Weiss Ratings, a U.S. independent rating agency, had announced that it will issue letter grades on cryptocurrencies, to be released Wednesday January 24. Beyond market leader bitcoin (BTC), the rating agency will also issue grades for ethereum (ETH), Ripple’s XRP, bitcoin cash (BCH), cardano (ADA), NEM (XEM), litecoin (LTC), stellar (XLM), EOS, IOTA, Dash, NEO, TRON, Monero (XMR), bitcoin gold (BTG) and many others. https://news.bitcoin.com/u-s-rating-agency-to-issue-bitcoin-and-cryptocurrency-grades-wednesday/ Are cryptocurrencies going mainstream?
Really ? Its just another way to manipulate the truth for someones benefit. Ratings agencies are notoriously inaccurate & mostly wrong
crypto is not going mainstream in local market, in Australian context we dont consider USD as mainstream. Though crypto can be considered foreign currency and if youre considering foreign currency in "main stream" I can see that happening. In most countries that unofficially operate a dual currency, there is always a local currency. Many places in London take Euros, everything is priced in Pounds. So some do take a punt, because EURO/POUNDS dont go up or down 10% a day. But the foreign currency always has "fee/risk" built in. The only country I am aware of where crypto is trying to go mainstream officially is Japan. But like UK/Euro it is still a hassle as it needs a conversion back to local currency. Also for it to act like a local currency it cannot be volatile where it swings up or down 10% a day as above, for a business owner to say "we will take the risk" Say Toyota in Japan was going to accept BTC or Dogecoin, what takes precedence in valuing the car in JPY or BTC on the for-sale sticker. It is very unlikely to say " 2218000 YEN or 2 BTC" more like 2218000 Yen and we accept x digital currency Where as in UK Toyota might take the risk and put on the sticker "14000 pounds or 16000 euro"
So what's the difference between me/you/us/public doing our due diligence, research etc and sharing/discussing our findings on various social platforms and some random company? It's not like they have access to super secret info that the rest of us don't Sounds like their just trying to cash in and use their name, which might mean something to some people who already use them (and could help with mainstream adoption), but for those of us that don't, I don't think we could care less about what their ratings will be Admittedly, I will be curious to see how they actually rate each coin, just to see if they know what their on about and provide balanced factual information or not
At a guess Step 1 - Rate blue chip coins accurately Step 2 - gain market acceptance as the thing to do to get your coin looking legit Step 3 - new comers pay per play - - tier rating based on "fee paid"
Ratings agencies’ power to influence are derived from government legislation mandating that investments must meet benchmark approval from the likes of Moody’s, S&P etc. Until that point in time Weiss’s assessments will be taken with a grain of salt.
Exactly what I am asking, as far as I can tell, it is not a recognized statistical rating organization aka Moody, Fitch and S&P. Could be professional paid for pumpers
Still yet another indicator that Fiat/Feds/Banksters are having to recognise that Crypto isn't going away any time soon. I get the cynicism totally ( look at the Ratings Agency's just prior to 2008) but look at it another way and it is just another path forward to mainstream adoption.
Weiss is more akin to marketing company than a rating agency. It’s seem their only claim to fame is four regulatory fine and that they will rate crypto. It is listed as 100 employees, based out of Palm Springs Florida. Looking at google maps of the building doubt 100 staff., as they are not even the main tenants. it’s unlikely location for financial services company. Putting two and two together, and their past fines, if any weird coins get rated with the usual btc, etc etc.... look for a major pump and dump, and the people behind those coins probably are the people paying for the rating, and also send8ng out t(e press release to media.
ETH and EOS the only two coins to receive a B, whilst NEO, STEEM and ADA received B- BTC received a C+, but overall Weiss was actually quite positive towards crypto with what they've said Here's a link to the PDF's https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/01/24/weiss-cryptocurrency-ratings-1/preview/page/1/
Interesting comment. Charles Hoskinson criticised the ratings. He argued BTC should have received an A. Not really a comment that someone who allegedly paid for the ratings would make don’t you think?