"Bitcoin was World's Best Currency in 2013"
Did anyone see such a headline in the mainstream press?
Topic: Bloomberg: Bitcoin was World's Worst Currency in 2014 (Read 1838 times)
Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.
Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.
Pretty sure that when you're looking at an asset that is losing value, there is no such thing as a too-short time period with which to examine performance. If your investment in any asset rises 1000% in a year (as btc did in 2013) and then loses 67% the following year (as btc did in 2014), you may still be up on your initial investment, but it doesn't change the fact that your asset lost 2/3 of it's value in a year, and the opportunity cost of continuing to hold it has bitten you in the ass. The point of the article is to make a conclusion that is very much warranted: btc had a terrible 2014. This doesn't have any implication for the past before that or the future after it. But as a post-script, the weakness is continuing into 2015 so far as money continues to flee btc, shrinking the market cap even as more coins are created, resulting in a falling price. I'm not drawing a conclusion as to how it will turn out, but it definitely seems at the moment the shine is coming off bitcoin and people are realizing it's not going to be the end of fiat they once believed.
Now they are calling it a currency 
As an investment it certainly had a poor 2014, no denying that. But the potential is huge and even all those who bought at the top will be making profits. In the meantime, more opportunities for us to get cheap BTCs.
As an investment it certainly had a poor 2014, no denying that. But the potential is huge and even all those who bought at the top will be making profits. In the meantime, more opportunities for us to get cheap BTCs.
Bloomberg?? Who are they anyways? Just a mob of wankers.
Bitcoin is doing just fine. It may not see 1000$ price tag ever again but it is not important at all.
Bitcoin is doing just fine. It may not see 1000$ price tag ever again but it is not important at all.
Let's be positive! It's quite an achievement that Bloomberg finally sees BTC as a currency.
Yes. But they are wrong Bit coin cant be compared with those currencies. You have many alts that fit more in that currency category.
Let's be positive! It's quite an achievement that Bloomberg finally sees BTC as a currency.
Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.
Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.
well they are right about bitcoin performing bad, but using peak vlaue is not fair, that just a peak it doesn't count, they should focus on the price that the majority said it was going to be unbreakable, like 600-800 range
I don't think they intended to use peak value just to slam bitcoin. They were using a calendar year, and bitcoin just happened to be around its all-time high at the beginning of the year.
Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.
Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.
Ah, I see. 2013 was an amazing year for bitcoin, but the scope of the article was only 2014, and it is stating a fact that no other currency performed worse in 2014. Russia, Ukraine, and Bitcoin were the three worst performing currencies on the year, and of the three, bitcoin lost the most value.
well they are right about bitcoin performing bad, but using peak vlaue is not fair, that just a peak it doesn't count, they should focus on the price that the majority said it was going to be unbreakable, like 600-800 range
Day traders think that way. Hodlers think 5 figures or more. 
Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.
Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.
Right? I can't wait to see what they all have to write about Bitcoin in 2015...would be nice to see some good publicity
well they are right about bitcoin performing bad, but using peak vlaue is not fair, that just a peak it doesn't count, they should focus on the price that the majority said it was going to be unbreakable, like 600-800 range
Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.
Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.
Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.
Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.
Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.
Worst performing currency of 2014 I can well believe.
Their conclusion is unfortunately not 100% untrue but some entrepreneurs will soon enough make bitcoin mainstream, that I am pretty sure of.
Their conclusion is unfortunately not 100% untrue but some entrepreneurs will soon enough make bitcoin mainstream, that I am pretty sure of.
It definitely seems to have lost some steam especially since the last dump from 600 to 300 ish - what worries me as it tried to climb back up which it normally does but this time got to 400 and then feel flat.
i think it is already discussed here
did you know that 2013 when bitcoin was at peak they said that bitcoin is not a currency and now they are calling it a currency
did you know that 2013 when bitcoin was at peak they said that bitcoin is not a currency and now they are calling it a currency
Newspaper writers want big headlines. They want something so they can talk about it and fill pages with it and attract readers. So the Bitcoin boom was attractive for them, now they are critisizing it because it will bring attention too. When Bitcoin goes up next year they will not say anything until it breaks ATH again.
Everyone knows the bitcoin 'bubble' has deflated quite a bit in the past 12 months as the mania is subsiding, so it's not surprising it was the "worst" currency in 2014. Still, Bloomberg's take on bitcoin is pretty brutal. http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-23/and-2014s-worst-currency-wasbitcoin
Bitcoin has underperformed this year, but it's still trying to find its footing. I believe adopters will still be rewarded in the future.
Quote
And this bit is not only unsubstantiated, but not even an attempt at a justification is offered:
Most of Bitcoin's supporters, meanwhile, seem to be hackers whose resources depend upon the Ponzi-scheme nature of the enterprise itself.
Most of Bitcoin's supporters, meanwhile, seem to be hackers whose resources depend upon the Ponzi-scheme nature of the enterprise itself.
Or maybe we can see the potential of the currency and how it can redefine what we know money to be? i think it is already discussed here
did you know that 2013 when bitcoin was at peak they said that bitcoin is not a currency and now they are calling it a currency
did you know that 2013 when bitcoin was at peak they said that bitcoin is not a currency and now they are calling it a currency
If it was already discussed here, I missed it.
Whether or not it's a "currency" depends entirely on the angle the writer is taking. It seems wild success like btc experienced in 2013 was proof it couldn't be a currency, it was just a speculative bubble. But once it is doing poorly for a stretch, people jump to announce what a terrible "currency" it is.
To Bloomberg's defense though, I think they have generally considered it a currency since about the time they started tracking it and offering quotes on their service at their currency desk. That happened earlier this year.
Jump to: