I’m confident that most subscribers admire your courage in publishing the uncomplimentary letter extoling the benefits of Bitcoin. Ten years ago, an early teenage, nerd neighbour, who was a Bitcoin investor gave me and some other local adults an introduction with the promise that Bitcoin was the money of the future. At that time, one calculated the number of Bitcoins required to buy a cup of coffee. Its usefulness seemed apparent. My partner was keen. My reticence won-out because I could see how easy it was to buy but I was not confident that I could get my money back.
Today, Bitcoin is obviously not money nor a substitute for money and will never become one. See attached article. How long it will continue to be an investible asset is also an open question. Your critic may be disappointed. Bitcoin may be a store of value; and its liquidity has improved but there will be similar and more convenient options. Unlike art it has no attraction other than its relatively unattractive store of value. It is purely a speculative venture dependent upon an increasing number of bigger fools while at the same time there is a diminishing number of potential buyers. One could never say the same about gold.
You politely ignored the correspondent’s criticism of your technical analysis that remains the principal reason for my subscription. Do you believe that T.A. has predictive characteristics?
Thank you for the associated article and your kind words. The best way to think about bitcoin or the other cryptocurrencies is as venture capital. Whatever portion of your portfolio you would normally devote to “make or break” opportunities, where you are willing to lose everything that is what you should think about investing in cryptocurrencies. That also fits the technical definition of gambling. The idiosyncrasy of the sector is that they are open to retail investors. Most venture deals, in the technology sector for example, are only available to much wealthier individuals.Click HERE to subscribe to Fuller Treacy Money Back to top