Are we focusing on the wrong market in crypto?

[lizarder]

Most headlines talk about ETFs, Wall Street adoption, and U.S. regulations… but what if the real crypto story is in developing countries? In places like Argentina, Nigeria, and even here in the Philippines, people use crypto for survival -  fighting inflation, sending remittances, and daily expenses.

So here’s the question: is the future of crypto shaped by Wall Street investors, or by ordinary people in weaker economies who actually use it?

It should be good because the presence of Bitcoin can change the view of many people to achieve a better life, especially regarding crypto to survive against inflation, send money, and meet daily needs. But for the country you mentioned it might take time to achieve it because it needs resources to run the concept so that it can run well, even though some people may be pessimistic that it will happen, but no one knows how in the future in that country it can run well.

Everything is interconnected because with the occurrence of widespread adoption, the Bitcoin journey itself should be better. The general public is also one of the reasons why Bitcoin can be like now because the adoption that occurs actually makes Bitcoin increasingly gain trust. Developed countries and developing countries need enough bitcoin in the general category because this is related to the pattern of adoption that occurs.

[Marvell1]

In countries with devaluing local currencies, they can use stable coins that are backed by US dollar to hedge against inflation. This is happening in countries like Argentina and Nigeria. But crypto is also still useful in developed countries like United States because not only fiat backed stable coins are cryptocurrencies.

But the point of the topic is comparing whether developed countries are using adoption more than developing ones. The real purpose of crypto is adoption - investment is only secondary, since price growth comes from demand created by adoption. And so far, it’s the smaller countries that are showing what real adoption looks like, not the ETFs.

ETFs are just paper exposure. Real adoption happens on the ground, when people actually use crypto in their daily lives.

Although bitcoin adoption in developing countries is growing faster in terms of number of users than in developed countries. But when it comes to the financial market, the main factor that drives an asset’s value up is capital and cash flow, not the number of users. Therefore, developed countries will play a more important role in the development and adoption of bitcoin.

The question for you is, what if there is no capital flow from developed countries and pushes the price of bitcoin to thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars. Do you think developing countries will adopt bitcoin? I don't think they'll need bitcoin if its value doesn't increase to help them cope with inflation or if it doesn't generate enough returns to help them escape poverty. I believe bitcoin adoption there will not grow as fast if bitcoin price does not increase because their goal is profit.

[bangjoe]

Most headlines talk about ETFs, Wall Street adoption, and U.S. regulations… but what if the real crypto story is in developing countries? In places like Argentina, Nigeria, and even here in the Philippines, people use crypto for survival -  fighting inflation, sending remittances, and daily expenses.

So here’s the question: is the future of crypto shaped by Wall Street investors, or by ordinary people in weaker economies who actually use it?

What do you think?

https://cointelegraph.com/news/wrong-crypto-market

The US and EU are looking the wrong way
Compare the above with the US and EU, where Bitcoin and Ethereum exchange-traded funds, institutional custody and regulatory turf wars usually dominate discussions about digital assets.

This is a misreading of the global landscape. These issues may matter for major financial markets, but they do little for the unbanked in one part of the world or the remittance sender and gig worker in another.

Of course, that's a very good thing, but right and wrong are subjective, depending on each person's personal perspective in assessing all of this.

I am personally from Indonesia, which is a developing country, and Bitcoin is indeed useful for me as a tool to prevent the depreciation of my money. Bitcoin has allowed my money to survive and grow so far, and for us in developing countries, it is very important to be able to take advantage of Bitcoin.

If you want to discuss crypto as a whole, it would be better to move the thread. Thank you.

[Tmoonz]

So here’s the question: is the future of crypto shaped by Wall Street investors, or by ordinary people in weaker economies who actually use it?

What do you think?

I believe it is both shaped by Wall Street investors and ordinary people.  Any kind of adoption is welcome in a growing industry.  In a developing country, I only see them utilize new technology to take advantage of the opportunity given by it.  There is no difference in how people on Wall Street engage in it, since both are for profit, just in a different approach.

If both sides prosper and develop isn't it a good thing for Bitcoin?

It is a good thing for Bitcoin and for all maximizing it's utility, it is only natural that every sector will always option for an upgrading system to which that is already working for a new better experience and efficiency, yes the approach can be different and of course can happen in different pacing while it existence and adoption is to add more values which doesn't necessarily matter how it happens.

[Porfirii]

In countries with devaluing local currencies, they can use stable coins that are backed by US dollar to hedge against inflation. This is happening in countries like Argentina and Nigeria. But crypto is also still useful in developed countries like United States because not only fiat backed stable coins are cryptocurrencies.

As a Spaniard citizen, I am very active in the Spanish board and for that reason I can read firsthand the opinions and experiences of fellows who live in countries where the local country is devaluing terribly in Latin America, who talk about the store of value that are stablecoins for them, and very peculiar stories like the way mining with some cheap laptops the Government gave students for school allowed them to make ends meet.

I also talk a lot with my African and Shouthern Asian colleagues from the AoBT, and what crypto is doing for many millions of people who didn't have access to banks and credits is a blessing.

[Donneski]

So here’s the question: is the future of crypto shaped by Wall Street investors, or by ordinary people in weaker economies who actually use it?

What do you think?

Honestly, I think both sides are important but in different ways. Wall Street investors and institutions bring in liquidity, infrastructure and the kind of recognition that helps crypto stand the test of time. Without that, adoption might stay limited to small pockets. But at the same time, when you look at how people in countries like Nigeria, Argentina or the Philippines are using crypto in their day-to-day activities, you realize that’s the real heartbeat of this technology. For them it’s not about speculation or ETFs rather, they literally see crypto as a tool to fight inflation, send remittances or just protect savings. Maybe the future of crypto isn’t one or the other but both working together with the big players building the rails while the everyday users give it real purpose.

[Momentummom]

Could be sometimes everyone chases altcoins or trendy projects while the real opportunities are in BTC, infrastructure, or underrated chains. Focus matters more than hype.

[Plaguedeath]

Well they have a hidden reason why they did that.

If they give a big spotlight to countries who use Bitcoin as legal tender or fight against inflation from their local currency, this could make many countries will follow the same path and make the government lost their power to control the whole thing.

What they promote is something that make the government able to control Bitcoin, that's why they promote about ETFs.

[coolcoinz]

We aren't focusing on it, it's the media bombarding us with news. Who controls the media controls the narrative.

Remember when the US media screamed at you to get vaccinated because covid was going to kill you otherwise? When you're bombarded with certain narrative you should think twice because that's what they want you to think about and take for granted. When they were telling you that Trump would create a national bitcoin reserve that's when BlackRock was making money selling ETF shares. They wanted that narrative. 6 months later there's no reserve at all. The recent news is they haven't done anything in the matter.

[Fiatless]

Well they have a hidden reason why they did that.

If they give a big spotlight to countries who use Bitcoin as legal tender or fight against inflation from their local currency, this could make many countries will follow the same path and make the government lost their power to control the whole thing.

What they promote is something that make the government able to control Bitcoin, that's why they promote about ETFs.

In addition, the focus is usually on big firms investing huge amounts in Bitcoin. This is because it is such news that has an influence on the market. Bitcoin adoption or use in these developing countries would have no big effect on the market. They want to promote news that will lead to FUD or FOMO to enable them to manipulate the market. When my country's currency lost about 20% in a few months, Bitcoin was the most popular hedge against inflation. But it didn't receive publicity like ETF.

[r_victory]

In the current scenario, the daily use of cryptocurrencies as a means of payment, except in specific cases as mentioned, is minimal. Most investors buy to hold, hoping for a further price rise (speculation). This ultimately denies cryptocurrencies their true usefulness and function. Those who have to "spend" them to survive are actually missing out on this opportunity for appreciation. I speak from personal experience, as I only manage to save a small portion of what I earn, not only from signature but also from my work as a translator.

[Z-tight]

The thing is, the bigger the country and economy, the bigger the news of crypto adoption coming out from there. I.e. the U.S. is a super power country, so crypto adoption in the U.S. will be more pleasing to the ear and more talked about in the crypto community than adoption coming from a third world country for example.

However, it does not mean that one matters less, but it is what it is. As soon as the U.S. made plans for a BTC strategic reserve, you can see how many countries have taken similar steps. Bigger countries have bigger influence, it is that simple.

[Stalker22]

~

Yeah. Its more like a gold rush, not really a currency.  People buy it hoping the price goes up, so nobody wants to spend it.

Your experience shows this really well.  If you use it for daily stuff, you miss out on its potential appreciation.  Thats a problem, and its why, at the moment, bitcoin is mostly used for speculation.

[Hamza2424]

Most headlines talk about ETFs, Wall Street adoption, and U.S. regulations… but what if the real crypto story is in developing countries? In places like Argentina, Nigeria, and even here in the Philippines, people use crypto for survival -  fighting inflation, sending remittances, and daily expenses.

So here’s the question: is the future of crypto shaped by Wall Street investors, or by ordinary people in weaker economies who actually use it?

