What Happens When Stablecoins Win? Reflections on A16Z’s Vision
This isn’t a Tether article.
I know, I know…..surprising. But today, I’m stepping out of my usual rhythm to dive into a different stablecoin perspective. I recently listened to a16z crypto’s podcast featuring Chris Dixon and Sam Broner, and it laid out one of the more coherent, long-term views I’ve heard in a while. It’s not about memecoins, yield-chasing, or regulatory catfights. It’s about payments, infrastructure, and where the puck is actually going.
I wanted to share some reflections; not because I agree with everything they said, but because this kind of thinking deserves to be unpacked. Let’s break down what stood out, what they’re getting right, and where the gaps still lie.
Stablecoins as Public Infrastructure
Dixon and Broner argue that stablecoins represent a horizontal layer; a new kind of neutral rail for global money movement. Unlike traditional financial systems that rely on layers of intermediaries (banks, processors, clearinghouses), stablecoins can be built on blockchains that anyone can access and build on.
Their thesis is clear: blockchains unlock a global, programmable, interoperable financial layer, like the web, but for money. Not merely about cost savings; more about reimagining how payments, credit, and commerce get stitched together.
But they also call out the paradox: this is the most widely used crypto product, with trillions in volume, and yet it’s the hardest to invest in. Why? Because the margins are compressed, and the product is structurally public-good-ish. It’s infrastructure. Not the kind of business that prints monopoly profits.
That’s part of what makes the stablecoin wars so fascinating. Because multiple players are building a money layer.
Composability Is a Bigger Deal Than You Think
One of the more important ideas the podcast raises, without shouting it, is composability. Stablecoins, as programmable money, allow anyone to plug into a global network of financial primitives: custody, lending, payments, and compliance.
That’s a yuge unlock.
Today, to build a payment app, you need to deal with multiple APIs, licensing, fraud tools, banking partners, FX desks, etc. But with stablecoins and open infrastructure, the startup cost of launching a financial app drops dramatically. You can now focus on the UX, not the plumbing.
As Broner noted, that’s how products like Blackbird (restaurant loyalty meets payments) can emerge. You couldn’t build something like that efficiently 5 years ago.
This is also why stablecoins will quietly reshape e-commerce, tipping, creator payments, streaming pay-per-second, and anything else that was too annoying to implement before.
Regulation as a Catalyst, Not a Constraint
There’s always been a weird dynamic in crypto: people loathe regulation, but regulation is also the very thing that unlocks institutional adoption.
The a16z crew makes it clear that regulation, especially something like the GENIUS Act, tells the banks, the fintechs, the payment service providers that it’s now safe to move. I guess that is a refreshing take….
Once that floodgate opens, stablecoin volumes will take the non-linear path…
They point to how Section 230 helped catalyze the internet, laying a legal foundation for builders to experiment. We could be looking at a similar moment for stablecoins.
Where Value Accrues in a Post-Intermediary World
This is the most important and perhaps most underexplored point in the episode.
If stablecoins eat payments, and intermediaries fade into the background, where does value accrue?
The a16z answer is layered and probably gives you a good insight into what they are (and will be) investing in.
Infrastructure (wallets, on/off ramps, compliance rails)
Fintech wrappers that abstract complexity
Protocol-level service providers (escrow, fraud protection, vaulting)
And eventually, reputation and identity layers that live natively on-chain
In other words, stablecoins become the foundation, but the real differentiation and business opportunity lie in the services built on top.
Even though they are coming and arguably are already here, you don’t need 100 different stablecoins. You need 100 different use cases built on top of one or two dominant ones.
Where Tether Fits (or Doesn’t)
Now let’s bring it back to my usual beat. Whether or not you agree with the a16z worldview, it does raise the question: where does Tether fit in?
Tether is the undisputed liquidity king. But it doesn’t play by the same game. It’s not pitching U.S. policymakers. It’s not angling for bank partnerships or IPOs. It’s shipping product into markets that most of the crypto elite don’t even think about. Tether after all is “the people’s project”
Definitley recommend listening to the full episode, even if you’re Team Tether. Because the future of stablecoins won’t be winner-take-all. It’ll be layered. Regulated coins for institutional rails. Off-shore liquidity coins for the rest. Localized fintechs wrapping it all in clean UX.
In that world, everyone wins; or at least some do…..