Increase in stable coins adoption might just be the key to crpyto dominance.

[Mahanton]

~

What I don't understand in the OP's position is that he is trying to connect the dominance of stablecoins in the digital asset market with the dominance that crypto will have as a direct result of that. This assumes that stablecoins are considered cryptocurrencies when they are just another form of digital fiat currencies.

Though most (or maybe all) of stable coin is centralized, and backed by fiat, as long as they are using Cryptographic encryption and blockchain technology, they still can be considered as cryptocurrency, a centralized crypto currency but still cryptocurrency, and it might sound weird, but there are actually some people who are never learn Bitcoin or Crypto, but they are familiar PayPal, Skrill and other online payment method, with PayPal releasing a cryptocurrency, it might be their first step to learn about crypto. I don't fully agree to every statements by OP, but some part of his opinion actually make sense.

Stable currencies are mainly used in trading platforms, where a novice user cannot understand the basics of their development and will most likely treat them as if they were fiat dollars. PayPal, Neteller, and other financial institutions never have a priority to spread blockchain culture and educate their users, and they do not even provide users with the ability to make payments except through a payment gateway.

Expected for those merchants on having that kind of treatment or behavior on which they cant really be just that easily be adopting or integrating on things which are decentralized or not really that regulated.
As much as possible they would really be avoiding on things which would really be putting up in trouble. Speaking of news and updates then lets stick to Paypal.

PayPal’s PYUSD struggles with early adoption — Nansen
https://cointelegraph.com/news/paypal-pyusd-stablecoin-struggles-with-adoption-nansen

They do even tend to create their own stablecoin which it is always that pegged with dollar and since these coins are really that stable or getting in line with regulation then it has nothing
to  do different on what we do have in fiat. Therefore, it isnt something that would be relevant on speaking about crypto dominance since these arent crypto at all in the first place.

[coupable]

~

What I don't understand in the OP's position is that he is trying to connect the dominance of stablecoins in the digital asset market with the dominance that crypto will have as a direct result of that. This assumes that stablecoins are considered cryptocurrencies when they are just another form of digital fiat currencies.

Though most (or maybe all) of stable coin is centralized, and backed by fiat, as long as they are using Cryptographic encryption and blockchain technology, they still can be considered as cryptocurrency, a centralized crypto currency but still cryptocurrency, and it might sound weird, but there are actually some people who are never learn Bitcoin or Crypto, but they are familiar PayPal, Skrill and other online payment method, with PayPal releasing a cryptocurrency, it might be their first step to learn about crypto. I don't fully agree to every statements by OP, but some part of his opinion actually make sense.

Stable currencies are mainly used in trading platforms, where a novice user cannot understand the basics of their development and will most likely treat them as if they were fiat dollars. PayPal, Neteller, and other financial institutions never have a priority to spread blockchain culture and educate their users, and they do not even provide users with the ability to make payments except through a payment gateway.

In the example of PayPal in particular, it can be said that the company is making attempts to enter the WEB 3 market in different ways. This may be without sufficient knowledge of market conditions and users, or perhaps it is experiments to come up with evaluations on the basis of which the next step is taken. PayPal did not seek to solve this problem by implementing some modernization proposals, especially since it only takes its name from the blockchain, while development and support are completely centralized. This is one of the worst experiences ever, in my opinion.
Expected for those merchants on having that kind of treatment or behavior on which they cant really be just that easily be adopting or integrating on things which are decentralized or not really that regulated.
As much as possible they would really be avoiding on things which would really be putting up in trouble. Speaking of news and updates then lets stick to Paypal.

PayPal’s PYUSD struggles with early adoption — Nansen
https://cointelegraph.com/news/paypal-pyusd-stablecoin-struggles-with-adoption-nansen

They do even tend to create their own stablecoin which it is always that pegged with dollar and since these coins are really that stable or getting in line with regulation then it has nothing
to  do different on what we do have in fiat. Therefore, it isnt something that would be relevant on speaking about crypto dominance since these arent crypto at all in the first place.

[Bushdark]

The adoption of stable coins are already big, you can check in CMC where the top 6 trading volumes are dominated by 4 stable coins, the rest is BTC and ETH. This means most people use it for trading, but I don't think it's related to crypto dominance since no one want to hold stable coins where it's centralized, not making any profit and there's a risk of the project turn to be scam. Don't forget about UST and LUNA.

