The promise of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies was to go mainstream and in essence create a new medium of exchange that was borderless and completely democratic, but several obstacles still stand in the way. Following up on previous discussions on this exact topic, this article seeks to provide some actionable business advice.

NurPhoto via Getty Images

In other words, bitcoin was introduced with the promise to democratize the financial system, but in order to make this a reality several significant issues still need to be addressed. The recent news from Paypal should be seen as encouraging, but crypto native solutions still have room for improvement to lead to wider adoption.

Cryptocurrency was first introduced as an idea and concept that would revolutionize the ability of individuals and institutions to conduct transactions, but that promise has not exactly become reality. Decentralizing access to financial information and financial resources lies at the core of blockchain, but also has served as a headwind to broader adoption. There are an array of issues that remain in terms of cryptoassets, but attempting to solve these issues with a blanket approach is bound to be rife with errors and oversteps.

That said, several specific issues seem to consistently crop up pertaining to widespread adoption across different economic sectors.

Usability. One of the largest problems when it comes to bitcoin and other cryptoassets is that these cryptoassets are not necessarily easy to use on a day-to-day basis. If people are not able to access crypto holdings in a manner that is easy, user friendly, and convenient, it is difficult to see how mass market adoption will occur. Private keys and cold wallets might be common knowledge for individuals involved in the crypto space, but the general non-expert public might not be as comfortable with these components.

The recent launch of the Binance powered debit card and layer-two improvements designed to make Bitcoin easier to use are clear indications that significant efforts are underway in this area. Ease of use, and making crypto as similar to current financial transactions are key factors to help encourage wider utilization.

Interoperability. To have any medium of exchange actually function as a medium of exchange it is important that this item be able to be used, exchanged, and accounted for on an easy-to-understand basis. In other words, for any cryptoasset to actually be used as a fiat alternative it will need to be able to interact and work with other existing technology systems. For example, how simple will it be use a cryptoasset to go shopping, buy groceries, or conduct any other transactions versus fiat currencies?

Specifically, the key to broader adoption is to break down the silos that have sprung up in the blockchain space, akin to how the Internet evolved from a walled-garden model to a more open source platform. Being able to swap crypto information between different networks is key to spurring further innovation; projects like R3 Corda, SIAchain, and IBM IBM Hyperledger Fabric are simply a few of the examples of how interoperability is moving to the forefront.

Bifurcating the marketplace. Technical specifications connected to cryptoassets may make perfect sense to those individuals familiar with, or veterans of, the space, but there does seem to be need for different levels and types of cryptoassets. Just like not every person that uses the U.S. dollar needs to have a detailed understanding of the federal banking system, it is unrealistic to expect every individual, small business owner, or investor will want to be required to understand the nuances of different cryptoasset tools and options. Linking back to the first point, usability, there seems to be a need for consumer oriented products as well as for products more applicable for use by institutional clients.

This is already occurring; in addition to the thousands of cryptoassets currently being traded, different use cases have already led to increased differentiation. From truly decentralized crypto like bitcoin, there are now stablecoins (whose market capitalization is measured in the billions), as well as the accelerating investment into the development of central bank digital currencies. Far from being negative, as critics of centralized options would state, these developments are another sign of maturity and growth.

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies may have been designed to replace and serve as an alternative to fiat currencies, but that idea has not quite lived up to its promise. Yet. Taking a handful of steps toward solving a few of the issues standing in the way of broader adoption can lead to dramatic benefits across the board in terms of both functionality and adoption.

The future of money is digital and most likely will have some crypto component, that much is clear, and while there are questions as to what the final form will be, it is important for everyone to be engaged and proactive participants in the process.

View post:

Bitcoin And Other Crypto Can Accelerate Adoption By Tweaking A Few Things - Forbes

The first half of 2020 has been wild for just about everyone in every asset class. In early March, when it became evident that COVID-19 was a seismic event, asset markets across the globe crashed. One important reason was that levered investors suddenly received margin calls and were forced to liquidate assets to satisfy them.

When the only thing anybody cares about is cash, there is no such thing as a safe asset or a defensive investment. During the crash, companies rushed to access their revolving credit lines, bolstering cash reserves as quickly as possible in fear that if they didnt do it today, that credit would be unavailable tomorrow. The bid for risk securities dropped out, and prices started to plummet. Bitcoin (BTC) and other cryptocurrencies were no different than stocks simply another asset investors were holding that they needed to sell in order to raise United States dollars.

Only after the U.S. Federal Reserve poured massive amounts of cash into the banking system did the cash hoarding subside, and shortly thereafter, everyone rushed to put their cash back to work in the financial markets. Crypto markets stabilized and rebounded along with stocks. During this time, both BTC and stocks were experiencing extreme volatility, and this uncertainty was priced into the options markets for both.

As markets slowly began to show strength, implied volatility as measured through option prices started to settle as well. One-month annualized forward-looking implied volatility got as high as 80% in the S&P 500 stock index, peaking as high as 180% in BTC at the height of the panic, on March 16. Over the next few weeks, volatility tracked lower and lower, though remained high relative to historical averages.

After the craziness at the end of March and beginning of April subsided, traders turned their eyes toward the next thing on the horizon. For BTC, the next big thing was the upcoming halving of mining rewards. There was plenty of speculation on all sides about what would happen when the clock ticked past the fateful hour on May 11. Would prices skyrocket? Crash? Would nothing happen at all? Was it all priced in?

No matter which side of the debate investors fell, they could all agree on one thing the halving might constitute a catalyst for a market move, and it might be worth owning some downside protection or upside exposure to take advantage of it. The fact that this potential event was on the horizon kept option-implied volatility from dropping too quickly, even as realized volatility started to settle down. Essentially, the market seemed to agree that options should have some extra value for the uncertainty of the halving event. Toward the end of April, despite realized volatility settling in the 65%70% range, implied forward-looking volatility started ticking up as demand for options increased, reaching as high as 95% immediately before the halving.

After the halving passed, and proved to be anticlimactic, there was much less of a reason for investors to own options, particularly the shorter dated expiries. The holders of long calls and puts started to close their positions, selling those options to market-makers, and even more of those holders decided to take short positions. As the market-makers started to get longer options in near term expirations, implied volatility was pushed aggressively lower.

At the same time, the market-makers were hedging their books as best they could. One of the most common hedging strategies in this scenario is gamma hedging. When a position is long options (whether they are calls or puts, as market-makers can easily hedge the first order sensitivity to underlying price), and especially with nearer-dated options, the position has positive gamma or positive convexity. That is, the risk profile looks longer and longer as the underlying asset rises, and shorter and shorter as the underlying asset falls. In this case, in order to balance that risk, market-makers had lots of BTC to sell every time BTC rallied, and lots of BTC to buy every time BTC sold off.

This action of hedging gamma can lead to a positive feedback loop between implied and realized volatility. As realized volatility drops, investors get comfortable because they do not anticipate anything crazy happening in the market in the near term and become more willing to sell options. As they sell more and more options, market-makers accumulate long gamma positions and subsequently lower implied volatility in their pricing models. They also actively hedge this long gamma position, selling BTC when it is up and buying when it is down. This act of gamma hedging, in the absence of other external factors (such as big news or a large influx of investors jumping into or out of the crypto markets), creates a dampening effect on volatility. This cycle continues, pushing the front of the implied volatility term structure continually lower while simultaneously creating upside resistance and downside support for BTC prices.

We have seen this effect play out substantially since the end of May. Realized volatility has dropped to under 30%, near multiyear lows despite the objectively uncertain world in which we are currently living. Yet even just slightly longer-dated implied volatilities, in the three-to-six month range, are still priced close to the historical long term average, in the 60%70% volatility range. Either the current low volatility feedback loop environment will come to an end soon, or perhaps there are some savvy trades to make in order to take advantage of the disconnect in implied volatilities over the next few months.

This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, you should conduct your own research when making a decision.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

This article was co-authored by Kristin Boggiano and Chad Steinglass.

Kristin Boggiano is president and co-founder atCrossTower, an exchange operator. Kristin is a structured products, regulatory and digital asset expert who brings over 20 years of experience as a trading and regulatory lawyer and over nine years in digital asset trading and regulation. Prior to founding CrossTower, Boggiano was a chief legal officer of AlphaPoint, managing director of an algorithmic trading platform at Guggenheim, and special counsel at Schulte Roth, where she founded the structured products and derivatives division and led the regulatory group for Dodd Frank. Kristin is also the founder of Digital Asset Legal Alliance and Women in Derivatives. She earned her law degree and MBA from Northeastern University and her B.A. from Sarah Lawrence College.

Chad Steinglass is the head of trading at CrossTower, an exchange operator. He has over 15 years of experience trading equity, index and credit derivatives. He was an options market-maker at Susquehanna and Morgan Stanley and the head trader for a division of Guggenheim. He was also a portfolio manager of capital structure arbitrage at Jefferies. He is an expert in market dynamics, market microstructure and automated market-making and trading systems.

Here is the original post:

Where, Oh Where Has Bitcoin Volatility Gone? Part 1 - Cointelegraph

According to data from CoinMetrics, a sell-off on Bitstamp led the market-wide plunge of Bitcoin (BTC). The top cryptocurrency by market capitalization dropped $150 within seconds on the exchange, well below the average market price at the time.

Researchers at CoinMetrics said:

Today's market drop was led by trade activity on Bitstamp, where Bitcoin's price dropped $150 in seconds, well below the rest of the market.

The price of Bitcoin drops lower on Bitstamp than other exchanges on July 10. Source: CoinMetrics

The sell-off on Bitstamp coincided with a sudden dump of BTC by miners. ByteTree shows miners sold 558 more BTC than they mined in the last 24 hours. This suggests that miners led the correction of Bitcoin on July 9, possibly trading on Bitstamp.

Miners are one of the two external sources of unmatched selling pressure on Bitcoin, as investor Willy Woo previously explained.

When miners begin to sell BTC and the market does not immediately absorb the selling pressure it can lead to an abrupt pullback. That is what likely happened on July 10 when the price of BTC dropped to around $9,100 from $9,400.

Throughout the past month, miners have been selling a modest amount of BTC regularly. But miners have always maintained a positive net inventory for over five straight weeks. In other words, miners have been selling less BTC than they mined since the start of June.

As miners started to sell a relatively large amount of Bitcoin for the first time in over a month, BTC saw a rapid, short-term price drop.

Miners sold off an unusually large amount of Bitcoin in the last 24 hours. Source: ByteTree

Although the sell-off primarily occurred on Bitstamp, the firms executive emphasized that it was not a flash crash. Hunter Merghart, head of U.S. operations at the exchange, said it was merely a normal market activity.

Merghart said:

Happy to see market moves analyzed but not sure a ~2% move should be called a flash crash. This is also how markets work, especially when an exchange doesn't act as a market maker. We let our clients try to take advantage of arbitrage opportunities, not ourselves.

Simply put, sellers on Bitstamp likely kickstarted the unexpected 2% price drop of Bitcoin followed by organic selling pressure from traders and clients on the exchange.

After the price of BTC dropped to around $9,110 across major exchanges, it rebounded quickly to above $9,200.

The swift rebound of Bitcoin might suggest that a sudden sell-off on Bitstamp possibly by miners triggered the drop. Based on the reaction of buyers in the $9,000 to $9,100 support area, the probability of a continued recovery of BTC price remains high.

If a one-off event caused a BTC drop to a level that presents significant liquidity for buyers, the probability of a strong reaction from bulls might increase.

Cryptocurrency trader Michael van de Poppe wrote:

Bitcoin is still holding support above the $9,000 barrier. A breakthrough further of $9,300 could lead toward $9,600. Essentially, anything between $8,500 and $10,500 is playground time for altcoins and that could last a few months longer.

In the near-term, traders generally consider the $9,300 level to be a strong area of resistance. A reclaim of $9,300 is likely to see a retest of the high-$9Ks, analysts say.

Originally posted here:

This Exchange Crashed Bitcoin Price to $9K: Heres Why Thats Bullish - Cointelegraph

A recent article by a Cointelegraph Markets contributor proclaimed that Bitcoin is the new Apple, explaining just how Bitcoins (BTC) price could reach $60,000 by 2023: Bitcoin hangs near the chasm of the adoption curve, and its price looks similar to Apples stock in 2008 before it broke out with a 520% rally.

The technology adoption curve referenced was Everett Rogers famous diffusion of innovations model, published in 1962, which described the five stages through which technology becomes diffused i.e., goes mainstream: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards.

In 2008, manufacturer Apples United States smartphone penetration was stalled at about 11% and still waiting to cross the chasm, the gap between the early adopter stage and the early majority stages in the Rogers lexicon. Any technical innovation worth its salt needs to cross that threshold. Apples smartphone surmounted that chasm, of course: Usage exploded, and Apples share price soared into the ionosphere. Bitcoin may well be in a similar place today.

But this comparison, satisfying as it may be, raises some questions. Is BTC even a technology like radios, PCs, and smartphones or is it something different: unique, sui generis i.e., in a class by itself? Is BTCs global penetration really anywhere close to 11% its putative U.S. penetration rate? Also, while smartphone usage indubitably crossed the chasm more than a decade ago, how does one extrapolate BTCs future price from AAPLs share price? Shouldnt it be compared with smartphones price?

The resemblance between Bitcoin and Apple in terms of growth and adoption is indeed there, but in short, is it fair to compare Bitcoin to younger versions of tech giants like Apple?

Arvind Singhal, a professor of communication at the University of Texas at El Paso, whose academic research has focused on the diffusion of innovation, told Cointelegraph that Bitcoin did indeed seem singular: It has tremendous barriers to adoption for most individuals and operates in a space of multiple familiar currencies and that peculiarity would greatly influence its adoption.

Michel Rauchs, the head of Paradigma a consulting firm focusing on the digital assets sector and a former research affiliate for the cryptocurrency and blockchain research program at the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance at the University of Cambridge, told Cointelegraph: Bitcoin is not a technology in itself, and any comparison [with traditional technologies] is misguided. He added: It is a social/economic system, a new monetary order that uses technology to represent its unit of accounts. Technology is just a secondary component, a means to an end.

