roinevirta.eth
@roinevirta
Commentary on Euro Stable Watch's last week's edition https://open.substack.com/pub/eurostablewatch/p/could-a-consortium-of-european-banks
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
roinevirta.eth
@roinevirta
1. Does ESW advocate for regulating earlier? This is exactly the opposite what European start-ups need. "As we noted in our analysis of MiCA’s reactive nature, Europe tends to regulate only after American firms have already shaped the market."
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
roinevirta.eth
@roinevirta
2. The take on stablecoin value proposition is largely lazy; there are at least six different value-drivers – speed, stability, programmability, interoperability, availability, and uncensorability – that drive replacing or building solutions/usecases that are not possible using current rails. "The traditional stablecoin value proposition—settlement speed and currency stability—offers little appeal to European consumers who already enjoy both."
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
roinevirta.eth
@roinevirta
3. ESW takes on the governance model and consortium model formation sound mostly correct; however: 3a. Whether “strategic guidance” from parent entities is feasible is another question; this could easily evolve into a barrier against taking risk and an internal “regulator”. I reckon the start-up should be maximally independent; if they understand the resources available at parent organisations, it will come to leverage those naturally. 3b. I’m not sure why market expansion needs to be gatekept until Phase 3; stablecoin values are in interoperability and programmability; promoting those usecases for external developers/stakeholders is important. That’s what made Tether back in the day; it started getting used by exchanges even though they had no direct financial stake in Tether itself. You also want to have one foot in the market always – just to understand what’s going on.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction