We started Intercoin because we saw that Satoshi’s vision of a “peer-to-peer cash” needed a different architecture. Indeed, Bitcoin may be a store of value, but as a medium of exchange, well…
I am old enough to remember when people still thought Bitcoin was going to be a medium of exchange, until around 2013. But ever since some drunk trader misspelled “HOLD”, the narrative around Bitcoin has shifted to “store of value”
I’ve also seen other projects falter, including the ambitiously-named CityCoins which named their coins after cities like Miami, and promised 20% to the city so the mayors would tout it. But the problem with MiamiCoin was that it wasn’t actually accepted by businesses in Miami! CityCoins/BlockStack didn’t do the work that VISA and Mastercard or WeChat did back in the day, i.e. get merchants to buy in. That’s why VISA could have the slogan “Everywhere you want to be”, and WeChat has all but replaced cash in China, while crypto still has yet to gain widespread adoption. You have to do the work with people on the ground, and not just release a zero-sum coin like $TRUMP or MiamiCoin:
Therefore, there is still a need for something like Intercoin, that will let each community release and manage its own money supply. Rather than having one coin for everyone, communities can manage their own monetary and fiscal policies.