What do you think?

That is really a good question, I think the real future of crypto is actually paved by Wall Street investors and big institutions. Once they started to invest, even countries also thought about it, so they began buying and making more rules so investors can clearly know what they are allowed to do and what they are not.

In this way, an ordinary person like me in a developing or even a developed country can use crypto freely without much hesitation.

But once the developing countries start investing and buying, they will surely make mistakes and also provide more liquidity for the powerful ones, who will leave them behind in misery haha. That’s what mostly happens, they feed on developing countries and also keep them there for a longer period too.

[Franctoshi]

In countries with devaluing local currencies, they can use stable coins that are backed by US dollar to hedge against inflation. This is happening in countries like Argentina and Nigeria. But crypto is also still useful in developed countries like United States because not only fiat backed stable coins are cryptocurrencies.

But the point of the topic is comparing whether developed countries are using adoption more than developing ones. The real purpose of crypto is adoption - investment is only secondary, since price growth comes from demand created by adoption. And so far, it’s the smaller countries that are showing what real adoption looks like, not the ETFs.

ETFs are just paper exposure. Real adoption happens on the ground, when people actually use crypto in their daily lives.

Both developing countries and wallet street that buys or invest in Bitcoin all are helping adoption because when people hears that Wallstreet bought Bitcoin it encourages them to buy the more or to continue to use Bitcoin in running their day-to-day transactions without future doubts, or to escape inflation, generally, In my perspective, everything is part of adoption.

[batang_bitcoin]

So here’s the question: is the future of crypto shaped by Wall Street investors, or by ordinary people in weaker economies who actually use it?

Wall Street and other big investors are part of the community already. So, even us ordinary people have the same contribution to what they do for the adoption. The difference is of course of how much they're putting in to bitcoin as part of its market capitalization. If it's only us, I don't think that we're in this capitalization because with them, they're the known ones in the market niche that they've been part and that also attracts other retailers as us into buying bitcoin. So, with them, WS and the others, they're setting a way for the other investors who are still skeptic about bitcoin which for me is a good sign of bringing more into massive adoption.

[uneng]

The focus is where the biggest portion of the money is located. That is why ETFs and Wall Street are the main topics, while developing countries don't get too much attention, despite Bitcoin being a helpful tool in countries with weak fiat currencies and quick inflation rates. Probably it's because investors know only a minor portion of citizens from third world countries become adopters, even though more than 90% of the country's population is struggling with economy.

[TheUltraElite]

I think OP is right, the developed countries and what their stance on crypto is takes more newspaper space than what developing countries are doing. Of course the second group does not do anything that is going to make headlines including how people survive on crypto - because who wants to read that?

But ETFs are always on the front page because that is what investors are after. That also drives the buy/sell on the market, so you have to that credit to them.

If news media does not cover it, I think as members of this forum, those who are taking initiatives with crypto should post about them in the forum. Seen such topics previously but those should continue.

[DanWalker]

When they were telling you that Trump would create a national bitcoin reserve that's when BlackRock was making money selling ETF shares. They wanted that narrative. 6 months later there's no reserve at all. The recent news is they haven't done anything in the matter.

I agree with you that we live in a world where whoever controls the media is the winner.

But on Trump's strategic bitcoin reserve story, we need to be fair. He only promised to create a strategic bitcoin reserve, he never promised to buy more bitcoin or create a national bitcoin reserve Act. So far, he has passed an executive order to create a strategic bitcoin reserve. We cannot say that he broke his promise.

The problem is that many of us do not understand the US Constitution. We become delusional and set our expectations too high, and when things don't go as expected, we start blaming Trump. Because if anyone knows the US Constitution, they will know that the president does not have the authority to make decisions on changing the national reserve on his own."

[Oshio-man]

Of course, those that needs bitcoin the more are those poor countries with bad economy and a weak fiat currency. Government of these countries can use bitcoin as a strategy reserve. While citizens in these countries who are not living from hand to mouth can use their extra funds to buy bitcoin and safe their savings from losing its purchasing power overtime. All fiat currency are prone to depreciate in value overtime which is why stablecoin isn't the best to hold value overtime.

Both develop and undevelop countries need bitcoin to allow their citizens to have access to it, but majority of countries that showed interest on bitcoin are poor countries looking for way to revive their economy to reduce inflation that is affecting their countries, El Salvador is one of the country that use bitcoin to make their country popular today because their government took a good decision to make bitcoin legal tender that is attracting both local and foreign investors, if you are looking for favourable coin to hold, bitcoin is the best coin to hold for long term to earn good income.