跨境匯款慢，穩定幣能取代哪一段？

5:47:36開場：穩定幣補的是對應銀行，不是整套取代

5:47:36太棒了。有人跟我們說 Drake 會遲到，但他現在到了。我跑過來的。你趕上了。太棒了。好，我真的很期待跟大家聊，也謝謝各位來到這裡。這會是一個很好玩的話題。你知道，我六歲的時候，我媽問我想這輩子做什麼，我跟她說我想主持一場全球對應銀行體系的座談。然後我們就在這裡了。這是我第一次聽到有人說對應銀行網路會很好玩。Awesome. We were told Drake's gonna be late, but he's here now. I ran here. You made it. Awesome. Well, I'm really excited to chat, everyone, and thank you all for being here. This is going to be a fun topic of conversation. You know, when I was six years old, my mom asked me what I want to do with my life, and I told her that I want to moderate a panel on the global correspondent banking system. And here we are. It's the first time I've heard anybody say correspondent banking network would be fun.

5:47:57我真的很想談對應……銀行體系。這是夢想成真。全世界沒有什麼比這更讓我感興趣。不過現在我確實覺得這很有意思，我們有很多東西要拆開講。我們就直接進主題。如果可以先開始，順著介紹下去，今天這組講者非常、非常強，我想讓大家先知道這一點。所以 Raj，你要先開始嗎？你是誰、你做什麼？我們就這樣走一輪。太棒了。I really want to talk about the correspondent... banking system. It's a dream come true. More than anything in the entire world, this is what interests me. But now I do find it very interesting, and we have a lot to unpack. We're just going to dive right into it. If we could kick things off and just go down the line, we have a very, very impressive panel today, so I want to make sure all of you are aware of that. So, Raj, you want to start? Who you are, what you do? We'll just run it. Awesome.

5:48:24對，我是 Raj Parekh。我在 Monad Foundation 負責穩定幣和支付。Monad 是高效能的 EVM L1。我們有各式各樣的穩定幣，從 USDC、USDT 到其他的，當然也包括 Agora。所以，對，很高興能在這裡。嗨，我是 Drake Evans。我是 Agora 的技術長兼共同創辦人。在 Agora，我們正在打造一個平台，把所有原生於網路的金錢都放在上面。Yeah, I'm Raj Parekh. I lead stablecoin and payments at Monad Foundation. Monad is a high-performance EVM L1. We have, you know, all sorts of stablecoins, from USDC, USDT, and beyond, and Agora, of course. And so, yeah, excited to be here. Hi, my name is Drake Evans. I'm the CTO and co-founder of Agora. At Agora, we're building the single platform for all internet-native money.

5:48:48這包括穩定幣、AUSD、白牌發行、錢包，以及未來，在我們拿到 OCC 執照、成為聯邦監管的銀行之後，也會提供託管、美元銀行帳戶，還有其他資金調度業務。大家好，我是 Kirit Bhatia。我負責 Banking Circle 的數位資產，從策略做到執行。在這家銀行一年了。之前在 Ripple 待了六年半，再之前我是 TradFi 銀行人。在 J.P. Morgan 待了 12 年，在 RBS NatWest 待了三年。That includes stablecoin, AUSD, white-label issuance, wallets, and in the future, with our OCC charter as a federally regulated bank, we'll also be offering custody, U.S. dollar bank accounts, and other treasury activities. Hey, everyone, I'm Kirit Bhatia. I run digital assets for Banking Circle, strategy to execution. Been with the bank for a year. Before that, I was six and a half years at Ripple, and before that, I'm a TradFi banker. Spent 12 years at J.P. Morgan and three years at RBS NatWest.

5:49:10Banking Circle：傳統軌道上的 1.5 兆美元

5:49:19Banking Circle 是一家 TradFi 銀行、法幣銀行。我們在傳統軌道上大約移動 1.5 兆美元，服務約 850 家金融機構，我們現在走的路，基本上是把這家銀行鏡像到鏈上。大家好，我是 Martins Benkitis，來自 Gravity Team。Gravity Team 首先是造市商，為新興市場提供流動性，交易量大約佔全球加密現貨成交量的 1%，超過 40、50 家不同交易所、數千個交易對。Banking Circle is a TradFi bank, fiat bank. We move around $1.5 trillion on traditional rails, serve about 850 financial institutions, and we're on a journey basically to mirror the bank on-chain. Hey, guys, my name is Martins Benkitis with Gravity Team. Gravity Team is, first of all, a market maker, providing liquidity to emerging markets, trading around 1% of all spot volume of crypto around the world, more than 40, 50 different exchanges across thousands of pairs.

5:49:52最近，兩個月前，我們為機構玩家、資金搬運者、經紀商推出了 OTC 交易台，幫這些人把穩定幣換成當地銀行帳戶，當天到帳，當地銀行帳戶，T-zero。這就是我們一直在做的，下游那段真正難的部分。太棒了。謝謝各位介紹。我想先很快把大家拉回到對應銀行體系這件事上，會比較好講。And recently, two months ago, we launched the OTC desk for institutional players, money movers, brokers, that helps these guys to take their stablecoins and convert them into their local bank accounts same day, local bank accounts, T-zero. And that's what we've been focusing on, doing the really hard part of the downstream. Awesome. Thanks for the intro. I think it's helpful just to ground ourselves really quick in talking about the correspondent banking system at large.

5:50:32你們大多知道這件事，但如果有人不知道：如果我想把錢從巴西匯到新加坡，我在巴西的銀行，跟我在新加坡需要往來的那家銀行，有直接關係的機率非常、非常低。所以全球銀行才做出我們所說的對應銀行體系，就是一串、一個銀行網路，讓全球銀行可以接入同一套系統。所以如果我Most of you know this, but for those who don't, if I want to send money from Brazil to Singapore, there is a very, very low chance that my bank in Brazil has direct relationships with the bank that I need to interact with in Singapore. Hence, the global banks created what we call the correspondent banking system, which is a series and a network of banks that allow global banks to plug into one given system. And so if I

5:50:59想把錢從巴西匯到新加坡，它可能真的會在好幾家不同銀行之間彈來彈去，那些銀行就是我們所說的對應銀行網路。現在，很多時候我們談穩定幣跟銀行體系的關係，市場炒作很多是圍繞著：哦，穩定幣就是要來取代對應銀行體系的，對吧？wanted to send money from Brazil to Singapore, it might actually bounce through multiple different banks, and those banks are what we call the correspondent banking network. Now, a lot of the times when we talk about stablecoins in relation to the banking system, a lot of, like, the market hype is around, oh, stablecoins are designed to replace the correspondent banking system, right?

5:51:20我們想把錢動得更好、更快、更便宜，做法就是用穩定幣繞過對應銀行體系。事情顯然比這更細一點。這場座談的標題是：穩定幣是在哪裡補上對應銀行體系，而不是取代它？既然各位在穩定幣支付、跨境結算裡扮演的角色都不太一樣，We want to be able to move our money better, faster, cheaper, and the way that we do that is by using stablecoins to route around the correspondent banking system. Obviously, things are a little bit more nuanced than that. The title of this panel is, Where are stablecoins supplementing the correspondent banking system, not replacing it? Given that all of you play a slightly different role in stablecoin payment, cross-border settlement,

5:51:45我想多聽一點，你們現在在各自角色裡，是怎麼跟對應銀行體系互動的。對，我是說，我們促成的一部分是，Monad 作為開源、無需許可的區塊鏈，我們的目標是要跟銀行生態系的其他部分完全接在一起。所以我們跟全球大約 40 多家法幣對加密的入金、出金通路合作。I want to hear a little bit more about how you guys are currently interacting with the correspondent banking systems in your respective roles. Yeah, I mean, part of what we enable, so, you know, Monad being— being an open-source, permissionless blockchain, our goal is that we want to be, you know, fully integrated with the, you know, rest of the banking ecosystem. And so we work with about 40-plus, you know, fiat-to-crypto on- and off-ramps around the world.

