> One institutional trader told The Wall Street Journal that his company has conducted fire drills to withdraw its assets from Binance quickly in the event of a meltdown.<p>If you think a crypto exchange you're doing business with is on shaky ground, the time to withdraw is <i>now</i>. So many crypto exchange collapses have shown that you need to withdraw <i>before</i> the "meltdown" if you want to ensure your assets are safe. If you wait you end up in bankruptcy purgatory for years and might only get a fraction of what you're owed.
So a system that is designed and meant to work trustlessly, rejects centralization, big institutions and middlemen showing that it will not be long-term sustainable for any actor that tries to become a big middleman? Why am I not surprised...
Most of Binance's trading activity isn't about being an "onramp" for crypto, it is mostly crypto to crypto trades, in which case the onchain solutions are far superior. The sooner these vestiges of a prior crypto era are torn apart, the better.<p>Within the crypto space, these exchanges are extortionate to project communities and the project founders, and a lot of it can't be talked about because that ensures no listing on Binance, and thats just the tip of the iceberg of what people have to put up with, all of the eastern exchanges have similar practices. eastern europe too, but and to a much lesser extent the US exchanges but to the point that it’s impossible to get listed unless all the VCs backed you.<p>Outside the crypto space, its pretty obvious that the discussion is much more juvenile, any distress with <i>any</i> crypto exchange represents "crypto" as a whole, and validates whatever people already believe. So the sooner these mismanaged companies go away, the sooner that conversation can mature.<p>Unpermissioned market making onchain has been a major boon to the crypto space, and so these exchanges like Binance are not necessary. Most of the major wallets have ways of getting fiat into the crypto space, and they can become the primary users of onramps. Both Block and Paypal are crypto exchanges, all that infrastructure is there by better managed companies, and trading of more esoteric asset pairs can be done onchain, as it already is.
> One institutional trader told The Wall Street Journal that his company has conducted fire drills to withdraw its assets from Binance quickly in the event of a meltdown.<p>… If you’re conducting fire drills on withdrawing your assets when Binance implodes… why not just withdraw them now? Like, it is not the only exchange.
Love that the charts and several data points are actually about Binance US which has been dying for a while. Binance global though seems to be doing okay.<p>Binance US is dead no doubts about it. Binance won't be available for US customers.<p>I'm not sure if the article has a point though. The TLDR seems to be Binance's overall size is reducing because Binance US is closing shop.
Ever since MtGox, a familiar headline, reusable every year or so, with only the specific identity of the biggest crypto firm needing be changed.<p>(Though, who's next? Not that many still standing, really.)
I'm still waiting for the "obvious scam that Tether is which is printing fake dollars as everybody knows" to implode. Any moment now.<p>BTW, wasn't the narrative that crypto goes up because it's bought with printed Tethers? Why aren't they printing some now to start another bull market?
The market does not agree:<p><a href="https://www.google.com/finance/quote/BNB-USD?window=MAX" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.google.com/finance/quote/BNB-USD?window=MAX</a>
> Crypto firm<p>Binance or exchanges are 'anti' crypto. Buying/Selling crypto defeats the purpose of crypto entirely, rather supports fiat(do the math please). Exchanges must die before crypto even starts working.