I agree with @hosseeb that Eth2 will likely have one or two "city-like" DeFi shards that contain the majority of all base layer liquidity on Ethereum, and have extremely expensive gas prices. 2/8
City-like DeFi shards likely have no direct competitors, including other base layers.
Customers won't want to run serious DeFi on another base layer any more than on a non-city Eth2 shard. 3/8
The transaction fees from city-like DeFi shards will generate massive profits for ETH holders.
profit = revenue - cost. Eth2's cost is the low, flat cost of validator hardware and electricity, so profit ~= fees.
This will be a numerical game-changer for the price of ETH. 4/8
If city-like DeFi shards generated 70x the fees that Ethereum did last week, then the price of ETH would be a minimum of $10,000/ETH from the cash value of those fees alone.
Last week, Ethereum generated an annual run rate of $700M in transaction fees. 5/8
70x growth in fees is a total of $49B per year in fees. This is reasonable, even likely for city-like DeFi shards, where global financial firms congregate, the average transaction moves hundreds of millions of dollars, and flash loans borrow a billion dollars. 6/8
In summary, we are making a numerical argument here:
Just the profit generated by Eth2, which can be thought of as a dividend or continuous share buyback, might be worth $10,000/ETH when Eth2 launches and city-like DeFi shards flourish. 7/8
A counterargument is that layer2 technologies, such as zero-knowledge rollups, may cause total transaction fees to remain orders of magnitude less than $49B per year. 8/8
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Curiously, the above debate's overview tees up stablecoins as riskier than tokenized deposits. But deposits are likely the riskier of the two, as they are fractionally reserved and loaned out, whereas stablecoins are moving to "full reserve" models, with no reserves loaned out.
When it comes to stablecoins vs deposits, imo the operative question may be, which has the greater opportunity to pass yield on to end users? Competitive pressures in crypto are extremely high. Today's big stablecoins (USDT and USDC) have a 100% take rate. That won't last.
"Significant governments globally are establishing their own stablecoin laws. ... [They] are enacting laws to regulate [their own] US dollar [stablecoins]"
Tomorrow, Jeremy says that to Congress.
American regulatory legitimacy is the final boss. Godspeed Jeremy. Some Thoughts🧵
Let me summarize Jeremy's remarks to Congress tomorrow:
Stablecoins are super useful. Today, by market demand, 99% of stablecoins are US dollars. If America wants to control its own currency's stablecoins and maximize US Dollar stablecoin market share, then we need legislation.
If America doesn't urgently pass a reasonable stablecoin bill, then other countries will soon own & operate the dominant *US Dollar* stablecoins, in addition to more effectively growing the market share of stables in their own currencies, due to the competitive void from America.
Devil Take the Hindmost explains how to navigate exuberant bull markets. Most of the behavior we see in bulls has been happening for at least hundreds of years. There's a big-picture playbook to learn and follow.
Tomorrow 3.0 explains why transaction costs matter, how to break them down, and helps you to see why crypto's superpower is selling reductions in transaction costs. Most crypto benefits we discuss, such as composability, are actually specific forms of transaction cost reductions.
Ledger Recover was a huge project. For many people, it might be a good solution.
However, the community invested in ledgers based on the firmware having no backdoor of any kind.
I have a starter proposal for us to put away the pitchforks🧵
I'd prefer that you kill Ledger Recover entirely.
I'd prefer that recovery be solved downstream in smart contract wallets.
If you don't kill it, I'd prefer that Recover be only available on a new dedicated kind of device.
Unfortunately, we're in a situation where we've all trusted and invested in your company and devices for years, and now you've betrayed us. "Betrayed" is harsh, but it is what it is.
You probably won't kill Ledger Recover. We need an immediate path forward.
First off, stables don't dodge monetary policy. A public market of privately-run stables is downstream of monetary policy because stables are subject to the ordinary forces of interest rates and liquidity.
However, given that the EU is the largest Western government actively pursuing the possibility of a China-style panopticon retail CBDC, it seems fair to say that a public market of privately-run stablecoins may be an effective substitute and competitor of such a retail CBDC.
Stablecoin legislation has been drafted in Congress
I read the bill.
TL;DR decentralized stables become illegal in the US (DAI, LUSD, RAI, etc. become illegal🚨) while centralized stables, defi, Ethereum, and ETH win big.
The Act also makes it illegal for a licensed stablecoin to be backed by reserves other than US-dollar equivalents. For example, it would be unlawful for a licensed stablecoin to be backed by reserves of gold, ETH, shares of Google, British Pounds, etc.
It seems really bad that the bill would make it illegal for American businesses or residents to receive unlicensed stables.
Imagine your buddy sends you 50 euro stablecoins for your trip to Paris. Oops, you're a criminal now.