What. the. absolute. hell.

Please tell me this is not actually happening.
Circle takes dollars

Circle issues USDC

Circle invests dollars in Bitcoin collateralised yield products.

Circle transfers risk to USDC holders.

USDC holders repackage Bitcoin risk and pledge it as collateral in DeFi yield products.

Please tell me this is not true.
If this is true and Circle manages to go public, I'm absolutely done trying to believe securities regulators care about their mandate to protect investors.
It appears there might be another way to read this.

Circle is apparently about to release an opt-in yield product for USDC holders, so these risks could be related to that and not to Circle's reserves.

Lack of transparency is still scandalous though.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Arturo Portilla

Arturo Portilla Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Arturo_P_A

6 Jul
Any papers/research out there on the limitations to store digital content on the blockchain? — Would like to understand how such limitations could affect NFTs in terms of ownership trustlessness, decentralization and self-sovereignity.
When it comes to NFTs, the real innovation lies in the possibility that the underlying object/item can be attached to its property title and, thus, they can both seamlessly and trustlessly be moved together. If due to blockchain storage capacity, it becomes unfeasible to
store the underlying objects along with the NFT (or the property title for that matter), the innovation starts to crumble down, as such limitation conveys the need to store the underlying either off-chain or in separate chains. Such process will most likely prepare the road for
Read 8 tweets
21 Jun
A few conclusions from my conversation with @HugoPhilion at the Telegram Flare Proposal Group (please correct if necessary):

1. The initial 15% distribution is set in stone (I won't be further addressing this topic hereon).

2. The Spark selling pressure caused by the

Staggered distribution model is supposed to be absorbed by network stake-like incentives (FTSO rewards and F-Asset yields), though I have my doubts.

3. The Staggered distribution model was designed to last 3 years as a way to provide exchanges and wallets with

sustained incentives to remain engaged with the Flare ecosystem, maybe even pushing them to build Flare services or infrastructure, which in my opinion, is somewhat inorganic. Players should join the ecosystem because it has value added offerings, not because they are

Read 13 tweets
20 Jun
Brief 🧵 on why I think @FlareNetworks' notion of inflation falls short and fails to appropriately communicate the [negative] effects that the planned 34 month Spark "staggered distribution" will produce on the markets.

This is an attempt to open a constructive debate.

First of all, I want to make it clear that I do not feel entitled to demand anything from Flare Networks Ltd ("FNL"); they are free to do whatever they deem appropriate in order to secure the future development of the network.

It is true though, as I've mentioned before,

that FNL is not a non-profit organization, and has the clear intention to make money on the back of Flare Network's ("FN") success. FN's success is considerably dependant on network effects provided by users, which means that FNL should be paying attention to user

Read 23 tweets
14 Jun
This Crunchbase report reveals 3 increasingly relevant trends in the VC industry.

1. The amount of $ invested in startups is picking up.

2. The $ is being invested in fewer deals/Cos.

3. Acquisitions of venture-backed Cos. are skyrocketing.


Conclusion: VC firms are raising barriers to entry for new competitors and are also promoting the concentration of markets with their aggresive, profit-seeking exit strategies.
If the SEC continues to gratuitously discriminate between accredited and non-accredited investors, these trends will continue to grow, leading to increasingly concentrated markets, i.e., worse products/services, less innovation, fewer alternatives, etc.

Read 4 tweets
9 Jun
Your back down to earth reading of the news coming from El Salvador 🇸🇻:

1. Bitcoin Law makes it mandatory for merchants to accept BTC, *IF* customers offer it as means of payment.

2. No incentives are created to use Bitcoin as legal tender; most Salvadorans with access

to bitcoin will most likely be die hard HODLers.

3. The Bitcoin Law doesn't actually address how the country will use Bitcoin to promote financial inclusion. It doesn't even make it clear where the country stands in terms of digital inclusion.

4. There are no rules and/or regulations around Bitcoin infrastructure providers (exchanges, custodians, market participants, btc payment service providers, payment dispute mechanisms, derivatives, etc). The whole landscape looks like the perfect honeypot for cyber gangs.

Read 6 tweets
24 May
I'm not a huge supporter of how finance is regulated, but paradoxically, I tend to believe that we won't enjoy the full benefits of blockchain/crypto until the tech is innovatively employed by regulated entities (e.g. open finance, account portability, self-sovereign ID, etc.).
There's another angle in this paradox, which is: blockchain/crypto founders usually want to avoid all the hurdles and costs associated with regulated services (e.g. finance), which is why there's so much stuff happening in DeFi, as it's perceived as a regulation-free safe harbor.
What most blockchain/crypto founders seem to be failing to properly address, though, is that they're favouring short-term opportunities with limited growth potential over mid/long term opportunities with much juicier prospective growth rates.
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!