5:52:13這讓我們能做的一部分是，我會一直用 Agora 當例子，因為我們跟 Drake 跟團隊合作很緊，我們想做的一部分是：當 Agora、AUSD 可以無需許可地在全世界流動，我們也想在巴西、墨西哥和其他市場跟 Agora 建立夠多的流動性交易對，這樣我們就能繞過你剛剛講的那些跳點，就是你……And part of what that enables us to do is that if we have, you know, and I'll use, I'm going to keep using Agora as an example, because we work with Drake and team pretty closely, but part of what we want to do is that as we have Agora, you know, and AUSD kind of moving permissionlessly around the world, we also want to build enough liquidity pairs with Agora in Brazil and Mexico and other markets where, you know, we can bypass the hops that, you know, you're—

5:52:39講的，錢從一家銀行跳到另一家銀行。改成它可以從無論哪家起始銀行流出來，也許是墨西哥，用 AUSD 當橋接資產。然後從那裡，如果需要在新加坡出金，也就是我們今天所在的地方，它可以很快換成 SGD。所以這大概就是那種連線層，talking about, where it jumps from one bank to another bank. Instead, it can, you know, flow through, you know, whatever originating bank it is, maybe it's Mexico, you know, use AUSD as a bridge asset. And then from there, if it needs to off-ramp in Singapore, where we are today, it can do that fairly quickly in SGD. And so that's kind of the connectivity layer that, you know,

5:52:59我們一直在 Monad 生態系裡大力培養的，我想這是一種跟銀行互補、同時也讓它更有效率的做法。不意外，這大概也跟我們的看法很合，我們真的想把這個缺口接起來，我認為像 Monad 這種高速區塊鏈軌道是很大一塊。we've been really fostering in the Monad ecosystem, and, you know, I think that's one way that we can go about supplementing with the banks and then also making it more efficient at the same time too. Unsurprisingly, that's probably very aligned with our view as well, is we really want to bridge the gap, and I think high-speed blockchain rails like Monad are a huge part of that.

5:53:19有一件有意思、我覺得一定要記住的事：對應銀行其實是把一大堆不同服務打包在一起，對吧？你們最熟的是資金移動、結算，但其實還有外匯、預先注資、流動性、防制洗錢合規，然後還有信用，對吧？所以作為穩定幣發行方，我們其實是把穩定幣看成其中兩項的技術跟基礎設施升級：資金移動和結算。The interesting thing I think that it's important to remember is that correspondent banking is actually a bundling of a ton of different services, right? So the ones you're most familiar with are, you know, money movement, settlement, but there's also FX, there's pre-funding, liquidity, AML compliance, and then credit, right? So I think as a stablecoin issuer, you know, we really see stablecoins as an upgrade in technology and infrastructure for two of those, right? Money movement and settlement.

5:53:28對應銀行打包的是一組服務

5:53:49其餘的，我覺得隨著時間，堆疊裡其他層也可以幫忙取代或變得更有效率。但終究，流動性、合規、預先注資，這些事情還是得發生。所以對我們來說，接進去的地方，很明顯就是入金、出金、移動法幣。但我想到穩定幣要一起做的，是那些其他事情。我猜作為場上的銀行，我們作為銀行確實會用對應銀行。The rest, I think over time, other pieces of the stack can help replace or make more efficient. But ultimately, you know, liquidity, compliance, pre-funding, all of those things still have to happen. And so for us, where we integrate, you know, obviously, is the on- and off-ramping, moving fiat. But I think where I think about stablecoins working with, it's on all those other things. I guess as a bank on the panel, so we, you know, we as a bank do use correspondent banks.

5:54:19我說過，我們每年移動 1.5 兆。所以我覺得 Drake 百分之百說對了。對應銀行上面有很多層。不是只有一件事，對吧？核心來說，我這週稍早已講過：對應銀行網路是一個全球多幣別結算層。如果把它煮到最乾，你就是想把錢從巴西移到新加坡等等。它就像一個結算層。某種程度是分散式的。對，而且有好幾百家銀行參與其中。As I said, we move one and a half trillion every year. So I think Drake is 100% right. Correspondent banking has a lot of layers on it. It's not just one thing, right? At the heart of it, I spoke about this earlier this week: the correspondent banking network is a global multi-currency settlement layer. If you boil it down, right, you're trying to— move money from Brazil to Singapore, etc. It's like a settlement layer. Somewhat distributed one. Yeah, and, like, hundreds of banks participate in it.

5:54:49它受監管機關監督等等。只是它沒有跟上最新可用的技術，沒辦法成為更有效率的結算層。因為我們這些人，很多用加密軌道的人，都知道我們可以在不到四分鐘內，從世界任何地方移動 USDC、USDT。所以我們現在的位置是：全球多幣別結算基礎設施是跑在對應銀行上的。它有點舊了，大約 50 年了等等。It's overseen by regulators and etc. It's just that it's not kept up with the latest available technology to be a more efficient settlement layer. Because all of us, you know, many of us who use these crypto rails, etc., we know we can move, like, USDC, USDT, in, like, sub-four minutes from anywhere in the world. So where we are right now is, so the global infrastructure of multi-currency settlement infrastructure runs on correspondent banking. It's kind of old, 50 years old and etc.

5:55:22裡面還有預先注資和信用這些東西，而且很笨重，對吧？就像一台非常笨重的機器。所以我們等於是要從一個大概隔天就移動好幾兆的結算層，轉到一個新的結算層。大家，監管機關、銀行和其他人，都還在試著搞懂它。但我覺得我們正處在這次轉換裡非常、非常重要的時刻。And there's all this stuff in it like pre-funding and credit, and it's clunky, right? It's like a really clunky machine. So we, to sort of transition from a settlement layer that moves trillions maybe every other day to a settlement layer which is new. Like, people are just, regulators and banks and others are just trying to get their head around it. But I think we're in a really, really important moment in this transition.

5:55:53這就是我們思考區塊鏈、思考多條區塊鏈的方式。所以對，特別是在這場座談上，看到越來越多多幣別穩定幣或法幣的鏈上表徵進來，長成不同形狀，這真的很酷，因為產業現在所在的位置是：區塊鏈網路有風險變成只是一個全球美元結算網路。That's how we think about, you know, that's how we think about blockchains and multiple blockchains. So yeah, and it's really cool to see, especially on this panel, that more and more multi-currency stablecoins or fiat representations are coming on-chain, taking different shapes, because right now where we are in the industry is, you know, the blockchain networks are at risk of just becoming a global U.S. dollar settlement network.

