The post Sanctions, Drone Strikes, And Market Shifts Hit Russia’s Energy Sector appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. BELGOROD, RUSSIA – APRIL 1 : An image of damage after Regional Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov says that helicopters of the Ukrainian Army hit the oil refinery in Belgorod, Russia on April 1, 2022. (Photo by Stringer/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images) Anadolu Agency via Getty Images On October 24, the Russian Federation’s Ryazan oil facility was forced to halt its crude distillation after Ukraine launched a drone strike. The refinery, Russia’s fourth-largest, is a major supplier to Moscow. Other energy facilities in cities across Russia, such as Belgorod, Sochi, Volgograd, Orenburg, Samara, Dagestan, and Rostov, have also been targeted by Ukrainian drone strikes. Due to these drone attacks, it is estimated that the Russian Federation’s oil refining capacity has now been reduced by 20%. Ukraine’s operation on Ryazan marked its twelfth strike on Russian oil refineries in October alone, where the Ukrainians are seeking to disrupt Russian fuel production and exports. Meanwhile, as the Ukrainians conducted the attack on Ryazan, the European Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States announced new sanctions packages targeting Russia’s energy industry. These events could be seen as a new set of attempts to pressure Russia to bring an end to the full-scale military incursion into Ukraine. TOPSHOT – This aerial picture taken on October 1, 2025 off the coast of the western France port of Saint-Nazaire shows the tanker Boracay from Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” suspected of being involved in drone flights over Denmark which sailed off the Danish coast between September 22 and 25, with a boat of the French Navy in the background. Named the Pushpa or Boracay, the Benin-flagged vessel, which is blacklisted by the European Union for being part of Russia’s sanction-busting “shadow fleet”, has been immobilised for several days off the French coast. (Photo by Damien MEYER / AFP)… The post Sanctions, Drone Strikes, And Market Shifts Hit Russia’s Energy Sector appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. BELGOROD, RUSSIA – APRIL 1 : An image of damage after Regional Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov says that helicopters of the Ukrainian Army hit the oil refinery in Belgorod, Russia on April 1, 2022. (Photo by Stringer/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images) Anadolu Agency via Getty Images On October 24, the Russian Federation’s Ryazan oil facility was forced to halt its crude distillation after Ukraine launched a drone strike. The refinery, Russia’s fourth-largest, is a major supplier to Moscow. Other energy facilities in cities across Russia, such as Belgorod, Sochi, Volgograd, Orenburg, Samara, Dagestan, and Rostov, have also been targeted by Ukrainian drone strikes. Due to these drone attacks, it is estimated that the Russian Federation’s oil refining capacity has now been reduced by 20%. Ukraine’s operation on Ryazan marked its twelfth strike on Russian oil refineries in October alone, where the Ukrainians are seeking to disrupt Russian fuel production and exports. Meanwhile, as the Ukrainians conducted the attack on Ryazan, the European Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States announced new sanctions packages targeting Russia’s energy industry. These events could be seen as a new set of attempts to pressure Russia to bring an end to the full-scale military incursion into Ukraine. TOPSHOT – This aerial picture taken on October 1, 2025 off the coast of the western France port of Saint-Nazaire shows the tanker Boracay from Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” suspected of being involved in drone flights over Denmark which sailed off the Danish coast between September 22 and 25, with a boat of the French Navy in the background. Named the Pushpa or Boracay, the Benin-flagged vessel, which is blacklisted by the European Union for being part of Russia’s sanction-busting “shadow fleet”, has been immobilised for several days off the French coast. (Photo by Damien MEYER / AFP)…

Sanctions, Drone Strikes, And Market Shifts Hit Russia’s Energy Sector

2025/10/29 18:57

BELGOROD, RUSSIA – APRIL 1 : An image of damage after Regional Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov says that helicopters of the Ukrainian Army hit the oil refinery in Belgorod, Russia on April 1, 2022. (Photo by Stringer/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

On October 24, the Russian Federation’s Ryazan oil facility was forced to halt its crude distillation after Ukraine launched a drone strike. The refinery, Russia’s fourth-largest, is a major supplier to Moscow. Other energy facilities in cities across Russia, such as Belgorod, Sochi, Volgograd, Orenburg, Samara, Dagestan, and Rostov, have also been targeted by Ukrainian drone strikes. Due to these drone attacks, it is estimated that the Russian Federation’s oil refining capacity has now been reduced by 20%.

