[2017-10-25] NYU's dean says he'll be 'OK' with the price of bitcoin. But

[bbc.reporter]

I reckon Aswath Damodaran's analysis on bitcoin is fair, unlike the other comments from Jaime Dimon and the Saudi prince. At least Aswath did his research and due diligence.

I am also ok with his analysis in classifying bitcoin as a collectible, as long as it is a collectible we can use to buy, sell and trade like a currency.



"I think the better path for bitcoin is to actually make it a digital currency, a currency that you and I can take on our travels and use actually to buy stuff and sell stuff. If that happens, then I'm OK with the pricing," said Aswath Damodaran, a professor of corporate finance and valuation at New York University's Stern School of Business.

"If that doesn't happen, I don't see how bitcoin can have the staying power of gold. It could be just another fad. Another digital currency could replace it," he said.

In giving bitcoin a chance, Damodaran said he disagrees with JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, who called the digital currency a "fraud" in September.

Separately, in a blog post on Tuesday, Damodaran laid out why he sees bitcoin as a currency without investable value.

Damodaran said he sees three possible paths for bitcoin as a currency. Listed from best to worst, they are:

Global digital currency
Gold for millennials
The 21st century tulip bulb.

Read the article https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/24/nyus-dean-of-valuation-says-bitcoin-is-a-currency.html

Read Damodaran's blog post about bitcoin https://aswathdamodaran.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-bitcoin-boom-asset-currency.html

[1714644276]

1714644276

[1714644276]

1714644276

[1714644276]

1714644276

[cr1776]

Does anyone really care if he is “ok with the pricing”?  It is like saying, I’m okay with 2+2 equaling 4.  It is what it is due to the judgements of millions of people.

[iamTom123]

Does anyone really care if he is “ok with the pricing”?  It is like saying, I’m okay with 2+2 equaling 4.  It is what it is due to the judgements of millions of people.

What makes Bitcoin a great success right now is not because it is being accepted and used by famous people in different industries and the banking sector but because it is acceptable by a considerable number of people. Bitcoin was never put up to get the approval of people in the pedestal but by the common people everywhere. In fact, it is the interference of these high-flying people that can be causing some problems and humps with Bitcoin. I am not saying these people could never be partners but they are not the intended beneficiaries of Bitcoin as they already have the power they can use anytime. Bitcoin has an ideal of returning back the banking power to all people and not concentrate it on the few who can decide anytime to pull through the rugs where we are standing on.

[Carlton Banks]

Does anyone really care if he is “ok with the pricing”?  It is like saying, I’m okay with 2+2 equaling 4.  It is what it is due to the judgements of millions of people.

But check out his job title though:

professor of corporate finance and valuation

This guy, and by extension NYU, actually believes that using language like "I'm [professionally] ok with this price", or "this price is technically incorrect" is in any way categorically capitalism.


It isn't. I'm ok with people like Damodaran making such pronouncements (), but let's call it what it is: technocratic central planning, or pricing by decree. Which is not capitalism, where capital allocated by it's owners is used to make price determination (it's so simple ffs), however "wrong" that price is.

The capitalist way of viewing this might be described as being only subtly different: one could say that they believe Bitcoin to be overvalued at price x or price y. Subtle or not, the language we use has an important effect on the filters through which we interpret the world around us.

[Xavofat]

It is what it is due to the judgements of millions of people.

The judgement of the majority is not always reasonable.  What he is saying is whether he thinks that the current pricing is reasonable.

I think the better path for bitcoin is to actually make it a digital currency, a currency that you and I can take on our travels and use actually to buy stuff and sell stuff.

Fair enough.  BTC is very effective at preventing currency exchange fees and poor exchange rates which a lot of systems will give you when you're travelling abroad.  This makes it pretty effective as part of the movement to globalisation.

In giving bitcoin a chance, Damodaran said he disagrees with JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, who called the digital currency a "fraud" in September.

The reporter here is attempting to be neutral, but there's no reason to be neutral because Jamie Dimon's statement is objectively false.  Damodaran is just stating fact (that BTC is not a fraud) and then his opinion (that it is in a bubble unless it can be effective as a global digital currency or modern gold).

[darkangel11]

It is what it is due to the judgements of millions of people.

The judgement of the majority is not always reasonable.  What he is saying is whether he thinks that the current pricing is reasonable.

Yet, democracy is based upon it.

If people are willing to put their money up then we have to accept it. To me the value of diamonds is unreasonable. It's a white gem, not much different in looks from a cubic zirconia or other white gemstones. Other natural gems like sapphires look better and were known and traded for centuries yet they don't reach the value of diamonds.
Analogically BTC could overtake gold as the new store of value and reserve currency.

[ImHash]

It is what it is due to the judgements of millions of people.

The judgement of the majority is not always reasonable.  What he is saying is whether he thinks that the current pricing is reasonable.

Yet, democracy is based upon it.

If people are willing to put their money up then we have to accept it. To me the value of diamonds is unreasonable. It's a white gem, not much different in looks from a cubic zirconia or other white gemstones. Other natural gems like sapphires look better and were known and traded for centuries yet they don't reach the value of diamonds.
Analogically BTC could overtake gold as the new store of value and reserve currency.

I'm OK with this pricing as well professors Demand is the pricing not money, bitcoin has no limit for it's price, You professors need to learn more about a decentralized currency before going live on television Diamonds are not expensive for their look, They are rare and made of the strongest elements.

[Xavofat]

The judgement of the majority is not always reasonable.  What he is saying is whether he thinks that the current pricing is reasonable.

Yet, democracy is based upon it.

No.  Democracy is based on the notion that the judgement of the majority is reasonable the majority of the time, not that it's always right.  In fact, one could argue that it's not even based on that notion, rather just the notion that changing governments on a regular basis and having checks and balances on a government helps to prevent a dictatorship from forming.

If people are willing to put their money up then we have to accept it.

So in a democracy, does someone with 1000 times more money than another person have 1000 times more votes?  No, because BTC isn't a democracy and we don't know how many people agree with what price.

Why bother speculating about consensus when you can just make actual arguments?  It's that sort of argumentum ad populum that takes over every YouTube comment section and renders huge swathes of the Internet worthless.

To me the value of diamonds is unreasonable.

Well according to you, it's unreasonable for you to say that.  After all, people put up their money, so you have to trust them right?