Add Strike App as a new payment method

[pazza83]

Strike - USA

References:

• Strike (in beta)
• Stroke Global (in development)
• Strike Twitter
• CEO Medium (for updates)

Strike is a payments application developed by Zap Solutions. It allowing users to send and receive money instantly around the world, for free. Strike moves fiat by buying and selling bitcoin in real time over the Lightning Network

Users use Strike to pay each other, buy goods and services online, make micropayments, tip content creators, as well as buy and sell Bitcoin.

Users using Strike have to complete KYC. Once KYC'd they can also buy Bitcoin directly with Strike by converting their USD to BTC.

Strike is to custodian of any fiat deposited within the the app.

Region / Currencies

Strike is currently only offered in the United States and only supports USD.

Strike is not available in you residents of New York and Hawaii.

200 other countries and adding EUR, GBP, CHF are on their roadmap. They are also keen to add USDT and USDC.

Strike Card aims to be available in the EU and UK Q2 2021.

Strike has partnerships with Neo Bank and Bittrex.

Account verification

New users can create an account by providing just the following:

• Name
• Email
• Phone number

To get higher limits >$100 users need to provide more information including:

• Address
• Birthday
• Social Security Number
• Photos of their ID

Chargeback risk

Terms state:

You will not be able to reverse or cancel a transaction once you have confirmed that you wish to proceed with the Transaction, and the Services cannot assist you to reverse or modify any transactions.

It is not 100% clear is this relates to all transactions (fiat and BTC). Either way it appears that chargeback risk would be low.

Size of user base

Looks like they are giving access to all Bittrex users (1 million+), and potentially more as they grow.

Prohibited Uses

Cryptocurrencies / Bitcoin are not mentioned explicitly in prohibited uses.

Data requirements

I am unsure as to this at the moment. I think it is just an email (would be good for a user of Strike to confirm).

Verification

TLSNotary can be used. Strike is mainly app based but also runs on Chrome.

Duration

Immediate.

Fees

Strike advertises its service to "Send money instantly, with no fees, anywhere in the world."

USD to USD is free

Limits

Users who have registered with only their email, name, and phone number have the following limits:

$100 maximum per deposit $1,000 maximum total deposits per week $100 maximum per payment Users who increase their limits by providing more information have the following limits:

$1,000 maximum per deposit $1,000 maximum total deposits per week $1,000 maximum per payment

Fraud risk

Unknown at present.

Payment amounts

$1,000 maximum per payment.

Payment description

N/A if changed as per https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/issues/2869

[viperperidot]

I am very excited about this payment method and I think it easily has the potential to become the #1 payment method on bisq. Having a pro-crypto money transfer finntech company will be an amazing improvement in the space. I do not know if companies like TransferWise are regulated to not allow crypto or if it just a personal choice. Either way if Strike does not allow crypto in their ToS then I know there will be a huge backlash and obviously not something Jack wants. He is 100% pro crypto so I have very high hopes that he will develop this incredible new company to its full potential and not have unnecessary restrictions.

As far as limits go, on the podcast he did with WBD (https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/jack-mallers-vs-the-world) he states that there would be virtually no limits to the amount of money someone can send. And he eluded to being able to send >$100,000 the same way you send $1, instantly with no fees and anywhere in the world. So I think these initial limits of $1000 are just for the launch of the app, I believe once they get more funding (they need to insure all funds they custody) then the limits will continue to increase. I know the bisq limits will probably never be $100,000 but I think in the future the Strike limits will be greater than the bisq limits which will be fantastic.

All in all I just think the potential here is enormous and I think they are going to destroy all other traditional finntech companies as long as they stay true to their values and do not start disallowing users from transferring funds for entirely legal purposes (like buying bitcoin).

Thanks for jumping on this so quickly @pazza83 , it will be good to have this setup and ready to go for when they launch globally and out of beta. If you need any help testing let me know and I can contribute.

I recommend people listen to the podcast because it gives you a good idea of the structure and potential of this new company and also the mentality of the CEO Jack who is 100% a real bitcoiner...this is a game changer.

[HeadyWook]

"Users using Strike have to complete KYC. Once KYC'd they can also buy Bitcoin directly with Strike by converting their USD to BTC."

I was under the impression users deposit cash on to Strike and stay in cash. Think of Venmo, for example, users can deposit cash into their accounts and make payments with that cash to others. The difference with Strike, as I understand it, is when a cash payment is sent the receiver gets bitcoin instead. However, the Strike user never has to touch bitcoin. Strike doesn't even display cash balance on the app in bitcoin. The user does not buy bitcoin or convert USD to BTC.

