5 ms·

Oh, I understand why it hasn't collapsed already. I just don't see how Tether refusing to honor redemptions makes it more resilient to a run in progress, rathe

Oh, I understand why it hasn't collapsed already. I just don't see how Tether refusing to honor redemptions makes it more resilient to a run in progress, rather than less. If nobody wants to buy 1 USDT for a dollar, the peg will break all the same. If Tether stepped in as a buyer of last resort, that would make it more resilient- but if it doesn't, that worse for the peg, not better. It's better for anyone with physical custody of the Tether assets I guess (they have a pile of gold to Scrooge McDuck dive into) but the currency is even more boned than if they'd propped the market up by buying Tethers back. A 100% collateralized stablecoin that just hands everyone back their dollars if they ask can survive anything, a 50% collateralized one can spend a lot of it back into the market to prop the price up, at least for a while. But if Tether can't or won't, that's going to make maintaining the peg a whole lot harder!

arcticbull 5y ago
Ah I see. The point I was making is that since it brazenly doesn't have backing and it openly gets to choose who is allowed to redeem, a run would be very hard to actually start. The exchanges themselves are incentivized to backstop the pegs (up to a point) out of their own capital to ensure their own survival. Beyond that, you are correct of course!
- roywiggins 5y ago
  That makes some sense, since in normal banking you can bleed collateral until you're nearly dry without actually provoking a run, and when you're forced to start looking under your couch cushions for change and ask your depositors for patience, there's the trigger for your run. Tether doesn't have to worry about that... But if "folks desperately try and exchange their USDT for something they can sell at a fiat-backed exchange" then surely the most desperate will be willing to take a haircut on their Tether to get out of it first, and then the Tether price collapses anyway, through some combination of the exchanges shutting down trading, drawing down their own collateral to maintain the peg (and then running out), and/or the exchange reluctantly allowing the price to float? Like, the too-big-to-failness is definitely part of why it's still a thing, but that just means that the real buyer of last resort is other large crypto holders who don't want the ecosystem to collapse. That's great for Tether-the-company, and maybe good for Tether the coin, but it seems to me sort of distantly related to Tether allowing direct withdrawals. There's an obvious mechanism for maintaining the peg if Tether allows large holders to redeem Tether: those holders buy any slightly discounted Tether, then hand it back to Tether and redeem it and keep the tiny profit. This will work but it's just Tether propping up the price with its capital with extra steps...
- humaniania 5y ago
  Assuming that the unlicensed exchanges have the capital to process withdrawals. In other unregulated industries the people operating the gray market platforms are almost always embezzling money and not keeping customer funds in segregated accounts. If the exchanges spend money propping up Tether they won't have it available for withdrawals.
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    Exchanges make money hand over fist, they keep non-trivial basis points from a nice simple MySQL transaction. The question is: is the net outflow from the USDT peg into USD more than the revenue they are bringing in?
    - humaniania 5y ago
      Yeah but they're operating in a gray market that is going to almost certainly close or shrink with regulation and they're greedy so why not take as much as possible? It's not like the customers have any recourse when their sketchy offshore exchange disappears or closes without paying everyone.
krick 5y ago
> Oh, I understand why it hasn't collapsed already. I feel stupid, but I still actually don't. If considerably more people will want to sell it than there is a demand for it, the price will have to go down, no matter what, as long as "price" is anything more than a decorative label on the exchange's website and you actually can swap it for any currency at all. So, either the exchange should cover all that demand, which doesn't sound reasonable (I'm not sure it's realistic, and even if it was — why would they do that? if this happens, Tether is dead, they can either abandon it or go down with it), or there actually must be some demand. So, I assume it's the latter. But why would there be any demand for it, if everybody (basically) knows that USDT is a scam? It isn't the same thing as "SHIBA is a scam" or whatever, because even if everyone agrees SHIBA is essentially worthless, people are buying it to speculate, so it can hold onto a belief that others believe it will grow. You cannot speculate on USDT, since USDT cannot grow by definition, it's a stablecoin (and not the only one — there are others with better reputation). It can only crash. So why doesn't it?
- gnopgnip 5y ago
  While crypto prices are rising generally there are more people putting money in and fewer people taking money out. Even a short shift in the market isn't enough to change that. But a longer term crypto recession would have a run on the exchanges, many would want to cash out, and the price isn't going to be stable
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  If I understand correctly nobody has a useful handle to profit from killing it and all the players have an incentive in it's continued existence. Killing it would require large scale collaboration among individuals who collectively would all be hurt.
  - tylerrobinson 5y ago
    > all the players have an incentive in it's continued existence Even retail investors? Why do they hold a stablecoin that has any risk at all, with no upside? What is the retail investor’s end game here?

arcticbull 5y ago

Ah I see. The point I was making is that since it brazenly doesn't have backing and it openly gets to choose who is allowed to redeem, a run would be very hard to actually start. The exchanges themselves are incentivized to backstop the pegs (up to a point) out of their own capital to ensure their own survival. Beyond that, you are correct of course!

roywiggins 5y ago
That makes some sense, since in normal banking you can bleed collateral until you're nearly dry without actually provoking a run, and when you're forced to start looking under your couch cushions for change and ask your depositors for patience, there's the trigger for your run. Tether doesn't have to worry about that... But if "folks desperately try and exchange their USDT for something they can sell at a fiat-backed exchange" then surely the most desperate will be willing to take a haircut on their Tether to get out of it first, and then the Tether price collapses anyway, through some combination of the exchanges shutting down trading, drawing down their own collateral to maintain the peg (and then running out), and/or the exchange reluctantly allowing the price to float? Like, the too-big-to-failness is definitely part of why it's still a thing, but that just means that the real buyer of last resort is other large crypto holders who don't want the ecosystem to collapse. That's great for Tether-the-company, and maybe good for Tether the coin, but it seems to me sort of distantly related to Tether allowing direct withdrawals. There's an obvious mechanism for maintaining the peg if Tether allows large holders to redeem Tether: those holders buy any slightly discounted Tether, then hand it back to Tether and redeem it and keep the tiny profit. This will work but it's just Tether propping up the price with its capital with extra steps...
humaniania 5y ago
Assuming that the unlicensed exchanges have the capital to process withdrawals. In other unregulated industries the people operating the gray market platforms are almost always embezzling money and not keeping customer funds in segregated accounts. If the exchanges spend money propping up Tether they won't have it available for withdrawals.
- arcticbull 5y ago
  Exchanges make money hand over fist, they keep non-trivial basis points from a nice simple MySQL transaction. The question is: is the net outflow from the USDT peg into USD more than the revenue they are bringing in?
  - humaniania 5y ago
    Yeah but they're operating in a gray market that is going to almost certainly close or shrink with regulation and they're greedy so why not take as much as possible? It's not like the customers have any recourse when their sketchy offshore exchange disappears or closes without paying everyone.

krick 5y ago

> Oh, I understand why it hasn't collapsed already. I feel stupid, but I still actually don't. If considerably more people will want to sell it than there is a demand for it, the price will have to go down, no matter what, as long as "price" is anything more than a decorative label on the exchange's website and you actually can swap it for any currency at all. So, either the exchange should cover all that demand, which doesn't sound reasonable (I'm not sure it's realistic, and even if it was — why would they do that? if this happens, Tether is dead, they can either abandon it or go down with it), or there actually must be some demand. So, I assume it's the latter. But why would there be any demand for it, if everybody (basically) knows that USDT is a scam? It isn't the same thing as "SHIBA is a scam" or whatever, because even if everyone agrees SHIBA is essentially worthless, people are buying it to speculate, so it can hold onto a belief that others believe it will grow. You cannot speculate on USDT, since USDT cannot grow by definition, it's a stablecoin (and not the only one — there are others with better reputation). It can only crash. So why doesn't it?

gnopgnip 5y ago
While crypto prices are rising generally there are more people putting money in and fewer people taking money out. Even a short shift in the market isn't enough to change that. But a longer term crypto recession would have a run on the exchanges, many would want to cash out, and the price isn't going to be stable
michaelmrose 5y ago
If I understand correctly nobody has a useful handle to profit from killing it and all the players have an incentive in it's continued existence. Killing it would require large scale collaboration among individuals who collectively would all be hurt.
- tylerrobinson 5y ago
  > all the players have an incentive in it's continued existence Even retail investors? Why do they hold a stablecoin that has any risk at all, with no upside? What is the retail investor’s end game here?