ESCO Urges Cardano to Prioritize Stablecoins

A Dispute Over DeFi Funding

The conversation began with a disagreement about DeFi and supply chain projects. One speaker argued that DeFi had received considerable support without producing enough in return. ESCO challenged the comparison, arguing that money allocated through Cardano’s treasury or Catalyst should be distinguished from funds that DeFi teams raised independently.

In his view, direct ecosystem support for DeFi and marketing became a serious focus only recently. He pointed to the 50 million ADA stablecoin liquidity initiative and Cardano PRIME with AlphaGrowth as two significant efforts. He also questioned whether the community had enough reporting to assess the liquidity initiative’s performance.

Other speakers disputed his account of past funding. They noted that the categories overlap: an agricultural project, for example, can use stablecoins to pay farmers or provide financing. Their disagreement exposed a broader question for Cardano’s next budget: what has already been funded, and what measurable results did it deliver?

The Reason Users Stay

ESCO’s central argument was about incentives. He questioned whether Cardano’s stablecoin liquidity is deep enough for larger transactions without substantial price impact. He then asked why he would hold dollar assets on Cardano without a competitive return when he could seek yield elsewhere. He cited 3.5% on another network as an example available to him.

His criticism focused on the practical conditions surrounding stablecoins. Having a dollar asset on the network is only part of the equation. Users also need liquidity, useful ways to move between assets and a financial reason to remain. ESCO argued that loyalty to Cardano cannot replace those incentives.

He welcomed AlphaGrowth’s involvement in Cardano PRIME, describing its team as specialists in liquidity and financial products. He expressed support for directing more effort toward the gaps they had identified in Cardano’s financial infrastructure. Strengthening those tools, he argued, could help many applications at once.

Needs Before Wants

ESCO connected the stablecoin issue to treasury spending. He argued that Cardano had sometimes prioritized what people wanted to build before agreeing on what the ecosystem most urgently needed.

To emphasize the point, he said that if the decision were his, he would direct the next period’s entire treasury spending capacity toward a stablecoin partnership with competitive yield opportunities. This was a hypothetical statement, rather than a formal funding proposal. His broader request was for clearer priorities and allocations, followed by reporting that shows whether funded work achieved its goals.

The same standard shaped his reaction to the FC Barcelona and Andamio pilot discussed during the Space. ESCO initially questioned its return for Cardano. After hearing how it works, he acknowledged a key advantage: the product is being introduced to a club with an existing audience. That gives it a clearer path to adoption than a pilot that must first build a product and then find its users.

His message to Cardano builders followed the same logic. Lead with the problem a product solves, the people who use it and the business case behind it. The blockchain matters, but its name alone will not persuade a customer.

For ESCO, the next DeFi push should be judged by more than the number of applications it funds. The test is whether Cardano builds financial tools strong enough that people choose to use them and keep their capital on the network.