In recent years, the blockchain and cryptocurrency space has seen a surge in projects claiming to revolutionize cross-border payments. Many of these projects tout specialized “utility tokens” as the key to faster, more efficient international transactions. However, a closer look reveals that these claims often mask get-rich-quick schemes that investors should approach with extreme caution.
The False Promise of Specialized Blockchains
Many companies are marketing what they call “the fastest blockchain on the block” or “the fastest payment solution for cross-border settlements.” These projects typically involve either leveraging an existing blockchain or creating a new one, often presented as a unique solution that requires the use of their proprietary token to facilitate fast transactions.
This approach, reminiscent of the “XRP scenario,” is fundamentally flawed. The truth is that specialized blockchains and their associated tokens are unnecessary for efficient cross-border transactions in the decentralized finance (DeFi) world.
The Reality of Cross-Border Settlements
In the international arena, stablecoins have emerged as the clear winners for cross-border settlements. Cryptocurrencies like USDC and USDT (Tether) already provide efficient solutions for transferring wealth across borders. These stablecoins have become the de facto method for international value transfer, eliminating the need for additional, specialized tokens.
Red Flags to Watch For
When evaluating projects that claim to offer superior cross-border payment solutions, be wary of the following red flags:
- Requirements to use a proprietary token for transactions
- Promises of microsecond-fast transactions using their “bespoke” blockchain
- Lack of transparency regarding correspondent agreements and end-to-end settlement processes
- Absence of verifiable information about on-ramps, off-ramps, and licensing
- Inability to provide concrete evidence of successful transactions with reputable financial institutions
The True Motivation Behind Utility Tokens
The primary goal of many of these projects is not to improve cross-border payments but to enrich the token creators. By convincing investors and banks to buy their tokens, these companies hope to profit from the initial minting and subsequent trading of their cryptocurrency.
This strategy often leads to volatile and ultimately disappointing outcomes for investors. It’s not uncommon to see token prices plummet from highs of $50 to mere cents, leaving early adopters with significant losses.
Existing Solutions in the Market
It’s important to note that efficient, blockchain-based payment solutions already exist in the market. Several companies offer systems that enable merchant payments via QR codes, supporting both fiat and crypto-based transactions. These solutions often work with a wide range of cryptocurrencies, typically including the top 50 tokens by market capitalization, without requiring a specialized utility token.
Due Diligence is Crucial
Before considering any investment in cross-border payment solutions that involve utility tokens, potential investors should ask probing questions:
- Can the company provide verifiable information about their correspondent agreements?
- What are their end-to-end settlement and payout processes?
- Who are their main anchor tenants or partners?
- Can they demonstrate a track record of processing real transactions, both on and off their blockchain?
- Are there reputable financial institutions that can verify the execution of these transactions?
Conclusion
While blockchain technology holds promise for improving cross-border payments, investors should be extremely cautious of projects promoting specialized utility tokens as the solution. In most cases, these offerings are unnecessary at best and potentially fraudulent at worst.
Existing stablecoins and established cryptocurrencies already provide efficient means for international value transfer. As the market continues to evolve, it’s crucial to approach new projects with skepticism and thorough due diligence. Remember, if a solution seems too good to be true or requires the use of a proprietary token, it’s likely best to steer clear and stick with proven, transparent alternatives in the cryptocurrency space.
—
This page was last updated on September 3, 2024.
–
