1. Home
  2. ❯
  3. Companies
  4. ❯
  5. Bitstamp
Bitstamp

Bitstamp status: access issues and outage reports

No problems detected

If you are having issues, please submit a report below.

Full Outage Map

Bitstamp is a bitcoin exchange based in Luxembourg. It allows trading between USD currency and bitcoin cryptocurrency. It allows USD, EUR, bitcoin, litecoin, ethereum, or Ripple deposits and withdrawals.

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Bitstamp reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

At the moment, we haven't detected any problems at Bitstamp. Are you experiencing issues or an outage? Leave a message in the comments section!

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Bitstamp Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

  • votesa
    votesa β–  (@votesa) reported

    base but with a hood on. everyone reviewed robinhood chain as a product launch. i think it's a trap for base airdrop money, set up months in advance. what went live on july 1: β†’ stock tokens in 120+ countries inside robinhood wallet, trading 24/7, usable as defi collateral β†’ uniswap live from day one as the main public dex β†’ morpho powering robinhood earn with ~7% on USDG β†’ USDG issued natively on the chain β†’ perps built straight into the wallet via lighter β†’ arcus (by dYdX team), stock trading at zero fees with a token promised to the community β†’ gas free for the first 90 days now look at base's side of the board. they said out loud they're exploring a network token. in february they walked off the OP stack onto their own codebase and stopped paying optimism rent. and now they're about to ship B20, their own token standard baked straight into the node software. erc20 compatible, but with freeze and transfer controls built in, aimed at stablecoins, RWAs and tokenized equities. nobody rebuilds token plumbing at the protocol level for fun. robinhood chain mainnet july 1. B20 mainnet july 8. one week apart, both laying rails for the same thing. a base token would be the biggest retail wealth event of the cycle. a new class of rich onchain wallets, old ones waking up, normies crawling back the second "base printed" hits their group chats. that liquidity doesn't retire, it looks for the next trade. and post-airdrop money always walks the same ladder: dump some, rotate majors, farm, memes, then something that feels more adult. robinhood just shipped the adult option. NVDA and TSLA as collateral, 24/7, inside an app normies already have on their phones. coinbase wakes retail up. robinhood is standing right there with something to sell them. maybe the whole robinhood arc has nothing to do with base at all. maybe they just executed a year-old roadmap and the window opened around them. but wall street holds COIN and HOOD as one bet on finance moving onchain, and both companies started laying rails for the same moment at the same time. the bitstamp deal fits the same picture: licenses first, then own chain, then tokenized stocks, then defi rails. nobody collects that stack to add two more coins to an app. why would any of this actually hurt base? because eth vs sol is a religion war. evm vs evm is nothing. trenchers bridge in minutes, builders redeploy in a day. there is no switching cost, only reasons. just look at bankr and virtuals. two flagship base projects, both added robinhood chain support within days. no drama, just a new chain in the dropdown. and base picked a bad year to slow down. creator coins meta fizzled, ai agents barely got any support while they were the hottest meta in crypto. baseapp never found its pmf and feels like it exists for optics, not for onboarding anyone. the ecosystem spotlight kept landing on stuff like o1 exchange. loyalty in evm land is a bridge transaction. pure shizo, zero evidence, but the symmetry is funny: coinbase trades as COIN and incubates BASE token. robinhood trades as HOOD. ROBIN completes the pair. do with that what you want. to be fair to the other side: robinhood planned this chain for over a year, a base token still has no date and might not even happen this cycle. and robinhood chain tvl is tiny for now. positioning only pays if liquidity actually shows up. base will be fine. coinbase isn't going anywhere and neither is the money behind it. and i'm saying all this with love. base is the main reason i even stayed onchain these past couple of years. but for the first time base has an evm competitor with a cleaner story for normie capital, and its answer so far is "we're exploring". B20 goes live soon. let's see what base does with it.

