Bloomberg: Bitcoin was World's Worst Currency in 2014

[jaysabi]

Everyone knows the bitcoin 'bubble' has deflated quite a bit in the past 12 months as the mania is subsiding, so it's not surprising it was the "worst" currency in 2014. Still, Bloomberg's take on bitcoin is pretty brutal.  http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-23/and-2014s-worst-currency-wasbitcoin

And this bit is not only unsubstantiated, but not even an attempt at a justification is offered:

Most of Bitcoin's supporters, meanwhile, seem to be hackers whose resources depend upon the Ponzi-scheme nature of the enterprise itself.

Ouch.

[BitcoinAddicts]

i think it is already discussed here

did you know that 2013 when bitcoin was at peak they said that bitcoin is not a currency and now they are calling it a currency

[jaysabi]

i think it is already discussed here

did you know that 2013 when bitcoin was at peak they said that bitcoin is not a currency and now they are calling it a currency

If it was already discussed here, I missed it.

Whether or not it's a "currency" depends entirely on the angle the writer is taking. It seems wild success like btc experienced in 2013 was proof it couldn't be a currency, it was just a speculative bubble. But once it is doing poorly for a stretch, people jump to announce what a terrible "currency" it is.

To Bloomberg's defense though, I think they have generally considered it a currency since about the time they started tracking it and offering quotes on their service at their currency desk. That happened earlier this year.

[Sefton]

Everyone knows the bitcoin 'bubble' has deflated quite a bit in the past 12 months as the mania is subsiding, so it's not surprising it was the "worst" currency in 2014. Still, Bloomberg's take on bitcoin is pretty brutal.  http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-23/and-2014s-worst-currency-wasbitcoin

Bitcoin has underperformed this year, but it's still trying to find its footing. I believe adopters will still be rewarded in the future.

And this bit is not only unsubstantiated, but not even an attempt at a justification is offered:

Most of Bitcoin's supporters, meanwhile, seem to be hackers whose resources depend upon the Ponzi-scheme nature of the enterprise itself.

  Or maybe we can see the potential of the currency and how it can redefine what we know money to be?

[oblivi]

i think it is already discussed here

did you know that 2013 when bitcoin was at peak they said that bitcoin is not a currency and now they are calling it a currency

Newspaper writers want big headlines. They want something so they can talk about it and fill pages with it and attract readers. So the Bitcoin boom was attractive for them, now they are critisizing it because it will bring attention too. When Bitcoin goes up next year they will not say anything until it breaks ATH again.

[btckold24]

It definitely seems to have lost some steam especially since the last dump from 600 to 300 ish - what worries me as it tried to climb back up which it normally does but this time got to 400 and then feel flat.

[NUFCrichard]

Worst performing currency of 2014 I can well believe.
Their conclusion is unfortunately not 100% untrue but some entrepreneurs will soon enough make bitcoin mainstream, that I am pretty sure of.

[cbeast]

Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.

[jaysabi]

Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.

Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.

[cbeast]

Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.

Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.

Just responding to the topic heading. There are many currencies worse that bitcoin. In fact on average bitcoin did far better in 2014 than 2013 so the article is trash and not worth reading, which i didn't.

[Amph]

well they are right about bitcoin performing bad, but using peak vlaue is not fair, that just a peak it doesn't count, they should focus on the price that the majority said it was going to be unbreakable, like 600-800 range

[Pastafarian]

Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.

Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.

Just responding to the topic heading. There are many currencies worse that bitcoin. In fact on average bitcoin did far better in 2014 than 2013 so the article is trash and not worth reading, which i didn't.

Right? I can't wait to see what they all have to write about Bitcoin in 2015...would be nice to see some good publicity  

[cbeast]

well they are right about bitcoin performing bad, but using peak vlaue is not fair, that just a peak it doesn't count, they should focus on the price that the majority said it was going to be unbreakable, like 600-800 range

Day traders think that way. Hodlers think 5 figures or more.

[jaysabi]

Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.

Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.

Just responding to the topic heading. There are many currencies worse that bitcoin. In fact on average bitcoin did far better in 2014 than 2013 so the article is trash and not worth reading, which i didn't.

Ah, I see. 2013 was an amazing year for bitcoin, but the scope of the article was only 2014, and it is stating a fact that no other currency performed worse in 2014. Russia, Ukraine, and Bitcoin were the three worst performing currencies on the year, and of the three, bitcoin lost the most value.

[jaysabi]

well they are right about bitcoin performing bad, but using peak vlaue is not fair, that just a peak it doesn't count, they should focus on the price that the majority said it was going to be unbreakable, like 600-800 range

I don't think they intended to use peak value just to slam bitcoin. They were using a calendar year, and bitcoin just happened to be around its all-time high at the beginning of the year.

[Window2Wall]

Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.

Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow.

Just responding to the topic heading. There are many currencies worse that bitcoin. In fact on average bitcoin did far better in 2014 than 2013 so the article is trash and not worth reading, which i didn't.

The problem with people like the OP and the author of the article is that they look at too short of time frames when deciding how investments performed historically. If you were to extend the time period to measure performance by at least ~6 months then bitcoin would be, by far the best performing currency.

[countryfree]

Let's be positive! It's quite an achievement that Bloomberg finally sees BTC as a currency.

[Unbelive]

Let's be positive! It's quite an achievement that Bloomberg finally sees BTC as a currency.

Yes. But they are wrong Bit coin cant be compared with those currencies. You have many alts that fit more in that currency category.

[mindrust]

Bloomberg?? Who are they anyways? Just a mob of wankers.

Bitcoin is doing just fine. It may not see 1000$ price tag ever again but it is not important at all.

[Coinshot]

Now they are calling it a currency
As an investment it certainly had a poor 2014, no denying that. But the potential is huge and even all those who bought at the top will be making profits. In the meantime, more opportunities for us to get cheap BTCs.