.
@solana head of glabal payments
@CaddleMaya explains how stablecoins will redefine correspondent banking:
"I think if we refer to a correspondent bank in a broader sense, the reason why I say they're not going to evolve is just that there's going to be new players that can become correspondent banks."
"There will still be in some markets hops, right? There may still be a middleman in certain markets, and that will depend upon the regulatory nuances, right?"
"For example, at the moment, in the context of India, it's sometimes hard to move between fiat and stablecoins, right? And that's because of the regulatory environment at the moment, and you have to be compliant and respect that."
"And so sometimes what you find is that people will go via AED, which is a UAE diram, right? To then ultimately get into INR and vice versa. There, you could argue that there will be a bank in the UAE, ultimately, who will help with that flow of funds. And so there may still be a middleman in that sense, but that's not a problem. Not all middlemen are bad, right?"
"But you can also see a world where, I don't know, a bank in Ex-Mart will directly settle a bank in Y-Market, but they will become correspondent banks, because not all banks in Y-Market will have that facility or capability. Not all payments companies will necessarily have a bank that can support that. And so I think it's more a redefinition of who will become a correspondent bank and also the role that they will play."