Connect with us

Crypto

Stablecoin Settlement Is Here, but Seamless Off-Chain Money Movement Is Not | PYMNTS.com

Published

on

Stablecoin Settlement Is Here, but Seamless Off-Chain Money Movement Is Not | PYMNTS.com

The stablecoin industry has spent years trying to prove one thing above all else: that blockchain-based money can move faster, cheaper and more efficiently than the financial infrastructure it hopes to replace.

This week, the industry produced another wave of evidence that the technology itself is working as advertised.

Project Agora, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) initiative involving seven central banks and more than 40 private-sector financial institutions, successfully tested blockchain-based cross-border settlement flows. SoFi became the first national bank to issue a stablecoin on a public blockchain. Circle expanded its payout infrastructure through a partnership with Nium, while Mastercard secured a New York cryptocurrency license that broadens its stablecoin-related capabilities, and Cash App rolled out support for stablecoin payments.

But the digital dollar industry is now approaching a more difficult phase of development where success will be measured not by how quickly stablecoins move between wallets but by whether businesses and consumers can use those assets in the real economy without introducing new friction, cost or complexity.

The first challenge was proving that value can move on chain. The next challenge is figuring out how that value becomes economically useful once it moves off chain.

Advertisement

See also: Stablecoins Target B2B Settlement as Marketplaces Scale 

Advertisement: Scroll to Continue

Interoperability Is More Important Than Issuance

The stablecoin market spent years focused on issuance scale. Tether and Circle competed for circulation dominance. New entrants launched chain-specific coins designed to drive ecosystem growth. But fragmentation is now becoming a structural challenge.

Stablecoins exist across multiple public blockchains, private ledgers, Layer 2 networks and emerging tokenized deposit systems. Financial institutions are simultaneously experimenting with permissioned blockchain environments while FinTechs continue building on open public chains.

But a payment system only becomes economically powerful when participants can transact across networks without introducing new operational complexity. If businesses must manage liquidity across multiple chains, maintain separate compliance processes or navigate inconsistent standards, the efficiency gains of blockchain settlement begin to erode. The future payments ecosystem is unlikely to converge around a single blockchain or a single stablecoin issuer. More likely, it will consist of multiple interoperable systems that require governance standards, messaging frameworks, compliance coordination and liquidity routing mechanisms.

Advertisement

“I think we go to a world built on digital network transfers of value rather than the message-based system we have today. The future of digital networks is going to be a multi-network world,” J. Christopher Giancarlo, former Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) chair and co-founder of the Digital Dollar Project, told PYMNTS on the latest episode of “From the Block.”

Project Agora’s significance lies partly in its recognition of this issue. The initiative explores how central bank money and commercial bank tokenization models can interact within shared programmable infrastructures rather than isolated silos.

See more: Fed Report Shows Crypto Still Has an Everyday Use Problem

Off-Ramps Are Becoming Stablecoins’ Biggest Adoption Bottleneck

The stablecoin ecosystem increasingly resembles a high-speed highway system that feeds into underdeveloped local roads. On-chain transfers may settle instantly, but businesses and consumers still operate inside local banking systems, regulatory frameworks, tax regimes, treasury processes and compliance structures that were not designed for tokenized money.

The result is that the “last mile” of stablecoin adoption often introduces many of the same frictions blockchain was supposed to eliminate. Findings in the March PYMNTS Intelligence report “Stablecoins Gain Ground: Why CFOs See More Promise There Than in Crypto” revealed that while 42% of middle-market companies have at least discussed stablecoins, only 13% have reported actual stablecoin use.

Advertisement

This is why partnerships like Circle’s integration with Nium matter as much as the blockchain itself. The competitive battleground is shifting away from token issuance and toward payout orchestration, banking connectivity, liquidity management and compliance automation.

SoFi’s entrance into public-blockchain stablecoins also illustrates that convergence. Traditional financial institutions are no longer merely partnering with crypto-native firms; they are directly participating in issuance and infrastructure development. Mastercard’s expanding regulatory footprint signals a similar shift.

The stablecoin networks that achieve mainstream scale are likely to be the ones that balance openness with institutional trust. Too much decentralization can create compliance uncertainty. Too much centralization can undermine the efficiency and programmability advantages that made blockchain attractive in the first place. 

Because the value proposition is not “crypto.” It is operational efficiency.

Advertisement

Crypto

Binance maintains commitment to EU, seeking more licences in Asia

Published

on

Binance maintains commitment to EU, seeking more licences in Asia
Cryptocurrency exchange Binance remains in “close talks” with regulators in the ​European Union over its application to operate in the bloc and is seeking to secure more licences in ‌Asia, said its co-chief executive Richard Teng on Thursday.
Continue Reading

Crypto

LAB Token Crashes 80% to $1.25 as $5B Market Cap Vanishes in 48 Hours

Published

on

LAB Token Crashes 80% to .25 as B Market Cap Vanishes in 48 Hours

Key Takeaways

LAB Trade Blames ‘Large Market Participants’

LAB, the native token of the multi-chain trading platform LAB Trade, suffered a catastrophic collapse this week, plunging from just over $7 to $1.25 on Wednesday—a staggering 80% decline in under 24 hours. This crash followed an equally brutal sell-off on Tuesday, which saw the token slide from nearly $17. In total, LAB wiped out nearly 90% of its value in just 48 hours.

