Bitcoin as a Safe Haven Asset: Can the community contribute to make it happen?

[Cryptomultiplier]

So my proposals would be (above all for those who have some kind of "influencer" function, be them youtubers/tiktokers or influential forum members):

- Whine a little less about bear markets, and see them as an opportunity or "discount". Smiley
- Also don't whine about things like "Bitcoin being not anymore the most profitable asset". Nobody should care about that. If Bitcoin's concept is sound, it will attract investment anyway.
- Bitcoiners could try to talk a bit more about the long term and less about the short term. Above all, the whole "cyclist" narrative (hey, let's catch the bottom!) probably hurts the digital gold narrative.
- It also would help to talk about the benefits of Bitcoin which are not related to its price evolution, like censorship resistance, international payments, etc..
- Also a bit less exaggeration of the supposed danger of Saylor and friends would not do harm.
- And of course, promote DCA.

So you basically want all Bitcoin/crypto influencers to unite under some kind of "Bitcoin propaganda manifesto", which is going to outline what Bitcoin is (a "safe heaven" asset) and what Bitcoin isn't (a speculation asset)? Not sure how this is going to work. The market decides which asset is "safe heaven" and which asset is "speculative". Bear in mind that not all investors in Bitcoin are true BTC supporters. The hardcore BTC supporters represent only a decent fraction of all investors. I'm not sure that they could "push the narrative" in a certain direction. Gold has become a "safe heaven" after being traded for decades and centuries. Perhaps BTC cannot become a "safe heaven" asset after a year or two(or after someone changes the narrative). Maybe BTC already is a "safe heaven" asset, but we just don't see it as such because of the price volatility.

We dwell on volatility too much and that's why the sentiments continues to brew and it seems like Bitcoin keeps losing its edge as digital gold, but in reality the community has the power to define the floor of the market even though we see wall street driving short term speculation.

When the community of Bitcoin investors refuse to give in or cave in by not selling, embracing DCA strategy, ignoring the noise of the market and hype and focus more on Bitcoin's utility case use as an alternative financial system that makes it contribute to the hybrid economy we foresee as a reality, the community in this sense has made sure to build a solid structure of stability that makes Bitcoin being known as digital gold to become a successful financial reality.

[d5000]

So you basically want all Bitcoin/crypto influencers to unite under some kind of "Bitcoin propaganda manifesto", which is going to outline what Bitcoin is (a "safe heaven" asset) and what Bitcoin isn't (a speculation asset)? Not sure how this is going to work. The market decides which asset is "safe heaven" and which asset is "speculative".

No. That is impossible indeed. The idea here is to make people think a bit. At least those who are active Bitcoin supporters. This community alone can't decide the fate but it can contribute to the narrative. But if even in these forums and specialized X accounts we read more tips to ride the waves than to benefit from the long term price increase, then the narrative is pushed into the exactly opposite direction: Bitcoin is speculative and will remain so.

Safe haven assets indeed need some buildup, but Bitcoin has already 13 years of flawless operation even if we count the 2013 bug which led to a short chain split.

Of course it will take more years perhaps to be considered a true gold competitor. But there are stocks considered relatively "safe" which have only a little longer ancestry, like Alphabet/Google and Booking Holdings which never lost more than 50% after their initial growth phase.

Maybe BTC already is a "safe heaven" asset, but we just don't see it as such because of the price volatility.

I think for a part of the investors this is indeed true. The percentage has to increase however, because I think it's way less than 50% still. And I don't consider people like Saylor really safe haven investors.

Perhaps it has to do a little bit with the already established level of consideration of "safe haven" in combination with fewer attacks against it?

Yes of course imo. Of course to reach this level of safe haven character it will take some time for BTC still. So it has to prove itself in other ways. And here I think the community can contribute, at least not distorting the message (into a speculative direction).

Regarding media FUD, imo it is often related to some kind of investors which could sell, with of course Strategy being the focus in the last months. Here the "antidote" could be simply to clarify that even a big investor's behavior is, if at all a temporary problem -- if they fail they'll go bankrupt and thus disappear from the Bitcoin universe too.

Now I wonder whether the issue is only related to digital finance or is this yet another symptom of an issue that has a root cause much farther in the past, whether in the schooling system or education. It seems to me that many people have struggles with critical thinking and adopting any healthy habits relating to discipline, irrespective of whether it is a financial or otherwise.

I think yes, and until people aren't educated in that at least at high school level it will stay this way. But it is not necessary imo to get all people on the "safe haven" train. If those who have influence as leaders of opinion adopt the narrative, the smaller investors are more likely to behave less emotionally driven too.

