From the Clarity Act to Bank Tokenized Deposits: Haseeb Analyzes the Undercurrents and Solutions for Stablecoins in a Indifferent Market

Haseeb Qureshi: The Next Bull Market Is Here (It’s Different Than What You Think) (The Rollup podcast interview with Haseeb Qureshi, managing partner at Dragonfly), here are the key points summarized: 1. Market Indifference and Interpretation of the Clarity/Genius Acts • Market indifference to Regulatory Clarity: The probability of the U.S. Clarity Act passing has declined (PolyMarket predicts it to be about 15%), yet the crypto market remains largely unresponsive. Asset prices (like Bitcoin, ETH) are not sensitive to regulatory developments, and in the long run, passing some form of legislation before 2028 remains a high probability event. • Signal effect of the Genius Act: Although the details of the Genius Act (stablecoin regulation) have been delayed, its most crucial role is to send a clear signal to the market—allowing and supporting the development of stablecoins within a framework. This signal has prompted traditional fintech giants like Stripe and Klarna to enter the space. 2. Entry of Traditional Giants and the Underlying Value of Rain • Defensive moves by giants like Western Union: Traditional cross-border remittance channels are facing rapid erosion from stablecoins. Western Union has partnered with Dragonfly portfolio company Rain to launch a stablecoin card, essentially leveraging existing brand trust and customer confidence to embrace stablecoin technology for self-protection and defense. • Business model advantages of Rain: Rain shares interchange fees with issuers (like NeoBanks and traditional giants), enabling third parties to build sustainable business models directly on its infrastructure, thus driving explosive growth in stablecoin-backed cards. 3. Critique of Tokenized Deposits: False Proposition and Walled Gardens • Tokenized deposits are extremely uninteresting: For example, tokenized deposits launched by Wells Fargo or JP Morgan are limited to transfers between internal customers of the bank, essentially just a shell change of traditional bank ledgers, failing to realize the core blockchain values of permissionless, programmable, and cross-protocol. • Fundamental differences with stablecoins: Stablecoins are open, permissionless, cross-border settlement infrastructures; whereas tokenized deposits are typical "enterprise-level/alliance chain local networks (Walled Gardens)" that cannot trigger true innovation and network effects. 4. Global Implementation Forms of Stablecoins and Future Outlook • Current best implementation form: Stablecoin cards: • Previously idealized that merchants would directly list "support for USDT settlement," but in reality, this only occurs in a few regions on the brink of hyperinflation and state failure. • In most regions globally, the most effective way to popularize is "front-end swipe Visa/Mastercard, back-end directly deduct stablecoins." Merchants do not need to change their acceptance habits, and users can enjoy the settlement efficiency of stablecoins. • Endgame logic: Bypassing and replacing traditional card organizations (Disintermediating Visa): • When users of stablecoin cards like Rain reach a sufficient scale, large e-commerce merchants (like Amazon, Alibaba) can settle stablecoins directly with Rain via API during payment, thus bypassing Visa/Mastercard fees. • Stablecoins, as no-rent, neutral public infrastructure, will ultimately replace traditional card organization networks. 5. Cold Wallet Security and Personal Custody Recommendations • Ordinary people should prefer third-party custody/ETFs: For non-professionals, the risks of self-custody are extremely high due to vulnerabilities and human error. Using a Bitcoin ETF (custodied by Coinbase) or compliant institutional custody is a low-risk choice. • Analysis of hardware wallet incidents: Recent vulnerabilities in niche hardware wallets (like Cold Card) stem from small vendor scale and failure to use AI for security reinforcement. This does not mean hardware cold wallets are entirely ineffective, but users should prioritize large brands to ensure ample security budgets.