Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

wsj.com

51–60 of 241 posts

Re: Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

#51
post #37
post #3

Honestly stablecoins - specifically tether - is about the only thing about crypto that genuinely frightens me. Crypto rollercoaster - up down sideways and in circles - sure I'm game. Tether that is stable until it implodes...hell no. Even without direct exposure the blast radius worries me.

Honest question. How's Tether imploding different from e.g. a public company suddenly shutting down and its stock price going to zero? I imagine the two scenarios being similar in the sense that anyone holding tether would eat a big loss, but aside from the event obviously affecting investor sentiment, wouldn't it just be more or less business as usual for other coins? As in, couldn't BTC/ETH/whatever people just use…

Tether imploding isn't at all like a public company closing shop, because public companies are Real Things and have public data about sales, revenue, employees, business relationships, etc. And even the ones that implode go through bankruptcy court where their assets are doled out to debtors and shareholders.

Tether imploding would be more like a bank run, where you can see YOUR MONEY as a number on the screen then when you go to cash out, you simply can no longer access your money. Or maybe you can withdraw $100 a day, but no more. If and when that happens (or threatens to happen), everyone freaks out and tries to get their money at once - which is exactly why the banking system in the U.S. is backed by the federal government so this doesn't happen.

The higher risk is that a good swath of crypto investment is done on leverage, which can increase with the more money you have. So with $100MM and a bit of lying you can go invest 10x your money in crypto and get some fat returns - lets say you go all-in and put $1B in Tether and get an 8% return on your money - thanks to leverage you are actually making 80% return on your $100M (sample #s, but you get the idea). This works great until things blow up, because you don't just lose your $100M, the BANKS that gave you leverage ("margin") lose $900M too, so one idiot taking this gamble can have a massive impact on the banking system as a whole.

This isn't just theory either, something akin to this happened about a month ago: https://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking-news/section/2/16880...

And that wasn't even fallout from a Ponzi scheme, but simply from: bad risk management + leverage + minimal oversight + lying. The real stupidity is that these banks have continued to provide margin loans at very low rates with loose oversight, which should remind you of "race-to-the-bottom" mortgage market that blew up housing around 15 years ago. Except now we are talking about hedge funds and billionaires and a billions of dollars being thrown into shitcoins and NFTs. So when this implodes there won't be any collateral at all to rely on.

Re: Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

#52
post #3

Honestly stablecoins - specifically tether - is about the only thing about crypto that genuinely frightens me. Crypto rollercoaster - up down sideways and in circles - sure I'm game. Tether that is stable until it implodes...hell no. Even without direct exposure the blast radius worries me.

Tether imploding would just mean a couple more years to stack up. People who don't understand the technology would flee, thinking it was just a fad, those that do understand it would stay, stack up and wait a few years.

lol imagine believing this

Re: Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

#53
post #10

I keep thinking of Madoff's fund. It was once called "the Jewish T-bill". It worked just fine until there was a significant net outflow. Then, total crash, because the backing assets were not there. Tether is way too much like that. Remember, Tether has no upside . There is no reason to ever hold Tether for any length of time. [1] https://www.timesofisrael.com/before-dying-bernie-madoff-lif...

Honestly Tether doesn't really to be that much different compared to fractional reserve banking. The biggest difference is the government protects banks from bank runs while Tether enjoys no such privilege.

Re: Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remember, Tether has no upside. There is no reason to ever hold Tether for any length of time. It looks like USDC, issued by a company co-owned by Coinbase (YC incubated right?) and Circle, is quickly replacing tether. One year ago there were about 1/10th of USDC compared to tether, now it's half. Apparently USDC are really fully backed by real USD and the smart contract for USDC can block any address containing US…

I hold a decent sized block of USDC via BlockFi and earn 8.6% APY. I realize there is inherent risk (after all, I am earning 8.6%) but compare that to 0.5% earned at Goldman Sachs or traditional FDIC insured bank accounts and it's a risk I am willing to take. By default, BlockFi issues GUSD as their stablecoin of choice, but Gemini (GUSD) market cap is only $145m, whereas USDC market cap is 22 with a B billion. Ultim…

It doesn't make sense to compare risk-free FDIC-insured deposits to stablecoins at BlockFi.

