Galaxia Metaverse Joins Hands with MVL Foundation to Expand Blockchain Ecosystems

SBI Zodia Custody is discontinuing operations two years after its launch, Bloomberg reported. The joint venture was formed by Tokyo-based SBI Holdings and Zodia Custody, an institutional digital-asset platform backed by Standard Chartered, with ownership split 51% and 49% respectively.Photo by Haotian Zheng on UnsplashStrategic realignment behind exitAccording to people at the companies involved, the decision reflected shifting priorities at both partners. Zodia Custody chief executive Julian Sawyer described the move as a mutual alignment of strategy and said the company had prepared materials to seek local registration with Japan’s Financial Services Agency but had not filed an application before opting to exit. An SBI Holdings spokesperson said the dissolution did not signal a withdrawal from crypto custody or the company’s broader Asia strategy, describing the step instead as an effort to generate greater collective impact across SBI’s digital ecosystem. Security breaches shape regulatory climateThe retreat comes as overseas crypto businesses continue to face a cautious regulatory environment in Japan, a market shaped by several high-profile security breaches. Industry analyses have repeatedly noted that three of the largest crypto hacks targeted Japanese exchanges: Mt. Gox in 2014, Coincheck in 2018, and DMM Bitcoin in 2024. Mt. Gox lost about 850,000 BTC, now worth roughly $98 billion, and began making creditor repayments in July 2024 after years of legal proceedings. The repayment deadline was later extended to Oct. 31, 2025, and initial distributions totaled about 59,000 BTC, or just over 41% of the roughly 141,686 BTC earmarked for repayment, to an estimated 127,000 creditors. Coincheck’s 2018 breach involved what was then about $534 million in NEM tokens. Despite that episode, the company secured approval from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in November 2024 for a Nasdaq debut through a merger with Thunder Bridge. The transaction generated roughly $31.6 million in gross proceeds for the combined company. Moving forward, Coincheck is entering Europe through the acquisition of Aplo, a French-licensed digital asset brokerage. The most recent breach involved DMM Bitcoin, which had suspended operations after a May 2024 theft of more than 4,502.9 BTC. Its accounts and assets were transferred in March 2025 to SBI VC Trade, a cryptocurrency exchange owned by SBI Holdings, which said it would support 14 tokens previously listed on DMM that were not available on its own platform. Policy uncertainty as leadership shiftsAt the policy level, uncertainty is growing over Japan’s stance on crypto and blockchain following Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba’s Sept. 7 announcement that he will step down. Ishiba, who took office in October 2024, has advocated for digital assets, with his latest remarks delivered at the WebX2025 event. There, he pledged greater state support for Web3 initiatives, describing the sector as a driver of innovation that could help address demographic decline and support broader economic change. Last month, Finance Minister Katsunobu Katō, seen as a potential contender to succeed Ishiba, said cryptocurrency could play a role in a diversified investment portfolio, noting its growing user base in Japan. While recent surveys show Sanae Takaichi and Shinjiro Koizumi as the leading preferences for the next Liberal Democratic Party leader, Katō has emphasized the need to foster a stable trading environment for digital asset stakeholders, balancing investor protection with industry innovation. Within this policy climate, SBI Zodia Custody’s shutdown underscores the operational and licensing challenges facing foreign-linked crypto ventures in Japan. 

Hong Kong’s Bricks-and-Mortar Crypto Shops Attract Chinese VisitorsHong Kong has become a thriving destination for cryptocurrency enthusiasts, particularly mainland Chinese visitors, due to the ambiguity surrounding the regulatory status of these crypto shops.Despite the illegality of cryptocurrency transactions on the mainland and the ban on overseas exchanges serving onshore clients, Hong Kong allows legal crypto trading, and according to a recent report published by the Financial Times, the autonomous Chinese territory is being accessed by residents of the Chinese mainland for the purpose of trading crypto.Photo by Chapman Chow on UnsplashSurging demandBricks-and-mortar crypto shops, lightly regulated and scattered across the city’s popular tourism and shopping districts, have flourished thanks to the surging demand from mainland Chinese visitors. These stores offer customers the convenience of purchasing digital assets with cash, often without the need to disclose the source of funds or personal information.In contrast to the strict licensing requirements imposed on online exchanges in Hong Kong’s push to become a virtual assets trading hub, these over-the-counter (OTC) crypto stores provide customers with the opportunity to buy large volumes of cryptocurrencies with minimal or no verification checks.Before the border between China and Hong Kong reopened fully in February, mainland Chinese customers accounted for less than 5% of customers at Crypto HK, an OTC crypto outfit with two branches in the city. However, this figure has now increased significantly, making up around half of their customer base.Similarly, One Satoshi, a crypto store with nine branches in Hong Kong, reported trading volumes between January and May 2023 that were 20–25% higher than the same period the previous year. They anticipate a 35–40% increase in trading for the entire year.While some store owners, like Roger Li of One Satoshi, currently decline mainland Chinese customers due to Beijing’s crypto ban, they remain optimistic that restrictions will ease. This belief is prevalent among the crypto community in Hong Kong following the city’s announcement to become a virtual assets hub in October.Regulatory anomalyHong Kong introduced a new regulatory framework for cryptocurrency exchanges in June, requiring all online platforms operating in the city to apply for a license. However, most OTC stores still operate outside the purview of Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), presenting an area of further consideration for the government.OTC stores primarily serve as a simple way for users to convert money to and from unlicensed online exchanges, according to Carlton Lai, head of blockchain research at Daiwa Capital Markets. Hong Kong’s lenient regulations and ease of starting such businesses, as long as there is sufficient capital, contribute to the higher number of OTC stores compared to other locations.While some shops welcome increased regulation in the sector, others do not require customers to provide identification, promoting quick and anonymous transactions. However, this falls short of the investor protection measures mandated for online platforms seeking licenses to trade cryptocurrencies to retail clients.The lack of scrutiny faced by Hong Kong’s OTC shops, coupled with their proximity to mainland China — a market that ranked fourth globally for crypto trading in 2022 — makes them appealing to Chinese citizens still interested in the asset class.

Conflict Identified as Crypto.com Trading on its Own PlatformTrading practices at Crypto.com, the Singapore-based cryptocurrency exchange, have raised questions about potential conflicts of interest within the digital assets industry.Citing a number of unnamed sources, the Financial Times (FT) made the claim in a report published on Monday.Photo by Pixabay on PexelsConflict of interestIn traditional financial markets, exchanges typically match buyers with sellers at competitive transparent prices, while market making and proprietary trading are conducted by separate private companies. However, US regulators have recently cracked down on similar activities at digital asset exchanges. Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange, faced 13 charges from the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including allegations of manipulative trading to inflate trading volume.The presence of internal traders at Crypto.com has not been widely known since the company’s launch in 2016. The FT’s sources claim that Crypto.com executives provided sworn statements to external trading houses denying the company’s involvement in trading activities.Employees were allegedly instructed to deny the existence of an internal market-making operation. In response to inquiries, Crypto.com denied that employees were asked to lie, stating that their internal market maker functioned similarly to third-party market makers, ensuring tight spreads and efficient markets on their platform.The majority of Crypto.com’s revenue reportedly comes from its app for retail traders, where the company acts as the counterparty for transactions and operates as a broker model. The company’s trading team hedges these positions on various venues, including their own exchange, to maintain risk neutrality. Crypto.com emphasized that their exchange provides a level playing field for institutional traders.According to insiders, Crypto.com’s proprietary trading desk engages in trading activities on the company’s exchange and other platforms, solely focused on generating profits rather than facilitating an exchange. The market making desk, on the other hand, aims to enhance liquidity on the platform.Not a revenue sourceCrypto.com defended its practices by stating that comparing trading volumes to competitors is common in the industry. It said that the company’s priority is to continuously improve order book liquidity and reduce spreads, benefiting all participants. The firm told Decrypt that trading is not a source of revenue: “While we do have some market making activity, for example, we have internal market makers for our CFTC-regulated product Up/Downs in the United States.”As a private company, Crypto.com publishes accounts in different countries, but revenue breakdown by business line is not disclosed.Closure of institutional tradingFollowing the SEC’s enforcement actions, earlier this month Crypto.com announced the closure of its exchange for institutional US traders due to limited demand in the current market landscape, effective from June 21.In any marketplace transparency and fairness are crucial. It’s fair to say that there has been some level of sharp practice among some actors in the marketplace while regulators have been lacking in getting up to speed with the emergent sector, and moving to protect consumers. With the major crypto platform failures of 2022 has come renewed interest in resolving these issues. That may make for some short-term difficulty, but in the longer term, it should mean greater protections for market participants so long as a common sense approach is pursued.