Is OUSD's 'List of Over a Hundred Companies' Actually Just an 'Expression of Interest'? Name-Borrowing Marketing Sparks Trust Crisis

marsbit发布于2026-07-06更新于2026-07-06

文章摘要

A new stablecoin, Open USD (OUSD), was announced by Open Standard on June 30th, promising fee-free minting/redemption, shared reserve yield, and multi-party governance. Its launch was accompanied by a list of over 140 purported partners, including major names like Western Union, Ripple, and MetaMask, causing a significant drop in competitor Circle's stock price. However, the announcement quickly faced backlash. Several listed companies, including Samsung Electronics and South Korean financial firms, stated they had never formally agreed to participate, with some claiming they were merely contacted for exploratory discussions. Critics, including Circle's CEO, Jeremy Allaire,质疑了 OUSD's business model sustainability and governance, calling the partner list misleading "legitimacy-borrowing" for marketing. Despite the controversy, some firms like Stripe and Coinbase confirmed support and integration plans. The incident has sparked a trust crisis for OUSD before its official launch, highlighting the challenges of entering the established stablecoin market.

Original Author: Eric, Foresight News

On the evening of June 30th, Beijing Time, the emergence of a new stablecoin once again stirred the stablecoin landscape.

A company named Open Standard announced it would launch the stablecoin Open USD. Features like free minting and redemption, shared revenue from reserve assets, and co-governance by partners directly address pain points in stablecoin distribution, making it seem very attractive.

What most surprised the market was that Open Standard had already "secured" over 140 partners before the stablecoin's launch.

The list included major companies that have already issued stablecoins, such as Western Union, Ripple, MetaMask, Aave, and others. The fact that it could gather signatures from so many giants in both Web3 and traditional finance before launch amazed the market and filled it with high expectations for Open USD's future. The most telling manifestation of this expectation was that Circle, the leading stablecoin company, saw its stock price plunge 17.55% that day, hovering just under 20% above a new low.

However, this explosive announcement was quickly debunked.

On July 3rd, according to a report by The Chosun Ilbo, companies including Samsung Electronics, Dunamu (parent company of Upbit), Shinhan Financial Group, and K Bank stated they had never held negotiations regarding Open USD (OUSD). A Samsung Electronics representative said, "There has been no formal negotiation, and we don't know what role (we are supposed to play) in the alliance." Shinhan Financial Holdings, Dunamu, and K Bank also said that Open Standard had inquired about their willingness to participate in OUSD, and they merely stated they "would consider it briefly," yet their names were listed as alliance members.

Tony Chung, BD Head at the Korean Web3 media Blockmedia, further stated that a representative from one of the Korean companies said they learned about being included on the list from Korean media reports and were "very perplexed" because they had only casually replied, "If feasible, we will consider it."

OpenAssets founder and CEO Gabor Gurbacs reposted Tony Chung's tweet, adding that it wasn't just Korean companies being misled. After contacting some OpenAssets clients on the list, Gabor Gurbacs received responses stating: "They indicated they never signed or agreed to any deals. Either the media severely misrepresented the facts, or the participant list is misleading."

It appears that Open Standard's "list of over a hundred companies" may have included some firms that were merely contacted. In the original announcement, Open Standard stated: "Businesses across industries have signed up to use Open USD." Perhaps in Open Standard's view, not explicitly refusing equals "agreeing" to use Open USD. But agreeing to use doesn't necessarily mean "committing to using" it.

This is a very typical marketing tactic of trading controversy for attention, which indeed produced some effect, albeit one that seems to trample business ethics underfoot.

Faced with such fierce competition and a "dishonorable" opponent, Circle co-founder and CEO Jeremy Allaire published a lengthy post on X questioning the "three key features" of Open USD:

Free minting and burning: Attractive in the short term, but likely unsustainable at scale, potentially leading to insufficient funds to maintain banking relationships, regulatory licenses, and tech infrastructure. Circle already offers preferential terms via contracts for large partners, not blanket free services.

Sharing nearly all revenue with partners: Could "starve" the infrastructure, leading to systemic underinvestment and limiting platform scale. Circle already shares most revenue with distribution partners.

Alliance / multi-company governance: Circle previously co-founded the Centre Consortium with Coinbase, which was later integrated for Circle's solo issuance. He stated the historical track record for scaling multi-company products is "very poor" (slow coordination, difficult decision-making).

Jeremy expressed a welcoming attitude towards OUSD joining the "stablecoin family," but his writing between the lines conveyed one viewpoint: stablecoin is a business where a winner-takes-all situation forms over time through accumulation; simply tweaking a few mechanisms isn't enough to "get a seat at the table."

Despite these negative controversies, some companies on the list have explicitly stated they will support Open USD's development. Stripe said it will set OUSD as the default stablecoin for businesses using stablecoins on Stripe; Coinbase also stated it will integrate OUSD into Base and other chains, planning to launch in late 2026 for expanding on-chain transactions, payments, and DeFi scenarios.

Payment network giants like Visa, Mastercard, financial institutions like BlackRock, BNY Mellon, and crypto-native projects like Aave, Solana, Ripple have also expressed support, but have not clarified specific cooperation methods yet.

According to the announcement, the founding CEO of Open Standard is the CEO of Bridge. This Bridge is the fiat on-ramp/off-ramp solution provider that had previously cooperated with multiple contenders in the battle for the issuance rights of Hyperliquid's native stablecoin USDH, but whose acquisition by Stripe, which is developing the stablecoin chain Tempo, sparked controversy. Stripe was also among the first to clarify its partnership after Open Standard's announcement, indicating a relatively close connection between the two.

A user named Bojan on X stated that Open Standard's promotion is a typical "legitimacy-borrowing" behavior—quickly enhancing its own legitimacy and credibility by borrowing the reputation or endorsement of other well-known, reliable entities, without actually having obtained their deep recognition or formal authorization. For the stablecoin track, which requires trust as its foundation, OUSD seems to have left a somewhat negative first impression even before its debut.

On the evening of June 30th, Beijing Time, the emergence of a new stablecoin once again stirred the stablecoin landscape.

A company named Open Standard announced it would launch the stablecoin Open USD. Features like free minting and redemption, shared revenue from reserve assets, and co-governance by partners directly address pain points in stablecoin distribution, making it seem very attractive.

What most surprised the market was that Open Standard had already "secured" over 140 partners before the stablecoin's launch.

The list included major companies that have already issued stablecoins, such as Western Union, Ripple, MetaMask, Aave, and others. The fact that it could gather signatures from so many giants in both Web3 and traditional finance before launch amazed the market and filled it with high expectations for Open USD's future. The most telling manifestation of this expectation was that Circle, the leading stablecoin company, saw its stock price plunge 17.55% that day, hovering just under 20% above a new low.

However, this explosive announcement was quickly debunked.

On July 3rd, according to a report by The Chosun Ilbo, companies including Samsung Electronics, Dunamu (parent company of Upbit), Shinhan Financial Group, and K Bank stated they had never held negotiations regarding Open USD (OUSD). A Samsung Electronics representative said, "There has been no formal negotiation, and we don't know what role (we are supposed to play) in the alliance." Shinhan Financial Holdings, Dunamu, and K Bank also said that Open Standard had inquired about their willingness to participate in OUSD, and they merely stated they "would consider it briefly," yet their names were listed as alliance members.

Tony Chung, BD Head at the Korean Web3 media Blockmedia, further stated that a representative from one of the Korean companies said they learned about being included on the list from Korean media reports and were "very perplexed" because they had only casually replied, "If feasible, we will consider it."

OpenAssets founder and CEO Gabor Gurbacs reposted Tony Chung's tweet, adding that it wasn't just Korean companies being misled. After contacting some OpenAssets clients on the list, Gabor Gurbacs received responses stating: "They indicated they never signed or agreed to any deals. Either the media severely misrepresented the facts, or the participant list is misleading."

It appears that Open Standard's "list of over a hundred companies" may have included some firms that were merely contacted. In the original announcement, Open Standard stated: "Businesses across industries have signed up to use Open USD." Perhaps in Open Standard's view, not explicitly refusing equals "agreeing" to use Open USD. But agreeing to use doesn't necessarily mean "committing to using" it.

This is a very typical marketing tactic of trading controversy for attention, which indeed produced some effect, albeit one that seems to trample business ethics underfoot.

Faced with such fierce competition and a "dishonorable" opponent, Circle co-founder and CEO Jeremy Allaire published a lengthy post on X questioning the "three key features" of Open USD:

Free minting and burning: Attractive in the short term, but likely unsustainable at scale, potentially leading to insufficient funds to maintain banking relationships, regulatory licenses, and tech infrastructure. Circle already offers preferential terms via contracts for large partners, not blanket free services.

Sharing nearly all revenue with partners: Could "starve" the infrastructure, leading to systemic underinvestment and limiting platform scale. Circle already shares most revenue with distribution partners.

Alliance / multi-company governance: Circle previously co-founded the Centre Consortium with Coinbase, which was later integrated for Circle's solo issuance. He stated the historical track record for scaling multi-company products is "very poor" (slow coordination, difficult decision-making).

Jeremy expressed a welcoming attitude towards OUSD joining the "stablecoin family," but his writing between the lines conveyed one viewpoint: stablecoin is a business where a winner-takes-all situation forms over time through accumulation; simply tweaking a few mechanisms isn't enough to "get a seat at the table."

Despite these negative controversies, some companies on the list have explicitly stated they will support Open USD's development. Stripe said it will set OUSD as the default stablecoin for businesses using stablecoins on Stripe; Coinbase also stated it will integrate OUSD into Base and other chains, planning to launch in late 2026 for expanding on-chain transactions, payments, and DeFi scenarios.

Payment network giants like Visa, Mastercard, financial institutions like BlackRock, BNY Mellon, and crypto-native projects like Aave, Solana, Ripple have also expressed support, but have not clarified specific cooperation methods yet.

According to the announcement, the founding CEO of Open Standard is the CEO of Bridge. This Bridge is the fiat on-ramp/off-ramp solution provider that had previously cooperated with multiple contenders in the battle for the issuance rights of Hyperliquid's native stablecoin USDH, but whose acquisition by Stripe, which is developing the stablecoin chain Tempo, sparked controversy. Stripe was also among the first to clarify its partnership after Open Standard's announcement, indicating a relatively close connection between the two.

A user named Bojan on X stated that Open Standard's promotion is a typical "legitimacy-borrowing" behavior—quickly enhancing its own legitimacy and credibility by borrowing the reputation or endorsement of other well-known, reliable entities, without actually having obtained their deep recognition or formal authorization. For the stablecoin track, which requires trust as its foundation, OUSD seems to have left a somewhat negative first impression even before its debut.

相关问答

QWhat was the main controversy surrounding the launch announcement of Open USD (OUSD)?

AThe main controversy was that Open Standard's announcement claimed over 140 partner companies had 'signed up' for OUSD. However, several high-profile companies like Samsung Electronics, Dunamu, Shinhan Financial Group, and K Bank later stated they had not engaged in formal negotiations or agreed to participate, and some were only approached informally or had given non-committal responses. This was seen as a misleading marketing tactic that borrowed legitimacy from these firms.

QWhat were Jeremy Allaire's (Circle CEO) main criticisms of OUSD's proposed features?

AJeremy Allaire criticized three main features of OUSD: 1) Free minting and burning: unsustainable at scale, potentially starving the project of funds for vital infrastructure. 2) Sharing nearly all revenue with partners: could lead to underinvestment in the core platform. 3) Multi-company governance: argued that such consortium models have a poor track record for scaling due to slow coordination and difficult decision-making.

QWhich companies have explicitly confirmed support for Open USD (OUSD)?

AStripe confirmed it would set OUSD as the default stablecoin for businesses using its platform. Coinbase stated it would integrate OUSD into Base and other chains in late 2026. Other companies like Visa, Mastercard, BlackRock, BNY Mellon, Aave, Solana, and Ripple have expressed general support, but without specifying concrete cooperation methods at the time of the article.

QWhat does the term 'legitimacy-borrowing' refer to in the context of this article?

AIn this context, 'legitimacy-borrowing' refers to Open Standard's marketing strategy of listing numerous well-known companies as partners to quickly boost its own perceived credibility and legitimacy. The article suggests the company did this without securing deep, formal authorization from many of these entities, thereby borrowing their reputable status for its own promotional gain.

QWhat was the market reaction to the initial announcement of Open USD?

AThe initial announcement caused significant market excitement and had a negative impact on Circle's stock price. On the day of the announcement, the stock price of Circle (a major stablecoin issuer) dropped by 17.55%, bringing it close to a new low, reflecting investor concerns about new competition.

你可能也喜欢

OUSD 假合作风波?稳定币与巨头背书的信用游戏

上周,Open Standard 推出美元稳定币 OpenUSD(OUSD),并公布了140多家企业组成的豪华背书名单,包括 Visa、万事达卡、Stripe、贝莱德、谷歌、三星、Coinbase 等巨头。此举一度引发市场震动,但名单很快遭到质疑。多家韩国企业如三星电子、新韩金融等出面澄清,称仅进行过初步接洽或表示会评估,并未正式同意加入,部分公司甚至是通过新闻才得知自己被列为成员。美国也有行业人士指出,名单存在误导性。 OUSD 宣称提供零手续费铸造赎回、无交易量上限,并将大部分储备收益分享给合作伙伴。然而,这种模式使得被列入名单具有实际商业和信誉含义,加剧了争议。文章指出,利用巨头名声造势是加密行业的常见营销手法,并引用了此前 Facebook 的 Libra(后更名 Diem)项目为例:该项目初期同样拥有全明星联盟,但在监管压力下,PayPal、Visa 等核心伙伴迅速退出,最终项目失败出售。 面对竞争,Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire 表示欢迎,但他指出稳定币市场具有网络效应,趋向赢家通吃。他认为联盟模式历史上协调困难、进度缓慢,且将收入全部分配会导致基础设施投入不足。目前稳定币市场由 USDT 和 USDC 主导,两者合计占据近90%市场份额。 文章总结道,稳定币的成功最终取决于真实的使用场景和用户,而非营销声势。OUSD 虽拥有部分真实背书和差异化模型,但其前景仍需市场检验。这场风波再次揭示了加密行业依赖“巨头站台”进行信用背书所伴随的风险。

链捕手11分钟前

OUSD 假合作风波?稳定币与巨头背书的信用游戏

链捕手11分钟前

亏损 5500 万美元也要卖币,Strategy 的信仰到了付息日

7月6日,迈克尔·赛勒宣布旗下公司Strategy出售了3,588枚比特币,套现约2.16亿美元,用于支付优先股股息。这笔交易以约60,197美元的均价成交,而公司平均持仓成本为75,651美元,导致约5,545万美元的实际亏损。此举打破了赛勒过往“永不卖币”的形象。 这并非偶然。Strategy在5月底曾小额出售32枚BTC进行市场“脱敏测试”,随后在6月底董事会批准了包括授权出售最多12.5亿美元比特币在内的一揽子方案,将“卖币付息”制度化。 背后的核心原因是支撑Strategy增长的“溢价飞轮”已失效。公司过去依靠股价高于比特币净值(mNAV)来增发股票融资买币。当mNAV溢价跌破1.22倍临界值后,增发股票会损害老股东利益,而优先股(如STRC)在二级市场大幅折价也关闭了融资渠道。与此同时,公司每年需支付约17.6亿美元的优先股股息与利息,这是刚性支出。在当前条件下,卖出比特币支付股息成了管理层计算下的“理性选择”。 这一转变影响深远。作为持有约84万枚BTC(占总量4%)的最大机构持有者,Strategy从稳定买家变成了有计划的定期卖家。若完全依赖卖币支付年度义务,预计每年需出售约2.9万枚BTC,形成持续的市场卖压。此举也可能动摇其他模仿其“数字资产财库”模式的公司的估值逻辑。 Strategy目前持有25.5亿美元现金,可覆盖约17个月的应付义务,短期内无流动性危机。但其模式陷入循环困境:比特币价格上涨,其融资飞轮才能重启;价格低迷,卖币付息的行为本身又会给市场带来压力。公司的未来命运,与比特币价格走势深度绑定。

marsbit46分钟前

亏损 5500 万美元也要卖币,Strategy 的信仰到了付息日

marsbit46分钟前

交易

现货
活动图片