I was thinking the OP is saying about the adoption of CBDCs of different countries and not stable coins. Although CBDCs are stable coins but they are more of fiat than crypto. The government who is avoiding or fighting crypto is still in the crypto space. Whether with or without facilitation, crypto must be widely adopted and it will have high level of dominance.

Whether what he thought was stable coins or cbdc that can never solve any problem and the government would never see that as an option or a problem to them. People are tire of holding fiats which is almost similar to fiat. Stable coin can not make anyone rich or increase our profits for holding it. I don't see any problem so far that stable coins have solve in alleviating sufferings and increasing the value of our Capital. I would better go for a volatile coins than the stable ones since they have the potential to increase in price.

[gunhell16]

Stablecoins have become a dominant force in the payments industry Op?

What do you mean by that, dude? Because of how many years I've been in this industry, I haven't heard of a single merchant or company that accepts payment in stablecoins. Yes, I know stablecoin can be used as an option payment, but are there many merchants or companies that do this?

As far as I know, there are none, because the only ones that I hear are accepted are Bitcoin, Ethereum, Dao, Monero, and others. But not stablecoins; maybe if there is, the USD or USD is only rarely thought of in my idea.

[Gyfts]

The adoption of stable coins are already big, you can check in CMC where the top 6 trading volumes are dominated by 4 stable coins, the rest is BTC and ETH. This means most people use it for trading, but I don't think it's related to crypto dominance since no one want to hold stable coins where it's centralized, not making any profit and there's a risk of the project turn to be scam. Don't forget about UST and LUNA.

What I don't understand in the OP's position is that he is trying to connect the dominance of stablecoins in the digital asset market with the dominance that crypto will have as a direct result of that. This assumes that stablecoins are considered cryptocurrencies when they are just another form of digital fiat currencies. These stable currencies derive their value from the fiat currency (mainly the dollar), and this also represents their biggest problem at the same time, since most of them are issued without sufficient dollar reserve cover.
As for the uses, the most important areas of using stable currencies is in the field of trading to freeze the price in cases of a sharp decline, and I have not heard that these currencies are used in shops and commercial exchanges in general.

Stablecoins still influence the crypto market even though they're not considered a crypto currency. They are meant to provide a stability arm to volatile cryptos. As much as I'm reluctant towards them, they do more harm than good if your purpose is trading. Average Bitcoin user doesn't need them.

Even if the underlying reserves don't actually amount to the stablecoins in circulation, I suppose the illusion of liquidity is what keeps things going. I'm still waiting on an actual 3rd party audits for Tether's reserves. Seemingly every Tether holder has to at least recognize that the entire system is built on a house of cards.

[Argoo]

Stable coin does not represent the entire cryptocurrency industry and it is no different from currency in its digital form.  so I don't think that proves crypto dominance or that cryptocurrencies are being used more than other traditional means.  even if people use more stablecoins than fiat or banks, I don't see that having any positive effect on making bitcoin more popular.
Ultimately, what is happening with stablecoin usage proves only one thing, people still prefer centralized systems and services over decentralized ones.

Stablecoins first appeared as private and other commercial financial assets, but more recently we have seen the emergence of CBDCs - digitized national currencies of states that are created primarily using blockchain technology. The number of state stablecoins will grow, and since they will compete with commercial ones, states, by regulating and complicating the rules for the circulation of commercial stablecoins, will create tangible obstacles to their development. Therefore, I do not expect strong further development of the current stablecoins, much less their assistance in the dominance of cryptocurrencies in the financial market.

[crwth]

Are there any updates on the stablecoin dominance here? I think it has been a while but there's no significant impact that I have seen or news about it. It's always going to be overpowered by the current payment processors I think. It's definitely a different league IMO if we're going to talk about that. Cryptocurrency has a league of its own.

[lombok]

The increase in crypto dominance is related to money flowing into crypto. Put more plainly it means a lot of people buy crypto and keep or use it. I think it's useless to have lots of stablecoins. Because the stable coin is backed 1:1 by USD. This is the same as the digital dollar, which does not affect crypto dominance though. unless the stablecoin is used to buy crypto, then the crypto is stored or used en masse, such as for shopping, payment and investment. However, for payment, I don't think it can run smoothly. Because many regulations in every country still prohibit crypto as a payment. If crypto is able to become a payment rival like visa and credit cards, I think crypto's dominance can increase exponentially.

