A blockchain-based alternative investment provider that tokenizes commercial debt is being listed on the Bloomberg Terminal, according to a news release published on June 4.
Cadence is believed to be the first digital asset to obtain a Financial Instrument Global Identifier (FIGI), enabling professionals who use the Bloomberg Terminal to research its offering and execute trades.
The company connects investors with businesses that need to borrow money in order to plug temporary gaps in their cash flow. On its website, Cadence says the minimum investment amount is $500, giving consumers “opportunities traditionally reserved for institutions.”
Currently in private beta, Cadence claims its platform allows investors to generate passive income and hedge against market volatility. Every deal matures within a year, and the company is aiming to deliver annualized returns of more than 10%.
In the news release, Bloomberg Head of Data Standards and Strategy Richard Robinson said:
“The assignment of a FIGI to digital assets is a natural and simple example of the standard’s native utility. It is proof that FIGI can easily extend to new, even esoteric financial instruments.”
Last June, the Bloomberg Terminal started listing Huobi’s Cryptocurrency Index, which tracks the performance of the top 10 traded assets on its exchange.
Source: Pivot – Blockchain Community
As the implications of the invention of have become understood, a certain hype has sprung up around blockchain technology.
This is, perhaps, because it is so easy to imagine high-level use cases. But, the technology has also been closely examined: millions of dollars have been spent researching blockchain technology over the past few years, and numerous tests for whether or not blockchain technology is appropriate in various scenarios have been conducted.
Blockchain technology offers new tools for authentication and authorization in the digital world that preclude the need for many centralized administrators. As a result, it enables the creation of new digital relationships.
By formalizing and securing new digital relationships, the blockchain revolution is posed to create the backbone of a layer of the internet for transactions and interactions of value (often called the ‘Internet of Value’, as opposed to the ‘Internet of Information’ which uses the client-server, accounts and master copy databases we’ve been using for over the past 20 years.)
But, with all the talk of building the digital backbone of a new transactional layer to the internet, sometimes blockchains, private cryptographic keys and cryptocurrencies are simply not the right way to go.
Many groups have created flowcharts to help a person or entity decide between a blockchain or master copy, client-server database. The following factors are a distillation of much of what has been previously done:
Is the data dynamic with an auditable history?
Paper can be hard to counterfeit because of the complexity of physical seals or appearances. Like etching something in stone, paper documents have certain permanence.
But, if the data is in constant flux, if it is transactions occurring regularly and frequently, then paper as a medium may not be able to keep up the system of record. Manual data entry also has human limitations.
So, if the data and its history are important to the digital relationships they are helping to establish, then blockchains offer a flexible capacity by enabling many parties to write new entries into a system of record that is also held by many custodians.
Should or can the data be controlled by a central authority?
There remain many reasons why a third party should be in charge of some authentications and authorizations. There are times when third-party control is totally appropriate and desirable. If privacy of the data is the most important consideration, there are ways to secure data by not even connecting it to a network.
But if existing IT infrastructure featuring accounts and log-ins is not sufficient for the security of digital identity, then the problem might be solved by blockchain technology.
As Satoshi Nakamoto wrote in his (or her) seminal work, “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”: “Merchants must be wary of their customers, hassling them for more information than they would otherwise need. A certain percentage of fraud is accepted as unavoidable.”
Private key cryptography enables push transactions, which don’t require centralized systems and the elaborate accounts used to establish digital relationships. If this database requires millions of dollars to secure lightweight financial transactions, then there’s a chance blockchains are the solution.
Is the speed of the transaction the most important consideration?
Does this database require high-performance millisecond transactions? (There is more on this point in our guide: “What is the Difference Between a Blockchain and a Database?”).
If high performance, millisecond transactions are what is required, then it’s best to stick with a traditional-model centralized system. Blockchains as databases are slow and there is a cost to storing the data – the processing (or ‘mining’) of every block in a chain. Centralized data systems based on the client-server model are faster and less expensive… for now.
In short, while we still don’t know the full limits and possibilities of blockchains, we can at least say the use cases which have passed inspection have all been about managing and securing digital relationships as part of a system of record.
Authored by Nolan Bauerle; images by Maria Kuznetsov
Source: Why Use a Blockchain? – CoinDesk
According to sources familiar with the matter, ConsenSys is trying to attract outside investors to raise $200 million. The company’s executives reportedly talked to investors in Hong Kong and South Korea, however as of early April ConsenSys had purportedly not yet found a lead investor.
The Information cited fundraising documents, revealing that ConsenSys closed 2018 with just $21 million in revenue coming mostly from its enterprise consulting business. Per the documents, ConsenSys is planning its revenue to be more than $50 million in 2019, with around $40 million coming from its services business.
The documents reportedly reveal that ConsenSys has a considerable share in blockchain companies that it has incubated. ConsenSys has reportedly been seeking a valuation of at least $1 billion, which The Information reports is too high, given the company’s revenue and investors.
Last December, anonymous sources stated that ConsenSys could lay off up to 60 percent of its staff as the blockchain space had become more competitive and “crowded.” The company was reportedly spinning out startups it had previously backed, some of them without financial support.
Later in January, ConsenSys’ Executive Director of Enterprise and Social Impact Vanessa Grellet told Cointelegraph that the layoffs did not exceed 13% of staff. All teams at the firm were purportedly reevaluated including technical and non-technical staff.
When asked about signs of crisis in the blockchain industry and criticism of ConsenSys not being able to deliver on its promises, Grellet said that she still sees huge interest in blockchain technology.
Bitcoin Cash Price Surpasses $250 Following Monster Bullish Run: A 39.8% push in USD value brings the current Bitcoin Cash price to $252.96. There is also a 32.3% rise in BCH/BTC, which elevates the ratio to 0.05115 Bitcoin…
Ripple Just Announced That It Is A Founding Member Of The European Commission’s Association For Blockchain, INATBA: The association has several other notable players in the cryptocurrency space, including IOTA, Cardano, Lisk, ConsenSys, Ledger and R3; and some outside, like payments system SWIFT