The End Of Bitcoin

For the last two years, I have been following the rocky road of Bitcoin, as it soared on the promise of revolutionary change and collapsed in a fog of fraud and bad economics. After losing almost 85% of its value in the last twelve months, plunging from $1,200 to $200, has bitcoin finally reached the end of the road? Does it have any chance of recovering or is it destined to simply fade away?

Now some people claim that the price of bitcoin doesn’t really matter. These people either have no clue what they are talking about or are trying to downplay the damage. The price is extremely important. The reason is simple, bitcoin has no internal economy. For example, I am not directly affected by the exchange rate of the Euro because I receive my wage in Euro and pay my rent, electricity, food etc in Euro. So if the Euro drops 10% against the Dollar, this doesn’t directly affect me as I have no need for Dollars (it has a small indirect effect on me through its affect on trade and the wider economy, but let’s leave that to one side). In comparison, almost no is paid in bitcoin or can pay their rent, electricity etc in bitcoin. Therefore each time they wish to trade they must exchange fiat currency for bitcoin. So every time the price drops, you have to pay more for electricity, rent etc.

Bitcoin chart
The price of Bitcoin over the last two years

Bitcoiners love to point to Bitcoin Obituaries as if to point out Bitcoins resilience. “Look, at all the people who claimed bitcoin is dead, how wrong were they!” However, if you actually look at the website, it’s clear that few articles actually claim bitcoin is dead, rather they say it is dying (which it is) or that it will never take off and be a widely used currency (which it hasn’t). Far better would be to look at a compilation of outrageous claims of $1,000+ bitcoins and the hyperinflationary collapse of fiat currencies.

Bitcoiners like to point to the number of retailers who use bitcoin and claim that the infrastructure is strong (or unwittingly quote politicians during the Financial Crash by claiming that “the fundamentals are sound”). There are frequent posting of businesses beginning to accept Bitcoin in forums. However, even on pro-Bitcoin sites, there are few reports of people actually using Bitcoin to buy things. While records are kept of how many places begin to accept Bitcoin, few are kept of how many keep accepting it or how many of the customers actually use Bitcoin. In fact, the majority of retailers automatically convert the Bitcoin they receive into fiat, making the Bitcoin part of the transaction completely pointless. Accepting Bitcoin is more of a cheap, one-off publicity stunt than a proper element of the business.

Bitcoiners love to compare bitcoin to the internet, however there are several problems with this. First of all, you are comparing apples and oranges, by mixing a technology with merely one applicant of it. Bitcoin has more in common with one internet company rather than the whole technology. Bitcoiners seem to forget (or are too young to remember) that during the 90s there was a massive IT bubble full of wild promises of completely changing how we live that ended up crashing into nothing (I’ll let you draw your own Bitcoin parallels.) Just because the internet was a revolutionary new technology, didn’t stop many IT companies from collapsing.

The biggest difference between bitcoin and the internet is that the internet offered a major advantage that no one else had. You could freely send and receive information instantly all over the world. The advantages of e-mail over regular post were obvious and enormous. Whereas its not clear what the main advantage of bitcoin is. If I want to purchase something online, I can already do this with debit/credit cards or Pay Pal. If I want to send money, I can do this with a bank transfer. The technology already exists, all bitcoin claims to do is replace paying fees to banks with paying fees to exchanges.

Bitcoiners are getting desperate in their defences of the currency. Some like to point out that despite massive collapse, the price is still higher than it was two years ago. Of course it is, two years ago, hardly anyone had heard of the currency and it was still spreading. All start ups register enormous proportional growth in the beginning (after all, they are starting from nothing), its only impressive if they can maintain it with absolute gains too. If I set up my own currency and convinced one friend to use, that would be 100% growth, which is only impressive on paper. After all, over six years Bitcoin up +∞%. This reminds me of politicians who claimed that the 2008 crash wasn’t so bad as the economy only fell to 2003 levels .

One of the main claimed advantages of bitcoin is that it is free. This is not true. In reality, bitcoin is heavily subsidised. You see, bitcoin transactions only occur when they are confirmed by miners. These miners don’t do this out of the kindness of their heart, but because they receive bitcoins in return. This system holds so long as the price of bitcoin is high. However, if it drops too low, then the mining costs outweigh the rewards and miners will either have to start adding transaction charges to every transaction, thereby forcing bitcoiners to pay the full cost of the transaction, or else shut down. Either way involves higher costs and a slower service.

Bitcoin mining is a major problem source. In order to create/mine Bitcoins you need advance computers with high processing power. Due to economies of scale, these computers (or mining rigs) are concentrated in a few hands which every so often threaten to seize control of the whole system. Without getting too complicated, if 51% of the bitcoin mining is in the hands of one group, they can effectively destroy bitcoin (by double spending bitcoins). There is also the problem that mining involves serious costs not only in equipment but also electricity. If the price of bitcoin falls below the cost of mining, then it is uneconomic to continue mining. If they halt mining, then transactions will not be processed. The falling price of Bitcoin could lead to a death spiral if miners halt processing transactions because the price is too low. This will push people away from Bitcoin and push the price even lower and so on.

One of the most ridiculous and unexplainably popular ideas in the bitcoin community, is that bitcoin will be used by billions of people in third world countries who do not have access to banks. The idea that desperately poor people with limited access to basic necessities will have the technology and the expertise (or need) to use bitcoin is laughable. It is delusional to believe that Bitcoin will be saved by people without access to running water. The people of the Third World have bigger concerns than a decentralised peer-to-peer electronic currency.

Many bitcoiners have the odd notion that Bitcoin somehow challenges the banking system. Perhaps they are not familiar with how banks work, because even if everyone used bitcoins, we would still need to borrow and save. International transactions are a tiny part of a banks’ operations and even if they did lose this business, they would not go bankrupt. The Financial Crisis of 2008 would have been as bad or worse if Bitcoin was the global currency instead of the Dollar. Housing bubbles would still occur, banks would still be greedy and bailouts would still happen. Sure the banking system needs reform, but Bitcoin is not going to do it.

One of the signs that Bitcoin is dying is that hardly anyone actually uses the currency. Records show that only an insignificant number of Bitcoins are used on a daily or weekly basis. A mere 10% are used in a month and a massive 70% of Bitcoins have not been used in at least six months. A currency that people don’t actually use to buy things is a failure. Looking at its history, it never met the basic criteria of a currency and was instead merely a speculative investment (aka “Get Rich Quick”).


Some claim that Bitcoin doesn’t really matter, what really matters is the blockchain. Apparently this is a new ledger system that will change the world. Maybe accountants might get excited about that prospect, but the rest of us don’t care. Why any company would want its entire trading record to be public knowledge is byond me. Claiming the blockchain is revolutionary smacks of desperation and is like watching a drowning man clutching at straws. Bitcoin is a sinking ship and the blockchain is not going to save it.

Another common Bitcoin argument is that it is protection against inflation or more usually phrased as protection from evil Central Bankers stealing your money with inflation through the printing press. This is a common libertarian and Austrian economics argument, and was particularly common when Bitcoin was created in 2009 and Quantitative Easing was beginning in the US. However, since then the argument has lost most of its credibility. The tsunami of hyperinflation that was supposed to destroy the Dollar never happened. Instead inflation has remained as low as its always been for the last 30 years leaving the doomsayers looking foolish. Bitcoin is essentially a massive bet that fiat currencies (especially the Dollar) will suffer high inflation, if not hyperinflation. As an economic experiment its certainly interesting, but the verdict is clear, it failed.

The lack of control over the supply of Bitcoin has turned into a major weakness, not a strength. Throughout 2014, as demand for Bitcoin fell, it would have been sensible to stablise or freeze the supply of Bitcoins. Instead, the supply increased from 12 to 13.5 million. Increasing supply in a market where demand is falling, makes the problem much worse. In the irony of ironies, Bitcoin, a currency designed by people who despise Central Banks ability to create money and are convinced that excessive creation will destroy fiat currencies, is being destroyed excessive expansion of the money supply. At least it is providing a lesson in showing the value of leaving money supply to the discretion of Central Banks, it allows them to adjuste it to suit the needs of the economy.

