a16z: The Real Opportunity for Stablecoins Lies Not in Disruption but in Filling the Gaps

marsbitPublicado em 2026-03-06Última atualização em 2026-03-06

Resumo

The article argues that the true opportunity for stablecoins lies not in displacing traditional card networks like Visa and Mastercard, but in serving new types of merchants that cannot access conventional payment systems. While some in the crypto community believe AI agents will bypass card networks to avoid fees, the author contends cards will dominate most transactions due to their consumer protections (e.g., chargebacks), fraud detection, rewards, and existing infrastructure. Card networks are already adapting to new use cases like AI-driven commerce. The real stablecoin opportunity exists in the emerging wave of AI-native developers and micro-businesses. These entities—often without legal structure, websites, or traditional banking—are creating tools and generating revenue but are unable to meet the risk and compliance requirements of traditional payment processors. For them, stablecoins are currently the only viable way to receive payments, filling a critical gap until traditional systems adapt. Thus, stablecoins serve not as a replacement for cards, but as essential infrastructure for the next generation of merchants that existing systems cannot yet underwrite.

A few weeks ago, an article published by Citrini Research claimed that stablecoins would bypass Visa and Mastercard, directly causing a sharp drop in the stock prices of card networks. The crypto community cheered.

This logic sounds clear: AI agents will optimize every transaction, processing fees are a form of 'tax,' and stablecoins can bypass it.

I spend all day in the crypto space, and I wish this narrative were true, but most of it is wrong.

It's not that stablecoins aren't important, but because the real opportunity isn't about replacing card payments; it's about serving merchants who struggle to access traditional card payment systems.

Card Networks Will Capture the Vast Majority of the Market

Citrini's argument is based on an assumption: AI agents, free from human habits, will proactively optimize away card network fees.

But card payments are more than just transfer tools. They offer unsecured credit, pre-authorize uncertain transactions, and provide fraud protection through chargeback rights.

Stablecoins can transfer value, but they can't do the rest.

Imagine your AI agent books a hotel for you, but it turns out to be nothing like the pictures.

With a card, you can dispute the charge and get your money back.

With a stablecoin, once the money is sent, it's gone.

82% of Americans hold rewards credit cards (referring to credit card perks like cashback, points, airline miles, hotel points, etc.), and there are over 18 billion cards in circulation globally.

For the vast majority of transactions, consumers won't voluntarily give up consumer protections and rewards to choose a payment method that offers neither benefits nor reversibility.

Fraud detection is another huge advantage of card networks: they can run models on billions of transactions in real-time.

Stablecoins currently lack a network-level anti-fraud layer that can compare.

Micropayments are often cited as a weakness of card payments, but card networks have long adapted to handle such mismatched transactions.

Visa, for example, processes over 2 billion transit ticketing transactions by aggregating multiple taps into a daily settlement.

The card industry has never abandoned any type of transaction; it always invents new products to cover them.

Another质疑 is: "But agents can't hold cards."

But agents are essentially just new devices.

Your phone, watch, and computer all hold independent tokens pointing to the same card, just like Apple Pay.

Your phone never did KYC; it just holds your token. Agents will be the same.

Visa has issued over 16 billion tokens. Agents will use these tokens.

Visa's Smart Commerce framework is in pilot, and Mastercard's Agent Pay is already live for all US cardholders.

The agent commerce protocol built by Stripe and OpenAI is already integrated with Etsy, with over a million Shopify merchants coming soon.

The conclusion is clear:

For existing merchants and consumers, card payments are almost certain to dominate agent commerce.

The opportunity for stablecoins lies elsewhere—with the merchants that haven't emerged yet.

Those Merchants That Haven't Emerged Yet

Every platform shift催生s a wave of merchants that existing payment systems cannot serve.

When eBay emerged, individual sellers couldn't get merchant accounts; PayPal served them.

Shopify grew from 42,000 merchants to 5.5 million in 13 years.

When Stripe was founded, many of its clients hadn't even been born yet.

The pattern has always been consistent: the winners serve merchants that incumbents cannot underwrite.

The AI wave will催生 such merchants faster than any previous platform shift.

Last year alone, 36 million new developers joined GitHub.

In the YC Winter 2025 batch, a quarter of the companies had codebases with over 95% AI-written code.

On the popular AI coding platform Bolt.new, 67% of its 5 million users aren't developers at all.

People who couldn't write production-level code two years ago are now shipping software.