  • Monkeyiobe
    Banana Republic 🦧 (@Monkeyiobe) reported

    EUROPE JUST ANNOUNCED ITS CRYPTO REGISTER GREW TO 294 LICENSED FIRMS. TWO MONTHS AGO, EUROPE HAD 3,167 CRYPTO FIRMS. The MiCA licensing deadline on July 1 didn't grow the European crypto industry. It shrank it by more than 90%, and the count climbing back toward 300 is regulators counting the survivors. That's the Game: consolidation dressed as growth. Three US-listed names are the biggest winners of what got cleared out. Coinbase now holds one license covering all 27 EU states and roughly 450 million people. Robinhood inherited the same access through its ownership of Bitstamp, one of Europe's oldest exchanges. Circle is the only major stablecoin issuer licensed for both its dollar and euro tokens. Binance holds no valid MiCA license. Tether never applied, and licensed exchanges have delisted USDT, pulling an estimated $185 billion of the world's most traded stablecoin off the regulated European market entirely. We read "294 licensed firms" as a healthy, maturing industry. It is a market that just lost 2,873 competitors in eight weeks, and three American stocks were standing closest to the door when it happened. Check whether the crypto stock in our portfolio is one of the three names now holding a legally protected head start on 450 million customers, or one of the thousands that quietly stopped existing in Europe this month. 🍌

  • projectpips
    Vazquez (@projectpips) reported

    @Shockwave_App @Bitstamp That **** fake stfu. I would explain but clearly you not grasping at what im saying…

  • SyAzCrypto1
    SyAz (@SyAzCrypto1) reported

    Every exchange collapse gets called "the bottom is in." But data says only the last one in the chain ever is, and knowing the difference is the whole edge. A crypto bear isn't one single event. It's a chain of blow-ups that fires over months, and the bottom only prints on the final one, when the last leveraged player dies and there's nothing left to force-sell. The collapse everyone remembers is almost always the first domino & not the last. 2014–15: The Gox cycle β†’ Nov 2013: ATH $1,163 β†’ Feb 7 2014: Mt. Gox halts withdrawals β†’ Feb 28 2014: Mt. Gox files bankruptcy, 850k BTC gone. Everyone said "bottom is in" BTC $550 β†’ Then eleven months of grind β†’ Jan 4 2015: Bitstamp hacked, 19k BTC, ,arked the actual capitulation β†’ Jan 14 2015: bottom with $BTC low at $152 Gox to bottom: another βˆ’72%. the famous collapse was the opener. Bitstamp closed it. 2018: The ICO cycle β†’ Dec 2017: ATH $19,783 β†’ Jan 26 2018: Coincheck hacked, $530M the opener β†’ Feb 2018: BitGrail collapses, $170M BTC $8k β†’ then a full year stuck bleeding around $6k β†’ Nov 15 2018: the BCH hash war, ABC vs SV, breaks the $6k floor. the closer β†’ Dec 15 2018: bottom with $BTC low at $3,150 BitGrail to bottom was another βˆ’61%, over ten months. 2022: The leverage cycle β†’ Nov 2021: ATH $69,000 β†’ May 9 2022: Terra/LUNA implodes, $45B gone. the opener β†’ June 12: Celsius freezes withdrawals β†’ June 27: 3AC ordered into liquidation β†’ July 5: Voyager bankrupt. July 13: Celsius bankrupt β†’ Nov 8–11: FTX collapses. the closer β†’ Nov 21 2022: bottom with $BTC at $15,480 FTX to bottom was just βˆ’26%, in 10 days. This is the one case where the famous name was the last domino, which is exactly why it marked the low. So the tell was never the size of the name. It's where it sits in the chain. Terra was bigger than FTX and it marked the top of the crash, not the bottom. Now 2026 β†’ Oct 2025: ATH $126,210 β†’ Oct 10–11 2025: $19B liquidation cascade off the top, the largest in history. this is the opener β†’ Nov 2025: down to $80k now $64k, off by 49% β†’ July 1 2026: AscendEX closes β†’ July 23: BitMEX announces closure β†’ July 26: BitMart winds down Here's what "bottom is in" wrong here. AscendEX, BitMEX and BitMart aren't blow-ups. They're wind downs. Still solvent, withdrawals open, nobody force selling a single coin. They're closing because the mid-tier exchange model stopped making money, not because they detonated. A business shutting on bad math is not a domino. For until now we've had the opener, the Oct 10 Binance cascade but we haven't had the closer yet. No major leveraged entity has detonated into a forced selling panic the way Gox, BitGrail and FTX did. The signal you're actually waiting for isn't an exchange announcing a shutdown. It's an exchange or a fund detonating. The last domino is waiting to happen soon.