[Ambatman]

Regarding media FUD, imo it is often related to some kind of investors which could sell, with of course Strategy being the focus in the last months. Here the "antidote" could be simply to clarify that even a big investor's behavior is, if at all a temporary problem -- if they fail they'll go bankrupt and thus disappear from the Bitcoin universe too.

I believe one of the issue is fixation on price
Many believe and push the narrative that if a large player sells
Bitcoin would die.
Like I said before people tend to believe what they want to
Recently peter admitted to the fact that he regretted not buying Bitcoin when he learnt about it the first time.

[abhiseshakana]

But what's your take on this? Has the community any chance to influence the narrative? And if yes, how?

My choice is Yes, but there are mostly other factor

Bitcoin community has indirect influence on these narrative, considering community is not a homogeneous entity, every community and in which platform community growth has its own culture, different user characteristic and algorithm which in the end resulting  different education and communication style. I see social media with their today communication culture not only as tools for spreading news but more to the tools for shaping the ways its user thinks. When this circumstance meet with behavior or thinking that is considered normal or appropriate by a community then the result is loss of curiosity and the degradation of critical thinking culture.

If community dominated by get quick rich and speculation, it will shape community behavior when taking financial or investment decision. In other side, when community emphasize on education the it will shape different investment culture which should be more rational.

Herd behavior especially on Bitcoin investment decision more due to the lack of Bitcoin literacy which start from lack of financial lieracy and financial planning. Decades ago before making investment, we in depth learn about asset but today practice buying first because trend and fomo based on instant influencer recommendations, short video clips to influence opinion rather than reading whitelist as primary source why Bitcoin is created, understanding Bitcoin and money history, or studying economic principles. The worst example around 300.000 people in my country experience fraud buying shitcoin which promoted by an influencer with total losses reaching USD 33 million(who reported).

Community can not control The Fed policy, global liquidity or institutional capital flows as major factor which in the end determine price or market perception but community can shape quality of Bitcoin holder thinking. So on my view, community must produce literacy and investment culture which more emphasis on Bitcoin understanding than promotion, i think, better educated community created more long term holder and reduce panic selling even speculative behavior.

We can simulate, when community educate about financial planning, risk management, DCA, self custody, history of monetary system and whitelist, then member will have more realistic expectation and long term orientation, with additional number of long term holder, panic based volatility will decrease, market trust increase and Bitcoin will be perceived as a store of value or safe haven. we can see topic about leverage, to the moon, bull run, ATH, next week target price always attracts speculators.

The right word to describe bitcoin at the meantime are emerging safe haven or potential long term store of value. Community can have slogan that Bitcoin is save haven but matter of fact market behavior determines it, beside that asset can be a save haven not only because its technical characteristic but collective trust of society. At the meantime many Bitcoin holders still oriented towards quick profits which cause the market continue to treat Bitcoin as a risk asset. Hopefully community can be catalyst for massive bitcoin literation, financial planning education, what is expected the use of Bitcoin as a store of value is becoming more widespread which followed by time proven function and i think Bitcoin status as save haven can be naturally formed not a flash narrative.

Learn from my own experiences, I think financial planning as a part of financial literacy is very important and give contribution for Bitcoin to be save haven. Withs its characteristic Bitcoin perfectly suit for growth asset and long term store of value for me and some of investor, so i decided to hold or release Bitcoin based on my plan not following trend or panic. As long as Bitcoin still in line with my financial goals and asset allocation I will hold it

[Darker45]

Yes, a lot. The problem, however, is that the community is far from being a solid group of like-minded individuals. On the contrary, I'd even say the majority are superficial supporters. In other words, not really supporters of Bitcoin in the strict sense, but simply people who have heard of an internet money that accordingly grows in dollar price quite fast.

I guess to make the community treat Bitcoin as a safe haven asset is to bring them back to step 1, that is, to bring their focus mainly to the fact that Bitcoin doesn't have indiscriminate money printing, isn't designed to gradually lose purchasing power, isn't run/managed/supervised by a handful of upright yet corruptible human beings who are replaced every now and then, and so on.

In other words, it's the narrative that matters. Unfortunately, influencers, crypto publications, the traditional media, big investors, and others are more focused on things that matter less. Also, creating headlines, publicizing articles, or discussing topics with misleading, unfounded, even shallow analyses linking Bitcoin's price movement to just anything big or small don't help. They create an impression that Bitcoin mainly moves according to fear, worries, hype, sentiment, and whatnot of things outside the market, thereby making it just another traditional asset.

