO trust them! (?)

[jseverson]

Well, it was supposed to not be an issue, although if you're pegged to a currency that experiences inflation it will also be affected. But in reality, because nobody was taken tether, people were trying to sell it at 90% of the value, just like Venezuelans do each day with their bolivar, offering more and more because nobody is selling goods in exchange at yesterday's prices. Imagine what is going in the heads of those that we're avoiding a bitcoin drop by holding tether on Monday

Yeah, I kind of meant that inflation doesn't matter in a sense that it's not a tool to escape inflation like other cryptos are (for some people anyway). But yeah these pegs are never going to work if they're not redeemable lol.

If that would have happened we wouldn't have tether around anymore  

Lmfao touche.

Why do we HAVE TO trust them! (?)

Well you don't really have to trust anything and you're absolutely correct to be wary of them. I personally think they're bad news unless done correctly, which they aren't. I was just pointing out that they exist because there's demand for them.

[Betwrong]

~

Why do we HAVE TO trust them! (?)

Well you don't really have to trust anything and you're absolutely correct to be wary of them. I personally think they're bad news unless done correctly, which they aren't. I was just pointing out that they exist because there's demand for them.

With some effort I can understand the demand for one of them, but why there are so many of them and why even more are going to be issued? Does this mean that previously issued "stable" coins need improvement? Or, maybe, it means that older coins have compromised their reputation already and people expect that new ones will be more trusted?

Actually I'm not against those coins in general, because I think they can be a stepping stone towards wider crypto adoption. Most people can't trust something as unstable as current cryptocurrencies, so maybe for many of them "stable" coins can become first crypto they are really not afraid to buy. I just don't want those coins to fail people's expectations because if that happens, they will abandon crypto market for a very long time, if not forever.

[CryptoAssasin]

Issuing those stable coins could bring positive or negative impacts on the long run and you actually have a point that it could use a  manipulative acts, but will it? Will those stable coins willing to destroy their reputation just like what happened to Tether? Are they just created for that manipulative acts or here to stay for cryptocurrency to get a steady price in the long run? All we need is a stable coins that we can rely in times of bears attacks and it saves out butt for huge losses or higher profits right? I don't think that we should call it manipulative acts but a supportive act for crypto investors.

[jseverson]

With some effort I can understand the demand for one of them, but why there are so many of them and why even more are going to be issued? Does this mean that previously issued "stable" coins need improvement? Or, maybe, it means that older coins have compromised their reputation already and people expect that new ones will be more trusted?

Probably because issuers are making money out of them? Having their own must strengthen their ecosystem or something because they won't have to rely on someone else's.

Newer ones like Circle's USDC are apparently more trustworthy because they're issued by a regulated entity, but I'd have to read up more about them. USDC specifically is also trading above the dollar right now which might mean that people are dropping USDT for them.

[Buttermellow]

This may seem possible that in the near future they could manipulate market price for cryptocurrency especially bitcoin but they will get some difficulties I guess for bitcoin has a huge market price already and hard to bring down its market price or to play with around. It may be possible to other altcoins in the market though.

[figmentofmyass]

For me, it does not really make a difference if they back the stablecoins or not.

Backed by a non-limit printed dollar ?? makes 0 sense for me.

inflation welcome in crypto!

that's how it's always been. what do you think has been backing USD balances at bitfinex all these years? or for that matter, gox?

the only difference between your bitfinex USD balance and USDT is whether you can send it over a blockchain. exchanges could be run as fractional reserves and can inflate prices with unbacked trading as well---on top of backing their USD balances with "non-limit printed dollars". stablecoins don't really change anything in that regard.

[Betwrong]

With some effort I can understand the demand for one of them, but why there are so many of them and why even more are going to be issued? Does this mean that previously issued "stable" coins need improvement? Or, maybe, it means that older coins have compromised their reputation already and people expect that new ones will be more trusted?

Probably because issuers are making money out of them? Having their own must strengthen their ecosystem or something because they won't have to rely on someone else's.

Newer ones like Circle's USDC are apparently more trustworthy because they're issued by a regulated entity, but I'd have to read up more about them. USDC specifically is also trading above the dollar right now which might mean that people are dropping USDT for them.

This is what I really can't understand. What was the point of buying USDC for $1.11, like it was traded 3 days ago with almost $10 million daily volume, if it was obvious that the coin would cost exactly $1 soon, because it is a "stable coin" by definition? What were the expectations of those people who were buying at $1.11? Were they thinking that USDC would go to $2, or what? And today, when it is $1.01 can we say that they lost 10% of their investment, Or is it more complicated than that?

[stompix]

This is what I really can't understand. What was the point of buying USDC for $1.11, like it was traded 3 days ago with almost $10 million daily volume, if it was obvious that the coin would cost exactly $1 soon, because it is a "stable coin" by definition? What were the expectations of those people who were buying at $1.11? Were they thinking that USDC would go to $2, or what? And today, when it is $1.01 can we say that they lost 10% of their investment, Or is it more complicated than that?

