If they are able to beat the interbank rate it means they are either buying the currency from someone below market value (in which case that person is being shafted) or taking on Forex risk themselves.

From the article:

> Strike maintains a live Forex rate and compares that to its own rate before every transaction. However, in our testing, a Strike international transfer has never been done at an unfavorable exchange rate when compared to Forex rates. Shockingly (or maybe not) it was even cheaper sometimes, exposing the flaws and lag in Forex rates and how they are used. Bitcoin, as the most liquid, globally transferable asset is already acting as the new world reserve currency with Strike.

A Forex trade is still taking place so there must be a counterparty. The USD don't just disappear and reappear as EUR. Someone is buying them on the other side. Getting a better rate implies the counterparty getting a worse rate.

I'm not sure I understand your criticism. The USD is used to buy BTC. The BTC is then sold for EUR. There's no Forex trade, not directly at least.

If x EUR is worth y USD, any discount results in someone losing money or taking on Forex risk through some derivative product. It doesn't matter which settlement layer is used.

Sadly still not available, do you know of any fully functional alternatives? Even if more expensive. Just surprised no one has done a Transferwise / traditional bank alternative yet considering it is one of the main publicized advantages of Bitcoin.

Strike is promising a lot (which is exciting!) but don't have a fully functional product yet.

I'm not aware of any alternative. Hopefully the global launch is not too far away.