Additionally, it may be important here to separate Bitcoin from the more generalized blockchain technology in which it partakes or risk misapplying Rogerss diffusion of innovation theory suggested Theophanis Stratopoulos, PwC Chair Associate Professor at the University of Waterloos School of Accounting and Finance, who further explained to Cointelegraph:

When decision-makers consider whether to implement blockchain in, lets say, their supply chain they develop expectations in terms of the cost of making the investment e.g., paying for the implementation of the software versus the benefits, such as increased revenues or cost savings. It is the difference in expectations among decision-makers that explains the adoption cycle that was observed by Rogers.

But Bitcoin does not behave the same way as other technologies typically adopted by firms like CRM systems, for instance. When it comes to Bitcoin, its the expected price that drives people to invest in Bitcoin. It is a matter of speculation, Stratopoulos continued, closer to a pyramid scheme than a capital expenditure. If I believe that more people will want to hold Bitcoin in the future, the price of the Bitcoin will rise. In a case like this, it makes sense for me to invest today rather than tomorrow.

Oliver von Landsberg-Sadie, the CEO and founder of the BCB Group a digital assets financial services group agreed that BTCs adoption cycle was anomalous, telling Cointelegraph: The reason Bitcoins adoption path has broken formation with established adoption curves is quite technical: In the short term, the more users there are, the less useful it is as a currency.

With more users, the Bitcoin network self-regulates by raising the network fees as the mem pool bulges up in busy periods and breathes out in quieter ones. But this makes Bitcoin less effective as a payments processing system. As von Landsberg-Sadie explained: When fees are high, no one is going to pay a $5 transaction fee on a $5 coffee.

Many technical solutions have been proposed to solve this dilemma, some in the form of forks, others like the Lightning Network project that makes use of a second layer, but none have truly stuck in the core Bitcoin protocol, which has been the slowest to evolve. The good news is that it is evolving, and the increase in off-chain transactions is reducing barriers, but all of this means one cant expect Bitcoin to follow a classic Rogers technical adoption curve, according to von Landsberg-Sadie.

When U.S. smartphone penetration stalled at around the 11% mark in December 2008, Apples share price became volatile three-month volatility stood at 92%, according to the July 6 Cointelegraph article. In June 2020, with BTC penetration at 11%, three-month volatility was at 64%, indeed also a very high figure.

But Stratopoulos was unimpressed. I would not compare Bitcoin to the performance of Apple or Amazon or any other high-tech company. Rogerss adoption cycle applies to innovations emerging technologies not to the price of stock. Kevin Dowd, a professor of finance and economics at Durham University in the United Kingdom, agreed, telling Cointelegraph:

Since BTC is a form of product, then the natural comparison is with Apples smartphone product. Apples share price might have risen strongly, but the better comparison is with the price of smartphones, which have not.

It is relatively easy to find correlations like between AAPL in 2008 and BTC in 2020, commented Stratopoulos. It does not mean that there is causation, or it could be just a spurious correlation.

What, then, can be said about Bitcoin adoption? If measured by awareness e.g., recognition of the term Bitcoin then it has already entered the mainstream, said Rauchs. A Blockchain Capital survey reported 89% awareness of Bitcoin in the U.S. as of Spring 2019. A U.K. Financial Conduct Authority survey conducted in December 2019, which was recently published, found that 73% have heard about crypto, compared to 58% in 2019.

As for BTC ownership, the Blockchain Capital survey reported: In total, 9% of the [U.S] population owns Bitcoin including 18% of those aged 1834 and 12% of those aged 3544. The firm originally reported 11% but that was later corrected. In the U.K. survey, by comparison, an estimated 3.86% of the general population currently own cryptocurrencies. This projects to approximately 1.9 million adults within the U.K. population (over 18) of roughly 50 million.

Rauchs finds the lower U.K. adoption estimate more realistic if generalizing; that is, he would peg crypto ownership at 3%5% of the global population, which also includes indirect ownership e.g., individuals participating in a pension fund that invests in Bitcoin. But this clearly means that all crypto is in the first half of the early adopter stage nowhere near the so-called chasm.

Its not much different for blockchain technology. Stratopoulos co-authored a paper on blockchain technology adoption exclusive of cryptocurrencies that concluded: Despite the recent hype, the current adoption rate is relatively low, and blockchain has not become mainstream yet.

Bitcoin clearly means different things to different people. Its most popular use today is as a store of value, while back in 2011, its principal use was as a payment method for gaming and other purposes, said Rauchs. Depending on its applications, different adoption curve scenarios are possible. For his part, Rauchs believes that BTCs most likely future usage will be as an alternative, non-sovereign store of value.

