[Only an old “crypto chaser” would ask this question: Why do institutions choose Solana and not ETH?]
Last week, MoneyGram started running a crypto-to-cash service on Solana. I didn’t rush to post it, because this kind of news happens in the crypto circles every day—what chain added which institution, how much money a project raised, and most of it is PR fluff. Three days later, nobody remembers.
But this time, I thought about it seriously.
MoneyGram isn’t the kind of company that just slaps its name on any random chain. It has hundreds of thousands of cash collection and payment points worldwide, and its business is remittances and foreign currency exchange. For these people, the chain selection criteria are simple: either it can help them save money, or it can help them acquire customers.
Can ETH do that? When gas is low, sure. But when volatility hits, the fees can end up costing more than what they earn. For MoneyGram, Solana’s TPS and fee structure is the real sweet spot.
So the question is: what Solana has won this time is institutional-level demand, not retail FOMO. Once this thing works end-to-end, it’s no longer a question of “can this chain survive?” It’s a question of “it’s already sustaining real business.”
This is different from the kinds of “blockchain adoption” I saw back in 2017. Those were all PPTs—this is someone actually using your chain to run a foreign-exchange business.
I can’t say the valuation part is accurate, but the fact itself shows that Solana’s fundamentals are genuinely being taken seriously. FNG 29—the market is still in fear—but big institutions are already moving. Isn’t that interesting?
Do you think this counts as “institutions running first”? Or is this just another big retail player positioning themselves?
Last week, MoneyGram started running a crypto-to-cash service on Solana. I didn’t rush to post it, because this kind of news happens in the crypto circles every day—what chain added which institution, how much money a project raised, and most of it is PR fluff. Three days later, nobody remembers.
But this time, I thought about it seriously.
MoneyGram isn’t the kind of company that just slaps its name on any random chain. It has hundreds of thousands of cash collection and payment points worldwide, and its business is remittances and foreign currency exchange. For these people, the chain selection criteria are simple: either it can help them save money, or it can help them acquire customers.
Can ETH do that? When gas is low, sure. But when volatility hits, the fees can end up costing more than what they earn. For MoneyGram, Solana’s TPS and fee structure is the real sweet spot.
So the question is: what Solana has won this time is institutional-level demand, not retail FOMO. Once this thing works end-to-end, it’s no longer a question of “can this chain survive?” It’s a question of “it’s already sustaining real business.”
This is different from the kinds of “blockchain adoption” I saw back in 2017. Those were all PPTs—this is someone actually using your chain to run a foreign-exchange business.
I can’t say the valuation part is accurate, but the fact itself shows that Solana’s fundamentals are genuinely being taken seriously. FNG 29—the market is still in fear—but big institutions are already moving. Isn’t that interesting?
Do you think this counts as “institutions running first”? Or is this just another big retail player positioning themselves?