Franklin Templeton, one of the world’s largest asset managers, has filed an application with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to launch a spot ether exchange-traded fund (ETF).

The proposed fund, named Franklin Ethereum Trust, would invest directly in ether, the native cryptocurrency of the Ethereum blockchain. The fund would seek to track the performance of ether, as measured by the CME CF Ether-Dollar Reference Rate, a benchmark index that reflects the daily U.S. dollar price of ether.

According to the filing, the fund would store its ether holdings with a qualified custodian and would use a third-party administrator to calculate its net asset value (NAV) on each business day. The fund would also charge an annual management fee of 0.75%, which is lower than some of the existing crypto ETFs in Canada and Europe.

The filing comes amid a growing interest in ether and Ethereum-based products, as the network undergoes a major upgrade to become more scalable, secure and sustainable. Ethereum is also the leading platform for decentralized applications (DApps), smart contracts and decentralized finance (DeFi), which offer new opportunities for investors to access innovative and diverse markets.

Franklin Templeton is not the first asset manager to seek approval for a spot ether ETF in the U.S. In May, VanEck and WisdomTree also filed similar applications with the SEC, but they have not received any response yet. The SEC has been reluctant to approve any crypto ETFs so far, citing concerns over market manipulation, custody and investor protection.

However, some analysts believe that the SEC may be more open to approving an ether ETF than a bitcoin ETF, as ether is considered more of a commodity than a security under the U.S. law. Moreover, the SEC’s new chairman, Gary Gensler, has expressed some familiarity and appreciation for Ethereum and its technology in the past.

In June 2018, SEC Director of Corporate Finance William Hinman said that based on his analysis of the current state of ether, he did not see it as a security. He explained that ether was not issued through an initial coin offering (ICO), and that it had become sufficiently decentralized over time, meaning that no central entity or group of entities had control over its supply or governance. He also noted that ether holders did not expect to receive any dividends or profits from their investment, unlike securities holders.

Hinman’s remarks were later echoed by SEC Chairman Jay Clayton, who confirmed in March 2019 that he agreed with Hinman’s analysis of ether. Clayton also clarified that his views were not based on the label or name of the asset, but on its characteristics and how it was offered and sold. He added that some digital assets could start out as securities, but later become non-securities as they evolve and mature.

These statements suggest that the SEC has a more favorable view of ether than bitcoin, and that it may be more willing to consider an ether ETF proposal. These proposals aim to provide investors with exposure to ether without having to deal with the technical challenges and risks of buying and storing it directly.

An ether ETF could also benefit from the growing popularity and innovation of the Ethereum network, which hosts a variety of applications and protocols in sectors such as decentralized finance (DeFi), non-fungible tokens (NFTs), gaming, social media, and more. These applications could drive more demand and adoption for ether, as well as increase its utility and value proposition.

If approved, Franklin Templeton’s spot ether ETF would be the first of its kind in the U.S. and would likely attract significant demand from institutional and retail investors who want to gain exposure to ether without having to buy or hold it directly. It would also provide more legitimacy and liquidity to the Ethereum ecosystem, and potentially boost the price of ether in the long term.

One of the most important aspects of any blockchain network is its security and performance. These factors depend largely on the validators, who are the nodes that run the network and process transactions.

Validators need to invest in hardware, bandwidth, and electricity to keep the network running smoothly and securely. But how much does it cost to be a validator on Solana, one of the fastest and most scalable blockchains in the world?

One of the most important factors that affect the scalability and security of a blockchain network is its consensus mechanism. Consensus mechanisms are the rules that determine how validators, the nodes that process transactions and produce blocks, agree on the state of the network. Different consensus mechanisms have different trade-offs in terms of speed, cost, and decentralization.

Solana, a high-performance blockchain platform that claims to support over 50,000 transactions per second (TPS), uses a novel consensus mechanism called Proof of History (PoH). PoH is based on the idea of creating a historical record of events on the network using a cryptographic clock.

This clock allows validators to verify the order and timing of transactions without relying on a leader or a coordinator. This reduces the communication overhead and latency among validators, enabling faster and cheaper transactions.

According to Anatoly Yakovenko, the founder and CEO of Solana, the annual cost of running and securing the Solana blockchain is around $50 million. This figure is based on the assumption that there are 1,000 validators on the network, each running a high-end server with 256 GB of RAM, 1 TB of SSD storage, and a 40 Gbps network connection.

Yakovenko also estimated that each validator earns about $200,000 per year in rewards, which means that the network has a positive return on investment for the validators.

However, this cost is not fixed and may change depending on various factors, such as the price of SOL (the native token of Solana), the number of transactions on the network, the hardware requirements, and the competition among validators.

Yakovenko also noted that Solana is constantly working to optimize its protocol and reduce the costs for validators, while maintaining its high performance and security standards.

Being a validator on Solana has several benefits, such as:

Contributing to the security and decentralization of the network. Earning rewards and fees for validating transactions and producing blocks.

Participating in the governance of the network by voting on proposals and upgrades. Supporting the development of innovative applications and projects on Solana.

However, being a validator on Solana also comes with some challenges.

Having to invest in hardware and infrastructure to run a reliable node. Having to keep up with the high performance and scalability requirements of the network.

Having to compete with other validators and clusters for block production opportunities. Having to deal with technical issues and network disruptions that may affect the node’s operation.

The future plans for Solana include:

Improving the network’s performance, security, and usability. Launching new features and upgrades, such as dynamic fees, smart contracts, cross-chain interoperability, and more.

Expanding the ecosystem of applications and projects built on Solana, such as decentralized exchanges, gaming platforms, NFT marketplaces, and more. Growing the community of users, developers, validators, and partners that support Solana.

Solana is a blockchain platform that aims to offer a fast, scalable, and secure solution for decentralized applications. By becoming a validator on Solana, one can contribute to the network’s growth and innovation, while earning rewards and fees for their service.

However, being a validator also requires a high level of commitment, investment, and technical expertise. Therefore, one should carefully weigh the benefits and challenges of being a validator on Solana before deciding to join the network.

In a recent release of e-payment data by the Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System (NIBSS), Nigeria has witnessed a significant surge in active bank accounts, reaching a staggering 151 million in 2022, reflecting a 13% increase from the previous year’s record of 133.5 million.

The latest figures unveiled by the NIBSS delineate that individual accounts constitute a significant majority, comprising 96.6% of the total active accounts, totaling 146 million, with the remainder being corporate accounts.

The report further reveals a notable upsurge in both current and savings accounts. Current accounts witnessed a robust growth of 14%, escalating to 56.9 million in 2022 from 49.8 million in 2021. Similarly, savings accounts displayed a substantial rise of 16%, surging to 139.2 million in 2022 from 120.4 million the preceding year.

However, amidst the buoyancy in active accounts, a concerning trend of inactive bank accounts has emerged. As of December 2022, the number of inactive bank accounts reached 72.8 million, marking a significant increase from the 57.9 million recorded at the end of 2021. This signifies a 26% surge or an additional 14.9 million inactive accounts within the year.

Industry analysts attribute this surge in inactive accounts to multifarious economic factors plaguing the country. These include soaring prices of goods and services, stagnant incomes juxtaposed with dwindling purchasing power, escalating unemployment rates, and emigration, among other challenges.

While the surge in active bank accounts ostensibly indicates progress toward financial inclusion and banking penetration, the burgeoning number of inactive accounts poses significant economic concerns. Inactive accounts, defined as those with no transactions for over 12 months, not only impede the efficiency of the banking sector but also signal underlying economic challenges.

The proliferation of inactive accounts underscores the stark reality of economic disenfranchisement faced by a substantial segment of the population. Despite the nominal increase in the number of account holders, the broader narrative of economic growth remains elusive, as reflected by persistent unemployment, income disparities, and inflationary pressures.

Moreover, the conversion of inactive accounts into dormant status by banks marks the need for prudent risk management practices. Banks are compelled to mitigate potential fraud risks associated with dormant accounts, thereby diverting resources away from productive investment avenues.

While the surge in active bank accounts signifies strides toward financial inclusion, the persistence of a large number of inactive accounts underlines the imperative for holistic economic reforms.

Nigeria’s headline inflation has peaked at 29%, with food inflation rising above 33% in some states.

Experts have urged the government to address underlying economic challenges such as unemployment, inflation, and income inequality which are paramount to fostering sustainable economic growth and realizing the true potential of Nigeria’s banking sector.