[05-03-2019] Coinbase CEO Suggests Using USDC Stablecoin Instead Of Tether

[bbc.reporter]

It begins. Tether's loss will be its competition's gain. Expect these paid for articles from the other stablecoin issuers who want to see Tether go down and die.

They are not real articles. They might be paid for promotional ads that are made to appear like news articles.



Brian Armstrong, the CEO of cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase, is urging cryptocurrency users to use more trustworthy stablecoins such as Coinbase’s own USD Coin (USDC), instead of the Tether (USDT) stablecoin.

Coinbase’s USD Coin is considered to be a far better stablecoin solution than Tether, because it is actually audited and backed 1:1 by US dollars, unlike Tether which is not actually backed 1:1.

The only downside to USDC, when compared to Tether, is that it’s not traded on as many cryptocurrency exchanges. However, it is still traded on the world’s largest crypto exchange, Binance, as well as Poloniex and Coinbase.

Read in full https://www.investinblockchain.com/coinbase-ceo-suggests-using-usdc-stablecoin-instead-of-tether/

[CryptoBry]

They are not real articles. They might be paid for promotional ads that are made to appear like news articles.

I am sure they are promotional articles published in order to make the buzz what they are offering and to gain more share of the market taking away from Tether more business volume and loyalty. This and more is happening because the competitors are aware that Tether is weakening and they are waiting for the time when Tether loyal users will be cutting the umbilical cord and make the massive exodus away from the Tether ecosystem. The stablecoin market is very big and there are many big players on the market with many backed by bigger parent companies. The ultimate winners here hopefully are the users of such stablecoins as they are being offered with better and more transparent services and products.

[buwaytress]

Of course they're not "real" articles;) Those are few and far between. But to be fair, it's not THAT much different in the news world outside of crypto! And should we be surprised the CEO of possibly the most corporate form of a crypto exchange is touting a competitor to a scandalised company? Tether and Bitfinex have somehow survived so much battering in the past couple of years I'm really surprised they're still standing. I guess people truly don't care about the risks and will use whatever's most convenient for them.

[pokermaniacxxx]

All traders know that Tether is much better than many other stablecoins, even now when it became known that it is backed by USD by 76% ( in this I see only advantages). USDT has become more transparent for everyone. USDC should follow suit. I don't think they're clean.

[o_e_l_e_o]

All traders know that Tether is much better than many other stablecoins, even now when it became known that it is backed by USD by 76% ( in this I see only advantages). USDT has become more transparent for everyone.

What are you talking about? In what way is having 25% your tokens completely unsecured advantageous? In what way is continually refusing to allow an independent audit transparent? In what way does lying to your customers for years, silently changing your terms and conditions, backing away from your promises, and printing money out of thin air, make you better than your competitors?

Tether is looking more and more like a scam every day. I can't understand why anyone in their right mind would continue to use it.

[gentlemand]

By this point I expected USDT alternatives to have a much stronger position. I guess the reason that is not the case is because the issuers are so uptight that many would prefer Tether's non shit giving, though of course that changes if you attempt to turn it into real dollars.

I supposed much of that is because they theoretically guarantee real dollars without fail whereas Tether is largely a mystery. But when you read tales of people being denied conversions because it makes their market cap look bad it combines the worst aspects of crypto and fiat all in the hands of one very twitchy entity.

https://www.coindesk.com/winklevoss-crypto-gemini-gusd-stablecoin-redemption

Tether gives you access to many, many more markets plus the Kraken USD/USDT market so you may never have to deal with Tether the company. That's not the case with the others.

[figmentofmyass]

By this point I expected USDT alternatives to have a much stronger position. I guess the reason that is not the case is because the issuers are so uptight that many would prefer Tether's non shit giving, though of course that changes if you attempt to turn it into real dollars.

that's the key right there. all the "legit" companies like gemini, paxos, coinbase......they're making it hellish to use their services with their meddling and account freezing. good luck moving millions of dollars through them. you'll probably end up on a fucking FBI watchlist. say what you will about tether, but they don't screw people like these companies do. that naturally leads to a situation where tether has better market liquidity.

[pixie85]

All traders know that Tether is much better than many other stablecoins, even now when it became known that it is backed by USD by 76% ( in this I see only advantages). USDT has become more transparent for everyone.

What are you talking about? In what way is having 25% your tokens completely unsecured advantageous? In what way is continually refusing to allow an independent audit transparent? In what way does lying to your customers for years, silently changing your terms and conditions, backing away from your promises, and printing money out of thin air, make you better than your competitors?

Tether is looking more and more like a scam every day. I can't understand why anyone in their right mind would continue to use it.

He will think it's all fine until he decides to withdraw to USD and finds out he's in that 25% with no backing and he's money is gone.

