[2018-08-15] Is Bitcoin A “Cult”? A Former Paypal CEO Seems To Think So

[hv_]

Gold bugs are the oldest cult on the planet. Bitcoin could become next, but just depends how open and inclusive it is to any mostly controversial oriented newbies and industries.

[1714833246]

1714833246

[jjacob]

It makes sense for PayPal to be threatened by Bitcoin because it has the potential to kill their business, and when people are threatened they'll lash out.

PayPal pretty much started with the Bitcoin ideology of low regulated accounts, but it could be hammered into becoming an establishment player. Decentralisation takes away the power of the government to do that. I would take the cult status comment as a compliment.

[Aikidoka]

So, if someone likes Cristiano Ronaldo and he believes that Juventus will win the Champions Leagues this year because Cristiano Ronaldo is there, would it be considered as a cult? Like really? Then explain why the USD is not a cult. I just do not get it. Why you just do not leave bitcoin alone. These people keep on spreading negative and false things about bitcoin as if they are to cease to exist if bitcoin is still alive. And they are driving people to their madness. I really hope they stop this already.

[Thekool1s]

It makes sense for PayPal to be threatened by Bitcoin because it has the potential to kill their business,

Please allow me to correct you there. Bitcoin is already killing them. I have been Paypal-free for the last 2 years. I have never felt the need to use my PayPal. I have bought domains/hostings with BTCs. Have bought advertisements on facebook via my BTC Visa card. Done Online shopping and was never forced to use my Paypal. I usually get triggered by statements like these which imply that "BTC only has the potential". BTC is already killing many businesses. I used to use Payza back in the day, Now I don't even remember the Email I used to register there. I don't care if you call me a member of a cult or a devil worshipper but I would gladly pay a 5% fee to a Raj in India to mine my transaction over a 2.5% fee to a "Rich" corporation to process my payment. As I believe Bitcoin is and will be a tool for redistributing wealth from these "Elites" to the masses.

[BitHodler]

Please allow me to correct you there. Bitcoin is already is killing them.

I think I have to correct you here. PayPal's volumes have only increased throughout the last couple of years, and that to me doesn't seem like they are losing their dominant position as financial institution.

See for yourself how PayPal's volumes have been growing.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/277841/paypals-total-payment-volume/

Despite all the complaints from people that PayPal is allowing scammers to charge back on innocent people and merchants, and that the fees are too high (which they are), it's still one of the more popular services.

I actually expected a decline a year or two ago, but they keep growing and growing, which for them as business is a healthy way to move forward. The question is how long will they be able to keep it up.

[Thekool1s]

I think I have to correct you here.

No, let me correct you here again This "growth" is nothing compared to "growth" bitcoin has seen. Compare the amount of volume transacted on the bitcoin network to Paypal's you will have your answer of who did the "real growth" here . Do Keep in mind The economies are growing, Paypal's revenue is expected to rise but notice how the "Growth" has slowed down?

[BitHodler]

This "growth" is nothing compared to "growth" bitcoin has seen. 

Not a good argument. Bitcoin's astronomical growth comes from the fact that it has grown from nothing to something. PayPal is an already established business and for that reason can't book similar growth rates.

Compare the amount of volume transacted on the bitcoin network to Paypal's you will have your answer of who did the "real growth" here .

Again not a good argument. Bitcoin's net dollar transaction volume is largely coming from its speculative nature, while PayPal's volumes are nearly for 100% economical transactions used to either buy or sell goods or services.

Bitcoin is already killing them.

I still haven't seen you explain how Bitcoin is already killing them.

[Samarkand]

...
I actually expected a decline a year or two ago, but they keep growing and growing, which for them as business is a healthy way to move forward. The question is how long will they be able to keep it up.

I guess that Paypal is simply capitalizing on the increase in online shopping in general.
More and more people order stuff online instead of buying in Brick and mortar stores
and Paypal is often one of the most convenient payment options.

Besides, most end users are not even aware how big the Paypal fees actually are, because
the merchant has to pay the fee. Obviously in the end the consumers pay the fee indirectly.

I´d bet that a huge percentage of the Paypal users even believe that the Paypal service
is completely free.

[squatter]

...
I actually expected a decline a year or two ago, but they keep growing and growing, which for them as business is a healthy way to move forward. The question is how long will they be able to keep it up.

I guess that Paypal is simply capitalizing on the increase in online shopping in general.
More and more people order stuff online instead of buying in Brick and mortar stores
and Paypal is often one of the most convenient payment options.

Indeed. I also think it's partly because consumers are becoming more aware of fraud risk. By linking their credit cards to Paypal, they can avoid exposing their credit card numbers to online retailers. In fact, I've had a couple card issuers recommend doing just that.

Also, I think they've expanded their credit issuing business -- which is probably significant in a time when consumer spending is up. I see more and more merchants offering Paypal Credit (previously Bill Me Later), and they drastically increased my limits over the past year or two even though I hardly use them.

[Thekool1s]

Not a good argument. Bitcoin's astronomical growth comes from the fact that it has grown from nothing to something. PayPal is an already established business and for that reason can't book similar growth rates.

Paypal was founded in 1998, So what stopped it to gain the "astronomical growth" bitcoin has experienced? wasn't Paypal a revolution back then? 

Again not a good argument. Bitcoin's net dollar transaction volume is largely coming from its speculative nature, while PayPal's volumes are nearly for 100% economical transactions used to either buy or sell goods or services.

Not bitcoin's fault. One could argue What stopped these "speculators" from investing in this "revolutionary" product?

[veleten]

there is nothing wrong with worshipping crypto
if there is a pastafarian church ,why can't there be a bitcoin church?
oh wait there is one already,haha  https://churchofbitcoin.org/
or even more than one: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_Church

[AXELNetwork]

It makes sense for PayPal to be threatened by Bitcoin because it has the potential to kill their business, and when people are threatened they'll lash out.

PayPal pretty much started with the Bitcoin ideology of low regulated accounts, but it could be hammered into becoming an establishment player. Decentralisation takes away the power of the government to do that. I would take the cult status comment as a compliment.

Yes anytime something is centralized we can expect it to follow the same path as PayPal, of eventually becoming like the rest of the establishment. But he clearly meant the cult status comment as a dig on the people who believe in Bitcoin, he's just trying to deter usage of Bitcoin by saying that Bitcoin users are crazy.

[1BTC EQUALS 1CAR]

If they treat us a cult then what do they call to these who defends fiat and gold so much from it? Bitcoin is not a cult but a technology that is so powerful that financial intitutions are scared to be removed because of the new system.

[figmentofmyass]

If they treat us a cult then what do they call to these who defends fiat and gold so much from it?

for better or worse, gold bugs are seen as a crazy cult too. here's one example: https://www.etf.com/sections/index-investor-corner/swedroe-12-gold-bug-commandments?nopaging=1

Recently, I wrote about the predictions of one market “guru,” Peter Schiff, who might be described as a leader of the cult of gold bugs.

gold bugs are often painted as fringe dwelling lunatics, probably because they've been preaching about the collapse of fiat money long before bitcoiners came along. as with bitcoiners, fiat money proponents are incentivized to marginalize them.

[BitHodler]

I´d bet that a huge percentage of the Paypal users even believe that the Paypal service
is completely free.

It's a psychological matter in the end. If people keep buying stuff without realizing that fees in most cases are priced in, they will not bother to care about anything else. It's with everything requiring use of central parties.

When I use my NFC enabled debit card to near instantly pay for stuff, the fees are on the store's end but are again calculated in the items I'm buying. In other words, I'm still paying for the fees.

I did some research about the payment gateway local brick and mortar stores use, and there is a 2% fee for every debit card transaction. If people use the Visa or MasterCard option it could go up to even 4% which is insane.

Based on that I assume that every item is 4% overpriced just to cover the fees. If I use a payment option only costing stores 2% in fees it means they are gaining on me.

[squatter]

I´d bet that a huge percentage of the Paypal users even believe that the Paypal service
is completely free.

It's a psychological matter in the end. If people keep buying stuff without realizing that fees in most cases are priced in, they will not bother to care about anything else. It's with everything requiring use of central parties.

When I use my NFC enabled debit card to near instantly pay for stuff, the fees are on the store's end but are again calculated in the items I'm buying. In other words, I'm still paying for the fees.

I did some research about the payment gateway local brick and mortar stores use, and there is a 2% fee for every debit card transaction. If people use the Visa or MasterCard option it could go up to even 4% which is insane.

Based on that I assume that every item is 4% overpriced just to cover the fees. If I use a payment option only costing stores 2% in fees it means they are gaining on me.

The problem is we, as consumers, are incentivized not to care. I know that credit card usage drives prices up, but those costs are socialized and therefore outside of my control. It's not in my interest to save merchants money, and the fact that other people use debit/credit cards already raises my prices. It's not like we get to pay a lower price with cash.

In fact, I can get 1.5-5% cash back by using my credit cards. So, the cycle continues....

It reminds me of all these "no-fee" crypto trading apps coming out like Robinhood, etc. There are definitely fees -- they're just taken from the order book spread (giving you a worse price) instead of being itemized as a trading commission.

[Samarkand]

...
If people use the Visa or MasterCard option it could go up to even 4% which is insane.
...

The market power of Visa and MasterCard is simply too big. More and more people
are using credit cards and therefore you are basically forced to accept their credit cards
as a merchant even if you think their fees are usurious. In my country 4 out of the big 5
supermarket chains have been accepting Visa and MasterCard payments for years while
one chain refused to accept credit cards at all.

Even this chain was recently forced to change their policy and nowadays they also
accept Visa and MasterCard. And obviously this raises the price for the products, because
it is definitely not the merchant, who is getting hit by the fees in the end.

[Harlot]

You won't really expect good comments/opinions coming out from the mouths of the knows competitors of cryptpcurrencies. It is like expecting a Democrat politician praising a Republican counterpart or vice versa, it would simply be bad for his image even though he is not the CEO anymore. To take it simply his words mean nothing to us because we know it is a biased comment coming from a former CEO of a payment solution, even if you try to understand it for people who has even a little knowledge about BTC they will know he knows little about it.