According to von Landsberg-Sadie, Bitcoins true adoption pattern will be more like a wave, oscillating higher at each cycle. In this view, the biggest bets are on the most extreme outcomes: Bitcoin will either ripple slowly out of relevance, or it will amplify meaningfully into the mainstream. My money is on the latter.

In sum, BTC following the same growth pattern as Apple sounds like a fun version of what may happen, but ultimately, one shouldnt quibble that it is not based on a statistically valid experiment, as Dowd reminded Cointelegraph. Still, according to several experts, it doesnt make sense to compare Bitcoin to traditional technologies because Bitcoin does not have the ability to create value either in the form of increasing revenues or reducing costs, as Stratopoulous noted. Moreover, global BTC penetration is arguably closer to 4% than to the 11% mark where smartphones stood in 2008, immediately before they went mainstream.

See original here:

Comparing Apple to Bitcoin? Crypto Occupies a Class of Its Own - Cointelegraph

Get Forbes' top crypto and blockchain storiesdelivered to your inboxevery week for the latest news on bitcoin, other major cryptocurrencies and enterprise blockchain adoption.

Mustafa Murat Kaynak / Anadolu Agency

Bitcoin enjoyed a modest breakout Monday, gaining close to 5%, though it soon retreated back near where it began the week. After rising more than 150% in a two-month period from mid-March to May, bitcoin has sputtered since its halving and its volatility by the end of June was its lowest since February. A report this week showed that bitcoin trading volumes sank by 36% in June, a decline reminiscent of the lead-up to the crypto winter in early 2019.

One small cryptocurrency did double in value this week with a push from young TikTok users. Dogecoin, which trades for less than half a penny, soared after a viral video with a million views encouraged users to invest.

Brock Pierce, a controversial cryptocurrency investor who cofounded the stablecoin tether, is running for president. While his vanity third-party run isnt getting as much hype as that of rapper Kanye West, Pierce promises that he would have used 21st century technology to get stimulus checks and unemployment to Americans much faster. In a wide-ranging interview, Pierce revealed more details on his policy positions and denied disturbing allegations that he provided drugs to minors and pressured them to have sex in 2000.

The first week of his campaign didnt go so well. A New York appeals court approved an investigation into a number of businesses behind tether, which is pegged to the U.S. dollar and has a market value of $10 billion. Questions about whether or not tether is actually backed dollar-for-dollar have circulated since 2018. The Bitfinex exchange is also a separate respondent in the New York attorney generals investigation.

Sigal Mandelker, a Donald Trump appointee for under secretary of the Treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence who stepped down last year to work in the private sector, has reemerged as an investor and board member for Chainalysis. Her venture firm, Ribbit Capital, joined the crypto investigation startups expanded $49 million Series B funding round, and she expects to put her government experience tracing illicit activities to good use.

Bitcoins lightning network was built to speed up low-value bitcoin transactions by moving them off the bitcoin blockchain, but researchers at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem warned that the network is vulnerable against cyberattacks if users arent careful. Computer scientists Jona Harris and Aviv Zohar wrote in a Medium post that since the network is susceptible to blockchain congestion, around $9 million worth of bitcoin could be looted by attackers.

The PlusToken Ponzi scheme masterminds disappeared in 2019 with a $3 billion profit after six people allegedly involved in the scheme were arrested, but after a long quiet period, the XRP holdings of PlusToken wallets are moving again, signaling that some Ponzi schemers may still be at large.

About 285 million XRP tokens were transferred to a pool of accounts on June 19 shuffling the money and making it difficult to trace, though the scammers dont necessarily control this shuffle-pool and it may be law enforcement simply selling seized assets.

Digital asset investment manager Arca launched the Arca U.S. Treasury Fund on Wednesday, making it the first SEC-registered product regulated under the Investment Company Act of 1940 to offer digital securities. The fund will use the Ethereum blockchain to offer shares of ArCoins, which will pay out quarterly interest to investors, and ArCoins value is expected to remain stable since the fund will invest primarily in low-risk Treasury securities.

The Federal Reserves Declining Balance Sheet Is Bearish for Bitcoin. Or Is It? [CoinDesk]

Crypto Stablecoins Face Increasing Regulatory Scrutiny [Bloomberg]

Could We Fight Misinformation With Blockchain Technology? [New York Times]

Read more:

Bitcoin Trading Volume Slumps; Will TikTok Revive Dogecoin? - Forbes

Crisis laden Argentina saw bitcoin transactions worth $1.4 million (101 million pesos) being recorded in the past week, a new high for the country.

According to a report by Vorem, this figure is nearly double the previous high of $0.96 million recorded in the last week of June.

Citizens who have previously watched their currency lose value are now turning to bitcoin and those finding it difficult to transfer fiat money to other countries now make use of the cryptocurrency.

The Argentine financial troubles, which started in 2018, worsened following the Covid-19 induced economy lockdown.

The countrys peso currency is depreciating while the inflation rate is growing.

According to a World Bank report, issued just as the country implemented lockdown measures, Argentinas economic situation presents a precarious balance.

The Argentine peso has lost 68% of its value since 2018. Annual inflation is over 50% and after a 2.5% fall in GDP in 2018, the economy contracted an additional 2.2% in 2019.

Already government data for the first three months show the economy shrank 4.8%. Unemployment rose to over 10% in the same period.

Meanwhile, Vorem quotes analysts predicting the economy to shrink by 10% by the end of 2020.

Argentina, one of Latin Americas largest economies, has faced persistent economic troubles going back several decades.

The crises are blamed on several factors including an insistence on using an overvalued currency, large scale borrowing as well as a lack of financial support by multilateral institutions.

After the crisis between 2001 and 2002, the country dollarized as it tried to restore confidence. That policy was abandoned in favor of a returning peso.

Again, prominent economists are calling for a return to dollarization but as the Vorem report suggests, citizens might be seeking a safe haven in crypto assets instead.

What do you think about the recent demand for bitcoin in Argentina? Let us know what you think in the comments section below.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

Follow this link:

Bitcoin Transactions: New High for Argentina as Confidence in the Peso Tanks - Bitcoin News

Peer-to-peer Bitcoin (BTC) marketplace Paxful announced on July 14 that its platform has witnessed another surge in trade volume, hitting the $4.6 billion mark and reaching over 4.5 million wallet registrations.

Paxful is also forecasting an additional two million users by the end of 2020, as the company is entering its 5th anniversary.

Ray Youseff, the CEO of Paxful, noted that emerging markets in developing nations are a major factor in the platform's recent growth.

He said, "When you look at our data, in Africa, Nigeria, Ghana, and Kenya lead in terms of volume this year. Coming in fourth, and surprisingly one breakout country weve seen is Cameroon where we have $5M USD in volume (YTD 2020)."

Youseff said that Paxful has seen a significant uptick in the Indian crypto market since 2019, with trade volume increasing by 883% from $2.2 million to $22.1 million in 2020.

The CEO also stated that the worldwide coronavirus pandemic has had some effect on the platform's growth. Investors have become more interested in non-traditional assets to protect their wealth as COVID-19 related closures rocked global markets.

He said, "In terms of the COVID-19 pandemic, while it has impacted usage of cryptocurrencies on our platform and more specifically the interest in a nontraditional monetary asset, we believe that the continued growth is more a result of the financial inequality that continues to plague the world.

Cointelegraph reported on June 11 that P2P Bitcoin trading activity in the United States surged to a new all-time high during the week of June 7.

See original here:

Paxful Reaches the $4.6B Milestone in P2P Bitcoin Trading Volume - Cointelegraph

This is a guest contribution by Jon Southurst, a writer with CoinGeek.com. He intereviewed BitBoss CEO Matt Dickson, who made the case for a Bitcoin SV gambling operation shortly after the AGA called for cashless systems in casinos. This article first appeared onCoinGeek.com.

The American Gaming Association (AGA) recentlypublished a reportcalling for a more rapid move towards cashless systems in casinos and other venues. Despite the damageCOVID-19and its mitigation policies have inflicted on some sectors of the economy, they also present a perfect opportunity for Bitcoin companies likeBitBossto pitch their solutions to operators and regulators.

Jurisdictions in Nevada and New Jersey were among the first to call for an end to lockdowns and get their economies moving again. In Las Vegas many venues have now reopened, albeit with face screens and social distancing rules. But the sheer turnover of cash money moving in and out of their systemsnot only on the gambling floor but also in restaurants, hotels and other entertainment venuesstill presents a transmission risk.

The AGAs report is actually the result of 18 months research into the cashless issue, but it is now more pertinent thanks to COVID-19 and new, dramatic moves to prevent the spread of viruses everywhere.

With Bridge, BitBoss is ready to roll

Bitcoinand blockchain gambling app developers have tended to focus more on the online gaming industry. ButBitBoss stands outas the company that targeted the entire industry and developed a system that integrates with physical venues just as easily.

Speaking to CoinGeek, BitBoss co-founder and CEOMatt Dicksonsaid his company has already built a blockchain-based gambling system thats ready to go. The AGAs cashless call and current public mood mean the concept should be far easier to pitch to gambling venue operators, and BitBoss intends to do just that.

BitBoss has already developed an integrated gambling system called Bridge with components for users, venue operators and hardware devices.

