Personally, I wouldn't take seriously anything that comes out of Nouriel Roubini's mouth. He's just riding on the popularity of bitcoin and playing the role of antagonist just to increase his fame and popularity. However, if you take a closer look, his arguments are always non-sense and only serve to prove how ignorant he is about the actual workings behind crypto and blockchain.
Thats just my opinion tho, also bitcoin is a great store of value.
Topic: Bitcoin: "Maybe Is a Partial Store of Value" - page 2. (Read 673 times)
If gold loses 85% of its value in 12 months, then it will be no longer considered as a store of value.
I'm not sure if you have followed gold's performance throughout the last years, but it had a terrible crash from $1.9k back to $1k, where today the price of gold is hovering around the $1.5k mark.If you put the gold and Bitcoin charts side by side, you'll see how similar the price activity actually is.... the important difference is that cycles within Bitcoin play out much faster than they do within the gold market.
I don't know when gold will take out its $1.9k high.... its recent price surge was due to economical turmoil, which means that when the situation calms down again, gold will be sold off hard.
Bitcoin existed as a store of value, and further when it gained more and more value it got used as a transition medium. From my understanding it is completely a store of value. Quoting the scalability, and lack of mainstream usage it was mentioned as partial store of value. Everything won't get such a level of growth, it takes time. On such a thought process I believe in future everyone will realize it a complete store of value.
Considering bitcoin as a tool for transition of will not be even possible since bitcoin is very unstable and when huge population adopt to it as their main cryptocurrency, economy will collapse as market prices of goods, services and every transaction will not have a consistent basis, not everone will know how much each transaction will be without comparing the value to fiats.
"a partial store of value"? I think it is neither entirely true nor completely false.
because it depends on each person's thoughts. like me, I just see bitcoin as a trading tool and it's not something valuable for me to hold it.
And for long-term investors who believe in the future of bitcoin, they will buy it and store it in a cold wallet and see it as an intangible asset.
because it depends on each person's thoughts. like me, I just see bitcoin as a trading tool and it's not something valuable for me to hold it.
And for long-term investors who believe in the future of bitcoin, they will buy it and store it in a cold wallet and see it as an intangible asset.
Well... Bitcoin exchange rates went down by 85% in 2008. This does not happen to assets which we consider as usage as "store of value", such as gold and platinum. If gold loses 85% of its value in 12 months, then it will be no longer considered as a store of value. Because when an asset is classified as store of value, it means that the holder can exchange it for fiat currency at any point of time, without incurring a significant loss. Bitcoin is a very good asset for speculative investment. But IMO it can't be used as a store of value.
This is a little bit funny. While admitting that Bitcoin can be a store of value -- at least partially -- Mr Roubini remains adamant on his old position against Bitcoin, in other words nothing has changed despite his admission which can just be influenced by people he was with in that conference. Well, as they are saying, there will always be two sides to the coin and in any human innovations there will be people whose role is to warn of possible impeding doom if we continue the change we are into. I have a great respect for this man because he is actually making some sense in many areas and I think we should also give space for people like him as their inputs can still be useful. However, don't get me wrong, it does not mean we have to follow what he is saying.
I feel like this is when someone finally realised they are incorrect, but they are still trying to stick to their old opinion and not sound weak.He clearly understands the currency a lot more, and I'd argue that he knows bitcoin is a store of value, but the problem is, he'd rather not make a public 180 turn on his previous turn, there is no term for a "partial store of value".
depends on the users . if he mainly use his btc for investing then he can honestly say that btc is a store of value ( 100% or full ) but for those who only use btc for both use ex. for 50 % for investing and 50% for paying and buying then he can also say that btc is a partial store of value . actually there are few simillar threads like this but they are comparing gold if what is a better store of value
It's still a store of value then, otherwise, you wouldn't be able to spend a currency that has no value. An item being a payment method doesn't mean it can be a store of value. 