Full disclosure: I did not find BlockFi's brief descriptions of their risk management strategies to be comforting.

Re: Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

#56
post #3

Honestly stablecoins - specifically tether - is about the only thing about crypto that genuinely frightens me. Crypto rollercoaster - up down sideways and in circles - sure I'm game. Tether that is stable until it implodes...hell no. Even without direct exposure the blast radius worries me.

Not obvious to me that it would be catastrophic. There are other stablecoins even if Tether is a 75%-funded scam (and honestly, who in crypto _hasn't_ taken a 25% haircut at some point?) Some people holding cash* would get hit, but there's no real magic to starting a 1-1 backed stablecoin. Someone will fill the space, since it's obviously needed.

The suspicion is that Tether is much closer to 5% backed than 75%. A 95% "haircut" would be catastrophic.

Re: Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

#57
post #10

I keep thinking of Madoff's fund. It was once called "the Jewish T-bill". It worked just fine until there was a significant net outflow. Then, total crash, because the backing assets were not there. Tether is way too much like that. Remember, Tether has no upside . There is no reason to ever hold Tether for any length of time. [1] https://www.timesofisrael.com/before-dying-bernie-madoff-lif...

> Remember, Tether has no upside. There is no reason to ever hold Tether for any length of time. It looks like USDC, issued by a company co-owned by Coinbase (YC incubated right?) and Circle, is quickly replacing tether. One year ago there were about 1/10th of USDC compared to tether, now it's half. Apparently USDC are really fully backed by real USD and the smart contract for USDC can block any address containing US…

"Apparently"

Re: Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

#58
tl;dr they think its bad because the federal reserve wont shore up these markets, while conceding that they work better than banks would in a run given that the reserves are higher by sometimes an order of magnitude even in the most controversial stablecoins, and all the stablecoins can pay out in-kind with assets instead of just in dollars

“But the Fed wont bail it out in a run or market crash, even though it will work more perfectly, for that reason I’m out”

Worse than a shark tank episode

Re: Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

#59
post #37
post #3

Honestly stablecoins - specifically tether - is about the only thing about crypto that genuinely frightens me. Crypto rollercoaster - up down sideways and in circles - sure I'm game. Tether that is stable until it implodes...hell no. Even without direct exposure the blast radius worries me.

Honest question. How's Tether imploding different from e.g. a public company suddenly shutting down and its stock price going to zero? I imagine the two scenarios being similar in the sense that anyone holding tether would eat a big loss, but aside from the event obviously affecting investor sentiment, wouldn't it just be more or less business as usual for other coins? As in, couldn't BTC/ETH/whatever people just use…

I just listened to a podcast about this and the guest Bennett Tomlin said these are things that may happen if Tether was shut down by the US government:

https://anchor.fm/aviv-milner/episodes/The-Tether-Situation-... at 30:57

* Price of BTC/USDT ETH/USDT explodes as people try to exchange Tether to another liquid asset

* BTC and ETH start to drop on non-Tether exchanges as people sell and try to get out to fiat currency

* Tether collateralises futures contracts, when BTC/USDT spikes, some strange behaviour may happen in derivatives based on Tether.

* Tether allegedly is a meaningful percentage of the commercial paper market, if those assets are seized, it may affect that market.

* Some S&P500 companies have a lot of Tesla on their books. As BTC/USD drops, that would impact their stock price, and potentially the index overall.

* Some shadier crypto exchanges may go under or abscond with client funds in the confusion.

A lot of this could happen in a matter of minutes.

You could imagine a similar flight to safety happen if Tether was revealed to not have the reserves they claimed to and were unable to redeem client funds.

Fun times!

Re: Bitcoin’s reliance on stablecoins harks back to the Wild West of finance

#60

Bitcoin's reliance on Stablecoins? I think the wsj is confused and has this backwards. Additionally, like all mainstream media sources, they cannot seem to understand that Bitcoin is what happens on the blockchain and that 99% of the breathless hype about trading and finance bro stuff is completely off chain and only tangentially related to Bitcoin.

> they cannot seem to understand that Bitcoin is what happens on the blockchain and that 99% of the breathless hype about trading and finance bro stuff is completely off chain and only tangentially related to Bitcoin.

The same could be said of crypto advocates who leave their "coins" on an exchange

Post reply on HN