5:56:26所以除非那個網路變成多幣別的，否則第一，你其實還沒從舊的轉到新的。第二，在很長、很長一段時間裡，法幣和鏈上資金移動還是得互通，會互通很久。所以這些人很多都提到的東西：流動性、出金端點是法幣端點，希望很大一部分會遷到穩定幣。但這就是我們現在都在蓋的東西，對吧？And so unless that network becomes multi-currency, then, you know, then you really haven't transitioned from the old to the new, number one. Number two is, for a long, long time yet to come, fiat and on-chain money movements are going to have to interoperate for a very long time. And so things that a lot of these guys have mentioned: liquidity, you know, off-ramping endpoints being fiat endpoints—hopefully a big part of it will migrate into stables. But this is what we're all kind of building right now, right?

5:56:59我們都在不同、不同的部分參與其中。對，所以回到 Dante 你的例子，對應銀行網路，這筆從巴西到新加坡的交易，在傳統對應銀行網路的例子裡，它可能真的要穿過大約四到五個圈，經過所有合作銀行。We're all participating in different, different parts of it. Yeah, so going back to your example, Dante, about the correspondent banking network, about this transaction going from Brazil to Singapore, so in the traditional correspondent banking network example, it might actually be some four to five hoops through all the partner banks through which this transaction has to cross.

5:57:25現在，講到「對應銀行」這個詞，我們的看法、以及我們今天跟銀行合作的方式，是把「對應」這個字拿掉，我們就是跟銀行合作。意思是我們跟匯出端的當地銀行合作，也跟收款端的當地銀行合作。中間的一切不經過對應銀行，是走區塊鏈、走穩定幣。所以基本上圈就少很多。Now, when it comes to the term “correspondent banking,” the way we see it and the way we work today with the banks is that we kind of take the word “correspondent” out and we just work with banks. Meaning that we work with the local bank on the sending side, and we work with the local bank on the receiving side. And everything that is in between does not go through correspondent banks; it goes through the blockchain, through stablecoins. And so basically the hoops are much less.

5:58:03所以我們總是試著找，作為造市商，我的工作首先是把錢移動，或讓人盡可能有效率地從一種資產進到另一種資產。所以在移動資金這件事上，我認為最有效率的系統設計就是這三步：當地貨幣、穩定幣、收款貨幣。對，所謂的穩定幣三明治，盡可能簡單。不要做成大麥克。就做一個簡單、好吃的漢堡。So we always try to find, as a market maker, my job is to first of all move money or allow people to enter from one asset into another asset as efficiently as possible. So the most— efficient system design, when it comes to moving money, in my opinion, is this three-step: local currency, stablecoin, and the receiving currency. Yeah, the so-called stablecoin sandwich, and make it as simple as possible. Don't make a Big Mac out of it. Just make a— simple, nice burger.

5:58:41這就是，對，這就是我們在做的，不過最難的部分是入金和出金，從 BRL 進到穩定幣，再從穩定幣出到 SGD，確保一切能跑、一切合規，對，這就是我們在解決的。而且對，現在看起來技術已經在了，支付公司、銀行、加密公司開始講同一套語言，一個接一個把問題解決掉。This is, yeah, this is what we are working on, and the hardest part, though, is the on-ramping and off-ramping, going from BRL into the stablecoin, going from stablecoin out into SGD, making sure that everything works, that everything is in compliance, and yeah, that's what we are solving. And yeah, it's looking, right now it's looking like the technology is there, and the payment companies, the banks, the crypto companies are starting to speak the same language and figuring out problems one after another.

5:59:18我很喜歡這個。我覺得一定要認清一件事：地球上沒有任何一家銀行會把自己定位成對應銀行，對吧？你不會走到某個人面前說「哦，你做什麼的？」然後他說「我是對應銀行。」這不會發生。他們說的是「我是銀行。」所以穩定幣讓你可以不用把付款從巴西I love that. I think it's— it's really important to recognize that there's not a single bank on the planet that identifies as a correspondent bank, right? Like, you don't walk up to someone, you're like, “Oh, you know, what do you do?” And they say, “I'm a correspondent bank.” It doesn't happen. What they say is, “I'm a bank.” And so what stablecoins allow for is instead of needing to route your payment from Brazil

5:59:39繞到新加坡，還要經過紐約、再倫敦、再到新加坡，能夠減少中間商的數量，但技術上你還是在走對應銀行體系，因為你還是在跟銀行合作，對吧？我想更清楚理解這件事真正有差的地方在哪，對吧？通常，如果我人在紐約，你……to Singapore through New York and then London and then Singapore, to be able to reduce the amount of intermediaries, but you're still technically working through the correspondent banking system because you're working through banks, right? I want to get a better understanding of where this actually matters, right? Normally, if I'm, like, I'm based in New York, you're—

5:59:59你人在倫敦。如果我需要把錢從紐約匯到倫敦，這從美國建國以來就在做了，甚至更早。這些是非常、非常老的市場，流動性非常、非常深，而且常常跑得非常、非常有效率。很多時候，在那些非常緊、非常有流動性的市場上，你其實不需要穩定幣來換價格優勢。我知道你們都在做全球支付。你們在世界各地結算付款。You're based in London. If I need to send money from New York to London, that's been done, you know, since the founding of the United States and well before. Like, these are really, really old markets with really, really deep liquidity, and they often run very, very efficiently. Oftentimes, you don't really need stablecoins for a price advantage on those really, really tight, really, really liquid markets. I know that you guys all work in global payments. You settle payments around the world.

6:00:25我想更清楚理解，我們以前也聊過，Martins，所以從你開始，穩定幣具體在哪些地方最能補上現有銀行體系，哪裡最有差，另一邊，哪裡最沒差。對，我猜最沒差的地方，我會說是現在系統最有效率的地方。我猜會是 G10，那些較大的貨幣：那裡的對應銀行網路關係超級有效率。I want to get a better understanding, and we've talked about this before, Martins, so we'll start with you, about where specifically stablecoins are best complementing the current banking system, where they matter most, and then on the other side, you know, where they matter least. Yeah, I guess where they matter least, I would say where the system is most efficient today. My guess would be the G10, the larger currencies: super-efficient correspondent banking network relationships there.

6:00:59新興市場走廊才最有感

6:00:59大多數時候，流動性很多、文化障礙較少、摩擦少很多。常失敗的地方是新興市場，拉丁美洲、非洲，某種程度上還有東南亞。這就是，這就是，尤其是你從其他地區匯進這些區域的時候。所以那裡最需要幫忙。舉例來說，如果我們看一筆從歐元到印尼的交易，今天用 SWIFT 可能要四到五天，還可能卡住、可能被退回。百分之七的Most of the time, a lot of liquidity, fewer cultural barriers, a lot less friction. Where it fails often is in the emerging markets, LATAM, Africa, to some extent Southeast Asia. This is, this is, and especially when you're moving into these regions from other regions. So that's where the help is needed the most. So, for example, if we look at, say, a transaction from euros to, say, Indonesia, today might take four or five days with SWIFT and maybe get stuck, maybe get sent back. Seven percent of

6:01:39這些交易其實會被退回。用 Gravity Team 現有的流動性系統，我可以在大約五分鐘內幫客戶做成這筆交易，規模可以到數百萬，然後會進到他們當地的銀行系統。所以，對，我覺得這類數字在 G10 貨幣上可以存在，但新興市場匯到其他市場就難很多。Martins，再講具體一點。these transactions actually get returned. With the liquidity systems that we have at Gravity Team, I can execute this trade for our clients within approximately five minutes, and it can go at size of millions, and it will get dropped in their local banking system. So, yeah, I think these kind of numbers can exist with G10 currencies, but much harder to achieve with emerging markets going into other markets. Martins, be more specific.

