Etherealize CEO Calls Wall Street's Private Blockchains a 'Race to the Bottom'

cryptonews.ruPublished on 2026-08-15Last updated on 2026-08-15

Abstract

Etherealize co-founder and CEO Vivek Raman criticized Wall Street's growing interest in private, permissioned blockchains, calling them a "race to the bottom." In an interview with CoinDesk, Raman argued that consortium networks fragment liquidity and return the industry to the siloed systems that blockchain technology was meant to overcome. He stated that closed networks do not interoperate, undermining two key advantages of the technology: system compatibility and liquidity concentration. Etherealize promotes Ethereum as an open, foundational layer for institutional players. Raman insists that privacy and access restrictions should be built on top of public infrastructure—at the application or L2 level—rather than creating separate, closed networks. He compared Ethereum to HTTP as a base layer, with additional permissioned and private layers akin to HTTPS. Examples of this new wave of "closed" solutions mentioned include Canton Network from Digital Asset, Circle's Arc project, and Stripe's Tempo. Raman termed this trend "consortium chains 2.0," recalling earlier initiatives like the R3 interbank consortium and the Hyperledger corporate ecosystem from 2016 that failed to gain significant traction. He reiterated his firm belief that a global, open, permissionless infrastructure is necessary as a foundational base layer. Raman previously noted in June that traditional financial institutions had begun implementing Ethereum-based solutions into real business processes.

Etherealize co-founder and CEO Vivek Raman criticized the growing interest of Wall Street in private, permissioned blockchains in an interview with CoinDesk.

Raman stated that consortium networks fragment liquidity and return the industry to the isolated systems that blockchain was meant to eliminate. He called this new wave of such projects a "race to the bottom."

According to him, private loops do not interact with each other and undermine two key advantages of the technology: system interoperability and the concentration of liquidity.

Etherealize promotes Ethereum as an open base layer for institutional players. Raman insists that privacy and access restrictions should logically be built on top of public infrastructure—at the application or L2 solution level—rather than multiplying separate private networks. He compared Ethereum to HTTP as a foundation, with additional permissioned and private layers to HTTPS.

Examples of this latest wave of "closed" solutions are the Canton Network from Digital Asset, Circle's Arc project, and Stripe's Tempo. Raman called what's happening "consortium chains 2.0." He recalled the interbank initiative R3 and the corporate ecosystem Hyperledger, which were actively promoted from 2016 but never truly took off.

"We firmly believe and have always maintained this position that a global, open permissionless infrastructure is necessary as a base layer," said the head of Etherealize.

Recall that in June, Raman claimed that traditional financial organizations had begun to implement solutions based on Ethereum into real business processes.

The End of 'Ultrasound Money': Why Ethereum is Losing Developers and Whale Support
end-content

Related Questions

QWhat did Vivek Raman, co-founder and CEO of Etherealize, criticize regarding Wall Street's interest in blockchain technology?

AVivek Raman criticized Wall Street's growing interest in private, permissioned blockchains, calling the new wave of such projects a 'race to the bottom'.

QAccording to Raman, what two key advantages of blockchain technology do private, closed-loop networks undermine?

AAccording to Raman, private closed-loop networks undermine two key advantages: interoperability between systems and the concentration of liquidity.

QWhat solution does Etherealize promote for institutional players, and how does Raman suggest achieving privacy?

AEtherealize promotes Ethereum as an open base layer for institutional players. Raman insists that privacy and access restrictions should be built on top of public infrastructure, at the application or L2-solution level, rather than creating separate private networks.

QWhat recent examples of 'closed' blockchain solutions for institutions does the article mention?

AThe article mentions Canton Network by Digital Asset, Project Arc by Circle, and Tempo by Stripe as examples of the latest wave of 'closed' institutional solutions.

QWhat historical blockchain initiatives does Raman reference as predecessors to the current 'consortium chains 2.0'?

ARaman references the interbank initiative R3 and the corporate ecosystem Hyperledger, which were actively promoted from around 2016 but never achieved widespread development, as predecessors.