Ukraine’s operation on Ryazan marked its twelfth strike on Russian oil refineries in October alone, where the Ukrainians are seeking to disrupt Russian fuel production and exports. Meanwhile, as the Ukrainians conducted the attack on Ryazan, the European Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States announced new sanctions packages targeting Russia’s energy industry. These events could be seen as a new set of attempts to pressure Russia to bring an end to the full-scale military incursion into Ukraine.

TOPSHOT – This aerial picture taken on October 1, 2025 off the coast of the western France port of Saint-Nazaire shows the tanker Boracay from Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” suspected of being involved in drone flights over Denmark which sailed off the Danish coast between September 22 and 25, with a boat of the French Navy in the background. Named the Pushpa or Boracay, the Benin-flagged vessel, which is blacklisted by the European Union for being part of Russia’s sanction-busting “shadow fleet”, has been immobilised for several days off the French coast. (Photo by Damien MEYER / AFP) (Photo by DAMIEN MEYER/AFP via Getty Images)

AFP via Getty Images

Western Sanctions On Russia’s Energy Sector

Throughout the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the international community has sought methods to punish the Russian Federation for starting the war. This has ranged from suspending Russia from various international organizations, such as the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the United Nations Human Rights Council, to freezing Russian assets and removing several Russian banks from the SWIFT international financial messaging system. Many businesses suspended their operations in Russia, and several countries around the world put a price cap on Russian oil.

These penalties, however, have not brought an end to Russia’s war in Ukraine. Instead, the Russian Federation has continued its full-scale invasion.

Members of the international community have now increased their efforts toward a different approach to pressure Russia. For example, the EU, the UK, and the U.S. have imposed sanctions on Russia’s energy industry. These countries have argued that the Russian Federation uses revenue from its energy market to purchase weapons and other equipment for the ongoing invasion of Ukraine. Additionally, sales made from Russian energy exports have helped the Russian economy remain stable, despite international sanctions imposed on Russian companies and businesses. As a result, the EU, the UK, and the U.S. are hopeful that implementing new sanctions on Russia’s energy market will force Russia to end the war in Ukraine.

To date, the EU has introduced 19 sanction packages on Russia since the start of the full-scale invasion in February 2022. The penalties target Russian energy, finance, and defense companies. Additionally, the EU has imposed sanctions on non-Russian companies operating as third-party intermediaries that purchase and sell Russian crude. Finally, the latest EU sanctions target the shadow fleet, a clandestine network of oil tankers and other vessels that help Russia evade Western sanctions by selling Russian energy. The EU’s new sanctions package on Russia’s energy sector, which was announced on October 23, targeted Russian companies such as Rosneft and Gazprom Neft, as well as third-party entities in China and the United Arab Emirates.

Similarly, the UK imposed new sanctions on Rosneft and Lukoil to put pressure on the Russian Federation’s energy industry. Additionally, the UK targeted Russia’s shadow fleet of oil tankers. The UK previously imposed sanctions on Gazprom Neft and Surgutneftegas in January.

Outside of the EU’s and the UK’s attempts to pressure Russia to end its war in Ukraine by targeting Russia’s energy sector, the U.S. has also imposed its own sanctions on Russia. On October 22, the United States announced sanctions on the Russian Federation’s two largest companies, Rosneft and Lukoil. Additionally, subsidiaries of Rosneft and Lukoil were targeted. The U.S. said that the new sanctions seek to “increase pressure on Russia’s energy sector and degrade the Kremlin’s ability to raise revenue for its war machine and support its weakened economy.” The U.S. under U.S. President Joe Biden and U.S. President Donald Trump has continued to impose sanctions on Russian energy companies, as well as third-party intermediaries, throughout the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

So far, attempts to pressure Russia to end its war have come to no avail. Russian President Vladimir Putin has also dismissed the effectiveness of these sanctions. But some energy experts believe that the latest penalties imposed on Russia’s energy sector by the EU, the UK, and the U.S. may have a new effect.

