Thread

Replies (53)

And by the way, there’s no inside information about Swan he could know that I don’t. There is nothing. 64% of sats purchased at Swan every month are withdrawn. We encourage and support self-custody as much as possible. Every other sat is in a legally segregated trust account in the client’s name and, by definition, 100% reserve. Only bitcoin, of course. There is no logical reason to compare us to Binance. 🤔
I have a lot of respect for the work you do because you try to give objective takes. What is your objective reasoning for comparing Swan to Binance in this way? I think we deserve to hear it.
Swan. They always point the finger at everyone else so no one looks at them. Their centralized custodian reliance of Prime Trust nearly rugged their users. River has a better business model for bitcoin only companies. But really it doesn’t matter where you get your bitcoin, just take self custody asap (while minimizing utxo’s) so your reliance on any centralized exchange is minimal. (Yeah I know peer to peer is better)
Wouldn't be surprised if Swan rugged. They narrowly escaped Prime Trust's magic carpet ride, then migrated everyone to Fortress, which was founded by Prime Trust's founder, Scott Purcell, and staffed with former SVB compliance officers. Very unsavory all around. As I type, they are experiencing technical difficulties with their Bitcoin purchasing portal thingy. https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/04/25/former-signature-bank-crypto-payments-chief-four-of-his-team-join-fortress-trust/
🛡️
Swan wouldn't be a surprise by any stretch. Binance can keep their ship afloat for a lot longer due to the sheer size of the shitcoin faucets they can tap in to. Both in the same week would be a decent outcome for stone cold stackers. Might be some tears shed along the way. As a sidequest... WoS pulls the mother of all LN rugs in the meantime.