The rise of stablecoin neobanks is happening rapidly, with new players entering the market almost daily. The author questions whether this trend represents a genuine shift in the banking industry or if it will lead to failure, similar to past financial experiments. Traditional banks, despite their flaws—high fees, low interest rates, and poor customer service—offer reliability that many consumers prioritize. People want to trust their banks with their money, favoring security over potential perks or higher returns. In contrast, stablecoin neobanks often overlook reliability in favor of attractive features. They rely on third-party providers for essential services like virtual accounts and card issuance. If one of these providers fails—due to technical issues or regulatory changes—the neobank risks significant disruption, leading to lost user trust. The article illustrates this with hypotheticals, showing how dependencies on a few centralized providers can create systemic vulnerabilities. The author argues that the current landscape of stablecoin neobanks is inadequate. The focus should shift to building robust infrastructure that ensures reliability above all else. Instead of a multitude of unstable neobanks, the industry needs a single, dependable platform that guarantees continuous service and user trust. Until the infrastructure improves, the promise of stablecoins remains unfulfilled, and traditional banks will continue to dominate the market.