“The sanctions announced last week by the Trump Administration against Russian oil majors Rosneft and Lukoil were long overdue,” Dr. Benjamin L. Schmitt, Senior Fellow at the University of Pennsylvania’s Kleinman Center for Energy Policy and Perry World House, told me in an interview. “This was not only a welcome step by the Trump White House, but may well be the most significant set of energy sanctions imposed against the Russian Federation since the beginning of Moscow’s renewed invasion of Ukraine in 2022. By actively sanctioning these Russian energy majors, the Trump White House is signaling that it finally may be willing to take steps to cut off the spigot of oil revenues to the Putin regime. But time will tell how rigorously the Treasury Department will ultimately be able to enforce these measures, which will be challenging given their broad, global scope. As always in sanctions policy, the efficacy of these economic restrictions will stem from robust and tight enforcement of the measures, which are set to take full effect in the coming weeks after a wind down period. If the Trump Administration is willing to actively track and designate secondary offtakers of Russian oil – whether they be from the People’s Republic of China, India, or elsewhere – it will be a big step forward to leading the Transatlantic community in damaging Putin’s energy bankroll once and for all.”

On paper, the latest sanctions imposed by the EU, the UK, and the U.S. on Russia’s energy sector also appear to be significant. While I conducted an interview with Tina Dolbaia, an Associate Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, she told me that “75% of Russian oil exports are 1761735440 subject to U.S. sanctions.” She added that the “International Energy Agency [is] projecting a record oil surplus in 2026, [meaning] the risk of a global price spike appears limited. This gives the Trump Administration [as well as the EU and the UK] greater room to enforce sanctions” on the Russian Federation.

Long-range drones An-196 Liutyi of the Defence Intelligence of Ukraine stand in line before takeoff in undisclosed location, Ukraine, Feb. 28, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved

Ukrainian Drone Strikes On Russian Oil Refineries

The impact of sanctions on Russia’s energy market, however, has been slow to materialize. As a result, the Ukrainians have opted to take matters into their own hands to pressure Russia’s energy industry. They have done so by launching a campaign against Russian oil refineries.

Throughout 2025, the Ukrainians have launched attacks on key Russian energy sites. The Economist and the BBC estimate that the Ukrainians have hit and damaged nearly half of Russia’s refineries. The objective of these Ukrainian attacks on Russia’s energy industry is to create fuel shortages within Russia, where the Russians then have fewer resources to power vehicles and machinery used for the war in Ukraine. In addition, the Ukrainian attacks on Russia’s energy industry have sparked price hikes and the rationing of fuel within Russia.

To conduct these attacks, the Ukrainians have used unmanned aerial vehicles. These drones, such as the FP-1 “Fire Point” and AN-196 “Liutyi”, can travel hundreds of miles, enabling them to target Russian oil refineries deep within Russian territory. These UAVs also have sophisticated software to counter electronic warfare jamming, allowing the Ukrainians to orchestrate their attacks with precision. Finally, drones such as the Fire Point only cost $55,000, meaning it is inexpensive for the Ukrainians to carry out these attacks on Russia’s energy sector.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has welcomed the drone strikes. In his public address in September, the Ukrainian president said that the most effective sanctions against the Russian Federation are “the fires at Russia’s oil refineries, its terminals, [and] oil depots.” Zelenskyy added that restricting Russia’s oil industry “significantly restricts the war [in Ukraine].”

Now, as the EU, the UK, and the U.S. increase their sanctions efforts on Russia’s energy sector, Ukraine’s drone strikes may have a more damaging effect on Russia’s oil industry. If coupled with other measures, this could further pressure Russia to end its war in Ukraine.

“The Ukrainian military can help ramp up pressure against the Putin regime as these oil sanctions take effect by continuing its campaign of drone-based strikes against Russian oil storage and refining facilities on the territory of the Russian Federation,” Schmitt told me in an interview. “Even if Ukraine is unable to fully take these facilities offline permanently, the rotating impact of strikes against these key Russian facilities in Russia’s energy export network will go a long way to complement the restrictive economic measures the United States has finally put in place against the likes of Rosneft and Lukoil.”

