Today I saw a bunch of people in the group shouting that Alipay has been restricted, and upon checking, I found out that many people's accounts have been locked for three months. To be honest, my first reaction was anger—how can we do business like this? But after calming down, I realized that this matter is not that simple. Personally, I think that C2C (consumer-to-consumer) may really be facing a tough battle ahead.
1. Current situation: Risk control tightening, the 'survival cost' of C2C is skyrocketing.
Recently, the large-scale risk control by Alipay is not an isolated case. Historically, the e-commerce C2C model has been criticized for its difficulty in regulation and low trustworthiness. For example, in the early years, Taobao was frequently complained about for counterfeit goods, and later the platform could only rely on real-name authentication and credit scoring (such as Sesame Credit) to barely maintain order. But the current C2C in the cryptocurrency field is even more complicated.
Payment channels are becoming increasingly tight: mainstream channels like Alipay and WeChat are highly sensitive to abnormal transactions (especially high-frequency, large-amount peer-to-peer transfers), with risk control rules often being opaque and frequently causing false positives.
Regulation is shifting from 'loose' to 'precise strikes': referencing the history of e-commerce development, early on, innovation was encouraged by allowing online stores to operate without business registrations, but then issues of counterfeit goods and tax evasion erupted, leading to tightening policies (such as the e-commerce law requiring online stores to register compliance). The crypto market may currently be experiencing a similar phase—outwardly targeting money laundering, but actually compressing the grey trading space.
After this wave of operations, the result is clear: the deposit and withdrawal costs for small retail players will skyrocket. Transactions that could previously be completed easily may now require multiple detours to break down orders or even seek offline solutions, drastically reducing efficiency.
II. Why Now? The Overlap of Policy Logic and Market Trends
'Controllability' outweighs 'convenience'
The decline of C2C in e-commerce has already signaled: platforms initially expanded through low thresholds (like early Taobao being free), but eventually had to move towards standardization (such as JD's self-operated model and Xianyu's quality inspection service). Similarly, current regulatory demands in the crypto space center around controllable fund flows. Once C2C becomes difficult to track, it will be seen as a source of risk.
The long-term game of 'good money drives out bad money'
In the e-commerce sector, B2C ultimately surpassed C2C to become mainstream because of better quality and service experience. The crypto market may be similar: in the future, compliant platforms (such as licensed institutions) that can provide more stable payout services will naturally attract users, even if the fees are slightly higher.
III. Future Projections: C2C Will Not Disappear, But Will 'Transform'
I personally believe that C2C will not completely disappear, but its form will inevitably upgrade:
From 'disorderly scatter' to 'protocol-based aggregation'
Referencing Xianyu's transformation into an 'Interest Community' (such as the fish pond feature), future peer-to-peer transactions may rely more on small circles or DAO organizations, reducing risk through social trust.
Technological empowerment replaces barbaric growth
Just as Dewu uses 'authentication before shipping' to solve the fake goods problem, crypto C2C could combine with smart contracts to achieve escrow transactions, reducing direct capital exchanges.
Offline and scenario-based approaches will become supplementary
Face-to-face transactions (one hand converting U, one hand transferring) may rebound, especially in high-value trades. But this will also trigger new security challenges, such as issues with credit verification.
IV. Impact on the Market: Short-Term Pain and Long-Term Restructuring
U's price volatility is intensifying: If the funding channels continue to shrink, the supply and demand of U will inevitably become unbalanced in the short term, widening the price difference. However, in the long run, once the market finds a new balance (for example, through compliant channels or overseas cards), prices will return to rationality.
Small players exit, professionals remain: referencing the process of individual online stores gradually becoming incorporated in e-commerce history, in the future, those who can adapt to the rules will either be professional teams (such as licensed market makers) or small circle trading highly reliant on private domain trust.
This wave of risk control may just be the beginning. The general direction of policy is clear: bring the uncontrollable into the controllable and push the non-standard towards standardization. As players, we either learn to find survival gaps under the new rules or prepare to exit.
Personal view: The cold winter has arrived, but those who freeze to death are mostly the naked swimmers. In the future, C2C will not die; it will only become a 'heavier' business—either heavy on technology (like using contract tools) or heavy on trust (like community binding). Survival of the fittest has always been the case.
Follow Ake to learn more about the latest information and knowledge in the crypto space, precisely guiding you, because learning is your greatest wealth!#巨鲸动向 #加密市场观察 $ETH
