The collapse of Signature Bank is very bad for bitcoin in the US, to say the least.
Discussion
Disagree
Well, if you don't care about easy on-ramps and off-ramps for BTCUSD, then you can go ahead and not care.
Is it a collapse?
How so?
How do you think a lot of Bitcoin-USD liquidity gets settled by exchanges and brokers? There were really two main marks doing that for the whole industry. And they both have failed. Silvergate and Signature.
Lol so first the “crypto” industry rep is tarnished, then new regs proposals are piled on, then major market makers for the industry fail…Seems coordinated af.
IMO, will at most be a temporary on ramp issue with Bitcoin, though.
When do you expect there to be noticeable “bad for Bitcoin” impacts from those two failures? What will those impacts be?
Not sure yet. All the institutional traders are all working towards standing up alternatives, and there’s some challenger banks who are already trying to step up and fill the void.
Please elaborate, would like to understand why. Have found you to be very knowledgeable.
Is Signature Bank connected to some of the NY based bitcoin companies?
Depositor funds all available Monday is good in general.
Explain
Long term everything is good for bitcoin. Especially banks collapsing. That was kinda the point …
đź‘€
Bad for who is the real question, Bitcoin was create for this so that statement does not make sense…
Your post is creating a buzz.
Added to the https://member.cash/hot feed
Respectfully and vehemently disagree. Bitcoin does not need Signature Bank nor any other “on/off ramp”. People desiring freedom will find other ways. Adoption will appear slower and faster at different times but wider adoption of bitcoin will continue.
I am not saying bitcoin will die because of Signature Bank. But I think anybody who thinks onramps and off-ramps are not important today to bitcoin are not thinking about it very carefully. Look, I want bitcoin to be a self-sufficient currency. It’s why I’m working on it. But we have be realistic about the fact that, for the most part, much of bitcoin’s utility is based on the fact it is highly liquid against other currencies. That’s just true.
You’re right, but I don’t think you’re going to get many zaps for saying this lol. I wouldn’t call trading utility though.
Not trading. The capacity to make payments around the world, including remittances, and then have that value be converted from and back into local currency to pay for things. Most people in the world do not live in bitcoin circular economies, if people haven’t noticed.
For his part, Barney, who helped draft the landmark Dodd-Frank Act after the 2008 financial crisis, said there was “no real objective reason” that Signature had to be seized.
“I think part of what happened was that regulators wanted to send a very strong anti-crypto message,” Frank said. “We became the poster boy because there was no insolvency based on the fundamentals.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/13/signature-bank-third-biggest-bank-failure-in-us-history.html
no, it's good because people can still mine bitcoin and accept it in trade
it's bad for grifters who want to trade back and forth to USD easily