As Dickson pointed out, gambling venues have historically been eager to use more efficient payment systems, moving from quarters in buckets to ticket systems in slot machines. And casinos themselves have long been cashless on the floor by using chips to represent value. Now the foot is on the gas to implement secure cashless systems as soon as possible, the main challenge is getting them to change any prejudices they might have about blockchain technology. It could reach a point, he said, where casinos became digital asset exchanges themselves.

Casinos, and BitBoss competitors, have faced the twin hurdles of compliance and security as they try to build their cashless systems around existing fiat currencies and bank accounts. Using a high-capacity blockchain to do that work instead has allowed BitBoss to build better products while others were busy going through procedures to become licensed payment processors.

It solves the problem all our competitors have: Interview with Matt Dickson

Is BitBoss planning to make a special push to market its products to casinos in the wake of the AGAs call for cashless casinos?

Yes, we are planning on making a push into land-based casinos. We have been working on a hardware/blockchain solution for over one year now.

What products does BitBoss have ready right now to pitch to venue operators?

Our product is called Bridge. Bridge is our patent-pending, crypto-based cashless ecosystem. It consists of three key components. First, is a crypto-based mobile wallet. We decided on using a crypto/blockchain based wallet because its the most secure standard that exists today.

Second, we have a hardware device that is installed in every slot machine and table game. The device for slots/EGMs speaks SAS protocol. This allows us to bypass the casino management system that typically runs the casino.

Of course we can integrate into the casino management system as well, which eliminates the need for the hardware. With the hardware device we are trying to give the casinos leverage against their casino management system provider. Typically these companies are slow to innovate and new products are absurdly expensive.

The third component is a lightweight server that communicates with the blockchain. The flow is simple to understand. Say a customer wants to send credits to a slot machine. The customers wallet sends a transaction to the blockchain over the public internet. The casino has this lightweight server listening for transactions sent to the casino. Once the casino sees the transaction on the blockchain it then routes credits to the slot the customer is playing. This is the real magic of the blockchain.

The customer never deals directly with the casino servers. There are no open ports on the casinos server to hack. It solves the problem all our competitors have: How do you allow a non secure device (the customers cell phone) to communicate with your secure devices (slots/EGMs) inside the casinos secure network?

Will your product rollout strategy change at all, or just the marketing message?

Our rollout strategy remains the same. We were ahuge believer in cashlesslong before COVID-19. We felt by driving adoption to cashless wallets we could help casinos make their mobile apps much more useful and utility-based. Most casino apps are currently information-based as opposed to being truly useful. There is a constant push to bring younger generations into the casino. The same young people that are using Venmo and Zelle almost demand cashless. Funny story, I asked my teenage son how many times hes used an ATM machine. The answer had me hit the floor. ZERO!

What regulatory hurdles exist to introducing a blockchain-based payments system like Bitcoin BSV into gambling venues?

Regulators have typically demanded a cooling-off period for gamblers. There has been a nearly universal ban on allowing players to transfer money from their bank accounts directly to the slot machine. The theory is, if a customer needs to get up from the chair and walk to the ATM, then maybe theyll cool off and think twice before they lose more money.

There is now a realization that the apps can control player spend. During the setup of the app players can set maximum daily transfer amounts. We feel that our blockchain system really shines when it comes to responsible gaming. Not only can players set limits, the regulators have an instant, public, permanent immutable record of the transfers. I think there was a resistance to this insight by regulators in the past. Increasingly casinos want to be seen as compliant and be seen as protecting customers.

Casino gambling is about entertainment, drawing customers into properties where additional revenue is generated from hotel rooms, restaurants, and entertainment. The fines are huge for casinos that fail to protect their customers.

Most of the (Western) world has been rushing to embrace cashless in recent years anyway. Is there a particular resistance to this, or love of hard cash, in casinos?

I think the love of cash isnt as strong as people think. This same debate happened when casinos moved from quarters in buckets to paper tickets printing from slot machines. Cash is expensive to handle, a major security issue and now a health risk.

The American banking system was generally slower to innovate than other countries. Places like Africa have been huge adopters of mobile banking for years. Much of Africa uses text messaging to send money. Your cell phone statement doubles as your bank statement.

What were seeing now in the U.S. is the younger generation rejecting their parents way of banking. The sharing economy started the trend. People needed an easy way to split bar bills and Uber fares. Venmo filled the gap, and the rest is history. Casinos have to adapt but in a compliant way. BitBoss feels strongly that done correctly, casino cashless wallets can compete with the Venmos of the world.

To that end, we are about to make a major announcement concerning person to person payments. Casinos have a belief that money transmitters are an essential component to moving money. Our competitors have spent massive amounts of money getting licensed as money transmitters. Blockchains negate the need for middlemen (money transmitters). The cost savings to the casinos customers will be massive.

