Visa to Join Paxos-Led USDG Stablecoin Consortium

TheCryptoTimesPublished on 2025-04-14Last updated on 2025-04-14

Visa is planning to join the Global Dollar Network (USDG), a stablecoin network initiated by Paxos, a U.S.-regulated digital asset firm.

The network already has heavyweights in crypto and fintech such as Robinhood, Kraken, Galaxy Digital, Anchorage Digital, Bullish, and payments firm Nuvei. Visa would be the first TradFi firm to be a part of this venture.

The Global Dollar Network was established in November 2023. Its goal is to promote the use of stablecoins and make them more useful in everyday life.

The network operates with a new stablecoin known as USDG (Global Dollar), which is issued by Paxos and supervised by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS). DBS, the largest bank in Southeast Asia, holds reserves for USDG and guarantees it to be backed in full and redeemable on demand.

USDG is unique among stablecoins such as Tether’s USDT and Circle’s USDC. It is meant to distribute its earnings (interest or yield) from its reserves with the businesses that contribute to the growth of the network by enhancing liquidity and connections.

Companies such as Telter retain all the interest themselves. USDG initially started on Ethereum and is set to expand to other accredited blockchains, such as Solana.

Visa’s motivation for joining USDG aligns with its bigger plan of engaging deeper in the cryptocurrency space. Visa was recently reported to be working with Sam Altman’s World Network (previously Worldcoin) to introduce payment functionalities into World’s self-owned crypto wallet.

This could allow users to spend stablecoins on its international network and freely switch between the crypto system and fiat currency system.

Although Visa hasn’t officially confirmed its participation. If finalized, Visa’s involvement could help bring stablecoins into mainstream financial systems and boost the credibility of USDG.

Also Read: Teltlk to Launch Visa Card for Pi Coin and USDT Payments

Related Reads

Galaxy Weighs Theories After $8.3M Bitcoin Burn Mystery

Galaxy Research is investigating a mysterious Bitcoin transaction where approximately 107 BTC (worth $8.3 million) was deliberately sent to a provably unspendable "burn" address. The primary question is the motive behind destroying such a large sum. Galaxy proposed several theories, including a tax-loss strategy (though deemed unlikely for old coins), a religious or ideological act, an attempt to dispose of illicit funds, or coercion. The firm suggested a plausible explanation could be an automated error, where a trading system mistakenly sent funds to a known burn address labeled "Counterparty" instead of the intended recipient. Galaxy acknowledged all theories are speculative, and the true reason may never be known.

bitcoinist1h ago

Galaxy Weighs Theories After $8.3M Bitcoin Burn Mystery

bitcoinist1h ago

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

A disgruntled early Ethereum developer and token holder presents six core criticisms of the project's trajectory, contrasting it with Solana's rise. 1. **Premature Complacency**: The Ethereum Foundation shifted from a "building" to an "infrastructure" mindset too soon, adopting a passive, "retired chairman" posture before securing market dominance, reflected in ETH's ~65% decline against BTC post-Merge. 2. **Misguided Messaging**: The Merge was marketed primarily on ESG (99.95% energy reduction) rather than user benefits like speed or yield, appealing to internal ideals instead of market demands. 3. **Delayed Execution**: Proof-of-Stake, on the roadmap since 2015, took seven years to launch, ceding critical narrative and development windows. Competitors like Solana built entire ecosystems in that time. 4. **Poor Native Staking UX**: Years after the Merge, there is still no first-party, user-friendly staking application, forcing reliance on centralized services like Lido and undermining ETH's "sound money" narrative. 5. **Managed Decline**: The rollup-centric roadmap deliberately weakens the base layer's fee capture, outsourcing value and profitability to L2s like Arbitrum and Base, which issue their own tokens and fragment capital. 6. **Ideology Over Product**: Ethereum culture prioritizes philosophical purity ("credible neutrality," "public goods") over competitive product delivery that meets user demands (e.g., financialization), while Solana's ecosystem focuses on coordinated execution. The diagnosis is accumulated execution debt, not a coordination failure. Ethereum possessed a structural advantage in 2021 but spent years in governance debates, while Solana efficiently executed. The current market cap reflects these specific strategic failures, not abstract theory.

marsbit1h ago

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

marsbit1h ago

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

Six Grievances from an Ethereum Developer The author, an early investor and developer still building on Ethereum, expresses deep frustration with its trajectory and declining ETH/BTC price since the merge. The core argument is that Ethereum's current market position stems from concrete failures in execution and strategy, not abstract coordination problems. The first grievance targets a shift in the Ethereum Foundation's mentality from builders to "infrastructure," adopting a premature posture of a retired victor. Second, marketing the Merge around ESG (99.95% energy reduction) is seen as talking to its own conscience rather than the market, which prioritizes user experience and yield. Third, the seven-year delay in delivering Proof-of-Stake (PoS) ceded critical narrative and development time to competitors like Solana. Fourth, three years post-merge, there is still no user-friendly first-party staking application, forcing reliance on centralized services like Lido and undermining ETH's monetary narrative. Fifth, the rollup-centric roadmap has strategically surrendered base-layer fee capture to L2s, fragmenting value within the ecosystem while Solana demonstrates an integrated L1's value accrual. Finally, the author criticizes an institutional culture that prioritizes philosophical ideals (credible neutrality, pluralism) over competitive product delivery focused on what users actually want. The diagnosis is "accumulated execution debt." Ethereum possessed a structural advantage in 2021 but spent years in governance debates, while Solana's ecosystem coordinated efficiently to deliver and capture the next wave of value. The conclusion is that Ethereum's market cap reflects its abandonment of the fight for asset appreciation.

链捕手1h ago

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

链捕手1h ago

Token Budget Wars: Enterprise AI Enters the 'Accounting Era'

Token Budget Wars: Enterprise AI Enters the "Accounting Era" Enterprise AI is shifting from the question of "whether to adopt" to "how to account for it." As AI inference costs evolve from experimental budgets into ongoing operational expenses, CEOs and CFOs are demanding proof of value: what tangible results does each dollar spent on tokens deliver? The core of "Token Budget Wars" is not simply about reducing AI bills, but about intelligently allocating compute resources. It involves determining which business processes warrant more computational power, which tasks can use cheaper models, which can be outsourced or handled manually, and which are merely inefficient consumption. A key insight is that AI usage (token consumption) does not equal value. While SaaS usage indicated software adoption, AI token usage only indicates the "meter is running." The same workflow can cost vastly different amounts due to factors like prompt quality, context, model choice, and retries. The critical metric for scaling is "marginal token utility"—the business value created per additional dollar of inference cost. However, this is difficult to measure due to challenges like the long tail of retries, context inflation (where costs can scale quadratically with context length), and inefficient model routing (defaulting to the most powerful model for all tasks). The competition for token allocation is intensifying because, in the AI era, influence is tied to how much intelligence one can command, not just team size. AI spending is essentially competing with labor costs, whether for replacing external BPOs, internal staff, or generating new revenue. BPO contracts provide a clearer benchmark as they are priced per completed unit. The missing layer is attribution from tokens to business outcomes. Companies need a system that connects inference spending to completed work and results, capturing the agent's decision trajectory—what it saw, retrieved, tried, and why it succeeded or failed. This recorded rationale becomes a valuable asset. Ultimately, those who master token-to-outcome attribution will control the allocation of AI resources within enterprises, deciding which workflows get more compute, which are capped, or which revert to humans. The first phase of enterprise AI proved models could do the work. The next phase will determine how much of that work is worth paying for.

marsbit1h ago

Token Budget Wars: Enterprise AI Enters the 'Accounting Era'

marsbit1h ago

Anthropic's Revenue Surpasses OpenAI by at Least 35%, IPO Race Dynamics Shift

Anthropic has overtaken OpenAI in revenue by at least 35%, according to a recent report. Anthropic's annualized revenue is now approximately $45 billion, compared to OpenAI's roughly $33 billion. This represents a dramatic five-fold revenue increase for Anthropic over the first five months of the year, while OpenAI saw growth of just over 50%. The profitability gap is even more significant. Anthropic is expected to post an operating profit in Q2 with around a 5% margin. In stark contrast, OpenAI reported a massive operating loss of over 100% of its revenue in Q1, equating to a loss of at least $7 billion for the quarter. OpenAI also faces substantial costs, including paying 20% of its revenue to Microsoft and high AI server rental fees. This financial reversal impacts their potential IPO timelines. Previously, OpenAI might have been favored to go public first, but now its leadership may view an accelerated IPO as a "more financially prudent choice" to avoid direct, unfavorable public market comparisons. If Anthropic, with its superior growth and profitability metrics, were to file for an IPO first, it would gain a significant valuation advantage. At its current growth rate, Anthropic's revenue could soon surpass major tech firms like Netflix and Salesforce within a year.

marsbit2h ago

Anthropic's Revenue Surpasses OpenAI by at Least 35%, IPO Race Dynamics Shift

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片

Hot Categoriesright-arrow

Hot Tagsright-arrow