Stablecoins Win Where Banking Is Weak, Not Where It Is Advanced Panelists Arnold Lee (@0xdirichlet, @sphere_labs), Jason Ne Win (@meshpay) and Zaheer Ebtikar (@zaheerebtikar, @Plasma) discussed "Money That Moves: The Infrastructure Behind Stablecoin Payments." Where do stablecoins actually beat the existing system? Not where you would expect. Lee of Sphere Labs was direct: in the US and Europe, interbank networks are tightly connected and existing remittance already moves funds reasonably well, so the incremental benefit is limited. Between emerging markets, securing correspondent banks costs real time and real money. Using a stablecoin as the intermediary collapses one complicated cross-border transfer into two local transactions, local currency into stablecoin in the sending country and stablecoin back into local currency at the other end, with blockchain connecting two regional financial networks instead of a chain of correspondents. Is this really about cheaper fees? No, it is about the calendar. Ne Win of Mesh pointed out that traditional finance is bounded by national business days and time zones, while stablecoins transact on weekends and holidays, so capital turns over faster rather than just costing less. Running existing payment systems takes substantial headcount and expense, and stablecoins settle transparently around the clock without an organization of the same size. His framing: a stablecoin is not a separate virtual asset but a more advanced version of money, and eventually users will not realize they are using one. What is the hidden cost nobody talks about? Duplicated compliance. A single transaction can touch several institutions and payment providers, so the same KYC and enhanced due diligence runs again at every stage. Lee's proposal is to let one institution's verification result be shared with another while protecting personal data, keeping the strictest obligations at the points where stablecoins are exchanged for fiat. Will one chain win all of this? No. Ebtikar of Plasma ruled it out, because users and businesses need different transaction speeds, costs and regulatory conditions, which means purpose-built chains and services connecting multiple networks develop together. For retail users, which chain it is matters far less than whether money arrives faster and cheaper without complex KYC or a chain to choose. So who leads the next three years? Not the obvious candidates. The panel's call was that on-chain payments get led not by traditional banks and not by unregulated crypto firms, but by emerging-market fintechs holding some level of financial license. And the sharpest consumer pitch came from Ne Win. Your online accounts and social media follow you when you move countries. Your bank accounts have to be closed and reopened every time. Financial accounts that travel with you is a better story than cheaper remittance. Moderated by Steve Lee (@xxstevelee), Co-Founder and Managing Partner at Neoclassic Capital (@NeoclassicCap). #EastPoint #EastPointSeoul2026 #EPS2026