Merge all the stable coin into one. | Bitcointalksearch.org

Rengga Jati

hero member

Activity: 2156

Merit: 670

Hire Bitcointalk Camp. Manager @ r7promotions.com

Quote from: DVlog on April 08, 2022, 03:00:34 PM

...My question is why do we need so many stable coins when they all serve the same purpose? ...

In my opinion, it's about money that will be gained by creating the stable coins, shortly, it's about Business done by a company by offering their own project (in this case stable coin), with their very interesting offers, promises, advertisement, and also all strengthen that they offer over other stable coins.

and to merge them?
I don't think that it can be because they come from different developers, companies and also projects. They are trying to compete each other by offering their best stable coin.

For me, I will no matter of how they create new stable coins again or not, it's like other altcoins that are coming new almost everyday.
I just need to use some of them that considerably needed and matched with what I need, it's enough.

KennyR

hero member

Activity: 2310

Merit: 532

Enterapp Pre-Sale Live - bit.ly/3UrMCWI

Different altcoins have got different backing mechanism. Having their own stablecoin will let them have stability in fund management against the unexpected market crash/drops. This is the reason why developers try to have their own stablecoin. Making every stablecoin get unified into a single one is good, but the same could create controversy with the backing. Switching between stable coins isn't a big deal, and different stablecoins have difference in the marginal variation. This too serves as a people going for specific stablecoins.

Erdogan

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1005

Quote from: DVlog on April 08, 2022, 03:00:34 PM

There are many stable coins in the market with a different name. The only difference between them is the blockchain they use and the assets they collateral. Stable coins are usually backed by fiat currency, commodities, crypto assets, and Seigniorage but they all have the same purpose. Recently terra announced a stable coin backed by bitcoin and rumors spread that near protocol is going to issue another stable coin. My question is why do we need so many stable coins when they all serve the same purpose?

What I saw from the market is they are trying to overthrow one another from the top position. The total stable coin supply is $180 billion. Is it possible to merge all these coins into one universal crypto stablecoin so that users do not need to switch between these stable coins again and again?

Most, if not all, stable coins are simply privately owned products. What you propose is just as possible as asking that all beer producers start making only one common and this same. Of course it is impossible and be prepared for the fact that the number of stable coins will increase rather than decrease.

Emitdama

sr. member

Activity: 1918

Merit: 328

Yes, I’ve also had the same thought that having too many stable coins in the market is totally unnecessary. But there’s nothing we can do about it, developers just want to make money and that is it, they will keep on competing with each other and you will still keep on seeing more and more stable coins being released into the market. It is never going to stop. If there is the possibility of merging all the stable coins together I will say that it would be into two places.

There are some stable coins that are centralized and regulated (e.g USDT) : these ones can go together, while the ones that are decentralized such as DAI can be merged together. That way we will have just two stable coins, a centralized one and the other that is decentralized.

calya

sr. member

Activity: 784

Merit: 250

Quote from: ice18 on April 09, 2022, 08:25:02 AM

Different stable coin issuers means different companies so merging may take a lot of talk and agreements between them its not easy to happen especially when it comes to profit. Much better if they will issue coins separately and have different advantages from each other so investors will have many choice of what they want to use.

merging all stable coins into one coin only really difficult, most of them have different algorithm about pegging their value to dollar. some of them even have value less $1 such as stable coin in wave recently that reach 0,65. personally i see it as difficult thing to unite them.

joro-metaversa

newbie

Activity: 8

Merit: 0

Economic liberalism and freedom brought me to the crypto world. After a couple of years in crypto I reached a cognitive dissonance. I hate regulation, but I strongly believe stable coins are crying for it. Change my mind.

JooBra

full member

Activity: 1204

Merit: 162

We don't need monopoly in crypto so having wider range is stable coins is good thing. If they are trusted I don't see a problem with having more of them.

bitkanu

hero member

Activity: 2184

Merit: 513

Moonbet.io | Web3 Casino

Switching between the stable tokens were so easy and it cost only a few seconds to do that. You can also use one stable token forever and the choice is yours. In this case univercal stable token aggregate is not actually needed at all. People are so smart and they have their own stable token as their own choices. I just wanna try to remind you that if you can also send various stable tokens easily even converting from the one to the each other. This mean when you are bridging your stable token and you can switch it easily. Im sure that if we didn't need stable token which was act as aggregat.
Universtal stable token was a useless idea for sure.

killerfrost

sr. member

Activity: 1988

Merit: 254

PredX - AI-Powered Prediction Market

Quote from: GreatArkansas on April 10, 2022, 08:18:21 AM

Quote from: killerfrost on April 10, 2022, 07:46:53 AM

In the future, we will not only see stablecoins that are stable in USD but also in other currencies such as rub, yuan, pound,... So to put your problem back, merging here is still necessary. Is that okay? The variety of stablecoins is not a big deal as they do not have a large impact on user usage.

Hmmm, you got a point here, I also agree especially when some country will start their own stable coins which are backed by their respective fiat currency. I believe that there are lot of stablecoins now which is backed or pegged with USD is because they have different goal as don't have with other stablecoins let's exclude the network/chain they are deployed.

We still have many big problems that still need time to be solved, so when we look at the problems that people mention and think that they are difficult to approach. It is better to see the problem according to its general nature, and not to look at it from a personal point of view, wanting to satisfy your own, then solve it yourself. Maybe the OP should look at it in a simpler way.