Related Reads

‘White hats’ take 4000 BTC from Liquid, ETFs see best week of 2026: Hodler’s Digest

A purported "white hat" hacking group has withdrawn nearly 4,000 BTC (worth $319 million) from the Blockstream-run Liquid Network sidechain, leaving a message to "contact us on chain." The network has been paused as its team investigates the security breach and negotiates for the funds' return. Analysis suggests the transaction pattern is more consistent with a white hat extraction than a theft. In other news, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs saw their strongest three-week inflow stretch of 2026, attracting a net $3.8 billion. Meanwhile, AMC's CEO Adam Aron has threatened legal action against Robinhood's Ethereum L2 for tokenizing AMC stock without permission, sparking a public feud. A consortium of 21 major financial institutions, including Bank of America and Goldman Sachs, plans to launch a USD-denominated stablecoin in the first half of 2027. Prediction market platform Kalshi has issued a lifetime ban to former lawmaker George Santos for alleged insider trading, while facing a legal challenge from New Jersey over state jurisdiction. Bitcoin traded around $80,234 at week's end. Arthur Hayes predicted Bitcoin could reach $1 million by 2030 but stated his best risk-adjusted bet is currently Ethereum. The IMF reported El Salvador used private donations, not public funds, for recent Bitcoin accumulation, a claim President Bukele disputes. A fake Claude desktop app is spreading crypto-stealing malware, and Hyperscale Data has ended Bitcoin mining in Michigan to convert the site for AI operations.

cointelegraph2m ago

‘White hats’ take 4000 BTC from Liquid, ETFs see best week of 2026: Hodler’s Digest

cointelegraph2m ago

Robinhood Chain Fees Spark Debate Over Business Models: To Be a Tenant or a Landlord?

A public debate erupted over the weekend of September 5th regarding the fee model of Robinhood Chain, highlighting a fundamental conflict between two blockchain philosophies: Solana's "lowest Gas" approach versus Arbitrum's focus on "finding a sustainable business model." Robinhood Chain, an L2 built on Arbitrum Orbit that launched in July 2026, saw its average Gas fee rise to around $0.40 as transaction volume grew—over 100 times more expensive than Solana and even double Ethereum's mainnet cost. Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko ("Toly") criticized this model, arguing that the 10% of net protocol revenue Robinhood shares with the Arbitrum ecosystem (with 90% retained) could cover quadruple the fees on Solana. He contended that applications, not the base layer, should charge users, with the base layer focusing on ultra-low costs. In response, Offchain Labs co-founder Steven Goldfeder defended the Arbitrum model. He stated that by operating its own sequencer, Robinhood captures 90% of the Gas revenue—acting as a "landlord"—whereas on Solana, all fees go to validators, leaving Robinhood as a "tenant" that would have to subsidize user costs out of pocket. This exchange framed the core debate: should chains be free with applications monetizing, or should chains themselves capture value? The discussion broadened with contributions from Nina Rong (BNB Chain Growth Lead and former Arbitrum employee), who argued that endlessly lowering Gas is no longer the top priority. The industry must establish sustainable business models—whether through fees, revenue sharing, or other agreements—to ensure long-term viability beyond reliance on foundation grants. The debate underscores two diverging paths: 1. **Solana's "Ultra-Low Cost + Ecosystem Flywheel":** Prioritizes high throughput and minimal fees to attract users and applications. Value capture for apps happens off-chain (e.g., front-end fees, subscriptions). 2. **Arbitrum's "Customizable App-Chain + Revenue Share":** Allows projects to launch their own chains, control sequencers, and retain most fee revenue while sharing a portion with the parent ecosystem, creating a clearer business闭环 for large entities like Robinhood. An underlying issue is Ethereum's minimal value capture. While Robinhood Chain settles on Ethereum, over 99.99% of the fees are retained by Robinhood and Arbitrum, with only a tiny fraction going to Ethereum for data availability and security—posing a long-term challenge for the mainnet's security budget. The conclusion is that the industry is moving beyond a simple "cheapest Gas" competition. The real challenge is finding a sustainable balance between user experience, infrastructure profitability, and security incentives. The winners will be those who successfully navigate this complex trilemma.

marsbit6m ago

Robinhood Chain Fees Spark Debate Over Business Models: To Be a Tenant or a Landlord?

marsbit6m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片