[CageMabok]

Stablecoins first appeared as private and other commercial financial assets, but more recently we have seen the emergence of CBDCs - digitized national currencies of states that are created primarily using blockchain technology. The number of state stablecoins will grow, and since they will compete with commercial ones, states, by regulating and complicating the rules for the circulation of commercial stablecoins, will create tangible obstacles to their development. Therefore, I do not expect strong further development of the current stablecoins, much less their assistance in the dominance of cryptocurrencies in the financial market.

Competition will continue to occur in the economic sphere in all countries in several sectors, including in the currency and stablecoin development sector. CBDC is part of a project that will be developed by several countries that have begun to experience progress in the crypto economy sector, because this is being done to make it easier for people to use currency. Even though many people already know about currencies in the crypto space, they can also be used easily by everyone. So competition in any case will still exist and will continue to occur in all sectors in order to be the best and also to attract more users.

[Pejoh Asu]

When many people understand that crypto fluctuations are so high that saving assets in stable coins with long-term goals is the best solution to avoid losses, moreover, most companies that own stable coins have a reputation and legality that makes investors make stable coins the main choice.

[jasonjm]

You can say that stablecoin does help the crypto market during pumping and all, but in the real world, they are not widely accepted compared to Visa and Mastercard. No one is accepting stablecoins in the real world for commodities etc., except a small percentage of crypto sites and casinos. Stablecoins are a bubble; look at the total circulating supply of USDT and compare it to 3 to 4 years ago. They are just minting new USDT along with other stablecoins. Don't you think this could be a scam or something? Stablecoins only mimic the fiat and can be used to store your profit for the short term.
With all the regulations in place, crypto payments are not a global phenomenon. The US government and SEC are going to bust a few scams in the near future. I think CBDC might be the way forward in this regard, along with other countries' stablecoins, but then there will be no privacy of transactions.

[Unbunplease]

Stablecoins are now mainly used to circumvent sanctions or not to keep funds in banks. People do not trust banks very much now. Therefore, if a person has stable coins, it absolutely does not mean that he will buy cryptocurrencies. It is simply a more reliable means of storing value

[shinratensei_]

stablecoin has been indeed having massive growth in term of market capitalization that it far surpass many of the coins out there that its actually quite awesome on its own, even paypal a large company that dominates their own fields are now interested in getting that share of massive growth in stablecoin.
I do think that stablecoin can indeed helps growth of cryptocurrency market capitalization overall by utilizing the technology while also keeping the value from fluctuating that much.
overall as you said it could be the key to crypto dominance, but the benefits for cryptocurrency in general specifically bitcoin and etheruem i think can still be argued.

[vv181]

Would be ironic if cryptocurrency dominance is led and caused by stablecoins. As others already suggest, this is misleading when we try to compare card network settlement rate with stablecoins volume and transaction rate since the metrics are somewhat unclear.

However, we must note that indeed stablecoins do offer more flexibility and transparency, for example, the fact many people can easily exposed to them and utilise them directly is convenient. In some countries where you said it developed one, this exposure surely makes the alternative payment/currency within the market viable to be used. But, cryptocurrency dominance isn't likely to be specifically caused by significant stablecoins adoptions.

[BitcoinTurk]

Stable cryptocurrencies certainly don't have the potential to positively or negatively affect the dominance rate in the cryptocurrency markets in any way because their intended use in today's conditions is only to trade against fiat currencies. Moreover, to make an evaluation according to today's standards, we see that many people use cash, credit card, debit card or check for their daily expenses. In other words, while cryptocurrencies aren't yet fully widespread, no individual uses stable cryptocurrencies as a means of payment method and they aren't accepted as a payment method in many businesses.

On the other hand, we see that stable cryptocurrencies have achieved an important ranking in the cryptocurrency markets due to their transaction volume but this isn't because they are used for earnings or investment but because they represent fiat currency in trading pair parities against all cryptocurrencies. So, in a possible scenario even if any of the stable cryptocurrencies ranks first in this ranking, this will only be because it is used in many transaction parities. It wouldn't be right to think that these cryptocurrencies which have no features or investment opportunities other than representing fiat currency will ever gain leadership in terms of dominance or determine the direction of the market.

