Maxim Builov’s column about the premature panic of Binance customers

It would seem that consumers should already get used to the changes in the rules of the game in various markets over the past year and a half, but it is still easy to panic. Thus, on August 23, the Binance Russian Telegram channel actively and with concern discussed the loss of Tinkoff bank cards from the available methods of transferring funds on the p2p platform of the cryptocurrency exchange of the same name. However, the misunderstanding was quickly resolved – it turned out that the option was preserved, but now under the name “Local card (yellow)”.

Numerous euphemisms are also one of the important elements of changing the rules. For example, Sberbank was simply referred to as “Russian bank” on Binance. In short – Rosbank, not to be confused with the real Rosbank. The cards of the latter are already called “Local card (green)”.

The caution of the exchange (as well as other Western suppliers and service providers that continue to work with the Russian market in one way or another) does not look like reinsurance – since May, Binance has been checked for help in circumventing sanctions against Russia. This week, The Wall Street Journal published an article alleging that Binance conducts “significant trading volumes in rubles.” In the exchange itself, in response to this, they simply emphasized that “they have no relations with any banks, either in the Russian Federation or in other countries.”

It would seem that consumers should already get used to the changes in the rules of the game in various markets over the past year and a half, but it is still easy to panic.

Much more questions, however, are not caused by the position of Binance (after all, Russian customers, buyers and partners are trying to keep many businesses even in unfriendly countries), but the reverse situation with domestic businesses, for example, the largest money transfer system Golden Crown.

The latter in March completely refused to accept replenishment for transfers from cards of Russian banks that fell under the sanctions. The explanation was surprisingly honest: “the risk of violating the sanctions regime.” Few of the Russian players are ready to admit this now, especially since there have been no official reports of any claims from foreign regulators specifically against the Golden Crown. At the same time, many foreign partners of the largest Russian banks in the CIS, namely, they account for the bulk of the transfers of both labor migrants and relocated Russians, have maintained relations, including with the players who fell under the sanctions.

It is not only the participants of the financial market who strive to preserve and even develop business with Russia. So, the Italian Benetton, Calzedonia and Terranova, the German New Yorker, the Danish Ecco, etc. over the past year could expand their networks in the country (it is difficult to accurately assess this, since they, for obvious reasons, do not disclose statistics – see “Kommersant” dated 21 June). And these are only those who did not play with words, changing names.