I see a lot of complaints about Swan, but nothing so egregious that would make me quit purchasing through them.
What offends you, specifically?
Discussion
Not offends, just making me cautious enough to eye some contingency plans. I liked (what felt like) the purity of Swan… how simple it was to setup and stack. At first glance, this feels like it could make things more complex, with more room for errors and slip-ups along the way.
Which is the complexity you’re referring to?
1) Ripple’s bid for Fortress?
2) Swan’s move away from Fortress to Bakkt?
3) Plans to make a Bitcoin-only Trust with BitGo?
4) Something else?
Closest to #3.
While the trust is bitcoin only, BitGo itself is not bitcoin only.
I wouldn’t want any shenanigans similar to Luna/FTX/etc, via BitGo, to put Swan clients or funds at risk.
Makes sense… but do you have any intention of storing your funds there? Or just concerned that *others* might get rugged?
FWIW, it will probably only be institutions who cannot self-custody for procedural or liability reasons.
There are new insurance products available that will protect these clients’ funds which weren’t available prior. It would just be really bad for Swan if they made any poor choices like that. Got a trust that Cory and the team are smarter than that.
Sorry for the delay. I don’t think we had overlapping relays that worked reliably. Fixed that.
I do not and would not keep my funds there. I self custody, as you might expect. So it is more a concern for others, though also hoping any theoretical catastrophe wouldn’t also take Swan down completely… removing my ability to continue to stack with them.
I do believe they’re smarter than that. Still confident enough in that to keep using Swan. 🤙