They are both buyers of developer services and, simultaneously, sellers.

Imagine this:

An average developer uses AI tools to spend 4 hours building a tool that displays financial data for public companies. No website, no terms of service, no legal entity.

Another developer's agent calls it 40,000 times a week, at $0.001 per call, generating $40 in revenue. No one ever clicks a checkout page.

I see developers building tools like this every week.

Their first question is always: How do I get paid?

For most, the answer is: Right now, you can't.

Existing payment providers struggle to onboard these merchants.

It's not a technical problem; it's that payment providers, once they onboard a merchant, assume their risk.

If the merchant commits fraud or generates a lot of chargebacks, the payment provider is on the hook.

A tool with no website, no entity, and no record has almost no chance of passing risk review.

The system is working as designed; it just wasn't designed for this.

Payment providers could adapt, and they have before.

But it took PayPal 16 years from launch to the industry's first underwriting guidelines for payment service providers.

And these new merchants need to get paid now.

For them, accepting stablecoins is like a street vendor only taking cash.

It's not that cash is better, but this type of merchant has historically struggled to get approved for card acceptance.

In this gap, stablecoins are currently the only viable option.

Even with rough wallet experiences and regulatory frameworks still forming, protocols like x402 can already embed stablecoin payments directly into HTTP requests:

No merchant account needed, no processor, no onboarding, no chargeback liability.

These merchants aren't choosing between stablecoins and card payments.

They are choosing between stablecoins and not getting paid at all.

New Commerce Will Be Born Here

Every wave of new merchants eventually gets absorbed by traditional payment systems, and this time will likely be no different.

But the sequence is always: merchants emerge first, risk management follows.

In the gap between these two periods, stablecoins are the infrastructure.

· Card payments serve all merchants that payment providers can underwrite;

· Stablecoins serve all merchants that payment providers cannot underwrite.

The next wave of commerce will be born in this gap.

Perguntas relacionadas

QAccording to the article, why is the common belief that stablecoins will replace Visa and Mastercard largely incorrect?

AThe article argues that the belief is incorrect because stablecoins can only handle transfers but lack critical features provided by card networks, such as unsecured credit, pre-authorization for uncertain transactions, fraud protection through chargeback rights, and consumer rewards. Card networks also have superior fraud detection capabilities that stablecoins currently cannot match.

QWhat is the real opportunity for stablecoins, as highlighted in the article?

AThe real opportunity for stablecoins lies in serving merchants who cannot access traditional card payments, particularly new types of AI-generated businesses that lack legal entities, websites, or operational history, making them ineligible for approval by conventional payment processors.

QHow do card networks handle microtransactions, which are often seen as a weakness?

ACard networks like Visa have adapted to microtransactions by batching multiple small payments into daily settlements. For example, Visa has processed over 2 billion transit ticketing payments using this method, demonstrating that the industry innovates to cover all types of transactions.

QWhat historical pattern does the article mention regarding platform shifts and payment systems?

AThe article notes that every platform shift催生一波 new merchants that existing payment systems cannot serve. Examples include PayPal serving individual sellers on eBay who couldn't get merchant accounts, Shopify's growth from 42,000 to 5.5 million merchants, and Stripe serving businesses that didn't exist when it was founded.

QWhy are emerging AI-generated businesses currently unable to receive payments through traditional systems?

AThese businesses often lack legal entities, websites, terms of service, or operational history, making them too risky for traditional payment processors to underwrite. Payment processors bear liability for fraud or chargebacks, so they cannot approve such high-risk, unstructured merchants without established safeguards.

Leituras Relacionadas

The AI Agent Era Accelerates Its Arrival: Questflow Defines a New Paradigm of Financial Intelligence with On-Chain AI Brokerage

The AI Agent era is accelerating, with the CB Insights AI 100 list highlighting global investment confidence. The focus has shifted from whether AI works to its speed of deployment and ability to manage complex workflows, with autonomous AI Agents driving this transformation. At the forefront is Questflow, a Singapore-based startup redefining financial intelligence through its on-chain AI brokerage. Unlike tools that merely provide data dashboards, Questflow deploys AI Agents that proactively scan markets, form judgments, and execute trades via a conversational interface—operating 24/7 without requiring manual confirmation for each decision. This embodies the new AI paradigm of agents capable of executing multi-step workflows autonomously. Questflow's mission is to democratize institutional-grade trading intelligence. Historically reserved for the ultra-wealthy, this capability is now accessible starting from just $1 through Questflow's "AI Clone + Copy Trade" model. The platform charges only a 1% execution fee, aligning its incentives directly with users and eliminating traditional management or performance fees. The timing is opportune, aligning with key trends identified by CB Insights: the scalable deployment of AI Agents, accelerated AI adoption in financial services, and the maturation of on-chain infrastructure. With robust liquidity on platforms like Hyperliquid and Polymarket, alongside advancements in AI reasoning and non-custodial wallet security, Questflow is positioned to merge the roles of broker, fund, and exchange into a single, accessible platform for millions.

链捕手Há 15m

The AI Agent Era Accelerates Its Arrival: Questflow Defines a New Paradigm of Financial Intelligence with On-Chain AI Brokerage

链捕手Há 15m

Why Pricing Social Interactions is Doomed to Fail?

Titled "Why Putting a Price on Social Interaction Is Doomed to Fail," this article critiques attempts to monetize social networks directly through SocialFi models, arguing their inevitable failure stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of media dynamics. Using Marshall McLuhan's theory of "hot" and "cold" media, the author posits that social networks are inherently "cold" media. Their value isn't contained in individual posts but is co-created through user participation, interpretation, and fragmented, ongoing interaction (e.g., replies, shares). This ambiguity and need for user involvement are core to their function. The article asserts that SocialFi projects like Friend.tech failed because introducing real-time, tradable financial pricing (a definitive "hot" signal) into this "cold" environment doesn't add a layer—it replaces the medium's essence. The unambiguous price signal overshadows and nullifies the nuanced, participatory social signal. Users become traders, not participants, and when speculative profits vanish, the underlying social ecosystem—never genuinely cultivated—collapses entirely. This principle extends beyond crypto. The author argues platforms like Twitter have gradually "heated up" through metrics (likes, retweets counts, algorithmically defined value), shifting users from participants to performers and eroding organic engagement. The solution isn't to abandon capital but to manage its entry point. Successful models like Substack, Patreon, or Bandcamp allow capital to "condense" at specific, isolated nodes (e.g., subscriptions, one-time payments) without permeating and "heating" every social interaction. They preserve the core "cold," participatory medium while enabling monetization at designated boundaries. The NFT boom and bust serves as a stark parallel: the ancient "cold" medium of collecting (valued for story, community, gradual accumulation) was rapidly destroyed by platforms that introduced real-time floor prices, rarity scores, and trading dashboards, transforming collectors into speculators and vaporizing cultural value when prices fell. The core lesson: "Liquidity equals heat." Injecting high liquidity and definitive pricing into a "cold" participatory medium doesn't optimize it; it fundamentally alters and destroys its value-creating mechanism. The future lies not in pricing every social gesture but in finding precise, non-invasive points for capital to condense without overheating the entire ecosystem.

marsbitHá 23m

Why Pricing Social Interactions is Doomed to Fail?

marsbitHá 23m

Jensen Huang's CMU Speech: In the AI Era, Don't Just Watch, Build

Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA and a first-generation immigrant, delivered the commencement address to Carnegie Mellon University's class of 2026. He shared his personal journey from a humble background to founding NVIDIA, emphasizing resilience, learning from failure, and the responsibility that comes with leadership. Huang framed the present moment as the dawn of the AI revolution, a shift he believes is more profound than previous computing waves. He described AI as fundamentally resetting computing—moving from human-written software to machines that understand, reason, and use tools. This will create a new industry for generating intelligence and transform every sector. While acknowledging AI's potential to automate tasks and displace some jobs, Huang distinguished between the *tasks* of a job and its core *purpose*. He argued AI will augment human capability, not replace humans. The real risk, he stated, is not AI itself, but people being left behind by those who effectively use AI. He presented AI as a generational opportunity for massive infrastructure investment—in chip factories, data centers, energy grids, and advanced manufacturing—that could re-industrialize nations like the U.S. and bridge the digital divide by making computing and intelligent tools accessible to all. Huang called for a balanced approach: advancing AI safely and responsibly, establishing prudent policies, ensuring broad access, and encouraging universal participation. He urged the graduates not to fear the future but to engage with optimism and ambition, reminding them of CMU's motto, "My heart is in the work." His core message was clear: this is their moment to actively build and shape the AI-powered future, not merely observe it.

marsbitHá 1h

Jensen Huang's CMU Speech: In the AI Era, Don't Just Watch, Build

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片