[X-ray]

Yeah, I personally think community should stop worrying about short term price volatility like 1.5% drop.

They should focus more on the long term because the long term chart for Bitcoin is bullish.

Moreover, if Bitcoin isn't considered safe haven just because the price is dumping, so did Gold which also went -30% in less than 3 months.

Yet if we see the long term price action, both are performing great.

[Satofan44]

Perhaps it has to do a little bit with the already established level of consideration of "safe haven" in combination with fewer attacks against it?

Yes of course imo. Of course to reach this level of safe haven character it will take some time for BTC still. So it has to prove itself in other ways. And here I think the community can contribute, at least not distorting the message (into a speculative direction).

Regarding media FUD, imo it is often related to some kind of investors which could sell, with of course Strategy being the focus in the last months. Here the "antidote" could be simply to clarify that even a big investor's behavior is, if at all a temporary problem -- if they fail they'll go bankrupt and thus disappear from the Bitcoin universe too.

Perhaps a chicken and egg problem we find ourselves in again? As Bitcoin is not widely perceived as a safe haven, more people are reacting to it in that specific ways further emphasizing that it is not. On the other hand, were it already seen this way more people would react to it that way. The community can definitely help with that, every bit of education helps. However, pay attention to individual idiots on this forum and you can see how terrible the situation already is. There have been countless threads of pure misinformation and they keep coming, how Bitcoin is not being used widely or LN either, and then that naturally makes the discussion reduce to Bitcoin's utility only being as an investment vehicle making it speculative. When this happens from forum members who are "supposed to be Bitcoiners", thanks theymos, then you can imagine the state in the real world. A double edged sword of letting any idiot say whatever they want no matter how wrong it is is that they are able to spread their infection onto other people.

Yes, a lot. The problem, however, is that the community is far from being a solid group of like-minded individuals. On the contrary, I'd even say the majority are superficial supporters. In other words, not really supporters of Bitcoin in the strict sense, but simply people who have heard of an internet money that accordingly grows in dollar price quite fast.

Most people in the world are stupid, that includes the majority of people that you know (regardless of whether it includes you or not) so this would be accurate.

[Lucius]

Whether anyone likes it or not, the Bitcoin community is relatively weak in terms of influencing a change in perception towards Bitcoin, which is mainly built through the mainstream media, which is again controlled (today more than before) by interest groups that make large profits by "trading" cryptocurrencies. This is most pronounced in the US, where the president himself influences the market with his actions, and all those who have information about what will happen profit the most.

Therefore, I would conclude that Bitcoin is far from being considered a safe haven asset considering its volatility. The average person looking at historical charts can see this very easily, but unfortunately cannot change anything about it.

[dezoel]

If we focus on this as a group, we can definitely make it a lot more common. But we need to make it as a group, as a community, individually it's hard. Is it safe haven right now?

It really is, but how many people actually hold long term? Like if you were to look at wallets that went untouched, only like money go in, but nothing comes out, for the past 5 years, zero amount taken out, that's very important, I am sure that it's a fraction of the amount of wallets we have. It means, most people just make moves.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

But what's your take on this? Has the community any chance to influence the narrative? And if yes, how?

Bitcoin doesn't need any pity party game, gold achieved it's status as a safe haven without it being pitied instead it proved itself and then people trusted it. For Bitcoin to be considered a safe haven it first has to prove itself to be worth hodling and I believe that is already happening, what is just left right now is time and then people will get to trust Bitcoin more. The current number of years Bitcoin have existed isn't enough time for Bitcoin to be put on the same table as a safe haven with gold because gold existed before BC started being used in counting years and it'll still exist even after this current generation has gone. Can Bitcoin achieve the safe haven status, yes it would but again it will need time and let's not try to hasten anything or we the community coming together to try to make it possible instead let's allow time do his thing and patiently wait for Bitcoin to develop fully into being a safe haven.

[o48o]

What does it matter what anyone says about it? That doesn't change the fundamentals. If it acts like a safe haven, people will see it as a safe haven. People can sell if they want to, i am not trying to shame anyone holding something they won't believe in, or understand in the first place.

And if influencers that swing trade it are the people that we are supposed to be fighting with the narrative, we have already lost. Because those weren't the voices that anyone should listened to in the first place. It doesn't matter what their narrative is, as their narrative changes to what ever serves themselves. More outrage their content produces, more people click them.

[Satofan44]

Whether anyone likes it or not, the Bitcoin community is relatively weak in terms of influencing a change in perception towards Bitcoin, which is mainly built through the mainstream media, which is again controlled (today more than before) by interest groups that make large profits by "trading" cryptocurrencies. This is most pronounced in the US, where the president himself influences the market with his actions, and all those who have information about what will happen profit the most.

This is not true as you are entirely missing the point. They can influence the narrative on others however they want, the issue with the narrative is still within the community. Unless you are trying to say that most people are too stupid to change themselves or their views at all, which I would agree with especially if they come from 3rd world shitholes, then you are wrong. The narrative in the wider world can not be worked on effectively until there is a coherent narrative among those that are already part of Bitcoin. We have seen even how this forum's "OGs", whatever that useless term is supposed to represent, get emotional and panicky as soon as the market sentiment is low or someone comes up with some useless FUD like OP_RETURN. If even they can't have a coherent and stable narrative yet, the average person has no chance -- with or without mainstream media manipulation.

Therefore, I would conclude that Bitcoin is far from being considered a safe haven asset considering its volatility. The average person looking at historical charts can see this very easily, but unfortunately cannot change anything about it.

You can consider it such and act accordingly regardless of what an useless chart shows. You've started building an argument that "they are manipulating you, the person" and then agreed with the data resulting from the manipulation.  

[d5000]

Yes, a lot. The problem, however, is that the community is far from being a solid group of like-minded individuals. On the contrary, I'd even say the majority are superficial supporters. In other words, not really supporters of Bitcoin in the strict sense, but simply people who have heard of an internet money that accordingly grows in dollar price quite fast.

I think the weight of the superficial/new investor group should go down over time. As bigger as the stake of these Bitcoiners become, the more they will listen to Bitcoin "influencers". And that's where they should learn. Thus yes, the influencers / leaders of opinion are strong factor. But a bit of that process is also "automatic", I think.

The problem for me is more the group that knows about Bitcoin but actively uses it for volatility driven profit. These traders know that Bitcoin has potential to be a global money, but they see currently more profit in riding the waves and leveraged trading. So they also tend to try to influence newer Bitcoiners, making them believe that Bitcoin is mostly a short term game.

The "task" for "the community" would thus be to try to drive newer Bitcoiners away from the "short-termers" and direct them to the "long-termers".

Perhaps a chicken and egg problem we find ourselves in again?

Of course. And many answers here prove it ... That's a bit the goal of this thread, to try to find ways to break out of that vicious cycle.

Apart from DCA & long term focusing ("eternally increasing" 200-week SMA, for example): One thing I think is simple enough to emphasize even to short-term and "profit-driven" investors is that the "contrarian" approach (buy when there is blood in the streets) has had the highest ROI in the bitcoin space. It has worked all the time. If you bought BTC at <50% of its previous ATH, 3-4 years later you always got massive returns.

This kind of "bottom fishing" is a kind of short term investment that would lead to more stability (if it was more massive) and thus help the "safe haven" narrative.

There have been countless threads of pure misinformation and they keep coming, how Bitcoin is not being used widely or LN either, and then that naturally makes the discussion reduce to Bitcoin's utility only being as an investment vehicle making it speculative.

Yep. I still wonder which is the best strategy, try to refute them or ignore them? Trolls should normally not be fed, but the problem is when they are fed by the wrong people (well-intended Bitcoiners who don't have good arguments and/or lack the knowledge to refute the troll, or directly other trolls or spammers) then the troll could convince some newbie readers that his fake arguments as superior.

Maybe it's not bad to start new threads to counter the troll threads. We may need a 2.0 version of "Rebuttals to Bitcoin Myths". Perhaps even self-moderated if the trolls are too persistent.

What does it matter what anyone says about it? That doesn't change the fundamentals. If it acts like a safe haven, people will see it as a safe haven.

That's exactly an example for the chicken and egg problem Satofan44 mentioned ... and if the community was following this reasoning, it would never happen (and probably eventually get into massive problems i.e. into a long term bear market).

And if influencers that swing trade it are the people that we are supposed to be fighting with the narrative, we have already lost. Because those weren't the voices that anyone should listened to in the first place. It doesn't matter what their narrative is, as their narrative changes to what ever serves themselves. More outrage their content produces, more people click them.

See answer to Darker45. The more people know that the short term oriented narratives are weaker (most people lose with Bitcoin short term trades, while contrarian and long term traders have always won until now), the more these influences will lose audience. And they may even switch to a long term oriented narrative themselves if it brings them more profit (regarding advertising income, subscribers etc.).