Now, as the pressure builds on Russia’s energy industry, the Ukrainians may be gaining additional firepower to use on Russian oil refineries. According to The Economist, there are reports that the Ukrainians may be starting to use FP-5 “Flamingo” cruise missiles. These long-range missiles travel faster and twice as far as the Fire Point and Liutyi drones, meaning the Ukrainians can inflict more damage to Russian oil refineries. This would put even greater pressure on Russia’s energy sector.

Global Markets Respond To Events Surrounding Russian Energy

Finally, sanctions on Russia’s energy industry and Ukrainian attacks on Russian oil refineries have impacted global markets. According to a report shared by Yahoo Finance on October 24, global energy markets are “entering a period of renewed instability” following the announcements on new Western sanctions on Russian energy companies. The sanctions could “constrain Russia’s ability to sell crude on global markets.” Furthermore, the Yahoo Finance report stated that restrictions on Russia’s energy sector would “accelerate structural changes in global energy trade.” As a result, consumers are seeking alternative options.

For example, in a report published by the Atlantic Council on October 23, countries and companies relying on Russian crude may “increasingly turn to alternative suppliers, [thus] gradually moving away” from the Russian Federation. Similarly, members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries could seek to increase production to offset a decline in Russian crude on the global market due to international sanctions. If this were to occur, it would further reduce Russia’s role as a global energy supplier. This would hurt Russian exports, and the Russian Federation would lose billions of dollars.

In some regards, this is already happening. On October 20, the European Council announced that it would phase out the imports of Russian natural gas by January 1, 2028. In addition, the European Council stated that imports of Russian gas would be prohibited starting on January 1, 2026. The announcement is a continuation of European policies that began when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The change have seen the EU drop its share of Russian gas imports from 45% in 2021 to 19% in 2025. These policies led the Russian Federation to lose tens of billions of dollars in revenue.

Countries outside of Europe have also begun to reduce their dependence on Russian energy exports. According to The Guardian, the penalties imposed by the EU, the UK, and the U.S. on Russia’s energy sector in October resulted in the “immediate pause of Russian oil deliveries to the biggest refineries in India.” Similarly, Russian oil deliveries were also paused to “China’s biggest state-owned oil companies.” If the Indian and Chinese energy markets continue this trend, then the Russian Federation would lose significant revenue from its energy exports.

“The key question is whether [sanctions] can meaningfully reduce Russia’s oil revenues and pressure Moscow to negotiate,” Dolbaia told me in an interview. “The measures include the threat of secondary sanctions against companies that continue to trade substantial volumes with Rosneft and Lukoil. The two largest buyers of Russian crude—China and India—will be central to determining their effectiveness. In the coming weeks and months, it will become clear whether these countries curb their purchases. India may be more inclined to do so if it secures favorable terms in its ongoing trade talks with the United States, while China is far less likely to comply. More realistically, both may leverage the sanctions to demand even deeper discounts on Russian crude. Combined with higher costs for the shadow fleet transporting sanctioned oil, this could reduce Russia’s export revenues.”

Finally, there are reports that the Russian Federation may be facing a recession. Rising inflation, higher consumer costs, and the effects of international sanctions have all contributed to a shift in the Russian economy. Should there be a global decline in demand for Russian energy exports due to international sanctions, this would further hinder the Russian economy.

Overall, it appears that the latest coordinated sanctions efforts by the EU, the UK, and the U.S. on Russia’s energy industry have sparked new conversations and strategies on how to end the Russia-Ukraine war. Previous sanctions on the Russian Federation resulted in Russia losing hundreds of billions of dollars, but they did not succeed in dissuading Russia from ending its war. Instead, the Russian Federation coordinated with its partners and third-party intermediaries to undermine the full effect of penalties imposed by the international community. This allowed the Russian invasion of Ukraine to continue.

