One Stablecoin, Ten Highways. Makes Sense?

USDC is now live on two more blockchains: XRP Ledger and World Chain.

From what I understand, stablecoins aren’t really meant for saving (why hold an asset that's almost guaranteed to lose value over time?). Their main use case is payments.

Which brings up a question: why do we need so many transport protocols for payments?

• Is it because existing networks can’t handle the volume? They seem to be doing fine.
• Is Circle unhappy with current chains? When that happens, Circle usually drops support (like they did with USDC on Tron). But that’s not the case here - they’re keeping the old networks and adding new ones on top.

So what’s the reason?

It’s probably not about user convenience. If anything, having too many networks for a single stablecoin is confusing. Sure, at Rabbit Swap we make it easy to convert your stablecoins between chains - if someone only accepts USDC on one network, you can just use rabbit.io to swap it to the one they prefer. But still, a smaller number of standards would likely make life easier for most users.

Maybe there are merchants who insist on using a specific blockchain for payments? Hard to believe. All they need is a wallet address - and generating one takes seconds on any chain. Why would it matter which network it’s on?

Anyone have a theory why Circle keeps expanding to more chains?