The Silvergate Exchange Network and Signature Bank’s “Signet” were real-time payment platforms that allowed commercial crypto clients to make real-time payments in dollars at any time.to comments from Nic Carter of Castle Island Ventures in a Mar. 12 CNBC report. He noted that both Signet and SEN were key for firms to get fiat in, but hopes that other banks will step up to fill the void.
Others believe the closure of the three firms will create room for another bank to step up and fill the vacuum. Jake Chervinsky, head of policy at crypto policy promoter the Blockchain Association, said the closure of the banks will create a"huge gap" in the market for crypto-friendy banking. The closures of Silvergate, SVB, and Signature create a huge gap in the market for crypto-friendly banking.
There are many banks that can seize this opportunity without taking on the same risks as these three.“There are many banks that can seize this opportunity without taking on the same risks as these three. The question is if banking regulators will try to stand in the way," he added.This is false. United Texas Bank, Western Alliance Bank, JP Morgan Chase, and Bank of New York Mellon all have crypto businesses as customers, and there are probably more.
self-custody, brokerage accounts
Not surprising given the environment right now, but was a traditional “bank” really needed for cryptocurrency? I don’t know much about what they offered, but it feels like they were trying to hang onto old, familiar models.