Posts from blockchain

Fun Friday: Crypto Crystal Ball

Chris Burniske posted this Twitter poll a few days ago:

I voted for option one. I think the crypto markets will be under pressure for at least the remainder of the year. But I am a buyer so that may be wishful thinking on my part.

Where do you think crypto is headed for the remainder of this year?

The China ICO Ban

Regulators in China imposed a blanket ban on ICOs over the long weekend.

A number of people have reached out to me via email and Twitter asking me what I think about this.

I think regulation of ICOs is inevitable and a good thing if done right (ie lightly).

The SEC’s comments on ICOs back in July were well done in my view.

There are all sorts of bad things going on in the ICO market right now, from outright scams to projects raising tens of millions of dollars on a white paper written in a day to celebrities getting in on the action.

We needed a cooling off period and if China’s actions are that cooling off period, then I welcome them.

However, a blanket ban on ICOs seems like bad policy to me.

The SEC is heading in the right direction by making a distinction between tokens with real utility vs tokens as a substitute for securities. The former is where the innovation lies. The latter is just a fast and loose way around the rules.

If you look back at the Ethereum token offering several years ago, it is hard to see how that was a bad thing. It provided needed funding to the Ethereum project and the result has been a wave of innovation on top of Ethereum, including the whole concept of ICOs.

If I am reading the Chinese regulators correctly, they are saying that an offering like the one that Ethereum did is not going to be allowed. That’s bad.

Many have speculated that this Chinese ban is temporary to give the Chinese authorities time to come up with sensible regulations. I suspect that is right.

However, I would not like to see the SEC and other regulators follow suit. I think a better move would be to work to rid the market of the scams and other bad actors and actions while allowing for real innovation to continue. That seems to be where the SEC is headed and I encourage them to keep going in that direction and not follow the Chinese.

The US has always been a home to innovation and innovators. We have been able to do that while applying sensible regulations (for the most part) on innovative new technologies. If we continue to take that approach we can compete and even beat China to market in areas like blockchain where they are arguably ahead of us. Naval said it well in this tweet yesterday:

Multi-Sig Wallets

A lot of financial processes require multiple signatories, like a wire transfer for example. That adds a level of security and comfort to a process that moves a lot of funds quite quickly.

So it makes sense that blockchain technology would find a way to mimic that in software.

It is called a “mult-sig wallet” and if you use one, you need multiple “signatories” to move funds out of the wallet. I put signatories in quotations because what you actually need is multiple private keys to move funds out of the wallet.

CoinCenter wrote a nice explanation of multi-sig technology back in early 2015 that I frequently share with people who ask me about multi-sig. Give that a read if you want to learn a bit more about how this technology works and why it is so useful.

Our portfolio company Coinbase uses multi-sig technology in its vault product which is currently available for Bitcoin wallets and will eventually come to its other wallet offerings.

If you use a hardware wallet like Ledger, you can use the BitGo software to get multi-sig on it. Here’s a blog post about that.

With the big increase in crypto prices this year, many people are now holding significant amounts of crypto assets. It is worth taking security more seriously and putting your assets, or at least most of them, into a multi-sig wallet is a good step toward that.

Store Of Value vs Payment System

One of the debates that has raged inside and outside of the Bitcoin community since I got involved back in 2012 is whether Bitcoin was a store of value vs a means of payment.

When I first started buying and owning Bitcoin, I would use it as a means of payment all the time.

I would whip out my phone and send Bitcoin to people instead of paying cash.

This was a Bitcoin t-shirt I bought in the summer of 2013:

At today’s prices, that t-shirt cost me $830. I love that t-shirt.

 

This was a payment I made that same summer for a golf caddie:

 

And this was a gift I made to the Bitcoin foundation in the spring of 2013:

That gift is almost $700k at today’s prices.

 

I share these three transactions with all of you to make a point.

And that point is that you can’t keep spending something that goes up as much as Bitcoin has.

So I don’t spend Bitcoin anymore.

I hold it.

It’s a store of value now.

That much is clear.

How To Value Crypto Assets

Given the explosive increase in the prices of crypto assets this year, there is a growing discussion on how to value them.

This is a very good thing.

Andy Kessler weighs in on the topic in this WSJ piece which was published over the weekend.

You should go read the piece as it does a good job of dissecting the economics of the transaction processing system that underlies Bitcoin (aka the Bitcoin Mining Network).