[Taskford]

Would be ironic if cryptocurrency dominance is led and caused by stablecoins. As others already suggest, this is misleading when we try to compare card network settlement rate with stablecoins volume and transaction rate since the metrics are somewhat unclear.

However, we must note that indeed stablecoins do offer more flexibility and transparency, for example, the fact many people can easily exposed to them and utilise them directly is convenient. In some countries where you said it developed one, this exposure surely makes the alternative payment/currency within the market viable to be used. But, cryptocurrency dominance isn't likely to be specifically caused by significant stablecoins adoptions.

Maybe they only think about more safer option to choose for since price cannot possibly go down since they only know that price of this coins is stable and they are not afraid to let it rot on their wallets. But they forget the certain aspect on why cryptocurrency became famous and one reason for that is due to its volatility. Many people love to see that since its more profitable than any other asset. So if they choose stable coins over than that for sure they cannot enjoy crypto and other people might choose fiat since its more convenient to use.

I like the current state of stable coin and I think there's nothing to change with it as I don't really trust them since they could still go down if they are affected on some big issues that can question there existence especially if government will take a look at them and declare them as illegal.

[Silberman]

stablecoin has been indeed having massive growth in term of market capitalization that it far surpass many of the coins out there that its actually quite awesome on its own, even paypal a large company that dominates their own fields are now interested in getting that share of massive growth in stablecoin.
I do think that stablecoin can indeed helps growth of cryptocurrency market capitalization overall by utilizing the technology while also keeping the value from fluctuating that much.
overall as you said it could be the key to crypto dominance, but the benefits for cryptocurrency in general specifically bitcoin and etheruem i think can still be argued.

Stable coins have their uses and that is undeniable, as they allow you to move back to a cryptocurrency that behaves similarly to fiat on the moments you may not like to be invested in this market as it is too volatile for your tastes, however I do not really see too much of a point to use stable coins in the same way you would use your fiat, since in that case it would be better to just use your fiat currencies instead, however I could see some people doing this and it could be one of the necessary steps on our quest to use bitcoin in our everyday lives.

[lionheart78]

As much as possible they would really be avoiding on things which would really be putting up in trouble. Speaking of news and updates then lets stick to Paypal.

PayPal’s PYUSD struggles with early adoption — Nansen
https://cointelegraph.com/news/paypal-pyusd-stablecoin-struggles-with-adoption-nansen

They do even tend to create their own stablecoin which it is always that pegged with dollar and since these coins are really that stable or getting in line with regulation then it has nothing
to  do different on what we do have in fiat. Therefore, it isnt something that would be relevant on speaking about crypto dominance since these arent crypto at all in the first place.

Merchants are avoiding PYUSD simply because they had or heard bad experiences from the client of Paypal.  Many of Paypal users know that this company freezes accounts and even suspend them, so they may probably think the same thing may happen with PYUSD since its network can freeze and confiscate fund in any accounts/addresses by simply blocklisting it to the network..

[JeffBrad12]

that I feel somehow true, it even good for remmittances, the fact that its available in various blockchain means it can get better utilized than using paypal for remmitances because the cheap fees required.
its not like using ordinary cryptocurrency where the prices also fluctuates as well its just overall good at some specific things.
but of course it kinda sucked for investment even the staking aren't really great at making the profits.
there are also many controversies surrounding this coin though.
I personally when it comes to investment i will invest in crypto like bitcoin and ethereum and consider stablecoin just a tool.

[alani123]

If you go to Turkey, where the local government issued currency isn't fairing so good, you'll see exchange offices that offer to fill your crypto wallet with Tether USD in exchange for cash. This was super interesting to see. Stablecoin usage is indeed something in high demand, and the ease of use crypto offers compared to traditional banking to those familiar with technology is indeed noteworthy. However, there's only certain audiences that would be more interested in that. For instance, if I live in a developed country, I can transact money around the world  and access very good exchange rates for different FIAT currencies just with a bank account and a couple of online services.

For crypto to take over as a viable payment method in developed countries, something better than just stablecoins would have to exist. And given bitcoin's decentralized nature though, I don't think establishing institutions would help. What might help bitcoin receive more adoption is if the financial system would either collapse or implode by establishing even more authoritarian measures than what we face today. But we can't really do much to bring another financial crises on our own. The good (or bad) thing is that they tend to come on their own.