Bitcoin: "Maybe Is a Partial Store of Value"

[lobat999]

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.

So is it really partial or full?

What else he can do, despite the volatility of bitcoin it should be clear now that bitcoin is not going to disappear and when we add that in the countries in which the fiat currency has crashed bitcoin has been used by a small minority to save their wealth, then it is obvious that bitcoin is a store of value.

I have no problems admitting that the volatility of bitcoin does not make it a very effective store of value compared to gold but it can still perform that function in the case of an emergency.

A store of value is the function of an asset that can be saved, retrieved and exchanged at a later time, and be predictably useful when retrieved. More generally, a store of value is anything that retains purchasing power into the future.

As per above definition from Wikipedia, I believe Bitcoin satisfies those requirements thus making it an absolute store of value and not "partial" as what he stated.

I guess we will see this assertion more clearly defined once Bitcoin reached its max supply which by that time, its worth would have surpassed Gold and other precious metals value!

[1715029541]

1715029541

[1715029541]

1715029541

[1715029541]

1715029541

[Murat]

Mr. Roubini doesn't make any wrong assumption or statement regarding Bitcoin or cryptocurrency because every currency has a store of value, otherwise, you can't save or hold for the future, but it remains a doubt why he stated the as a partial store of value, I don't have any interest in this issue I know Bitcoin is fully currency and a payment system I don't care what people say, but it also true that in the society, people have a misconception regarding the Bitcoin and cryptocurrency, so people always pay to heed the statement what recognized people states so everybody should learn about first and then remark anything.

[mu_enrico]

So, if we take a period of time when Bitcoin increased in value by 100%, can we say with this logic that Bitcoin is a double store of value? That it "stores" even more value than you put in it?
Either this wasn't what Roubini meant, or he'd just not arguing in good faith and simply picks the observations that suit his narrative.

Why do you ask me about this? Ask NR.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8izCNm6S63M (at 21:00 he addressed this question).

I'm not saying that I agree with NR about this "partial store of value" thing. Like I said, IMO, Bitcoin will always be "worthless" in the eye of traditional economics guru (or skeptics). It's like preaching the bible to skeptics/atheists. We need to show them the proof, e.g., healthy/efficient market, low volatility, more participants, etc., or simply leave them behind.

[Cnut237]

A thing is either a store of value or it isn't, there's not really any halfway state. I think he means that he's partially convinced that bitcoin is a store of value, i.e. he has reservations about it, i.e. he is backtracking partially on previous statements.

Bitcoin is a store of value, it's just that there are several issues at the moment that prevent being as good a store of value as gold or even USD. Not least of which is the price volatility.

[ardentvolcanoes]

A thing is either a store of value or it isn't, there's not really any halfway state. I think he means that he's partially convinced that bitcoin is a store of value, i.e. he has reservations about it, i.e. he is backtracking partially on previous statements.

Bitcoin is a store of value, it's just that there are several issues at the moment that prevent being as good a store of value as gold or even USD. Not least of which is the price volatility.

Bitcoin treated as store value of assets same with how investors treated gold or those precious gems. Investors find this place as a good venue to invest money.

There's still discussions about the real value since it's still not being embrace by most government around the world, but once being labelled for sure it will bring more price movements, rise will happen along the way.

[elda34b]

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.

[beerlover]

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.

[Febo]

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

[figmentofmyass]

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.

[Theb]

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.

[abhiseshakana]

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.

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.

[SummerBliss]

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.

[JeffBrad12]

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.

[alyssa85]

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.

[khaled0111]

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.

[BartS]

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.

This makes me wonder if we are ever going to see bitcoin being used massively as a currency all over the world?

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.

[rose9696]

"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.

[magneto]

“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.

[shoreno]

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

[audaciousbeing]

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.