Now, it seems that the new penalties imposed by the EU, the UK, and the U.S. may have damaging effects for Russia. It remains to be seen how the Russian Federation will respond to the latest energy sanctions, and how global markets will adjust to the new penalties on Russian energy. The new pressures on Russia’s energy industry and its economy, coupled with continued Ukrainian drone strikes on oil refineries, may just be enough to force Russia to bring an end to its full-scale military incursion in Ukraine.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/marktemnycky/2025/10/29/sanctions-drone-strikes-and-market-shifts-hit-russias-energy-sector/

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Share Insights

You May Also Like

CaaS: The "SaaS Moment" for Blockchain

CaaS: The "SaaS Moment" for Blockchain

Source: VeradiVerdict Compiled by: Zhou, ChainCatcher Summary Crypto as a Service (CaaS) is the "Software as a Service (SaaS) era" in the blockchain space. Banks and fintech companies no longer need to build crypto infrastructure from scratch. They can simply connect to APIs and white-label platforms to launch digital asset functionality within days or weeks, instead of the years that used to take. ( Note: White-labeling essentially involves one party providing a product or technology, while another party brands it for sale or operation. In the finance/crypto field, this refers to banks or exchanges using third-party trading systems, wallets, or payment gateways and then rebranding them.) Mainstream markets are accelerating adoption through three channels. Banks are partnering with custodians like Coinbase, Anchorage, and BitGo while actively exploring tokenized assets; fintech companies are issuing their own stablecoins using platforms like M^0; and payment processors such as Western Union (with $300 billion in annual transactions) and Zelle (with over $1 trillion in annual transactions) are now integrating stablecoins to enable instant, low-cost cross-border settlements. Crypto as a Service (CaaS) isn't actually that complicated. Essentially, it's Software as a Service (SaaS) based on cryptocurrency, making it a hundred times easier for institutions and businesses to integrate into the cryptocurrency space. Banks, fintech companies, and enterprises no longer need to painstakingly build internal cryptocurrency functionality. Instead, they can simply plug and play, deploying within days using proven APIs and white-label platforms. Businesses can focus on their customers without worrying about the complexities of blockchain. They can leverage existing infrastructure to participate in cryptocurrency transactions more efficiently and cost-effectively. In other words, they can easily and seamlessly integrate into the digital asset ecosystem. CaaS is poised for exponential growth. CaaS is a cloud-based business model and infrastructure solution that enables businesses, fintech companies, and developers to integrate cryptocurrency and blockchain functionality into their operations without having to build or maintain the underlying technology from scratch. CaaS provides ready-to-use, scalable services, typically delivered via APIs or white-label platforms, such as crypto wallets, trading engines, payment gateways, asset storage, custody, and compliance tools. This allows businesses to quickly offer digital asset functionality under their own brand, reducing development costs, time, and required technical expertise. Like other "as-a-service" offerings, this model allows businesses of all sizes, from startups to established companies, to participate in a cost-effective manner. In September 2025, Coinbase Institutional listed CaaS as one of its biggest growth areas. Since 2013, Pantera Capital has been committed to driving the development of CaaS through investment. We strategically invest in infrastructure, tools, and technology to ensure that CaaS can operate at scale. By accelerating the development of backend fund management, custody, and wallets, we have significantly enhanced the service tier of CaaS. Advantages of CaaS By using CaaS to transparently integrate encryption capabilities into their systems, enterprises can achieve numerous strategic and operational advantages more quickly and cost-effectively. These advantages include: One-stop integration and seamless embedding : The CaaS platform eliminates the need for custom development cycles, enabling teams to activate features in days rather than months. Flexible profit models : Businesses can choose a subscription-based fixed-price model for predictable costs, or a pay-as-you-go billing model to keep expenses in line with revenue. Either approach avoids large upfront capital investments. Outsourcing blockchain complexity : Enterprises can offload technical management while benefiting from a powerful enterprise-grade backend, ensuring near-perfect uptime, real-time monitoring, and automatic failover. Developer-friendly APIs and SDKs : Developers can embed