Its really not totally out of place to assume that and if one should look at it holistically, one might want to agree with economist. From the lay point of view money as a store of value means a sort of investment which generate returns to the holder and in this case bitcoin could be and a simple example is what happened just early this week where if someone have invested at the rate of $7500+ but would have gained $1k+ just by holding for some days.
depends on the users . if he mainly use his btc for investing then he can honestly say that btc is a store of value ( 100% or full ) but for those who only use btc for both use ex. for 50 % for investing and 50% for paying and buying then he can also say that btc is a partial store of value . actually there are few simillar threads like this but they are comparing gold if what is a better store of value
Quote
“Maybe Bitcoin is a partial store of value but it’s not a unit of account, it’s not a means of payment, it’s not scalable [...] in spite of its rally earlier this year, it’s lost 60% in value since it’s peak, so I don’t see it going anywhere frankly.”
Sounds like a whole lot of BS to me.
Does he even know what a unit of account is? A unit of account can be anything, it can even be commodities. Are you saying that you can't account for liabilities and assets with BTC? It has nothing to do with even whether or not it can store value - it is a unit of account.
Also, why associate bitcoin's short term movements to something that is the fundamentals of BTC? The two should be separated given how volatile bitcoin can be, yet the fundamentals show that BTC should store its value better than fiats will in the long run.
"a partial store of value"? I think it is neither entirely true nor completely false.
because it depends on each person's thoughts. like me, I just see bitcoin as a trading tool and it's not something valuable for me to hold it.
And for long-term investors who believe in the future of bitcoin, they will buy it and store it in a cold wallet and see it as an intangible asset.
because it depends on each person's thoughts. like me, I just see bitcoin as a trading tool and it's not something valuable for me to hold it.
And for long-term investors who believe in the future of bitcoin, they will buy it and store it in a cold wallet and see it as an intangible asset.
Store value is really not that important when you think of what other things could be done with bitcoin. We are talking about a currency here not gold, gold is not something you can just go to a shop and use, bitcoin is like that.
it can be used as a medium of exchange, but think about it---bitcoin is the first asset with a known, finite supply. it has a level of extreme scarcity the world has never seen before. such a limited supply makes bitcoin ideal for storing (or growing) value. that's what makes bitcoin so attractive. if it were just another digital payment rail, it wouldn't be very interesting.
gresham's law suggests that bitcoin would be hoarded rather than spent given other weaker alternatives like fiat money. so it lends itself first and foremost to being a store of value.
As you say bitcoin has characteristics that makes it very suitable to become a store of value, maybe we are going to see altcoins like litecoin performing that function while bitcoin is stored very much like gold and only whales and powerful institutions hold any significant amount, or maybe bitcoin will become the new gold while the rest of the population keeps using fiat.
His opinion is basically based on the fact that bitcoin has a scalability issue which makes it less competitive with other payment methods.
I am not sure if he knows about Ln and other proposed solutions to fix that issue though.
I am not sure if he knows about Ln and other proposed solutions to fix that issue though.
It's more than a partial store of value.
At the start of 2017 bitcoin was under $1,000, and gold was about $1,200. Bitcoin is now over $8,000 and gold is about $1.500.
So storing your money in bitcoin beat both holding dollars or gold.
Roubini is assuming everyone bought at the top. But most people bought either before the top, or after it had dropped back down again.
At the start of 2017 bitcoin was under $1,000, and gold was about $1,200. Bitcoin is now over $8,000 and gold is about $1.500.
So storing your money in bitcoin beat both holding dollars or gold.
Roubini is assuming everyone bought at the top. But most people bought either before the top, or after it had dropped back down again.
Agree with the first post, it's not like the whole crypto community is against critics even the crypto community usually counter some of accusation with logical and technical explanation regarding the problem pointed. However it seems hearing this person is like veiwing someone trying to figure out something and prove something. it's not like his opinion matter that much anyway regarding this partial store of value. bitcoin was first intended to be a currency and it will always be. the store of value is just a bonus if the value of bitcoin keeps rising steadily although there's bearish and bullish time aswell but overall it has up to thousands percent to initial price.
At first btc was considered as store of value and investment option by all but slowly when it grows and more people start adopting btc it became the medium of exchange and transacting business with its help and it was integral part of its growth and it became partial store of value but it is similar to fiat and other currencies in many ways.