6:02:10你我剛剛才聊過好幾條非常具體的走廊，你在那裡用當地穩定幣這些。有沒有特定路線讓你覺得，穩定幣相對走對應銀行網路，有明顯的邊際改善？你有沒有看到特定市場，穩定幣真的造成很大差異？對，絕對有。我會說像菲律賓。我覺得已經可能有超過You and I just talked about a number of very specific corridors where you're working with local stablecoins and everything. Are there specific routes where you're like, stablecoins add significant marginal improvement versus interacting with the correspondent banking network? Have you seen any specific markets where stablecoins are making a really significant difference? Yeah, absolutely. I would say the Philippines, for example. I think that there are already maybe, like, more than

6:02:39個位數百分比的匯款流量，已經由穩定幣支撐，而且很大程度上由穩定幣在處理。另一個，我想是墨西哥，美墨走廊。匯到墨西哥的交易成本，在跨境支付這塊其實已經降了不少，其中一部分就是因為用了穩定幣。a single-digit percentage of remittance flow is already supported by stablecoins and managed largely by stablecoins. Another one, I think, is Mexico, the U.S.-Mexico corridor. The transaction costs to Mexico have actually gone down quite a lot when it comes to cross-border payments, and in part of it, this is because of stablecoin usage.

6:03:02墨西哥和菲律賓常常被提到，我想一點都不意外，其實連阿聯也是，因為那些經濟體有很多移工在世界各地工作。所以如果你實際從觀察來看，如果你去研究採用曲線，會看到零售匯款是穩定幣資金流最早的採用者之一，對吧？I think it's no surprise that you hear Mexico and the Philippines come up a lot because, and actually even in the UAE, because those are the economies where you have a lot of migrant workers working in different parts of the world. And so if you actually, you know, from observation, if you study the arc of adoption, you see retail remittances being one of the first earliest adopters of stablecoin flows, right?

6:03:24像，那些創新、往前傾的支付公司真的開始往穩定幣靠。我們現在到了一個階段，一些大型商戶網路開始看到，好，這可以用來結算，像是解決週末的問題，對吧？錢要轉來轉去。Like, you know, and the innovative, forward-leaning payment companies really kind of leaning into stablecoin. We're now in a space where some of the big merchant networks are beginning to see, okay, this can be useful to settle, like, solve the weekend issue, right? Like, money around.

6:03:39我覺得只是時間問題，我們就會開始聽到，好，新加坡一些大宗商品使用者想即時結算交易，開始用穩定幣，而不是等個兩三天。所以菲律賓、墨西哥，當然，百分之百。我們也看到穩定幣用來在世界各地結算資金的使用情境正在長出來。I think it's a matter of time before we start hearing, like, okay, some of the commodity users in Singapore want to settle their trades real time and are beginning to use stablecoins, you know, instead of waiting like two, three days. So it's the Philippines, Mexico, sure, 100%. We're also seeing, like, how the use cases are growing for stablecoins to settle money across the world.

6:04:02我想再補一個可能比較複雜的例子，但我看到對應銀行這邊比較棘手的是：如果我是一家跨國組織，我的稅務實體剛好在愛爾蘭，另一個實體在巴西，我總是得先把所有付款從美國送到愛爾蘭，才能再往任何地方走。所以現在，你可以想像，我把那筆交易從美國送到愛爾蘭。現在它之後還得去巴西。I want to add maybe like a more complex example, but I think where I have seen it, you know, the correspondent banking side be a little bit more tricky is that, you know, if I'm a multinational organization and my tax entity happens to be Ireland, and I have another entity in Brazil, I always need to pass all payments from the U.S. to Ireland before it goes anywhere. And so now, and then, so you can imagine, like, I send that transaction from the U.S. to Ireland. Now it has to go to Brazil after.

6:04:33所以其實要兩跳，才能完成一筆本來其實很簡單的交易。所以這些就是那類複雜金流，我想我們已經講了很多匯款，還有一些比較直白的金流。And so there's actually two hops in order to complete what would be, like, actually a simple transaction. And so these are the types of, like, complex flows that, you know, I think we've talked a lot about remittances and some of these, you know, more straightforward flows.

6:04:47但當你開始加上那層複雜度，我是企業資金調度、財務人員，我在做供應鏈、貿易，或那些環節，如果你不是像 Banking Circle 那種大型網路，能夠解決其中一些問題，那就很棘手，還得看你用的是哪種類型的銀行。但我覺得就是那些更複雜的金流，帶有稅務影響、利息。But as you start to add the level of complexity where I'm a corporate treasurer, finance individual, I'm doing supply chain, trade, or some of those pieces, you know, if you're not, you know, like a large network like maybe Banking Circle, that's going to solve some of these things, it's tricky, depending on, like, the types of banks you're using. But I think it's, like, those more complicated flows that have, you know, tax implications, you know, interest.

6:05:10你可能也想把利息的經濟效益調到最好。我覺得複雜度就是在那裡開始再疊一層，而對應銀行的一些複雜度其實會讓它更棘手。我要把話題帶到跟剛才不太一樣的方向。我覺得有兩塊。一塊是已經在發生美元化的經濟體。我們在阿根廷有一些員工，他們其實不會，他們拿了穩定幣就繼續拿著穩定幣。You maybe want to optimize for your interest economics also. That's where I think the complexity starts to stack a little bit more, and some of the correspondent banking complexities actually make it even trickier too. I'll take it in a slightly different direction than what's talked about. I think there's two pieces. One is economies where there's dollarization already happening. You know, we have a number of employees in Argentina, and they don't actually, they take the stablecoins and keep them as stablecoins.

6:05:37所以那種情況，那就是對應銀行的完全取代。但我也在想，我們想很多的是，預先注資和信用怎麼能讓付款感覺是即時的，對吧？你刷信用卡感覺即時，原因不是結算即時。是因為背後有信用在撐，對吧？我覺得這其實是一個很有意思的地方，And so in that case, like, there's just— that's a complete replacement of correspondent banking. But I also think about, we think about this a lot, is how pre-funding and how credit can make payments feel instant, right? The reason that your credit card swipe feels instant is not because the settlement's instant. It's because there's credit sort of backing this, right? And I think that's actually an area that's very interesting where

6:05:59穩定幣會造成差異，因為如果你需要換成當地貨幣，去找當地的人說，我有穩定幣，幫我承作這兩天贖回的時間、把外匯給我，這跟說我有一則 SWIFT 訊息說我會被付款、錢最終會進我的銀行，差很多。承作後面那種風險貴很多。所以我覺得它其實就是把「做到即時」的成本降下來。stablecoins make a difference because if you're, you know, you need to go to local currency, it's a lot different to go to someone locally and say, I have a stablecoin, underwrite the two days it takes to redeem this and give me the FX, as opposed to I have a SWIFT message that says I'm going to be paid, that, you know, it'll hit my bank eventually. Underwriting that risk is much more expensive. And so I think it actually just lowers the cost of getting things to be instant.

6:06:27這甚至還沒講到已經有 RTP 的地方，對吧？我太愛了。我理想的週六晚上，通常會包含讀 BIS 報告，上週六我在讀一份 BIS 報告，上面說對應銀行體系在過去大約 15 年裡萎縮了，大約減少了 30%。依你們的看法，這對把穩定幣接到全球支付和銀行軌道的世界來說，是好事嗎？這是And that's not even talking about places that already have RTP, right? I love it. When I think about my ideal Saturday night, it normally involves reading BIS reports, and I was reading a BIS report last Saturday, and it said that the correspondent banking system over the last 15 years or so has fallen, has reduced by about 30%. In your guys' opinion, is this a good thing for the world of integrating stablecoins into global payments and banking rails? Is this

6:06:59令人擔心的嗎？你們怎麼看對應銀行體系的快速萎縮？對，我是說，你現在開始看到很多集中。如果你是社區銀行，或超區域銀行，你通常，要建一套對應銀行網路很難。你可能只管美國幾個不同的州，然後可能看到很多流向印尼或新加坡。現在你就得客製去建這些關係。worrisome? How do you view the rapid shrinkage of the correspondent banking system? Yeah, I mean, you're starting to see a lot of concentration right now. And, you know, if you're a community bank or, you know, super regional bank, you're not typically—it's hard to build a correspondent banking network. You know, you might be, you know, maybe managing just a few different states in the United States, and maybe you see a lot of flows to Indonesia or Singapore. Now you have to go build these relationships bespoke.

6:07:26你得把它寫成文件、談這筆交易。另一條路是你付給 Citibank 一大筆錢，然後說，嘿，Citibank，我不想自己把這套網路建出來。我只想用你們的軌道。這其實很常見。很多、很多這些社區銀行和長尾銀行，根本沒有資源出去說，我們要把這些網路建出來。You have to, you know, you have to paper it, negotiate the deal. The alternative is that you pay, you know, Citibank, you know, a ton of money and say, hey, like, Citibank, I don't want to build this network out myself. I just want to use your rails. And that's actually pretty common. I mean, a lot of a lot of these community and, you know, long-tail banks, they just don't have the resources to go out and say, we're going to, you know, build out these networks.

6:07:47於是你現在把這些依賴都集中在這些 G-SIBs 和這些跨國機構上。時間一久，這造成的結果是，至少在美國，實際存在的銀行數量萎縮了，數量，也有很多整併正在發生。所以依我的看法，我個人很喜歡長尾銀行。我覺得它們在社會裡有很重要的位置。它們真的很了解自己的社區。And so now you concentrate all this dependency across these G-SIBs and these multinationals. And what that's done over time is that it's actually shrunk, at least in the United States, the number of banks that actually exist, the amount of— there's a lot of consolidation that's happening also. And so, you know, in my opinion, I think, you know, I personally love, you know, like the long-tail banks. I think they have, like, a really important place in society. Like, they know, like, their communities really well.

6:08:14當它們開始整併、也許變成這些大銀行的一部分，它們就開始失去那種感覺。我舉個例子，一家社區銀行，也許活不下去或做不了那麼多。也許它們在那個市場很擅長農業放貸，對吧？但現在，它們沒能把整套產品堆疊建起來、把這些關係建出來，就整併了。And as they start to consolidate and maybe become part of these larger banks, they start to lose that feel. You know, and, like, I'll give you an example, like a community bank that, you know, maybe is not able to survive or do as much. Maybe they're really good at, you know, agriculture lending in that market, right? But now, like, you know, they've not been able to build up their whole product stack, build out these relationships, they consolidate.

6:08:35你某種程度就失去跟社區的那份接觸，這其實也有二階效應。所以我站的這一邊是，我個人比較喜歡外面有更多元的銀行，尤其是開始在核心市場專精的那些。所以我覺得那是好事。我覺得 G-SIBs 會存在，集中也一直都會在，但那種依賴長期好不好，誰知道？但至少這是我的看法。You kind of lose that touch with the community, and that actually has second-order effects as well. So I'm on the side where I personally love the, you know, I'd rather have more diversity of banks out there that especially start to get specialized in their core markets. So I think that's a good thing. I think, you know, G-SIBs exist and concentration is always going to be there, but that dependency, you know, may or may not be good longer term, who knows? But that's at least my take on it.

6:09:03我覺得 Raj 的看法是更多銀行、更少銀行間依賴。而這也是為什麼 Agora 你們在做的事很厲害，你們現在拿到 OCC 執照的有條件核准。這太驚人了。過去好幾十年，OCCI think the Raj take is more banks, less interbank dependency. Well, and this is why, like, it's awesome where, like, you know, folks like, you know, Agora and what you guys are doing, like, you guys now have, you know, your conditional approval of the OCC charter. Like, that's amazing. That never happened, you know, over the last, you know, multiple decades where the

6:09:19發執照的情況不是這樣，但現在我們開始看到像 Agora 這種新的、真的很可信、技術優先的組織，可以接到這些軌道裡。所以你們現在有一個很驚人的機會，真的把這件事做大。對，我們非常興奮。我，嗯，這有點像送分球。謝謝。我覺得這OCC was giving charters out, but now we're starting to see, like, new, like, really credible, like, tech-first organizations like Agora that can kind of build into these rails. And so, you know, you guys have, like, an amazing opportunity right now to, like, really scale this thing out. Yeah, we're very excited. I, um, that was a little bit of a layup. Thank you. I think it's

6:09:39很有意思，我們談競爭、創新這些事，而金融危機之後，巴塞爾協議第三版真的把外匯市場、以及 G-SIBs 在經濟上實際能做的市場壓得很緊。我覺得加密更廣義來說，一件很棒的事就是競爭增加了。我記得 ICE 宣布他們要做一天 23 小時交易。你看，那就是加密有一天 24 小時交易的結果，對吧？句號。interesting, you know, we talk about competition and innovation and all these things, and really, like, post-financial crisis, Basel III, like, really crunched on FX markets and what markets G-SIBs could, like, economically actually play in. And I think one of the great things about crypto more broadly is it's just an increase in competition. And, you know, I think ICE announced that they're going to do 23-hour-a-day trading. And look, that's a result of crypto having 24-hour-a-day trading, right? Full stop.

6:10:08他們本來不想做那個。他們本來不想把客戶服務得更好。所以我覺得這種競爭增加、逼著整條堆疊創新的趨勢，就是淨正面。我不會評論巴塞爾協議第三版算不算淨正面，大概是，不過這是平衡的問題。對，百分之百。我覺得 Raj 抓到一個很好的點。我覺得 BIS 那件事，我沒讀那份報告，講的是關係數量萎縮了。你週六晚上沒有在讀They didn't want to do that. They didn't want to serve their customers better. And so I think this trend of just increased competition forcing innovation across the stack is just a net positive. I won't comment on whether I think Basel III is a net positive, probably, but, you know, it's about a balance. Yeah, 100%. I think Raj picked up on a really great point. I think the exact BIS thing, and I didn't read the report, was around the number of relationships had shrunk. You didn't spend your Saturday night reading

6:10:39BIS 報告。我之後睡不著的時候會試著讀。所以，對，我覺得成為對應網路的一部分有很多額外負擔，我想萎縮的就是這個，也有集中等等。我們確實看到很早期的對話，跟很多小型，我該怎麼稱呼，比較小的銀行，圍繞著，有一個詞在被丟出來，關於用穩定幣建一套對應網路。the BIS report. I'm going to try now when I'm struggling to sleep. So, so yeah, I think there's a lot of overhead that comes with being part of the correspondent network, and I think that's what's shrunk, and there's been concentration, etc. I do— we do see very early-stage conversations with a lot of small, like— what do I call them, smaller banks, around—there's a word being thrown around about building a correspondent network based on stablecoins.

6:10:55只有 13% 國家配對有直接銀行關係

6:11:08比較小的銀行常常只是想跟新加坡的一家銀行有點對等式的關係，銀行等等。我覺得這挺酷的，我想我們會看到這件事開始累積動能。不過對，我覺得擴散、更多可得性、更多選擇，我覺得大體上都是好事。對，補充你的點，我覺得今天所有國家配對裡，只有 13% 彼此有直接關係，而且只有大約 30。Smaller banks often kind of just want to have, like, a peer-to-peer relationship with a bank in Singapore, banks, etc. I think that's pretty cool, and I think we'll see some momentum building around that. But yeah, I think proliferation, more availability, more choice, I think it's all kind of a good thing. Yeah, and adding to your point, I think today only 13% of all country pairs have direct relationships with one another, and only 30 or so.

6:11:43所以，世界上還有大約 80 個國家根本沒被納進去，就是完全被排除在資金移動系統之外。所以，對，對應銀行體系要建立這些關係顯然成本非常高，但這看起來真的過時了。對我這種加密原生的人來說，這居然還存在，看起來非常過時。So, and there are some 80 countries in the world that are not even included at all, that are just excluded from the money movement system completely. So, yeah, there is obviously, like, a very high cost in the correspondent banking system to establish these relationships, but it seems really outdated. Like, for me as a crypto-native person, it seems very outdated that this still exists.

6:12:10而到某個時間點，到某個時間點，我確實覺得它會慢慢接手，就像你提到的，這類由穩定幣驅動的系統，應該能促成更多連線，也應該讓全球金融體系更包容。我覺得這個題目我們可以再開一場三小時的座談，因為有很多辯論：穩定幣會不會讓你更容易自己建出對應銀行網路？那會長成什麼樣子？And at some point, at some point, I do think that it will kind of slowly take over, as you mentioned, these kind of stablecoin-powered systems, which should enable much more connections and should empower a more inclusive global financial system. I think we can have another three-hour-long panel on this topic because, you know, there's a lot of debate over, do stablecoins make it easier to build out your own correspondent banking network? What does that look like?

6:12:40但為了時間，大概也為了聽眾的精神狀態，我們要進下一題。Martins，這一題我想從你開始，因為你我聊過，我知道你對這題很興奮。我們稍早也稍微提到，但對應銀行不只是訊息傳遞。不只是一家銀行說「嘿，我要把錢送到這邊。」But for the sake of time and probably the sanity of the audience, we're going to move on to the next question. Martins, I want to start with you on this one because you and I have talked about this, and I know you're excited about the question. And we alluded to this a little bit earlier, but correspondent banking is not just about messaging. It's not just about one bank saying, "Hey, I'm going to send my money over here."

6:13:02對應銀行裡面還有很多東西。Drake，你提過好幾次。有信用、有流動性管理，成為對應銀行網路的一部分，這些東西都在裡面。當越來越多銀行採用穩定幣，越來越多錢在鏈上移動，在穩定幣的世界裡這會長成什麼樣子，信用、流動性管理，銀行怎麼跟這互動，金融機構怎麼跟這互動？There's a lot more that goes into correspondent banking. Drake, you mentioned this a few times. There's credit, there's liquidity management, there's all of this stuff that goes into being part of the correspondent banking network. As more and more banks adopt stablecoins, as more and more money moves on chain, what does that look like in the world of stablecoins, the credit, the liquidity management, how are banks interacting with this and FIs interacting with this?

6:13:28我們需要把什麼做完，才能在這裡模仿出對應銀行體系一模一樣的結果？對，我可以稍微推測銀行在 TradFi 怎麼做，以及你們自己怎麼做。我們怎麼做。對，那我就直接講我們怎麼做。顯然，對支付公司來說，資金調度成本是他們最重要的成本之一，他們真的很想把它壓很低。像今天才跟一家公司聊，他們說至少要在資產負債表上保留What do we need to get done to mimic the exact results of the correspondent banking system here? Yeah, I guess I can speculate a little bit how banks do it in TradFi and— And also how you are doing it. How we do it. Yeah, so I guess I'll just tell how we do it. So obviously, for payment companies, treasury cost is one of the most important costs that they have that they're really trying to minimize a lot. Like, just talked today with a company who said that they need to keep at least

6:13:59三天成交量的準備金，最後可能是數百萬美元。所以我們嘗試解決的方式，是提供跟銀行給客戶類似的信用額度。不過跟銀行不同，我們其實沒有從存進來的資產上賺到那麼多利息，因為我們沒有，對，我們沒有銀行執照。like a reserve of three-day volume in their balance sheet, which can end up into millions of dollars. So the way we try to solve it is we provide the same kind of, similar kind of credit lines that banks provide to their clients. However, unlike for banks, we're not really earning the interest on the asset deposited that much because we are not, yeah, we don't have a banking license.

6:14:27所以其實對我們有利的是，確保交易盡快結算，因為那對我們是額外成本。所以我們提供這些信用額度做交易後結算，客戶不一定每次都要先注資給我們。這樣他們大幅砍掉資金調度成本，然後我們跟他們即時結算。所以他們拿到錢。不必預先注資。當然有一些風險限額。我覺得這跟銀行體系比，So it is actually in our interest to make sure that we settle the transactions as fast as possible because that is an additional cost for us. So we provide these credit lines for post-trade settlement, so clients don't necessarily always need to pre-fund us. So they cut down their treasury costs significantly, and then we settle with them instantly. So they get their money. They don't need to pre-fund. There are some risk limits, of course. And I think this, compared to the banking system,

6:14:59差別是我們沒有誘因要盡可能慢，因為在銀行體系裡，當你在賺利息，你其實可能想把資產拿個幾天，因為為什麼不賺一點無風險報酬？有銀行想評論這個嗎？對，我不確定這是不是公平的指控，不過我們盡量把錢動得越快越好，至少 Banking Circle 會這樣做。我們這行就是想盡可能做到即時。the difference is that we are not incentivized to be as slow as possible, because in the banking system, when you're earning interest, you actually might want to hold the asset for a few days because, you know, why not earn these risk-free returns a little bit? Do any of the banks care to comment on that? Yeah, I'm not sure that's a fair accusation, but, you know, we try and move money as fast as possible, at least Banking Circle would do. We're in the business of trying to go as instant as possible.

6:15:27但完全說中了，我覺得對應銀行體系要做到即時，得用很多資本才能做到即時。所以如你所說，如果我要在巴西做結算，我得先注資給巴西那家銀行。資本得放在那裡。作為銀行，我得算出對那家銀行的風險曝險，還要看那家銀行自己的信用評等。所以要交付那個即時，會疊上好多層成本。而這些機制在穩定幣的世界裡並沒有改變，對吧？But spot on, I think the correspondent banking system, to make it instant, has to use a lot of capital to make it instant. So as you said, if I want to do settlements in Brazil, I have to pre-fund the bank in Brazil. The capital has to sit there. As a bank, I have to work out my risk exposure to that bank, depending on the credit rating of that bank in particular. So there are so many layers of cost that add up to deliver that instant. And those mechanics do not change in the world of stablecoins, right?

