Despite widespread institutional adoption and soaring prices, veteran financial editor Jim Grant maintains a deeply skeptical view of Bitcoin. He considers it a fundamentally valueless asset propped up by hype and questionable promotions, dismissing its utility and concluding its most efficient and logical price is zero.
Related Insights
As Bitcoin matures, its risk-return profile is changing. The era of doubling in value every couple of years may be over. Instead, it could transition into a high-performing asset that reliably generates 15-25% annualized returns, outperforming traditional assets but no longer offering the explosive, "get rich quick" upside of its early days.
Drawing parallels to closed-end funds, Berkshire Hathaway, and well-managed banks, analyst Andy Edstrom argues against high MNAV (multiple of net asset value) multiples for Bitcoin treasury companies. Historical precedent suggests these firms should trade between a slight discount (0.8x) and a modest premium (2-2.5x MNAV), not the extreme valuations seen previously.
Bitcoin's core properties (fixed supply, perfect portability) make it a superior safe haven to gold. However, the market currently treats it as a volatile, risk-on asset. This perception gap represents a unique, transitional moment in financial history.
The argument that 'Bitcoin fixes this' ignores human reality. Its volatility and complexity create an insurmountable adoption barrier for the average person. The only practical solution for the masses is holding governments accountable, not mass crypto adoption.
Bitcoin's 27% plunge, far exceeding the stock market's dip, shows how high-beta assets react disproportionately to macro uncertainty. When the central bank signals a slowdown due to a "foggy" outlook, investors flee to safety, punishing the riskiest assets the most.
The recent divergence, where Bitcoin has fallen significantly while major stock indices remain stable, breaks the asset's recent high correlation with risk-on equities. This suggests the current bearish sentiment is isolated to the crypto asset itself and its specific market dynamics, rather than being part of a broader market-wide downturn.
Kyle Samani is "intellectually short" Bitcoin because he sees it as an unproductive asset. He argues platforms like Ethereum and Solana offer the same core benefits—a fixed, code-defined supply—while also being economically productive. This makes them a superior long-term asset class from a first-principles perspective, despite his firm holding some Bitcoin financially.
An asset can only function as money if it has intrinsic value to a subset of the population, establishing a price floor. Cigarettes work as currency in prison because some people actually want to smoke them. Bitcoin, having no underlying use, is like a "digital cigarette" you can't smoke, making its value purely speculative.
The primary driver of Bitcoin's recent appreciation isn't hardcore believers, but mainstream speculators who bought ETFs. These investors lack ideological commitment and will rush for the exits during a downturn, creating a mass liquidation event that the market's limited liquidity cannot absorb.
An investor's Bitcoin thesis rests on three pillars: 1) as a self-custodied asset for debanking/borderless scenarios, 2) as an investment for pure price appreciation ("number go up"), and 3) as an ethical holding to support a better financial system. This framework clarifies why proxies like MSTR satisfy the latter two needs but never the first.