I swear, if I see only one guy posting that he has bought USDC at 1.0whatever but it will soon moon or mars or ur anus, I'll start searching for a script where you don't ignore people, you add those whose posts you want to read. One such post and I'll lose hope .....

With some effort I can understand the demand for one of them, but why there are so many of them and why even more are going to be issued? Does this mean that previously issued "stable" coins need improvement? Or, maybe, it means that older coins have compromised their reputation already and people expect that new ones will be more trusted?

Now, this one is easy...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2016/08/01/starbucks-holds-more-cash-than-many-banks-infographic/#43f481cb231a

Starbuck's customers in the U.S. have loaded at least $1.2 billion onto the company's cards and app.

Every guy that is losing his coins (and a lot of morons do) means coins that will never be redeemed, just like cash on lost or forgotten Starbucks cards. Add fractions of USDC that people will never bother to move around, some that will never be changed for $ again waiting for god knows what and if we think of those as only 3-5% of the total, when those are put against 10-20 billion, it makes one pretty nice sum of money.

And there are the fees...
Bank Wire - Redeem 0.1%  ($50 minimum) and the tx fees.

[timotron]

not a week after launch and we see some FUD around stablecoins, Was this expected?

https://www.chepicap.com/en/news/4491/stabelcoins-accused-of-not-publishing-audits-cameron-winklevoss-steps-in.html

[Betwrong]

~

With some effort I can understand the demand for one of them, but why there are so many of them and why even more are going to be issued? Does this mean that previously issued "stable" coins need improvement? Or, maybe, it means that older coins have compromised their reputation already and people expect that new ones will be more trusted?

Now, this one is easy...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2016/08/01/starbucks-holds-more-cash-than-many-banks-infographic/#43f481cb231a

Starbuck's customers in the U.S. have loaded at least $1.2 billion onto the company's cards and app.

Every guy that is losing his coins (and a lot of morons do) means coins that will never be redeemed, just like cash on lost or forgotten Starbucks cards. Add fractions of USDC that people will never bother to move around, some that will never be changed for $ again waiting for god knows what and if we think of those as only 3-5% of the total, when those are put against 10-20 billion, it makes one pretty nice sum of money.

And there are the fees...
Bank Wire - Redeem 0.1%  ($50 minimum) and the tx fees.

First off, thanks for your explanations! Now, it's an understandable move on the part of the issuers of new "stable" coins, to make new ones for people to buy. But what makes them(issuers) so sure people would buy them? If there are people who love those coins so much why wouldn't they stick to the old ones? It is always risky to invest in something new and untried, and seeing that USDT has been around for some time, why look for other options? Normally, although taking risks, people expect big gains when investing in new altcoins. But what gain can one expect investing in a "stable" coin?

[timotron]

First off, thanks for your explanations! Now, it's an understandable move on the part of the issuers of new "stable" coins, to make new ones for people to buy. But what makes them(issuers) so sure people would buy them? If there are people who love those coins so much why wouldn't they stick to the old ones? It is always risky to invest in something new and untried, and seeing that USDT has been around for some time, why look for other options? Normally, although taking risks, people expect big gains when investing in new altcoins. But what gain can one expect investing in a "stable" coin?

Gains with stablecoin are made by shorting most cases, but you can see the price is just stable to 1USD, not to some amount of Btc



The yellow line is VS BTC, and there are chances to make some profits


and here another example.



Yellow again for VSBTC

Got it?

[setialovers]

I think some developers or company launching their own stable coin because they dont trust on others stable coin. Many stable coin in market right now and it will flooding market will stable coin. It will give good impact for bitcoin or others good coin but its hard to predict in long term because the world flooding with USD paper money too

[pumbum]

this is a new round of events, as in 2017 there were events around bitcoin forks. so you just need to get used to the fact that some events need to be discussed

[timotron]

One more opinion about Stable Coins or Disney dollars has they call it.

I like this Disney name for the StableCoins, they are really similar to Mickey mouse.

https://bitcoinist.com/stablecoins-crypto-fiatcoins/

[timotron]

Some news about Stablecoins:

https://ethereumworldnews.com/increased-competition-for-tether-as-another-stablecoin-goes-live-offering-better-transparency/

and a new Stablecoin soon: https://medium.com/stably-blog/stably-announces-early-access-launch-of-1-1-usd-pegged-cryptocurrency-stableusd-usds-990c538a8b8c

I lost track of Stablecoins, how many are there now?

[gentlemand]

The primary risk of ever more stablecoins is splintering their markets into a bunch of tiny and weak ones. I see no reason why any self respecting exchange would list multiple coins. All they're doing it creating an incomprehensible mess with piddling volumes.

Absolutely no way would places like Gemini or Circle gaily issue unbacked coins. It's not going to happen. They have heavyweight investors and regulators up their arse. They'll be a level of legitimacy higher than anything that's come before.

Another risk is running them on ETH. If you have another cryptokitties then your quasi dollar gets stuck in a swamp of txs. And I hope those contracts are watertight as well.