Which is a step in the right direction, but it’s not enough.
As per a recent article, Fujitsu Eyes Cryptocurrency Trading with Cross-Blockchain Payments Tech. The goal of the platform is to allow two different cryptocurrency networks to interoperate.
Interoperable networks are the future of supply chain, as per a recent article on we need blockchain, but not for the reasons you think, as, implemented properly, it could allow supply chain partners on different platforms to securely, but openly, trade information that multiple partners need access to in an unalterable way.
But that, of course, is easier said than done. Company X might post that it has a 10 Million Renminbi receivable in China that it wants to trade for a 1.5 Million USD receivable in the USA, but even if that is the exact exchange rate, are the two debts equal? Only if both parties can, and will, pay the same amount at the same time. If one debt is due now and one is due in 30 days, there is a cost of capital if one organization has to borrow in the interim to meet cashflow requirements. Also, if both debts are due in 30 days, something could happen within 30 days that would result in one organization being unable to pay its debt for 60 days, and this again could result in a cashflow issue for one party that traded a debt.
As a result, unless both parties pay into a network and the funds can be immediately transferred, then you need a network where parties are trading at negotiated discount rates (subject to credit ratings or other agreed upon factors), and that could get tricky.
We could be left with a situation where each IOU is auctioned off to the highest bidder in one of the counter-party currencies of choice (1.4M USD, 1.0M British Pounds, etc) or the situation where each block is put up with a (set of) offer requirement(s) and the first offer takes it. In the first situation, which requires a fixed time auction over block chain, you have a lot of overhead (and blockchain’s primary application — bitcoin — already takes too much energy), and the second case this could leave trade possibilities on the table.
Unless a truly global currency facilitation fund where a number of entities establish a global bank, each funding in their own currency, and agree to pay out debts in the local currency in an established timeline for each IOU placed on the network, the dream could stay that, a dream. But with a global organization, the global organization would do its own risk checks, insure the risk is acceptable, and then take a cut just like supplier networks and payment networks take a cut. It would be like a bank or an invoice factoring network, but could offer lower costs as it wouldn’t need to exchange currency all the time, could weather currency storms, minimize global transfer (and global transfer costs), and generally improve global trade efficiencies. Just like the Knight’s Templar did when they effectively established one of the first global banks.
What we’re asking is not an easy network to design, but one we need to be thinking about.