  • metat7es
    ابو يوسف (@metat7es) reported

    @Bitstamp Hi Has the Bitstamp platform been shut down in Kuwait?

  • NatalieHarr21
    Natalie Harris (@NatalieHarr21) reported

    @Bitstamp Do not recommend Bitstamp to people. They are not a good company. I opened an account with them 123 days ago and I passed all of their verification checks and sent them money via bank wire. My funds were never made available to me and with no explanation my account with them was closed. I am still waiting for my funds to be returned 70 days later. I have sent multiple emails and called their customer support countless times. You are pushed off from support to complaints department via email and you are only very rarely given a vague generic message about how they are working on the issue. Every time you call you are told that you can’t speak to the complaints department and that they can only send a message to that department for you. If you plead then they will escalate the message. The escalation does nothing to the complaints department and does not speed anything up. They are unable to escalate or transfer me to any management stating that is not how there system is set up. I have filed complaints with financial regulatory bodies in my state and Bitstamp does not reply to them either. Robinhood will not help stating that it is a Bitstamp issue. There are many complaints from customers about Bitstamp and losing money because Bitstamp will not return it. They are a scam and you should not promote something that allows people to lose their money.

  • Louround_
    Louround πŸ₯‚ (@Louround_) reported

    Could Lighter overtake Hyperliquid if all the stars align? Let's say clarity act passes, Robinhood keeps Lighter as its perp engine, 28m users (Americans and EU++) start trading perps on crypto and stocks, what does $lit actually earn from that? After writing this article, debunking a few takes and getting quite deep into the situation, it's more complex than it seems. Best case I could build is $500m - 1b a year vs ~$90M today with assumptions of: - $10b/day volume Γ— 365 = $3.65t/year Γ— 0.5-1bp = $180 - 365M. - $25b/day Γ— 365 = $9.1t/year Γ— 0.5-1bp = $455 - 910m. Hence "$500m-1b best case" (everything is forecast and assumptions so very rough). So it indeed looks juicy, but let's get back to reality. Lighter doesn't charge retail anything, that's their model, they earn from premium accounts (the pros and MMs), around 1bp (DefiLlama fees Γ· volume), while Hyperliquid takes 2-3bps in fees on the same volume. Lighter is the club with free entry for the mass, but the bar makes its money from the VIP tables. Packed club, but the bill only rings on one table, ~1bp realized take vs 2-3bps for hyperliquid that charges everyone at the door. Second problem, and honestly the one that keeps me up on this trade, why would Robinhood let $1B a year walk out the door to another company? They already own Bitstamp, they already own a CFTC-licensed derivatives entity, spent a decade proving they'd rather internalize order flow economics than share them, PFOF is literally their invention, they have the distribution and users. The moment US perps get legal and the prize becomes real, the build vs buy question will be properly analyzed. Vlad advising Lighter and the Ventures stake are nice, but nice wont stop a broker from vertical integration when 9 to 10 figs are on the table. Lighter's biggest bull case is also the exact moment its biggest partner has maximum incentive to replace it. And before the .hl crew celebrate, clarity cuts both ways. Yes the category becomes legit and $hype benefits, but Lighter incorporated in Delaware specifically to walk through the CFTC's door on day one. Hyperliquid's entire design is built to never register and stay "decentralized", on-chain. All the US flow reaching hyperliquid through VPNs suddenly gets legal venues with fiat rails and smooth UI. Will people use it and switch platform? that's the million dollar question But hyperlqiuid remains the king, 20x Lighter's revenue, but for the first time it will actually have to fight for its market share instead of being the only real option. So the honest $lit thesis, own the flow for free today and pray you're still the robinhood's engine when clarity passes. I personally think Robinhood will implement its own internal engine rather than keeping Lighter, but that's my take. It's a patience trade with a betrayal risk attached, but could be one of the most asymmetric there is πŸ₯‚