JayTrain

full member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 105

Sugars.zone | DatingFi - Earn for Posting

There is nothing to do with these, how many projects are on the market with their own blockchain, there will probably be so many stablecoins, because each project praises its own stablecoin, and then there is competition in the market, as for me, I would also like to see one stablecoin on all blockchains.

lornadane

full member

Activity: 529

Merit: 101

Quote from: Ketesnuko on April 10, 2022, 08:05:25 AM

All stable coins are not the same, some claimed to be backed by Fiat but its a lie, even if its decentralised stable coin or centralised stable coin none of them really really back Fiat in the open world, I think this backing of a thing is just online, I don't trust but still use stable coins like USDT and USDC, regulation is lacking here don't you think? Maybe CBDC will take over in near future.

What you say is true too, how can fiat money be able to compete with stablecoins because the two are very different.
But why can you be sure that CBDC will take on an expert in the near future?
Does CBDC also have more power than USDT and USDC,?

TheGreatPython

sr. member

Activity: 2660

Merit: 339

Quote from: goinmerry on April 09, 2022, 03:57:48 AM

We need lots of stable coins as that will push on a much tight competition. They might have the same purpose but the actual implementation and future developments are varied with each other. The goal is, how to solve all issues and a single stable coin can't solve it.

We need these several options as being limited to only a few options or a single one might just lead to more problems.

We can compare these to other blockchains network problems like the reason why altcoins are made.

Well I do agree with you because the purpose that leads to creating one project and another is to fix a particular problem or create competition which would make every other projects to keep fighting to be better than another. That would keep the developers on their toes and they will keep working hard so that they would maintain their platform and be able to retain their users.

If there is just only one stablecoin and let's say for example it is USDT, they will do as it pleases them when they see that there is no competition for them. So we do need competition for the community to thrive.

zasad@

legendary

Activity: 1932

Merit: 4602

Quote from: DVlog on April 08, 2022, 03:00:34 PM

There are many stable coins in the market with a different name. The only difference between them is the blockchain they use and the assets they collateral. Stable coins are usually backed by fiat currency, commodities, crypto assets, and Seigniorage but they all have the same purpose. Recently terra announced a stable coin backed by bitcoin and rumors spread that near protocol is going to issue another stable coin. My question is why do we need so many stable coins when they all serve the same purpose?

What I saw from the market is they are trying to overthrow one another from the top position. The total stable coin supply is $180 billion. Is it possible to merge all these coins into one universal crypto stablecoin so that users do not need to switch between these stable coins again and again?

Do you believe these reports? Me not.
https://assets.ctfassets.net/vyse88cgwfbl/VcNv0hgvQ2a3Ochjs5TqR/59e77f0c076544a88f977d1d36b76dbf/tether_assuranceconsolidated_reserves_report_2021-06-30.pdf
If you're talking about creating a new global currency, then the big question is who will control the issue.

GreatArkansas

legendary

Activity: 2534

Merit: 1397

Quote from: killerfrost on April 10, 2022, 07:46:53 AM

In the future, we will not only see stablecoins that are stable in USD but also in other currencies such as rub, yuan, pound,... So to put your problem back, merging here is still necessary. Is that okay? The variety of stablecoins is not a big deal as they do not have a large impact on user usage.

Hmmm, you got a point here, I also agree especially when some country will start their own stable coins which are backed by their respective fiat currency. I believe that there are lot of stablecoins now which is backed or pegged with USD is because they have different goal as don't have with other stablecoins let's exclude the network/chain they are deployed.

Ketesnuko

member

Activity: 233

Merit: 12

All stable coins are not the same, some claimed to be backed by Fiat but its a lie, even if its decentralised stable coin or centralised stable coin none of them really really back Fiat in the open world, I think this backing of a thing is just online, I don't trust but still use stable coins like USDT and USDC, regulation is lacking here don't you think? Maybe CBDC will take over in near future.

Fesatmas

sr. member

Activity: 2268

Merit: 275

This is actually a competitive system in the cryptocurrency world, every development must offer something tempting for cryptocurrency users. But if to combine stable coins into one that is quite difficult, the article must unite several people into one container. They must also think about what benefits they will get if they agree to make it happen.

killerfrost

sr. member

Activity: 1988

Merit: 254

PredX - AI-Powered Prediction Market

In the future, we will not only see stablecoins that are stable in USD but also in other currencies such as rub, yuan, pound,... So to put your problem back, merging here is still necessary. Is that okay? The variety of stablecoins is not a big deal as they do not have a large impact on user usage.

Xampeuu

full member

Activity: 1442

Merit: 116

Enterapp Pre-Sale Live - bit.ly/3UrMCWI

with each stable coin having its own blockchain, so it is clear that there is competition for investors and they profit from using the blockchain, of course the need for fees will be higher. I think it is difficult to unite, considering this is a business competition with the same field that will never unite. but I think each choice will have its own consumers, while those who are not able to compete will be degraded, isn't this a positive competition to pamper consumers, because of course they will improve services to get consumers

WalkerIVIV

hero member

Activity: 2436

Merit: 503

Cryptocasino.com

This thing can be done anytime even you can create an aggregate stable token to be used by any stable token. I mean something called YUSD and this stable token can be exchanged with whole of stable tokens that available in the market. When you are owning YUSD and this is also meaning if you are owning the universal stable token as well.
You can create your own solution for this and this is how it's working today. You didn't even need wait the developers to create their universal stable token.

FrozenBit

full member

Activity: 658

Merit: 102

PredX - AI-Powered Prediction Market

Let me know if it affects your trading or not. Consolidation is a superfluous idea when we see diversity and assurance from it. Don't draw your own paranoid scenarios in your head because it won't change anything. We all know the major stablecoins all have their own collateral and they are not a collective. By nature, they are stable coins, so competition is gradually driving the market bigger.

Topic: Merge all the stable coin into one. (Read 226 times)