Andy finishes his post with the following statement:

at some point the market will wake up and apply rational valuation techniques. That price—$4,361—implies a lot of belief in Bitcoin as a long-term store of value well beyond the economic value of the transaction platform. 

Like Andy, I hope and expect that the market will apply rational valuation techniques to crypto assets. There are a number of people trying to do that. I think the work of Chris Burniske is very solid.

My issue with Andy’s analysis is that he’s conflating the market value of the Bitcoin Mining Network with the value of Bitcoin, the crypto token.

My partner Albert says it well in this tweet:

Blockchain technology upends many of our traditional notions of what networked applications look like.

Our former colleague Joel captured this “upending” well in his seminal post on Fat Protocols, in which he says:

What’s significant about this dynamic is the effect it has on how value is distributed along the stack: the market cap of the protocol always grows faster than the combined value of the applications built on top, since the success of the application layer drives further speculation at the protocol layer. And again, increasing value at the protocol layer attracts and incentivises competition at the application layer. Together with a shared data layer, which dramatically lowers the barriers to entry, the end result is a vibrant and competitive ecosystem of applications and the bulk value distributed to a widespread pool of shareholders. This is how tokenized protocols become “fat” and its applications “thin

Networked applications that run on top of the shared data layer of blockchains will be forced into commodity pricing and rent seeking will be nearly impossible. Those who build the Visas and Mastercard networks on top of Bitcoin will never achieve the economics of Visa and Mastercard. But that is the point. The Bitcoin protocol will capture those economics and the only way you can participate in that is by earning or buying and owning the crypto token (ie Bitcoin).

And so that is what we must model, analyze, and understand. We cannot use EBITDA multiples to do this work. We need to turn to other tools and that is what Chris and others are doing.

I applaud Andy for putting this critical issue on the table and hope that he and other serious market analysts and observers will take the time to understand what is really going on here and help us all figure out how to properly value it.

Speculation is rampant right now and without the proper valuation tools, we lack the ability to arbitrage and profit from that speculation. We need that.

Video Of The Week: The NYS DFS Virtual Currency Hearings

Apparently there is a Netflix documentary on Bitcoin that recently came out.

I’ve been hearing from a lot of friends that my NYS DFS testimony from almost four years ago is featured in that documentary.

This took place in January 2014 and it’s worth going back and seeing what the questions were at that time and which of them have been resolved and which have not.

My statement (unprepared) starts at 21mins in.

A Public Record

AVC has been going on for almost 14 years now. I write every day, mostly about tech and investing in startups and observations about entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship.

WordPress says I have posted 7,622 times. That is more than once a day but that is because I used to post multiple times a day. Now I can barely find the time to write once a day.

Anyway, posting your thoughts and investment ideas every day creates a public record.

That can be bad when you are consistently wrong about something, like I have been about Apple since Steve Jobs left the company.

But all in all, I would not have it any other way.

A few days ago, Founder Playbook posted a timeline of my writing on Bitcoin and Blockchain, stating that “Since 2011, Fred has been bullish, yet critical, on the crypto market.”

I have been a believer in Bitcoin, Blockchain, and Crypto since 2011 and my confidence in this macro investment thesis gets stronger every day.

And I will continue to critique the sector, calling it out when I see things like greed, infighting, or other issues that get in the way of its collective success.

One could do a similar lookback on my roughly decade long obsession with social media that led me to blogging and ended around the time I fell for crypto.

I tend to get obsessed about one thing and write a lot about it. Which creates a public record. You can’t hide from that, but then again blogging is the opposite of hiding.

Greed Isn’t Good

The famous Gordon Gekko line that “greed is good” is bandied about quite often to explain why capitalism, and the pursuit of riches, is a positive thing for the economy, society, and the world at large.

Greed is not good. There is a fine line between the profit motive and greed.

I am a firm believer in the profit motive. It drives many of us to work hard, make new things that can move the world forward, and better our lives and the lives of our children, and others, through philanthropy.

But when the profit motive is taken to excess and you enter into the territory of greed, things go bad quickly.

We have seen this in the tech sector in many places, we have seen it in wall street, in real estate, and elsewhere. And we certainly are seeing it crop up in the crypto sector as well, particularly recently.

I like the concept of checks and balances. It is important to make sure to stay on the right side of the line between what is reasonable and what is excessive. Surrounding yourself with the right people, who have been around this issue a lot, can help a lot.

There are a lot of temptations out there when a lot of money is sloshing around. It is good to resist them.