Ray Dalio Admits He May Be Wrong About Bitcoin"

[Gemini24]

Ray Dalio Admits He May Be Wrong About Bitcoin But Still Concerned of Government Ban?

Billionaire hedge fund manager Ray Dalio has admitted that he may be wrong about bitcoin after stating that governments will ban the cryptocurrency if it “becomes material.” Dalio founded Bridgewater Associates; his hedge fund is the largest in the world.
"I might be missing something about bitcoin so I’d love to be corrected." He quoted..

Firstly, he claimed: “Bitcoin is not very good as a medium of exchange because you can[not] buy much with it (I presume that’s because it’s too volatile for most merchants to use, but correct me if I’m wrong).”

Secondly, he asserted: “it’s not very good as a store-hold of wealth because it’s volatility is great and has little correlation with the prices of what I need to buy so owning it doesn’t protect my buying power.”

Next, he reiterated the risk of governments banning bitcoin that he outlined in an interview with Yahoo Finance last week. Dalio said that if bitcoin “becomes material, governments won’t allow it.” He emphasized: “they’ll outlaw it and they’ll use whatever teeth they have to enforce that. They would say … you can’t transact the bitcoin, you can’t have a bitcoin.”
see full article here...https://news.bitcoin.com/ray-dalio-bitcoin/

What do you think about this guys?

[Alert31]

Ray Dalio is definitely wrong and he already admit it that he might be wrong. Bitcoin is already more than 10 years now of existence in crypto world but it is still alive and valuable. And because of the decentralization of bitcoin, government has no control over it which means even government banned bitcoin, people will always find ways on how to continue using bitcoin. The years of bitcoin and this continued development are the proof that Ray Dalio is wrong. Bitcoin is very useful to us nowadays. It serves not only as an investment but as a means of payment and also as an alternative source of income during the pandemic. People enjoy it.

[Wexnident]

I guess the mistake he has is assuming that government currencies would become obsolete with the rise of Bitcoin. I'd like to say he's wrong on that part imo, since, in the first place, government currency would never disappear as long as they're basically in public control. And additionally, they may place regulations over regulations on Bitcoin, but that's it, it's not like they can put it in a leash since you can't even touch it, let alone put one on it. As for volatility, well we can't deny it now, but in the long term it should slow down one way or another. As for merchants not being able to use it due to volatility, aren't there merchants that already use them? I've used a few before, and I'm pretty sure there wasn't really any issue with it.

[Darker45]

That must have also been the initial preference of the government. Why bother regulating this alien currency when it is not in anyway helping the government in its goals? As a matter of fact, this currency is a form of resistance, so it should just be banned outright. The problem, however, is that it can hardly be implemented because Bitcoin is both there and not there at the same time. I mean, how could you ban Bitcoin? How could you shut down Bitcoin?

[mu_enrico]

Well, that's how conservative (about finance, not politics) thinks. They are cautious about the new technology but open to being convinced. The negative side of this stance is that they tend to miss out on buying opportunities until Bitcoin becomes more and more expensive. Imagine if he just put a small amount of his fund into Bitcoin when the price was $100 or $1,000.

[Hydrogen]

Ray Dalio Admits He May Be Wrong About Bitcoin But Still Concerned of Government Ban?

Firstly, he claimed: “Bitcoin is not very good as a medium of exchange because you can[not] buy much with it (I presume that’s because it’s too volatile for most merchants to use, but correct me if I’m wrong).”

Secondly, he asserted: “it’s not very good as a store-hold of wealth because it’s volatility is great and has little correlation with the prices of what I need to buy so owning it doesn’t protect my buying power.”

....

This was an interesting development in the "government will ban bitcoin" discussion:

$6 Billion United Nations Agency Launches Bitcoin, Ethereum Crypto Fund

In addition to investing cryptocurrency into early-stage, open-source companies working with children, the fund represents the first time any UN agency, much less one that generated $6.7 billion revenue last year, will be able to accept bitcoin and ethereum donations. The prototype, launched today with a donation of 1 bitcoin and 10,000 ether from the Switzerland-based Ethereum Foundation, has signed agreements with Unicef USA, Unicef France, Unicef Australia, and Unicef New Zealand to start accepting cryptocurrency donations immediately.

As the United Nations, which received $15 billion in donations last year, kicks off a new phase of development in which it sees itself as not only dispenser of aid but as a financial innovator, the ability to accept cryptocurrency donations and track exactly how they were spent could pave the way for a new, more transparent agency, leading to more donations.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeldelcastillo/2019/10/08/6-billion-united-nations-agency-launches-bitcoin-ethereum-crypto-fund/

Firstly

I think merchants who exchange bitcoin for fiat after accepting transactions can minimize or eliminate affects of volatility. Uncertain. This isn't something I've seen much info posted on and could be an area needing further investigation.

Secondly

Imagine someone saying.

Ray Dalio: "owning an asset worth $12 in 2012, that is worth more than $10,000 in 2020, doesn't protect my buying power".

There is a lingering question of whether owning assets denominated in fiat currencies can protect purchasing power or value in a post corona world. And whether investment in bitcoin/crypto could be a better investment decision. For reasons that have been discussed to death since this forum was founded.

[petyang12]

Well, if he admitted that bitcoin is not useless then more and more people will know about bitcoin. Even in my country where bitcoin is not known by many.

[davinchi]

Well, I do know that governments can only ban it in their own country or they can set up rules and try to regulate part of it as much as possible. If a government in a particular country should ban Bitcoin, that doesn’t mean that others are going to do the same as they did, as long as they see the need for it, they are going to allow it to stay as a legal asset.

Only his last comment is what I kind of agree with, but not that I fully agree with it, because I believe the main aim of government is to regulate it as of now. China might have decided to ban it by preventing people from being able to exchange Bitcoin for fiat, but other countries do the same.

[slapper]

Well, not everybody realize the truth behind lying under bitcoin. Many criticize bitcoin because of its votality. They said they could not believe an asset which easily lose its value in a short time.

However, bitcoin is not just about its value. It has advanced techonlogies, new innovation and the moreover, it gives people the ability to against the inflation. Do you like to be lost money day by day? The central banks and its fiat system are the ones conrols our economy system and pull out the inflation. You can hate bitcoin, but dont force other people to have the same opinion. We are wise enough to observe clearly that bitcoin is a heaven's gift

[Jating]

I don't know though, in a hindsight I'm thinking that Ray Dalio is secretly stashing bitcoin and he is just trying to put the spotlight on him as anti-bitcoin or something to create some FUD so that he can continue to accumulate more.

On the other hand, there are a lot of billionaires already going in public telling that they have invested on bitcoin. So if Ray continue his hard line stance (assuming he hasn't bought anything), he will be late when the train leaves. While his fellow billionaires are making good money, Ray is left in the dust. So it's his call to continue his negative believed in bitcoin.

[Mauser]

Ray Dalio is an exceptional investor. He has been successful for so many years. I love his books and try to follow is investment recommendations when ever possible. But even the best investors can't be 100% right of the time. In my opinion what makes the difference between a good and a great investor is the ability to adapt to new information. Maybe bitcoins didn't make sense to him when they were created, but he reviewed his position and changed his opinion. Overall great guy.

[Upgrade00]

Well, that's how conservative (about finance, not politics) thinks. They are cautious about the new technology but open to being convinced. The negative side of this stance is that they tend to miss out on buying opportunities until Bitcoin becomes more and more expensive.

That is quite a backward approach. For one, before forming an opinion of a new asset or technology, one should have done sufficient research on it, to understand the fundamentals behind it. And the idea of forming a negative opinion with little actual knowledge and then asking to be convinced otherwise is also backward. If you're going to ask for opinions, you should be open minded enough to assimilate them without prejudice.
Maybe that's a part of being conservative; Putting the perceived risks above the potential reward.

Imagine if he just put a small amount of his fund into Bitcoin when the price was $100 or $1,000.

Imagine he puts in a small amount as the price is at $18k+ and comes back to check in the next 5-10 years

[bittick]

Well everyone makes mistake and people that are pessimistic like Ray Dalio usually makes one so it's just very normal thing for him and whether he admits he was wrong or not is not relevant for the market really although he's hedge fund manager, still the market shows despite his statement crypto still growing.
Also, this is why people should not makes such overconfident statement because big chance you are wrong.

[shield132]

What does he mean in turning bitcoin into a material things? Does he mean bitcoin banknotes? Where we will have banknotes with value of 0.001 BTC, 0.005 BTC, 0.01 BTC? I think such thing won't happen because the main idea behind the bitcoin isn't to be a material thing and at the same time even if anyone decides to print such banknotes, why the hell people will look at it as a valuable thing? It's not the nature of bitcoin and it will exist the way it is right now, in digital space. And no one is enough authoritative to seriously start printing of btc banknotes, it's the thing that can be banned as easy as ABC.

[coolcoinz]

His attitude was a typical example of fear of the unknown, the same kind that Warren represents. We're going to have so much fun reading about all these people change their mind and admit to being wrong pretty much like JPMorgan's CEO did. Can't blame them really. For old investors who dabbled in centralized fiat-based markets for decades, it's can be hard to understand decentralized systems like Bitcoin.

[fillippone]

Ray Dalio is an exceptional investor. He has been successful for so many years. I love his books and try to follow is investment recommendations when ever possible. But even the best investors can't be 100% right of the time. In my opinion what makes the difference between a good and a great investor is the ability to adapt to new information. Maybe bitcoins didn't make sense to him when they were created, but he reviewed his position and changed his opinion. Overall great guy.

Accepting the mistake is the biggest thing which he did it. Also, related to bitcoin many billionaires were turned out to be wrong including Warren Buffet who said it was nothing more than bubble and will fall in value. But on other side all those who knew it is next big thing and stayed invested in it knows the result today and, many billionaires have now started invested in it.

This is why I prefer Ray Dalio. He is different from other super-investors like Warren Buffet: always thinking out of the box about longer investment horizons. I follow him on a few social media and I always find his long posts quite interesting. Of course he was wrong about bitcoin, but he’s also honest enough to admit it and ask for directions.

I think I saw his thread on Twitter, and also gave some intriguing answers when bullied by fellow bitcoiners.
You can check it out here:

I might be missing something about Bitcoin so I’d love to be corrected. My problems with Bitcoin being an effective currency are simple... (1/5)

https://twitter.com/raydalio/status/1328731042690306048?s=21

[mu_enrico]

That is quite a backward approach.
..
Maybe that's a part of being conservative; Putting the perceived risks above the potential reward.

He is rich already, so his attitude is understandable. It's like trying to sell a business plan or HYIP to rich people. "Convince me, and I'll think about it."

True, conservativism in financial management is about risk preference. Although he manages mutual funds that consist of stocks, the risk is nowhere near the crypto risk (from a non-believer standpoint).

Imagine he puts in a small amount as the price is at $18k+ and comes back to check in the next 5-10 years

5-10 years is a very long time, and anything can happen. I can't guarantee there will be no WW3 that destroys all living forms except cockroaches. LoL

[enhu]

He was wrong during that time because he is part of the group that opposes cryptocurrency adoption. But with Paypal coming into the picture, it's only now that investors in the finance industry started to consider BTC because it's becoming very legal in US. Central banks are forced to join the bandwagon already. It's safe to say that the government will not outlaw this currency.

[BrewMaster]

it is very interesting that for the past couple of weeks i keep hearing pretty much the same news that someone is either saying something positive about bitcoin or are changing their previous stance. but the more interesting part is that all of those that i have seen were "hedge fund managers".

these hedge fund companies may be receiving a lot of request these days from their investors to buy bitcoin or diversify into bitcoin as bitcoin has proven to be so strong and most importantly an excellent hedge against the strained economy while other assets such as stocks will be struggling in the coming years.

[Ridcan]

What does he mean by becoming material?  Bitcoin is already a commodity of value.  Yes, I accept it too, its volatility is very high and it must be of a standard to be used in daily life.  but I think governments will see them as rivals under the ban on Bitcoin.