Store value is really not that important when you think of what other things could be done with bitcoin. We are talking about a currency here not gold, gold is not something you can just go to a shop and use, bitcoin is like that. So, we are talking about the ease of transaction of a banknote changing hands (and digitally at that so even a lot easier), the purchasing power saver like a gold, the ease of spending like debit card and it is all in one.
Yes, you can call it a store of value as well which bitcoin does have and I do agree it is a good part of it but saying it is JUST a store of value currency is just not looking at the awesomeness it has created so far in bitcoin world which I can't really handle, people have been underrating bitcoin for years and I am sick of it.
Yes, you can call it a store of value as well which bitcoin does have and I do agree it is a good part of it but saying it is JUST a store of value currency is just not looking at the awesomeness it has created so far in bitcoin world which I can't really handle, people have been underrating bitcoin for years and I am sick of it.
We really need to remain objective towards the opinions of others, the opinions of leaders or figures who are anti-bitcoin are conventional figures in the comfort zone of making transactions or saving money in banks, not millennial parents who are close to technology. We call them antiquity and anti-change ancient people.
The function of bitcoin is indeed expected to be a legal and legal transaction tool in every country, but bitcoin itself to be a currency still does not meet several conditions, which is generally accepted and guarantees from the government.
Maybe now we need to ask, why do you have to use bitcoin if many banks already provide digital money technology? Maybe for those of us who understand the world of blockchain and cryptocurrency, this technology is very safe because there are no registration errors, but for ordinary people, if not recognized before the law in the event of default, then the injured party will not be able to get legal protection. They don't underestimate the logic of advantages and disadvantages.
Just admitting that Bitcoin is a "partial" store of value alone directly contradicts on the other things he have saved about Bitcoin. If it is somehow a store of value then it could also be a means of payment as well as a unit of account as this is what the functions of a currency is and Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are showing it not only by definition but also the users involve in the industry. He might still be denying the facts of its existence but the evidence is just right in front of us from companies adapting and accepting cryptocurrencies to companies like Facebook creating their own crypto this should prove that Bitcoin started the age of digital cryptocurrencies not only as a means of payment but a store of value.
Store value is really not that important when you think of what other things could be done with bitcoin. We are talking about a currency here not gold, gold is not something you can just go to a shop and use, bitcoin is like that.
it can be used as a medium of exchange, but think about it---bitcoin is the first asset with a known, finite supply. it has a level of extreme scarcity the world has never seen before. such a limited supply makes bitcoin ideal for storing (or growing) value. that's what makes bitcoin so attractive. if it were just another digital payment rail, it wouldn't be very interesting.
gresham's law suggests that bitcoin would be hoarded rather than spent given other weaker alternatives like fiat money. so it lends itself first and foremost to being a store of value.
He also told Tone Vays he is holding and supporting shitcoin. I listened this video yesterday. Let me find it for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WORkYsg2I4
Store value is really not that important when you think of what other things could be done with bitcoin. We are talking about a currency here not gold, gold is not something you can just go to a shop and use, bitcoin is like that. So, we are talking about the ease of transaction of a banknote changing hands (and digitally at that so even a lot easier), the purchasing power saver like a gold, the ease of spending like debit card and it is all in one.
Yes, you can call it a store of value as well which bitcoin does have and I do agree it is a good part of it but saying it is JUST a store of value currency is just not looking at the awesomeness it has created so far in bitcoin world which I can't really handle, people have been underrating bitcoin for years and I am sick of it.
Yes, you can call it a store of value as well which bitcoin does have and I do agree it is a good part of it but saying it is JUST a store of value currency is just not looking at the awesomeness it has created so far in bitcoin world which I can't really handle, people have been underrating bitcoin for years and I am sick of it.
Not least of which is the price volatility.
This is going to take some years to solve. The rate of adoption, and by that I mean the usage of Bitcoin as money needs to increase so lots of people are using it, need to increase. If more and more people only buy Bitcoin just to store it in their backyard, I doubt it will bring any benefit at all. What makes gold so precious is not because it's rare, but because it's useful.
Bitcoin could be better than that, but we need time to solve this volatility thing.
Jump to: