3 ms·

Remittance. Moving suitcases of money back and forth is hard if it is not an equal flow back and forth. Do you own every location?

by useful 5y ago

rchaud 5y ago
Can you provide an example of suitcase-level transactions being carried out by individuals, that couldn't be done at the same cost and less complexity at a Moneygram office?
- xur17 5y ago
  MoneyGram is quite expensive as well..
  - rchaud 5y ago
    Moneygram and Western Union have been 'banking the unbanked' for decades. They actually deliver what crypto promises. With MG and WU, they are deeply embedded in the countries they operate in; they develop relationships with the banks so customers can get their money without hassle, even if they don't have accounts there. If you send money in Country A, it's available in Country B within 10 minutes, which is approx. the amount of time it would take a human to look up that transaction and verify the customer's ID. Your recipient walks out with cash. Meanwhile, transferring crypto peer-to-peer isn't even free, and transactions are nowhere near instantaneous. And even if your recipient understands crypto, they still have an extra step of converting these bytes into actual legal tender.
user-the-name 5y ago
Remittance is something cryptocurrencies have tried many times to do, and generally failed completely at. To do remittances, you have to have money flowing in both directions, or you will run out of local currency. Cryptocurrencies do not have that. There are not an equal number of people in foreign countries that want to buy cryptocurrencies as there are that want to send money and convert it to local currencies. The solution for this is, ultimately, arbitrage using the traditional financial channels. And at that point, you are paying the costs for those channels, plus the costs of the extra middlemen you have added on top of them.

3 ms·

Remittance. Moving suitcases of money back and forth is hard if it is not an equal flow back and forth. Do you own every location?

by useful 5y ago

Remittance. Moving suitcases of money back and forth is hard if it is not an equal flow back and forth. Do you own every location?

rchaud 5y ago
Can you provide an example of suitcase-level transactions being carried out by individuals, that couldn't be done at the same cost and less complexity at a Moneygram office?
- xur17 5y ago
  MoneyGram is quite expensive as well..
  - rchaud 5y ago
    Moneygram and Western Union have been 'banking the unbanked' for decades. They actually deliver what crypto promises. With MG and WU, they are deeply embedded in the countries they operate in; they develop relationships with the banks so customers can get their money without hassle, even if they don't have accounts there. If you send money in Country A, it's available in Country B within 10 minutes, which is approx. the amount of time it would take a human to look up that transaction and verify the customer's ID. Your recipient walks out with cash. Meanwhile, transferring crypto peer-to-peer isn't even free, and transactions are nowhere near instantaneous. And even if your recipient understands crypto, they still have an extra step of converting these bytes into actual legal tender.
user-the-name 5y ago
Remittance is something cryptocurrencies have tried many times to do, and generally failed completely at. To do remittances, you have to have money flowing in both directions, or you will run out of local currency. Cryptocurrencies do not have that. There are not an equal number of people in foreign countries that want to buy cryptocurrencies as there are that want to send money and convert it to local currencies. The solution for this is, ultimately, arbitrage using the traditional financial channels. And at that point, you are paying the costs for those channels, plus the costs of the extra middlemen you have added on top of them.