[Conza88]

I have less of a problem with KYC - IF there is no direct BTC engagement / deniability of sorts. e.g. KYC with a central exchange and the state asks for records of everyone who bought BTC, ya cooked.

Same with TW, Revolut etc. it's fiat to fiat only. Step detached.

So very interested in how that gets handled by Strike Global. I think after hearing Micro Startegy w/ Saylor interview of NIYDG founder - that they use the BTC monetary network element, not BTC asset. So no conversion directly, but a reference point taken when triggering fiat to send to other party?

With the way its hyped, locking in Strike Global - is basically a proxy for Lightning Network? Getting this on BISQ asap if that is the case, would be epic.

[RififiCastorjunior]

If a Gov want to track those who buy Bitcoin and make them pay, they can fetch those KYC on strike.

I'm not a big fan of this app.

Those easy cash in and out of bitcoin can't happen yet. Gov doesn't control that part so be prepare for some blow up.

Those chiefs have bad reputations ready to take those risks ? https://bittrexglobal.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360009624200

[pazza83]

Strike (Beta) has been scored for inclusion to Bisq:

Essential	Desirable	Definite No’s
Very low risk of chargeback	No risk of chargeback	< very low risk of chargeback
Way to verify the sender in the received payment	Way to verify the sender in the received payment and ability to enter a reference	No way to verify the sender in the received payment
Trade time less than one week	Instant payment	Trade time more than one week
Singular Fiat currency	Multi-currency	Not a payment method for fiat currency
Significant user base	Large user base	No significant user base
High usability	High usability and great user experience	**< high amount usability~~
No KYC required for sending and receiving payments	No KYC required for sending and receiving payments, allows users to trade with upmost privacy. Minimal identifying information as possible (no names, email, phone etc required)	Some KYC required (proof of address, ID, selfie) for sending and receiving payments
Low risk of scam attempts	Very low risk of scam attempts	< low risk of scam attempts
Traders can provide evidence of payment / receipt	Traders can provide evidence of payment / receipt and Verification of payment can be made using PageSigner or similar	Traders will be unable to provide evidence of payment / receipt
Minimum limit at least equal to at least account limits protocols	No minimum limits	Minimum limit not able to achieve account limits protocols
Maximum limits equal to at least 0.01 BTC	Large payment limits up to 2 BTC	Maximum limit is less than 0.01 BTC
Likely to increase liquidity	Likely to increase liquidity and open markets for different countries and currencies	Likely to decrease liquidity
Low risk of mediation	Very low risk of mediation	< low risk of mediation
Low risk for traders from government agencies	No risk for traders from government agencies	< low risk for traders from government agencies
Fees should not be a barrier to trading	No fees for transactions	Fees will be a barrier to trading
Only minor changes needed to trade protocol	No changes needed to trade protocol	> Minor changes needed to trade protocol

Score: 22/32 Percentage: 68.75%

[pazza83]

Strike - Proposed National Currency Payment Method

I am proposing that Strike to be added as a national currency payment method.

@refund-agent2, @huey735, @leo816 please let me know if you have any questions as to how Strike will be mediated / arbitrated. If you have any objection please let me know by 31 May 2021.

Date proposal being made: 01.05.21 Date feedback to be provided by: 01.05.21

Trade window: 1 day

Name of payment method: Strike

Required fields:

• Strike username

Signing required: No

Regions accepted: USA

Currencies accepted: USD

Bisq Limits: eg 0.25 BTC

Any relevant information for mediators / arbitrators: No

Any relevant information for devs: No

Any relevant information for users: No

Screenshot of expected GUI: TBC

[Mycelial1]

All that one needs to pay someone on Strike is just their handle, similar to cashapp and revolut.

Here's a screenshot of the payment screen

You can also make invoices that are actually lightning invoices, but it's not practical to have a custom field for it. If users want to use invoices, I think they could direct message each other to work it out.

All you need is a field for a strike user's handle. :)

[pazza83]

Thanks @Mycelial1, I have updated my recommendations above to include Strike handle

[Conza88]

Still very keen to know if using automatically entails being said to have bought BTC.

Like from a regulatory perspective is it fiat to fiat, from user perspective? IRS consideration?

Or is it considered BTC?

When they hold a gun to Strikes head and get who is transacting, does that matter? KYC wise you've just done fiat to fiat? Using BTC monetary network. Or is BTC the asset converted. Or they won't differentiate?

[Mycelial1]

You can use strike and never touch bitcoin. Sending fiat and having it arrive as LN-BTC is just an option.

If you send LN-BTC to your strike account, it will show up as fiat.

The CEO Jack Mallers has said that they are only regulated insofar as they deal with the fiat side.

He also mentioned that they're working with regulators and "writing the rules" as they go because this is brand new.

As far as irs is considerned, I always assume that once I'm kyc'd, the irs knows, and therefore it would be wise to conduct yourself accordingly.

[pazza83]

Here is the XD for Strike, it should be straight forward to add:

[HeadyWook]

Adding Strike as a payment method does not make sense to me. To me, it only seems beneficial from a seller stand point. I will elaborate: A seller creates a sell offer and deposits collateral on Bisq, a buyer takes the offer and deposits collateral, the buyer makes a payment request to the seller and the trade is completed. However, from a buyer stand point, if someone wants to buy bitcoin, then they can deposit fiat on Strike and send BTC to themselves (i.e., to a wallet address they control that is not Strike). Which, from a buyer POV, makes Bisq seem redundant. Why would a buyer want to use Strike as a payment method through Bisq when they can just use Strike to send to themselves; especially with the collateral bit? It just doesn't make sense to me. Can someone please explain their thinking on why adding Strike makes sense?

[Conza88]

As a buyer, I would not want to buy BTC from Strike. KYC!

If I'm sending fiat, then no KYC.

AFAIK. The state will hold a gun to Strikes head and ask for all those who bought BTC, and it won't have me in there.

Fiat - why do they care?

---

From: HEADY_WOOK @.> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 3:51:38 PM To: bisq-network/growth @.> Cc: Conza @.>; Comment @.> Subject: Re: [bisq-network/growth] Add Strike App as a new payment method (#220)

Adding Strike as a payment method does not make sense to me. To me, it only seems beneficial from a seller stand point. I will elaborate: A seller creates a sell offer and deposits collateral on Bisq, a buyer takes the offer and deposits collateral, the buyer makes a payment request to the seller and the trade is completed. However, from a buyer stand point, if someone wants to buy bitcoin, then they can deposit fiat on Strike and send BTC to themselves. Which, from a buyer POV, makes Bisq seem redundant. Why would a buyer want to use Strike as a payment method through Bisq when they can just send to themselves; especially with the collateral bit? It just doesn't make sense to me. Can someone please explain their their thinking on why adding Strike makes sense?

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/bisq-network/growth/issues/220#issuecomment-844720777, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMMLWYXWTUAFWIUYMFE3S23TOSPOVANCNFSM4WGLFRLQ.

[HeadyWook]

Exactly my thoughts on a buyers end. However, one is still KYC'd through Strike in order to receive a payment. Any received amount through Strike will be on the records and may be considered income even if on the receivers end they only get fiat versus bitcoin, no? Further, if any interested entity, such as the State, wants to dig in, they will see a deposit on to Strike, a send, and a received amount in almost an equal amount to the original deposit. Even further, why would a buyer want to receive a payment on Strike in fiat when they want bitcoin because that is how it will show up in their Strike wallet, as fiat? The buyer would then need to send that fiat from Strike to a bitcoin address they control. Why not just send it to themselves in the first place? One argument I have heard from Jack himself is that sending to a non-KYC'd bitcoin address creates a plausible deniability that one did not actually send to themselves (that is, made a payment to someone else). This creates an incentive for buyers to send bitcoin to addresses not associated with Strike which they control. This essentially makes Strike on Bisq as a payment option impractical. Those are my thoughts on the buyers end. P.S. I always advise my acquaintances to never buy from Strike, only to strictly make payments to others.

On a sellers end, it only makes sense if they send from a non-KYC'd source (i.e., not Strike or the like).

[Conza88]

Well for example TransferWise, KYC.

They do fiat to fiat, and they do buying BTC through them etc.

(1) Fiat to fiat is = so what? (2) Fiat to buying BTC = state cares.

So is Strike the first, or second? Will the state consider that? Can I confidently argue just 1?

If it's not 1, then as a buyer I have no interest in it being added.

---

From: HEADY_WOOK @.> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 4:35:22 PM To: bisq-network/growth @.> Cc: Conza @.>; Comment @.> Subject: Re: [bisq-network/growth] Add Strike App as a new payment method (#220)

Exactly my thoughts on a buyers end. However, one is still KYC'd through Strike in order to receive a payment. Any received amount through Strike will be on the records and may be considered income even if on the receivers end they only get fiat versus bitcoin, no? Further, if any interested entity, such as the State, wants to dig in, they will see a deposit on to Strike, a send, and a received amount in almost an equal amount to the original deposit. Even further, why would a buyer want to receive a payment in fiat, when they want bitcoin, because that is how it will show up in their Strike wallet? The buyer would then need to send that fiat to a bitcoin address they control. Why not just send it to themselves? One argument I have heard from Jack himself is that sending to a non-KYC'd bitcoin address creates a plausible deniability that one did not actually send to themselves. This creates incentive for buyers to send to bitcoin addresses not associated with Strike which they control. Those are my thoughts on the buyers end.

On a sellers end, it only makes sense if they send from a non-KYC'd source aka not Strike or the like.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/bisq-network/growth/issues/220#issuecomment-844751281, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMMLWYUHKYAOYYMQD5RHUALTOSUSVANCNFSM4WGLFRLQ.

[HeadyWook]

However, a buyer on Strike will receive fiat, not bitcoin. Then what? The buyer sends the fiat as bitcoin to a wallet that they control, no? Essentially #2 as you mentioned above. Unless it can be proven it was indeed a payment to another party versus a send to oneself. Again, why not just send to oneself? (which I personally advise against)

As a seller, I get it.

[Conza88]

A buyer of BTC with fiat WITH strike will receive BTC. KYC BTC.

A buyer of BTC with fiat NOT with Strike (but fiat to other trader) will receive BTC (non KYC outside of Strike). KYC Free BTC.

---

From: HEADY_WOOK @.> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 5:09:59 PM To: bisq-network/growth @.> Cc: Conza @.>; Comment @.> Subject: Re: [bisq-network/growth] Add Strike App as a new payment method (#220)

However, a buyer on Strike will receive fiat, not bitcoin. Then what? The buyer sends the fiat as bitcoin to a wallet that they control, no? Essentially #2https://github.com/bisq-network/growth/issues/2 as you mentioned above. Unless it can be proven it was indeed a payment to another party versus a send to oneself. Again, why not just send to oneself? (which I personally advise against)

As a seller, I get it.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/bisq-network/growth/issues/220#issuecomment-844775652, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMMLWYXAZZASGEOGHM6QQJ3TOSYUPANCNFSM4WGLFRLQ.

[viperperidot]

I think there is some confusion here as to why Strike was added as a payment method to Bisq. It was specifically added to utilize the fiat to fiat payments ONLY. It is not meant to be used for buying or selling bitcoin in the app at all, that is all done within bisq. It is simply another fiat payment method that is attractive because they plan on going global which opens up many markets to users who otherwise are stuck in their local illiquid currency (and the fact that they are a bitcoin first company means likely little censorship). Think of it as the same as any other payment method on bisq like, bank transfers, Revolut, TransferWise etc. The trade protocol on bisq remains the same, all bitcoin functions of the trade happen inside the application and fiat transfers happen outside (on Strike). So on the Strike side of things it just looks like someone is sending money to another person for an unknown reason just like SEPA and there is no link to anything bitcoin related. Does this clear things up? I still think Strike has the potential to be the number 1 payment method on Bisq once they roll out globally and if they allow for medium sized money transfers. Personally, I would prefer to do fiat transfers via Strike rather than a bank because I trust Strike more than a bank.

[HeadyWook]

Ahh, I got it. Thank you for the explanation

[pazza83]

Thanks for all the discussion, to confirm as stated by @viperperidot Strike will be used for fiat to fiat payments only. It looks really promising as a payment method. Especially considering the proposed roll out to multiple countries / currencies.

[pazza83]

Information required for Bisq software strings:

Hi @jmacxx here is the information for the strings.

Let me know if you need anything else:

Special info about any of the inputs required for creating the payment account:

Please make sure to include your Strike username.

In Bisq, Strike is used for fiat to fiat payments only.

Please make sure you are aware of the Strike limits:

Users who have registered with only their email, name, and phone number have the following limits:

$100 maximum per deposit $1,000 maximum total deposits per week $100 maximum per payment

Users can increase their limits by providing Strike more information have the following limits:

$1,000 maximum per deposit $1,000 maximum total deposits per week $1,000 maximum per payment

If you trade over the above limits your trade might be cancelled and there could be a penalty.

Special items to be aware about when sending payments (for BTC Buyers):

Please send payment only to the BTC Seller's Strike username as provided in Bisq.

The maximum trade size is $1,000 maximum per payment.

If you trade over the above limits your trade might be cancelled and there could be a penalty.

Special items to be aware about when receiving payments (for BTC Sellers):

Please make sure your payment is received from the BTC Buyer's Strike username as provided in Bisq.

The maximum trade size is $1,000 maximum per payment.

If you trade over the above limits your trade might be cancelled and there could be a penalty.

[pazza83]

Wiki complete: https://bisq.wiki/Strike