wallet creation and key management functions, smoothly handle on-chain settlements, trigger smart contract interactions, and create a comprehensive sandbox environment. White-label branding and an intuitive interface : The CaaS solution is easy to customize, enabling non-technical teams to configure free infrastructure, supported assets, and user onboarding processes. Other value-added features : Leading providers bundle ancillary services together, such as fraud detection based on on-chain analytics; automated tax filing; multi-signature fund management; and cross-chain bridging for asset interoperability. These characteristics transform cryptocurrency from a technological novelty into a revenue-generating product line while maintaining a focus on core business capabilities. Three core use cases We believe the world is rapidly evolving towards a cryptocurrency-native environment, with individuals and businesses interacting more frequently with digital assets. This shift is driven by increasing user acceptance of blockchain wallets, decentralized applications, and on-chain transactions, which in turn benefits from continuously improving user interfaces, abundant educational resources, and practical application value. However, for cryptocurrencies to truly integrate into the mainstream and achieve widespread adoption, a strong and seamless bridge must be built to bridge the gap between traditional finance (TradFi) and decentralized finance (DeFi). Institutions seek the advantages of cryptocurrencies (speed, programmability, and global accessibility) while relying on trustworthy intermediaries to manage their underlying complexities: tools, security, technology stack, and liquidity provision. Ultimately, this ecosystem integration could gradually bring billions of users onto the blockchain. Use Case 1: Bank Banks are increasingly partnering with regulated cryptocurrency custodians such as Coinbase Custody, Anchorage Digital, and BitGo to provide institutional-grade custody, insured storage, and seamless spot trading services for digital assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum. These foundational services—custody, execution, and basic lending—represent the most readily achievable aspects of cryptocurrency integration, enabling banks to easily embrace customers without forcing them out of the traditional banking system. Beyond these fundamental elements, banks can leverage decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols to generate competitive returns from idle treasury assets or customer deposits. For example, they can deploy stablecoins into permissionless lending markets (such as Morpho, Aave, or Compound) or liquidity pools of automated market makers (AMMs) like Uniswap to obtain real-time, transparent returns that typically outperform traditional fixed-income products. The tokenization of Real-World Assets (RWAs) presents transformative opportunities. Banks can initiate and distribute on-chain versions of traditional securities (e.g., tokenized U.S. Treasury bonds, corporate bonds, private credit, or even real estate funds issued through BlackRock's BUIDL fund), bringing off-chain value to public blockchains like Ethereum, Polygon, or Base. These RWAs can then be traded peer-to-peer through DeFi protocols such as Morpho (for optimizing lending), Pendle (for yield sharing), or Centrifuge (for private credit pools), while ensuring KYC/AML compliance through whitelisted wallets or institutional vaults. RWAs can also serve as high-quality collateral in the DeFi lending market. Crucially, banks can offer seamless stablecoin access without losing customers. Through embedded wallets or custodial sub-accounts, customers can hold USDC, USDT, or FDIC-insured digital dollars directly within the bank's app (for payments, remittances, or yield-generating investments) without leaving the bank's ecosystem. This "walled garden" model resembles a new bank but with regulated trust. Looking ahead, major banks may form alliances to issue branded stablecoins backed 1:1 by centralized reserves. These stablecoins could be settled instantly on public blockchains while complying with regulatory requirements, thus connecting traditional finance with programmable money. If a bank views blockchain as infrastructure, rather than an accessory tool, it is likely to capture the next trillion dollars in value. Use Case 2: Fintech Companies and New Types of Banks Fintech companies and new-age banks are rapidly integrating cryptocurrencies into their core offerings through strategic partnerships with established platforms such as Robinhood, Revolut, and Webull. These collaborations enable seamless use and secure custody of digital assets, while providing instant trading of tokenized versions of traditional stocks, effectively bridging the gap between traditional finance and blockchain-based markets. Beyond partnerships, fintech companies can leverage professional service providers like Alchemy to build and launch