You lend someone some money and he brings back 75% and says he lost the rest. When does it become a bad thing when you kick his ass for it? When he loses 30% or 35% because 25% is fine for some people so maybe their limit is at 30? If USDT is OK now when does it stop being OK?

[gentlemand]

that's the key right there. all the "legit" companies like gemini, paxos, coinbase......they're making it hellish to use their services with their meddling and account freezing. good luck moving millions of dollars through them. you'll probably end up on a fucking FBI watchlist. say what you will about tether, but they don't screw people like these companies do. that naturally leads to a situation where tether has better market liquidity.

Either through wisdom or ignorance, Tether have kept use and redemption separated. That's a very clever move and probably the key to their ongoing appeal. I can't see any of the alternatives being willing or able to go down that road.

[bbc.reporter]

All traders know that Tether is much better than many other stablecoins, even now when it became known that it is backed by USD by 76% ( in this I see only advantages). USDT has become more transparent for everyone.

What are you talking about? In what way is having 25% your tokens completely unsecured advantageous? In what way is continually refusing to allow an independent audit transparent? In what way does lying to your customers for years, silently changing your terms and conditions, backing away from your promises, and printing money out of thin air, make you better than your competitors?

Tether is looking more and more like a scam every day. I can't understand why anyone in their right mind would continue to use it.

He will think it's all fine until he decides to withdraw to USD and finds out he's in that 25% with no backing and he's money is gone.

You lend someone some money and he brings back 75% and says he lost the rest. When does it become a bad thing when you kick his ass for it? When he loses 30% or 35% because 25% is fine for some people so maybe their limit is at 30? If USDT is OK now when does it stop being OK?

Agreed to the suggestions that Tether needs to be more transparent and should be audited, however, I reckon that it has become very clear that the issue is not about Tether printing USDT out of nothing. That was fud. The real issue is Bitfinex's $850m was taken by a questionable money processor and covered it by taking a loan from their Tether fund.

Also does the New York attorney general have the power to charge Bitfinex with something? Can they enforce New York regulations on a company based in Hong Kong? What caused this, are there Bitfinex users from New York?

I reckon this might be gross overreach by the US government. Let us celebrate if Bitfnex wins the case hehehe.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I reckon that it has become very clear that the issue is not about Tether printing USDT out of nothing. That was fud.

I'm not so sure. Tether quietly changed their terms and conditions a few weeks ago from "every USDT is backed up 1-to-1 with USD" to "USDT is backed up with a variety of other assets which may include other cryptocurrencies" (obviously I'm paraphrasing here). If you are backing up Tether with other cryptocurrencies, then what is stopping them printing some USDT out of nothing, using it to buy bitcoin, and then claiming the USDT is fully backed up with said bitcoin as per their terms and conditions.

Given the seemingly endless list of shady activities that Bitfinex and Tether seem happy to engage in, how can you be sure they haven't done what I've just described?

[gentlemand]

Given the seemingly endless list of shady activities that Bitfinex and Tether seem happy to engage in, how can you be sure they haven't done what I've just described?

The thing with Tether is that we're never really going to know anything. I can certainly believe it's been fully backed at certain points, but that doesn't mean they didn't leave gaping holes in the past that were subsequently refilled. This present situation could be just another example.

[figmentofmyass]

Given the seemingly endless list of shady activities that Bitfinex and Tether seem happy to engage in, how can you be sure they haven't done what I've just described?

The thing with Tether is that we're never really going to know anything. I can certainly believe it's been fully backed at certain points, but that doesn't mean they didn't leave gaping holes in the past that were subsequently refilled. This present situation could be just another example.

people have always speculated that tether intentionally ran a fractional reserve. i always thought that idea was ridiculous. to what ends?

the real fundamental problem has always been exactly what we're seeing now. banking like criminals and rubbing elbows with drug cartels will eventually get your accounts seized by police. tether simply isn't profitable enough (especially because it's so hard for them to move money) to recover from endless seizures or to cover seizures that bitfinex suffers from.

becoming insolvent is an eventuality for both companies.

[bbc.reporter]

I reckon that it has become very clear that the issue is not about Tether printing USDT out of nothing. That was fud.

I'm not so sure. Tether quietly changed their terms and conditions a few weeks ago from "every USDT is backed up 1-to-1 with USD" to "USDT is backed up with a variety of other assets which may include other cryptocurrencies" (obviously I'm paraphrasing here). If you are backing up Tether with other cryptocurrencies, then what is stopping them printing some USDT out of nothing, using it to buy bitcoin, and then claiming the USDT is fully backed up with said bitcoin as per their terms and conditions.

Given the seemingly endless list of shady activities that Bitfinex and Tether seem happy to engage in, how can you be sure they haven't done what I've just described?

I reckon Tether changed their terms when Bitfnex was already certain that they would not easily get the $850m of Bitfinex funds entrusted to Crypto Capital and begun to loan some money from Tether's funds.