6:15:58所以讓我把這點講清楚。所以……你對那個幫你在巴西、阿根廷、無論哪裡清算資金的對手方的風險曝險，並沒有改變。風險從來，我聽過很多次，風險從來不會真的消失。它只是換一個家，或改變形狀。所以你得搞懂什麼東西改變了形狀。所以你的對手方風險從來不會消失，但你可以更有效率，對吧？So let me just get that. So... Your risk exposure to the counterparty that you're using to clear your funds in Brazil, Argentina, wherever that is, does not change. Risk never—I had a, I've used, I think I've heard this many times—risk never really goes away. It finds a different home, or it changes shape. And so you have to kind of understand what changes shape. So your counterparty risk never goes away, but you can be efficient, right?

6:15:59預先注資從一週壓到當日

6:16:24所以你可以，不用預先注資一週的在途資金，可能只要當日盤中一天的在途資金，因為你可以用穩定幣即時注資。那是效率。那不是風險。好。所以我覺得這些都是你得想的元件，穩定幣不是魔法子彈。它只是讓你可以更有效率。風險會把自己變成不同的東西，但效率確實讓你可以更好。So you can, instead of pre-funding a week's worth of float, you might just have an intraday day's worth of float because you can fund it real time in stablecoins. That's efficiency. That's not risk. Okay. So I think these are all the kind of components you have to think about, how, you know, stablecoins are not a magic bullet. It's just that it allows you to be more efficient. Risk transforms itself into different things, but efficiency definitely allows you to be better.

6:16:53像，你還是沒有保證，你把穩定幣寄給對手方，然後一小時後他們倒了，對吧？所以那個沒辦法算進去。那就是風險。那是真實風險。Drake，你說。哦不，我其實沒有要補充的。哦，很好。Raj，有嗎？好，那我們繼續。最後一題給你們，這題有點辣。Drake、Raj、我自己，我們是美國人。Like there's, you know, you still don't have no guarantee you're going to send a stablecoin to a counterparty and then— an hour later, they've gone bust, right? So, like, there's no accounting for that. That's just risk. That's real risk. Go for it, Drake. Oh no, I don't have anything to add, actually. Oh, great. Raj, anything? All right, let's do it. So, last question for you here, and this is— this is sort of a spicy one. Drake, Raj, myself, we're Americans.

6:17:24我們在美元、以及美元的成功上押得很重。美元現在佔全球穩定幣市場的 99%。Agora 是美元擔保的穩定幣。美元外面顯然還有整個世界。我想聽你們對穩定幣目前在外匯裡怎麼被使用的看法，尤其是在對應銀行體系裡面。就你說的，銀行到處都是。它們需要跟當地貨幣互動。你沒辦法We are heavily invested in the U.S. dollar and the success of the U.S. dollar. The U.S. dollar right now makes up 99% of the global stablecoin market. Agora is a dollar-backed stablecoin. There's an entire world outside of the dollar, obviously. I want to get your thoughts on how stablecoins are currently being used in FX, especially within the correspondent banking system. You know, to your point, banks are all over the place. They need to interact with local currencies. You cannot

6:17:59只靠美元就運轉一套全球銀行體系。多跟我講一點，美元計價的穩定幣，也許還有非美元計價的穩定幣，是怎麼擠進全球銀行體系的。對，我是說，有意思的是，穩定幣大概從 2014 年就存在了。從 Tether 一開始真正起飛，而且壓倒性地一直是美元。run a global banking system off of just the dollar. Tell me a little bit more about how U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoins and maybe non-U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoins are, you know, wiggling their way into the global banking system. Yeah, I mean, I think what's interesting is that, you know, stablecoins have been around since like 2014. Since Tether really took off in the beginning, and it's overwhelmingly been U.S. dollars.

6:18:24過去大概兩三年，我們看到非美元穩定幣開始出現，對吧？我們現在有新加坡元的，有墨西哥披索的。所以它開始在長。顯然還是很小的百分比，對吧？但隨著時間在長。我覺得它確實，這形容可能很糟，但它確實對得上全球外匯、以及外匯現在是怎麼對上的。Over the last, like, you know, two or three years, we've seen non-dollar stablecoins start to emerge, right? We have a Sing dollar one now, we have Mexican peso. So you have, it's starting to grow. It's obviously still, like, small percentages, right? But over time, it's growing. I think it does have, you know, and this is, like, kind of a really bad characterization, but it does map into, you know, global FX and how it's currently mapped.

6:18:47像美元仍然是世界上交易量最高的資產之一，交易的外匯。所以那邊還是有對應。我覺得歷史上，在加密世界裡有意思的是，很多穩定幣是交易員在用、DeFi 在用、鏈上生態系很多不同面向在用，而那裡美元很重。所以我覺得還是有一些對應。Like, the U.S. dollar is still, like, one of the most traded assets, you know, traded FX out there in the world. So there's still, like, mapping over there. And I think historically, in the crypto world, which is interesting, is that a lot of stablecoins are used by traders, by DeFi, and by a lot of different aspects of the on-chain ecosystem, and that's heavily dollars. And so I think there's still some mapping.

6:19:09我覺得當你開始為非美元建立更好的需求輪廓，事情會開始更有意思。但今天，我覺得它很清楚地對上鏈上使用，也對上美元今天本來就怎麼被交易。我這裡可能有個比較衝的看法。我覺得金錢就是有極端的網路效應，我其實不確定，我常常在想，穩定幣是不是其實就是……對大多數外國貨幣的威脅。I think as you start to build, like, a better demand profile for the non-USD dollars will start to get more interesting. But today, I think it's mapping really well to just, like, usage on-chain and also just, you know, how dollars are naturally traded today too. I might have a little bit of a hot take here. I think that there's just extreme network effects on money, and I actually don't know if—I oftentimes wonder if stablecoins are actually just... a threat to most foreign currencies.

6:19:42就是有超多例子，人們如果可以、而且能自主地這樣做，會選美元來做儲蓄、來運作。我覺得，對，這跟我們剛剛在談的非美元穩定幣有點相反，但我想市場不會說謊。嗯，對，我是說市場不會說謊。而且你看，確實有很多不確定性，關於There's just a ton of examples of people, if they can and have it sovereignly, choose U.S. dollars for their savings to operate in. And I think that, yeah, I mean, kind of goes a little bit against what we're talking about in terms of just, like, non-USD stablecoins, but I think the market doesn't lie. Well, yeah, I mean, I think the market doesn't lie. And look, there's certainly a lot of uncertainty about, you know, the

6:20:07美國的政治氣候、聯準會、這些事情，而那是美元風險裡固有的。但我覺得對很多地方來說，那筆交易比當地貨幣更好。不是每個地方，但有些地方是。所以我其實認為未來幾年會看到政府真的反推美元穩定幣，特別是因為他們正在失去一點設定貨幣政策的槓桿。U.S. political climate and the Federal Reserve and all these things, and that is inherent to the risk with the dollar. But I think for a lot of places, that's a better trade than their local currency. Not everywhere, but some places. And so I actually think we're going to see over the next few years governments really pushing back against U.S. dollar stablecoins specifically because they're losing a bit of the levers that they have to set monetary policy.

6:20:36對，我是說，當然，我覺得我們得看時間範圍，對吧？所以穩定幣大概八、九、十年了，從 Tether 存在以來。它解決了加密世界的問題，那個世界現在已經長到大約 3 兆美元。所以它的主要使用情境和採用大概是從那裡開始的。它現在在找不同的家，對吧？不論好壞，加密產業其實是以美元為基準的，對吧，全球都是。我們就是那樣談的，對吧？好。Yeah, I mean, for sure, I think we have to look at time horizons, right? So stablecoins are about eight, nine, ten years old, since Tether has been around. It solved the problem for the crypto world, which has now grown into, like, $3 trillion. So its primary use case and its adoption kind of started there. It's now finding different homes, right? And for better or worse, the crypto industry is . . actually benchmarked against the U.S. dollar, right, globally. We talk about it that way, right? Okay.

6:21:05當然，我覺得 Drake 你提到的一些事，當地貨幣貶值已經發生的地方、有管道拿到美元穩定幣的地方，那類事情。有意思的是，我再回到這點，會有持續的壓力讓美元穩定幣成長。讓我用這個，如果美國資產上鏈，股票、貨幣市場基金等等，它們主要會以美元計價或錨定美國的And for sure, I think some of the stuff you mentioned, Drake, where, you know, local currency devaluations have moved, where there's access to U.S. dollar stablecoins, all that kind of stuff. The interesting thing is, and I come back to this, there is a— There is going to be a continuous pressure on U.S. dollar stablecoins to grow. And let me just use, if U.S. assets come on-chain—stocks, money market funds, etc. —they're going to primarily be denominated or anchored against U.S.

6:21:35美元，對吧，或美元穩定幣。所以你會在那裡看到這個成長模式，那個數字比一兆還大，好幾兆。絕對是。對。問題是內部貿易，像東協要怎麼做？印度要怎麼做？印度跟歐洲的貿易，那要怎麼跑？亞洲跟拉丁美洲的貿易呢？非常、非常大的流量，對吧？目前是透過美元中介的，如果有夠強的穩定幣和流動性，那個第一錨定的東西。dollars, right, or U.S. dollar stablecoins. So then you— see this growth pattern there, and that's a bigger number than a trillion, a few trillion. Absolutely. Right. The question is intra-trade, like, so what is ASEAN going to do? What's India going to do? And India-Europe trade, how's that going to work? How is Asia-LATAM trade? Huge, huge flows, right? Currently intermediated through U.S. dollars, like if there was a strong stablecoin and liquidity, the number one anchor thing.

6:22:12然後你會看到，好，穩定幣的成長和流動性會有一個平衡。反映真實經濟活動。現在，壓力其實是在穩定幣成長被超加速這件事上，因為這些其他資產都在上鏈。我也覺得這一段時間對央行和那些人來說，還沒那麼系統性到需要注意，因為那還是早期，市值很低、很低。Then you can see, okay, there'll be a balance of the stablecoin growth and liquidity. Reflective of real economic activity. Right now, the pressure actually is on a supercharged growth of stablecoin growth because of all these other assets that are coming on-chain. And I also think it hasn't been as systemic, you know, for central banks and folks to kind of pay attention to for a while because— it was, you know, early days, like low, low market cap.

6:22:42但現在當你開始把大約半兆美元只是穩定幣流動性推進去，它現在開始對央行總裁造成壓力，你會想，嘿，我要不要讓美元化接管我的市場？所以這些就是真實的地緣政治，依我看，它已經超過我們這個產業，正在變成一個全球地緣政治問題。所以這就是它開始真的變得有意思的地方。But now when you start to push, you know, half a trillion dollars in just, like, stablecoin liquidity, it's now, like, it starts to put pressure as a central banker where you're like, hey, like, do I want to have dollarization kind of take over my market or not? And so these are just, you know, real geopolitical, like— it's now past, like, our industry, in my opinion, and it's now becoming a global geopolitical question. So this is where, like, it starts to definitely get interesting.

6:23:09下一章就要展開了。還有準備金和發行方真正的結構問題，他們是誰、在哪裡，這會變得很有意思。對。對，雖然我是新興市場的超級粉絲，你們可能以前聽過，我想，我也希望非美元穩定幣成功，但我覺得這很棘手。這很棘手。這是一個非常、非常棘手的挑戰，我覺得有好幾個面向。首先是監管面向。The next chapter is about to unfold. And real structural issues on the reserves and the issuers and who are they, where are they, like, it's going to get interesting. Yeah. Yeah, well, as much as I am a big fanboy of emerging markets, as you may have heard before, I think, and I would love non-dollar stablecoins to succeed, I think it is tricky. It is tricky. It is a very, very tricky challenge, and I think there's multiple aspects. First of all, there's the regulatory aspect.

6:23:39當地監管機關其實需要核准這些幣、這些資產，它們才能被使用，因為只有終端消費者在用，它們才有意義。因為同樣，從我作為造市商的角度看，如果我需要確保資金從比如說巴西移到新加坡時有流動性。而如果我們現在，在這個穩定幣三明治裡，決定再加進當地穩定幣，那我的三明治就變成大麥克了，裡面有很多不同的部分，其實，The local regulators actually need to approve these coins, these assets, for them to be used because they would only be meaningful if they are used by end consumers. Because again, from my perspective as a market maker, if I need to ensure that there's liquidity in moving money from, say, Brazil to Singapore. And if we are now, so in this stablecoin sandwich, deciding to add in the local stablecoins, now my sandwich becomes a Big Mac, and it has a lot of—there's a lot of different parts in it that actually,

6:24:19作為造市商、作為流動性提供者，我知道這些部分都要花錢。流動性，這些全都是流動性事件，進到 BRL、進到 BRL 穩定幣、進到 USDT、從 USDT 出到 SGD 穩定幣、然後再出。它們全都是流動性事件，都要花錢。而且，而且，而且我覺得只要我們最終還是需要當地法幣，要讓這類系統更有效率就會很難。as a market maker, as a liquidity provider, I know that these parts cost money. Liquidity, these are all liquidity events, going into BRL, to BRL stablecoin, going into USDT, going off USDT into SGD stablecoin, and then off. They are all liquidity events, and they cost money. And, and, and they—and I think as long as we still need the local fiat at the end of the day, we will—it will be hard to make this kind of system more efficient.

6:24:53不過，我是說，我是超級粉絲。我希望它們成功，但這不容易。我太愛了。好，我們差不多要聽到音樂、被請下台了，但我感謝各位上來。我知道這是一個很乾的題目，對應銀行體系。希望我們有讓它對大家稍微性感一點。我跟你們說過，我六歲的時候就跟媽媽說：「媽，我就是真的、真的很想談對應銀行。」所以謝謝各位上來。我感謝。But, I mean, I'm a big fanboy. I hope they succeed, like, but it's not easy. I love it. Well, we're about to hear the music and get played off the stage, but I appreciate all of you being up here. I know that this was a very dry subject, correspondent banking systems. I hope we made it a little bit sexy for everyone. I told you, when I was six years old, I was like, "Mom, I just really, really want to talk about correspondent banking." So, thank you all for being up here. I appreciate it.

6:25:19也希望各位都聽得開心。And I hope you all enjoyed.