their own blockchain infrastructure. Alchemy, a leader in blockchain development platforms, offers scalable node infrastructure, enhanced APIs, and developer tools that simplify the creation of custom Layer-1 or Layer-2 networks. This allows fintech companies to tailor blockchains for specific use cases, such as high-throughput payments, decentralized authentication, or RWA (Risk Weighted Authorization), while ensuring compliance with evolving regulatory requirements and optimizing for low latency and cost-effectiveness. Fintech companies can further deepen their involvement in the cryptocurrency space by issuing their own stablecoins and leveraging decentralized protocols on platforms like M^0 to mint yielding, fungible stablecoins backed by high-quality collateral such as US Treasury bonds. By adopting this model, fintech companies can mint their own tokens on demand, maintain full control over the underlying economic mechanisms (including interest accumulation and redemption mechanisms), ensure regulatory compliance through transparent on-chain reserves, and participate in co-governance through decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs). Furthermore, they can benefit from enhanced liquidity pools on major exchanges and DeFi protocols, reducing fragmentation and increasing user adoption. This approach not only creates new revenue streams but also positions fintech companies as innovators in the field of programmable money and fosters customer loyalty in the competitive digital economy. Use Case 3: Payment Processor Payment companies are building stablecoin "sandwiches": a multi-tiered cross-border settlement system that receives fiat currency at one end and exports instant, low-cost liquidity in another jurisdiction, while minimizing foreign exchange spreads, intermediary fees, and settlement delays. The components of the "sandwich" include: Top Slice (Entry Point) : US customers send US dollars to payment providers such as Stripe, Circle, Ripple, or newer banks like Mercury. Filling (minting) : US dollars are immediately exchanged at a 1:1 ratio for regulated stablecoins—usually USDC (Circle), USDP (Paxos), or bank-issued digital dollars. Bottom Slice (Export) : Stablecoins are bridged or exchanged for local currency stablecoins—for example, aARS (pegged to the Argentine peso), BRLA (Brazil), or MXNA (Mexico)—or become central bank digital currency pilot projects directly (for example, Drex in Brazil). Settlement : Funds arrive in local bank accounts, mobile wallets or merchant payments on a T+0 (instant) basis, with total costs typically below 0.1%, compared to 3-7% through SWIFT + agent banks. Western Union, a 175-year-old remittance giant that processes over $300 billion in remittances annually, recently announced the integration of stablecoins into its ecosystem. Pantera Capital CEO Devin McGranahan stated in July 2025 that the company had historically been "cautious" about cryptocurrencies, concerned about their volatility and regulatory issues. However, the enactment of the Genius Act has changed this. “As the rules become clearer, we see a real opportunity to integrate digital assets into our business,” McGranahan said on the Q3 2025 earnings call. The result: Western Union is currently actively testing stablecoin solutions for Treasury settlements and customer payments, leveraging blockchain technology to eliminate the cumbersome processes of correspondent banking. Zelle, a bank-backed peer-to-peer payment giant (part of Early Warning Services, a consortium of JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and others), facilitates over $1 trillion in fee-free transfers annually within the United States via simple phone numbers or email addresses, currently boasting over 2,300 partner institutions and 150 million users. However, cross-border payments have been a previous challenge. On October 24, 2025, Early Warning announced a stablecoin plan aimed at bringing Zelle to the international market, offering "the same speed and reliability" overseas. As banks, fintech/new banks, and payment processors integrate cryptocurrencies in an intuitive, plug-and-play, and compliant manner (with as few regulators as possible), they can continue to expand their global reach and strengthen relationships. in conclusion CaaS is not hype—it represents a revolution in infrastructure that makes cryptocurrencies invisible to end users. Just as people don't think of AWS when watching Netflix or Salesforce when checking a CRM, consumers and businesses won't think of blockchain when making instant cross-border payments or accessing tokenized assets. The winners of this revolution are not companies that add cryptocurrencies as an afterthought to traditional systems, but rather institutions and enterprises that see blockchain as infrastructure, and the investors who support the underlying technology that underpins it all.
Share
PANews2025/11/05 16:00
Bitcoin Price Crashes Below $99,000: Experts Breaks Down Why