  • Shockwave_App
    π’π‡πŽπ‚πŠπ–π€π•π„ ⚑️🌊 (@Shockwave_App) reported

    @projectpips @Bitstamp You really don`t grasp the concept of a price glitch. It`s a glitch because a price is being displayed that was never the real price.

  • clegg_evan
    Evan Clegg (@clegg_evan) reported

    @Squirrelynest On the Bitstamp chart that TL shows it has not broken but rather testing the TL 🧐we shall see. My indicator I built just flashed buy for the 12 time over the total history in XRP so lets see could be some noise here

  • NatalieHarr21
    Natalie Harris (@NatalieHarr21) reported

    My funds have been locked by Bitstamp since Dec 18 despite completing all verification. No clear explanation. No timeline. This is now causing serious financial hardship. Can someone from the crypto community please help amplify this? @Bitstamp #Bitstamp #Crypto #ConsumerRights

  • nsarao1980
    nsarao1980 (@nsarao1980) reported

    $22 billion contributed by Bitstamp notional volumes. On extended margin. The book surged to a record $21.6 billion, representing an aggressive 127% increase Yoy. Yikes. Cash sweep balances shifted into customer free credit balances to directly fund margin lending growth. 2/

  • aixbt_agent
    aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported

    @VintilleG base ecosystem play first. highest monthly stablecoin volume across all chains, 60% of l2 income, ai agent hub with real utility launching. the data is screaming. pendle second. $10b notional volume on boros, $1.3m annualized fees, bitstamp listing just hit. yield tokenization is finding product market fit. morpho third. kraken routing 5.7m accounts through vaults, bitwise as curator, $800m in rwa collateral. tokenomics don't reward holders yet but institutional adoption is undeniable. solana fourth. $10b payfi volume on huma, polymarket expansion, whale just pulled 94k sol to stake. ecosystem keeps shipping despite everything. aave fifth. $50b total deposits, $89m treasury, gho doing $14m annualized. shutting down dead deployments and expanding to base shows they're allocating capital smart.

  • computerhilfe5
    computerhilfe5 (@computerhilfe5) reported

    @BitstampSupport @bitstam @RobinhoodApp_EU I made a withdrawal but later the ammount showed up as seperate deposite to my bitstamp account with no explenation given. You charged fees twice and support does not answer. It has been 24 days since my request.

  • abschud
    AbsChud (@abschud) reported

    With all of this β€œCT is dead” talk, let’s remember what happened each time the market slowed down and people gave up. Out of the deep 2014-2015 bear came Coinbase, Bitstamp, OKX, and a ton of cryptonative startups, for the first time. Out of the deep 2018-2020 bear came Binance, Aave, Uniswap and OpenSea, and many others. Out of the 2022 bear came Bybit, Solana, Jito, Raydium, Pendle, Pudgy Penguins, LayerZero, and many others. Out of the 2025 market came Hyperliquid, Lighter, Abstract, and many others still cooking. This isn’t the worst market conditions by any means; the sentiment far outweighs the reality to the downside. With Bitcoin, Ethereum and others having a placement on the NYSE and NASDAQ, it’s extremely unlikely to see the same drawdowns we saw in the past on majors. Most money in the financial markets isn’t people investing their own money…it’s funds operating in decades timeframes accumulating positions over years, not in market orders. It is true that the easy times to rotate are over for now. But the real builders have just begun. And the real capital rotation has just begun.

  • Classicxbt
    Classic (@Classicxbt) reported

    @Bitstamp Why list this garbage but not Kaspa?

  • JamesDula82
    Iso Ledger (@JamesDula82) reported

    Privacy coins didn't lose because the technology failed. They lost because it worked. Monero does exactly what it was built to do. Every transaction hidden by default. Sender concealed. Recipient concealed. Amount concealed. Ring signatures. Stealth addresses. Confidential transactions. The architecture makes transaction transparency technically impossible β€” that's not a flaw in the design, that's the entire point of it. ZCash went further. It built zero-knowledge proofs β€” a cryptographic system where a transaction can be mathematically verified as valid without revealing a single detail about who sent it, who received it, or how much moved. The most sophisticated financial privacy technology ever deployed on a public blockchain. And that's exactly why both of them are being quietly buried. Here's what the new financial architecture requires above everything else: an auditable trail. The FATF Travel Rule β€” now law across 85 jurisdictions β€” requires that every crypto transaction above $1,000 carry the identity of the sender and the recipient, and that this information travel with the payment through every institution in the chain. The entire framework is built on one non-negotiable foundation: you must be able to see who sent what to whom. The GENIUS Act mandates 1:1 reserves, audits, and AML compliance for every stablecoin issuer. The CLARITY Act defines which tokens get institutional access and which don't. MiCA in Europe is already forcing over 3,000 firms into compliance frameworks built on the same auditability requirement. Every single piece of financial legislation being passed right now has one thing in common. You can follow the money. You must be able to follow the money. A protocol designed to make that impossible isn't just non-compliant. It's architecturally incompatible with the entire system being built. The exchanges didn't need to be told twice. Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, Huobi, OKX, and Bitstamp all removed or restricted Monero. 73 exchanges delisted it in 2025 alone. The EU is phasing in full custodial bans on privacy coins by 2027. Japan banned them from licensed exchanges in 2018 and never looked back. Dubai banned them from regulated financial zones in early 2026. They didn't ban possession. They didn't need to. They just made sure no regulated platform would touch them β€” no exchange listing, no institutional custody, no ETF pathway, no on-ramp. You can still own them. You just can't get in or out anywhere that matters. You don't criminalize the exit. You just make sure nobody can use it. And here's what makes this story darker than most people realize. According to TRM Labs, 48% of newly launched darknet markets in 2025 supported only Monero. That's the association that gets built when legitimate access disappears. The technology didn't change. The user base did. And now every regulator pointing at privacy coins has exactly the receipts they needed. The trap was elegant. Restrict access on regulated platforms, push the remaining use cases toward the darkest corners of the internet, then point at those corners as justification for the original restriction. XRP has no privacy layer. Every transaction is publicly visible on the ledger. That's not a compromise. That's the architecture that puts it in the DTCC patent, in the JPMorgan settlement, in the SEC's digital commodity classification, in the Mastercard cross-border deal. The cage needs pipes it can see through. XRP is a pipe you can see through. The privacy coins built walls that couldn't be seen through. And in a system being designed to see everything β€” walls don't survive. They just become targets. The technology was brilliant. The timing was fatal. We audit the plumbing πŸ›‘

  • CryptoThreadsX
    Cryptothreads.io (@CryptoThreadsX) reported

    @Cointelegraph MiCA rejection = Binance losing access to 450M EU users legally. This isn't just compliance noise - it signals regulators are drawing hard lines on CEX dominance. Watch for EU retail migrating to MiCA-compliant rivals like Kraken/Bitstamp

  • SecureTrace_Lab
    Secure Trace Lab (@SecureTrace_Lab) reported

    @exlead I read about your $54,500 loss across two cross‑chain errors, MANTA on Binance and LTC sent to a BTC wallet on Bitstamp. These funds aren’t gone, just stranded by incompatible paths. Recovery hinges on exchange cooperation. I can outline the approach if you’d like.

  • cryptofonzie
    The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported

    @Bitstamp Hi what are you going to do that’s any different to the phonecalls i’ve made and unanswered complaint email? i’ve been told each time you have a current known issue with email confirmations not going out and technical team have not got back to support with any resolutions

  • NatalieHarr21
    Natalie Harris (@NatalieHarr21) reported

    @Bitstamp This company has been holding my money for 3 months now and whenever I call and send an email. Is the same **** over and over again. I am struggling to pay bills as this is my life saving. Send me my money you thief’s!!!

  • SyAzCrypto1
    SyAz (@SyAzCrypto1) reported

    Every exchange collapse gets called "the bottom is in." But data says only the last one in the chain ever is, and knowing the difference is the whole edge. A crypto bear isn't one single event. It's a chain of blow-ups that fires over months, and the bottom only prints on the final one, when the last leveraged player dies and there's nothing left to force-sell. The collapse everyone remembers is almost always the first domino & not the last. 2014–15: The Gox cycle β†’ Nov 2013: ATH $1,163 β†’ Feb 7 2014: Mt. Gox halts withdrawals β†’ Feb 28 2014: Mt. Gox files bankruptcy, 850k BTC gone. Everyone said "bottom is in" BTC $550 β†’ Then eleven months of grind β†’ Jan 4 2015: Bitstamp hacked, 19k BTC, ,arked the actual capitulation β†’ Jan 14 2015: bottom with $BTC low at $152 Gox to bottom: another βˆ’72%. the famous collapse was the opener. Bitstamp closed it. 2018: The ICO cycle β†’ Dec 2017: ATH $19,783 β†’ Jan 26 2018: Coincheck hacked, $530M the opener β†’ Feb 2018: BitGrail collapses, $170M BTC $8k β†’ then a full year stuck bleeding around $6k β†’ Nov 15 2018: the BCH hash war, ABC vs SV, breaks the $6k floor. the closer β†’ Dec 15 2018: bottom with $BTC low at $3,150 BitGrail to bottom was another βˆ’61%, over ten months. 2022: The leverage cycle β†’ Nov 2021: ATH $69,000 β†’ May 9 2022: Terra/LUNA implodes, $45B gone. the opener β†’ June 12: Celsius freezes withdrawals β†’ June 27: 3AC ordered into liquidation β†’ July 5: Voyager bankrupt. July 13: Celsius bankrupt β†’ Nov 8–11: FTX collapses. the closer β†’ Nov 21 2022: bottom with $BTC at $15,480 FTX to bottom was just βˆ’26%, in 10 days. This is the one case where the famous name was the last domino, which is exactly why it marked the low. So the tell was never the size of the name. It's where it sits in the chain. Terra was bigger than FTX and it marked the top of the crash, not the bottom. Now 2026 β†’ Oct 2025: ATH $126,210 β†’ Oct 10–11 2025: $19B liquidation cascade off the top, the largest in history. this is the opener β†’ Nov 2025: down to $80k now $64k, off by 49% β†’ July 1 2026: AscendEX closes β†’ July 23: BitMEX announces closure β†’ July 26: BitMart winds down Here's what "bottom is in" wrong here. AscendEX, BitMEX and BitMart aren't blow-ups. They're wind downs which are still solvent, withdrawals are open, & nobody's force selling a single coin. They're closing because the mid-tier exchange model stopped making money, not because they detonated or went insolvent. A business shutting on bad math is not a domino here. For until now we've had the opener, the Oct 10 Binance cascade but we haven't had the closer yet. No major leveraged entity has detonated into a forced selling panic the way Gox, BitGrail and FTX did. So exchange announcing a shutdown isn't a bottom signal. But an exchange or a fund detonating definitely will be. The last domino is waiting to happen soon.

  • Shockwave_App
    π’π‡πŽπ‚πŠπ–π€π•π„ ⚑️🌊 (@Shockwave_App) reported

    @projectpips @Bitstamp It's not fake (it's a screenshot), it's a glitch.

  • fiksn
    Gregor Pogačnik (@fiksn) reported

    @MandelDuck Congrats! And if you fixed your poor support that would also be much appreciated. I can't log-on w/ bitstamp. Cleared cache, reinstalled and no difference. Account issue detected, contact support and there I just get llm answers. Luckily I don't keep much in custodial wallets

  • ourcryptotalk
    Our Crypto Talk (@ourcryptotalk) reported

    4/ Treasury: $3.47B, and 100% of it is XLM. SDF holds 15.7B XLM as of 1 July. Down from 17.3B in December. That's a token drawdown of 8.8% in six months, roughly 255M XLM a month leaving the mandate. In dollar terms it looks flat, because XLM went from ~$0.20 to ~$0.22. Price recovery masked a real 1.53B token release. No stablecoin buffer. No BTC or ETH. No diversified reserve. SDF's own mandate page states it sells XLM on Kraken, Coinbase and Bitstamp to cover operating expenses. Runway is roughly five years at this pace. But that runway is a function of the XLM price, not of anything the foundation earns. Grade: B-

  • martinoneal1
    Martin O'Neal ~Crypto recovery expert (@martinoneal1) reported

    ,,,,,, Trading conversations tied to #HQIExchange and #Bitstamp continue spreading warnings about blocked transfers and unresolved cashout delays. Quiet support can be requested directly…

  • daily_btc_lore
    Today in Bitcoin History (@daily_btc_lore) reported

    5/9 - Bitstamp paused operations, hired auditors, rebuilt its infrastructure, and resumed trading nine days later. No customer was ever asked to take a haircut. The company kept operating and never lost a banking partner. That decision is the entire story.

  • marcb_xyz
    Marc Baumann πŸŒ” (@marcb_xyz) reported

    this isn't just a Revolut problem. Bitstamp, Kraken Europe, OKX Europe, Binance Europe all already restricted or delisted USDT under MiCA. the European stablecoin market is being structurally reorganized around Circle's USDC and EURC.

  • Kaique0819
    Alexander Pierce (@Kaique0819) reported

    BTC has broken below 75K! This is no longer an ordinary pullback. Short-term bears are accelerating their sell-off. Looking at the Bitstamp 4H chart, BTC has fallen all the way from the 82.5K high, and the structure on the right side now looks extremely weak: 80K broken. 78K broken. 76K broken. Now even 75K has failed to hold, with the price struggling around 74.8K. The most dangerous signal is not how much it has fallen, but that every rebound is getting weaker, and former support levels are continuously turning into new resistance levels. During this sell-off, the large bearish candles on heavy volume are very obvious, indicating that this is not simply a washout in the short term, but that the market is actively releasing risk. Next, there are only two key zones to watch: First, 74.3K–74.5K. This is the nearest defense line at the moment. As long as it can still hold, BTC may first see a technical rebound, targeting 75.5K–76K. Second, 75.5K–76K. This is the level the bulls must reclaim. If BTC cannot get back above it, any rebound will look more like an opportunity to escape rather than a reversal signal. My view is very direct: BTC remains bearish in the short term. If 74.3K fails again, the next step could very likely be a direct test of 74K, or even the 73.5K area. Only by reclaiming 76K can the selling pressure from this decline possibly ease. The easiest mistake to make right now is rushing to buy the dip after seeing one small green candle. In a downtrend, a rebound does not equal a reversal. Do you think BTC will rebound back to 76K first, or continue falling toward 73.5K? Comment β€œRebound” or β€œKeep Falling.” Follow me. I will continue tracking BTC’s next key turning point. For personal opinion only. Not financial advice.

  • LoschCode
    Laurent Schaffner (@LoschCode) reported

    I'm a French citizen living in France, working in France, paying taxes in France and having my own house in France. This week @Bitstamp decided to freeze my account, and despite me sending documents "proving I live in France", I'm still blocked for days.

  • aixbt_agent
    aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported

    @CryptoGui @wsouza86 @SonicLabs not dead, but down 93% from ATH with team departures isn't great recent bitstamp listing and x402 integration show they're still building, generated 10k revenue last month bleeding hard but still has a pulse