Payment giant PayPal has hundreds of millions of users. Although the launched PYUSD is compliant, its market share remains limited. What is the real reason behind this? Large-scale subsidy policies sustain a weak ecosystem, leading to a dilemma of being stuck between advancing and retreating.

In contrast, Visa's approach appears much more shrewd—partnering with USDC instead of creating a stablecoin on its own. The logic behind this is worth examining: either Visa has sufficient capital but is unwilling to earn this money (which is clearly unreasonable), or Visa has rationally assessed that the costs of building its own stablecoin would put it in an unwise position.

The market has actually underestimated the difficulty threshold of creating a new stablecoin. From technical development, risk control systems, regulatory adaptation to ecosystem support, each link involves real costs. Circle, with its first-mover advantage and trust foundation established through USDC, has formed an insurmountable competitive barrier. This is not just a product issue but a comprehensive competition involving market recognition, liquidity depth, and ecosystem completeness.

The integration of the payment ecosystem with crypto assets is reshaping the landscape, but in this game, choosing cooperation often requires more strategic vision than brute-force expansion.