LAB crash chart: CoinGecko

The financial fallout was swift: a market capitalization that exceeded $5 billion on Tuesday morning evaporated to just $390 million by 3:30 p.m. EST on Wednesday. The freefall prompted the LAB Trade team to address the panic on X, where they expressed disappointment and deflected blame toward external heavy-sellers:

“While today’s market activity is disappointing, our product roadmap and long-term focus remain unchanged. We’re seeing significant selling pressure from large market participants. Several independent trading firms also hold substantial LAB positions that are not affiliated with our team. We’re working closely with our liquidity partners and continue to monitor market conditions,” the team said on X.

With this crash, LAB joins a notorious lineup of volatile tokens, such as RAVE, RIVER and SIREN. Each of these projects experienced meteoric rises followed by near-instantaneous erasures, sparking widespread “pump-and-dump” allegations against their respective teams and murky distribution networks.

Crypto Sleuth Slams Centralized Exchanges

Prominent on-chain detective ZachXBT, who previously flagged suspicious insider loans and market-maker coordination back in May, blasted major centralized exchanges ( CEXs) for failing to protect retail investors. Taking to X, ZachXBT criticized the lack of proactive intervention:

“Disappointing to see how no action was taken by Binance, Bitget, and Gate earlier to prevent it. If CEXs cared, profits from the accounts manipulating the price would be distributed to users at a minimum. Unlocks for investors were scheduled to begin later this month, however, multiple late vesting changes occurred in the past.”

Advertisement

ZachXBT reiterated his previous warnings that insiders have effectively controlled the entire circulating supply, allowing market makers to orchestrate extreme price manipulation on major exchanges. His final advice to the community was blunt: avoid trading LAB under any circumstances.

ZachXBT Names RAVE, RIVER, SIREN, and LAB as Victims of Bitget-Enabled Market Maker Fraud

ZachXBT Names RAVE, RIVER, SIREN, and LAB as Victims of Bitget-Enabled Market Maker Fraud

Blockchain investigator ZachXBT has renewed his assault on Bitget, accusing the exchange of knowingly enabling market makers to run supply…

ZachXBT Names RAVE, RIVER, SIREN, and LAB as Victims of Bitget-Enabled Market Maker Fraud
Bitcoin.com News

ZachXBT Names RAVE, RIVER, SIREN, and LAB as Victims of Bitget-Enabled Market Maker Fraud

Blockchain investigator ZachXBT has renewed his assault on Bitget, accusing the exchange of knowingly enabling market makers to run supply…

ZachXBT Names RAVE, RIVER, SIREN, and LAB as Victims of Bitget-Enabled Market Maker Fraud
Bitcoin.com News

ZachXBT Names RAVE, RIVER, SIREN, and LAB as Victims of Bitget-Enabled Market Maker Fraud

Blockchain investigator ZachXBT has renewed his assault on Bitget, accusing the exchange of knowingly enabling market makers to run supply…

Continue Reading

Crypto

Residents question proposed crypto mining center

Published

on

Residents question proposed crypto mining center

STARKVILLE – Potentially higher utility bills and sound pollution topped the list of concerns raised by six residents who addressed the board of aldermen Tuesday about a cryptocurrency mining facility proposed for Industrial Park Road.

Vice Mayor Roy Perkins, who represents Ward 6, said he has fielded similar concerns from constituents following the board’s June 12 work session, during which members heard a presentation about the potential project.

“I know these things need to have full accountability, full transparency and different things,” Perkins said. “… Well you can rest assured the vice mayor is going to be on assignment. I’m going to do my part. I’m not going to do anything that’s going to negatively impact this community.”

The proposed facility would be a specialized type of data center designed to mine cryptocurrency, a digital currency that operates independently of government-backed financial systems. It is stored in digital wallets and fluctuates in value.

Advertisement

Mining facilities use specialized computers that draw large energy loads to secure the digital transactions that take place. The center proposed in Starkville would be much smaller than “hyperscale data centers” that store and process data for large tech companies.

Utility usage topped the concerns of most residents with Pam Jones, the first to speak, set the tone.

“I understand that this is on a smaller scale than the hyper-scale facilities, and I just wanted to be sure that we had ordinances in place that will count the noise, especially at night and that there will be water and power management,” Jones said.

Other residents took issue with what they see as a lack of transparency around the proposed project.

“I was quite disappointed to learn (the mining facility) was not an agenda item today,” said Eadie Keenan, a Ward 7 resident. “… Quite frankly, I have more questions than can fit in three minutes.”

Advertisement

Tiffany Womack, another Starkville resident, echoed Kennan’s concerns, adding utility usage and market volatility to her own list of issues.

“If (the center was) to go bankrupt or something like that, would that possibly fall back on the responsibility of Starkville citizens?” Womack asked.

Mayor Lynn Spruill did not answer each question individually, instead encouraging those with questions to watch the June 12 presentation. Due to the project’s early stage, she noted the board does not yet know answers to all the questions raised during Tuesday’s meeting.

“I brought (the center) to the board as an opportunity for us to begin that process of learning so we are nowhere near making a decision,” Spruill said. “Which is why it isn’t on the agenda and won’t be on the agenda for some time.”

Spruill said the proposed center is currently going through the staff vetting process. Once the process is complete, staff will make a recommendation to the board on whether to pursue the center. At that time, Spruill expects to be able to answer residents’ remaining questions.

Advertisement

Spruill said transparency is important to her and the board while going through the process of vetting the mining center.

“Nothing is being hidden. It’s all out there for everybody to see, and we’ll make decisions based on facts not on Facebook craziness,” Spruill said. “… We want facts, and we want all decisions to be made with facts. And so hopefully that will put some of your concerns (to rest), at least to the extent that this is nowhere near something that will be on the agenda.”

Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 24 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.

Advertisement

Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 24 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending