Maybe, but I don't think directly as in they orchestrated a collapse. Wall Street have probably extract most of all the lower risk capital available in the crypto-markets and the bailed once things got to heated. Sort of like the gold market, leaving individuals and smaller investors with the toxic investments and all the high risk stuff.

What crypto would have need, was for the larger institutions to have stayed long term, but that's not how "Wall Street" works. It's no different from dropping shares in a company once the risk gets to high. The future for crypto, if one exists, is beyond the horizon for Wall Street in terms of a payout. Their lack of support may very well have contributed to the collapse, but I don't think they've actively made plans to destroy crypto-currencies.

Crypto mostly collapsed because it failed to be useful. The MasterCard deal was the most useful part and only because it could convert funny money to real money, and very few people used that. MasterCard is likely begin generous when they say "less than 1% of customers". There's no way that close to 1% of MasterCards customers had a crypto-backed card.

I think the opposite is true - they were very much behind the rise of crypto, and now they're just divesting and it's naturally collapsing back to a niche technology.

they are agnostic. they make money from fees either way, up or down.

> elite

Are you implying that basic understanding of finance and economics makes you a part of some 'elite' these days?

nah. it never took off. i'll believe crypto is a viable currency when people are using it to pay for haircuts, oil changes, and $25 worth of groceries.

as it stands it's just a vehicle for finance-tech-bro speculation.