Bitcoin Price Crashes Below $99,000: Experts Breaks Down Why

Bitcoin endured one of its sharpest selloffs of the year on Tuesday, knifing below the six-figure threshold and printing lows around the $99,000 area on major composites before rebounding. At press time, bitcoin (BTC) hovered near $101,700 after an intraday trough just above $99,000 on widely used benchmarks, marking a fall of roughly 6% day-over-day and the lowest print since June. The slide came as US equities limped into mid-week, with the Nasdaq up 20.9% year-to-date and the S&P 500 up 15.1% as of Tuesday’s close—gains that underscore how much bitcoin has lagged other risk assets during long stretches of 2025. That divergence, together with a growing body of ETF-flow data showing several straight sessions of net outflows from US spot bitcoin funds into early November, provided the macro backdrop for a fragile crypto tape. Independent tallies from Farside/SoSoValue and multiple outlets point to a roughly $1.3–$1.4 billion cumulative bleed over four trading days into November 3–4, led by BlackRock’s IBIT. Why Is Bitcoin Price Down? Into that context, Joe Consorti—Head of Growth at Horizon (Theya, YC)—argues the selloff is less a loss of conviction than a structural handoff of supply. In a video analysis posted late November 4 US time, he framed the day’s move as “one of its roughest days of the year, down more than 6 percent, falling to $99,000 for the first time since June,” adding that while equities would call that “the start of a bear market… for Bitcoin, though, this is typical of a bull market drawdown.” He noted that “we’ve already weathered two separate 30 percent drawdowns during this bull run,” and characterized the present action as “a transfer of Bitcoin’s ownership base from the old guard to the new guard.” Related Reading: CryptoQuant Head Reveals Reason Behind Bearish Bitcoin Trend Consorti anchored his thesis to a now-viral framework from macro investor Jordi Visser: bitcoin’s “silent IPO.” In Visser’s Substack essay—shared widely since the weekend—he posits that 2025’s rangebound price belies an orderly, IPO-like distribution as early-era holders access the deepest liquidity the asset has ever had through ETFs, institutional custodians and corporate balance sheets. “Early-stage investors… need liquidity. They need an exit. They need to diversify,” Visser wrote, arguing that methodical selling “results [in] a sideways grind that drives everyone crazy.” Consorti adopted the frame bluntly: “This isn’t panic selling, it’s the natural evolution of an asset that’s reached maturity… a transfer of ownership from concentrated hands to distributed ones.” Evidence for that churn has been visible on-chain. Multiple instances of Satoshi-era wallets and miner addresses reanimating this quarter—some after 14 years—have been documented, including July’s duo of 10,000-BTC wallets and late-October movement from a 4,000-BTC miner address. While not dispositive that coins are being market-sold, the pattern is consistent with supply redistributing from early concentrates to broader, regulated channels. Technically, Consorti cast the drop as part of “digestion,” not exhaustion. “The RSI tells us Bitcoin is at its most oversold level since April, when the last leg of the bull run began. Every drawdown this cycle, 30%, 35%, and now 20%, has built support rather than destroyed it.” He added a key conditional: “If we spend too much time below $100,000, that could suggest the distribution isn’t done… perhaps we’re in for a bull-market reversal into a bear market.” Macro, however, is intruding. The Federal Reserve cut rates by 25 bps on October 29 to a 3.75%–4.00% target range, but Chair Jerome Powell carefully pushed back on the idea of an automatic December cut, citing “strongly differing views” inside the FOMC and a “data fog” from the ongoing government shutdown. Markets promptly tempered their odds for further near-term easing. Consorti’s warning that bitcoin “is extremely correlated” to risk-asset drawdowns therefore looms large: if equities lurch meaningfully lower or funding stress reappears, crypto will feel it. Related Reading: Bitcoin Bull Run: Over Or Just Paused? CryptoQuant CEO Presents The Data If Visser’s “silent IPO” is right, ETFs are both symptom and salve. They have delivered the two-sided depth to absorb legacy supply but also introduced a new, faster-moving cohort whose redemptions can amplify downdrafts. That dynamic showed up again this week in the four-day string of net outflows concentrated in IBIT, even as longer-term assets under management remain enormous by historical standards. Consorti’s conclusion was starkly patient, not euphoric. “For every seller looking to liquidate their position, there’s a new participant stepping in for the long haul… It’s slow, it’s uneven, and it’s psychologically draining, but once it’s finished, it unlocks the next leg higher. Because the marginal seller is gone, and what’s left is a base of holders who don’t need to sell.” Whether Tuesday’s pierce of the six-figure floor proves the climactic flush—or merely another chapter in a months-long ownership transfer—will hinge on how quickly price reclaims and bases above $100,000, how ETF flows stabilize, and whether the Fed’s path from here restores risk appetite or starves it. For now, the most important story in bitcoin may be happening under the surface, not on the chart. At press time, BTC traded at $101,865. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Share
NewsBTC2025/11/05 16:00