Is there such thing as chipless? Large casinos (at least the ones Ive been to) only deal with cash at the bank, but physical chips would have the same virus-transmission problems as cash inside the gaming rooms. (Im not sure about slot machines a lot of older style ones are still coin-operated, arent they?)

Chipless casinos are relatively easy to implement from a technology perspective. Many companies have created innovative electronic versions of roulette and craps. This was done years ago to save on labor costs. There may be an acceleration to these products because of COVID. They seemed to be gaining in popularity before COVID.

Does Bitcoin present an opportunity to change the culture of casino gambling here too, and is this shift actually necessary? For example, attract a younger clientele, introduce new kinds of games, etc.

BitBoss believes that once casinos understand the benefits of cryptocurrencies there will be a major adoption. Casinos need to understand this isnt about the cryptocurrencies themselves. Its all about the underlying technology. Every gaming transaction is a combination of two things; money and data. A $10 bet on banker in baccarat. The internet evolved as a data transfer system with redundancy placed as a higher priority than security. Blockchains developed as highly secure monetary transfer systems first and foremost. Why wouldnt a casino want a highly secure monetary system that can add data easily?

This obviously ignores the fact that theres US$300 billion in blockchain digital assets floating around the world. Its become a very useful funding mechanism over the last few years. Cryptocurrency exchanges have become a very low cost way to convert fiat to crypto and then the crypto can flow into casinos for a fraction of the cost of typical money transmitters.

The largest crypto exchange in the U.S., Coinbase, had a US$8 billion valuation in October 2018. I suspect todays valuation is many multiples of that. If casinos embraced crypto they would in essence be exchanges. The amount of transactions processed is huge in casinos. I foresee a day when the largest casino companies are crypto exchanges as well. It would add billions to their market caps and increase utility and functionality for their customers.

Originally posted here:

US gambling group calls for cashless casinosluckily Bitcoin is ready - CalvinAyre.com

You may not know this, but the federal government is not a fan of bitcoin.

In 2012, the U.S. Attorneys office asked a federal prosecutor to look into shutting down the cryptocurrency before it could take off.

But Katie Haun, the prosecutor tasked with taking down bitcoin, said there was no way for the U.S. Department of Justice to do it:

It would have been akin to saying lets go prosecute cash.

The government isnt a fan of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies because it cant regulate them.

Its attempt to halt bitcoins rise failed then. And just as President Donald Trump aimed his 2021 budget at stymieing bitcoin, it will fail again.

One reason bitcoin got so popular wasnt because hackers working nefariously in their dark basements wanted to buy things on the darknet.

Computer operators wanted a way to grow their wealth without being over-regulated by the government.

You need to understand that bitcoin has no central authority and doesnt run on the traditional financial system.

It runs on a voluntary network of thousands of computers around the world.

Governments have no way of shutting down this network without shutting down the entire internet and keeping it off.

And thats just not going to happen.

When bitcoin was first introduced to the currency market in 2014, it was slow to take off.

A lot of that was because investors had no idea what to make of it.

In 2017, however, the price of bitcoin skyrocketed from $1,000 in January to near $20,000 in December, buoyed by bullish investor sentiment.

The 1,800% jump came despite the governments best efforts to crack down initial coin offerings (ICO) and reject a cryptocurrency exchange-traded fund (ETF).

A main reason is that investors saw bitcoin like gold a good safe haven against stock market fluctuation and the devaluing of the U.S. dollar.

That will play a part in bitcoins next rise.

As you can see in the chart above, the price of bitcoin jumped significantly:

The current price trend shows another jump on the horizon.

Earlier this year, bitcoin tested a recent low around $5,000 in February. Since then, it has risen 80% to come close to the $10,000 mark.

The big reason: stock market volatility.

Market indexes dropped more than 36% in March, pushing investors into safe havens such as gold and bitcoin.

And that volatility isnt going away.

But there are more reasons bitcoin is a good investment now and in the future.

Just like in 2012, the government is taking aim at cryptocurrencies.

All because it cant control them.

In his 2021 proposed budget, Trump proposed moving the Secret Service back to the Department of the Treasury. The idea is to use the Secret Service to investigate how cryptocurrencies are used by criminal organizations.

But bitcoins rise is not because of some underworld criminal organization using it. Its because of what the government has already done.

You see, the Federal Reserves recent action namely printing more money to help the economy devalues the U.S. dollar.

When the dollar loses value, you lose buying power.

But with bitcoin, you arent subject to unsound banks, heavy regulations or even theft.

And since we are in the midst of an economic crisis, the value of bitcoin is only going to rise.

As an investor, now is a good time to own bitcoin.

It protects you against market volatility as well as stringent government oversight.

Original post:

Feds Couldnt Stop Bitcoin in 2012 and They Cant Today - Money and Markets