All of which is to say nothing of the rampant fraud and theft in the Bitcoin community. Be your own bank has gone from being a slogan to a warning against theft, unless you want to get robbed, you need to provide the security of a bank. Many bitcoiners have gone to the level of spending as much on security as their Bitcoins are worth or storing them in paper wallets, which essentially means taking them off computers and away from the internet. Bitcoin, revolutionary internet money that it isn’t safe to keep anywhere near the internet.

You could fill a book with the flaws of Bitcoin and why it will never take off. Its had its 15 minutes of fame and now everyone has moved on. The community is shrinking and growing more desperate in its attempts to pretend everything is fine. Currencies rely heavily on network effects to survive, if no one else uses one then there’s no sense in you using it. The Bitcoin network is fading away and the price is destined to continue its downward march. This is likely to be the last year people take Bitcoin seriously (if last year wasn’t already). Whether Bitcoin disappears with a bang or a whimper, the end is coming.

31 thoughts on “The End Of Bitcoin”

  1. So Bitcoin is not dead, it’s dying? So, tell us, wizard, when will it finally be dead and you naysayers will stop writing about it? Will it be in 10 years, next month? Or will it be when the price is back down to $0.06? Put your name on it and own it like a man – seriously, tell us what criteria will indicate the actual death of bitcoin – or STFU. Until then, the blockchain goes on and on, regardless of your ignorant, uninformed opinion.

    1. Sorry, you want me to exactly predict the future price of Bitcoin? If I could see into the future, I wouldn’t be writing a blog for free, I’d be off making millions on the stock markets. Unfortunately, I don’t have that power. Its as ridiculous as expecting you to name the exact time and date Bitcoin will hit $500 again (presuming you think that will happen).

      If I had to guess I’d say Bitcoin will be in double digits before the end of the year. All I know for sure is that the price is going down and down. It won’t be a straight line, some temporary rises and sudden drops, but the trend is down, its only a question of how long it takes.

      As to when Bitcoin will “die”, that’s hard to say. If there’s only 10 people in the world trading with Bitcoin, someone will probably claim its not dead, but the rest of the world will have long since lost interest. So I have no idea when or if Bitcoin will reach zero, but it will keep getting closer to that point.

      1. But it would be interesting to know what price bitcoin must fall to for it to become uneconomic to maintain the blockchain. Any thoughts – or links – on that?

  2. Internet – You could freely send and receive information instantly all over the world. Bitcoin – You could freely send and receive money instantly all over the world. That is the advantage of bitcoin. Doesn’t look like the author had ever transferred money via bitcoin. Who need email if you can just wait a few days for the postman? Who need bitcoin if your prefer to wait for bank wire for hours even days.

    1. Stop and think about what you are saying. Isn’t the benefits of email obvious? Everyone has to send messages, especially in the world of business. After six years email was far more developed that Bitcoin (and without a fraction of the scandals). There was no comparable opposition or group of people saying email will fail.

      Whereas how often do you need to transfer money to the other side of the world? I’ve only done a bank transfer once in my life and that was between two accounts of mine. The technology to send money is already there, so bitcoin isn’t revolutionising anything on that end. Nor is it free, it is heavily subsidised by miners, the exchanges charge fees and there are costs in securing yourself against theft.

      1. Sir, use your own world, email has greatly improved the way people communicate. But I bet 30 years ago, when people could only send emails via Unix command line, you would say what was the purpose of email? Way too complicated to use. Postal mails worked just fine for me. I bet you only used emails via AOL, Yahoo email, MS outlook, etc, which were built for everyday users on top of email and TCP/IP protocols and came to live years after the original emails was born. One of the biggest advantage of Bitcoin is greatly improving the way people transfer money. I am stunned you only did bank transfers ONCE in your life. Have you ever purchased a house or a car? Have you ever paid rent? Have you ever had to pay bills? It takes 3 business days to transfer money between my own accountants. It takes at least 3-4 business days for online payments to reach their payees. It takes up to a week for checks to clear. With Bitcoin, it is instant and payment is guaranteed. It 24/7/365. No such thing as business hours. I suggest you at least experiment Bitcoin before publishing an opinion. Bitcoin is only 6 years old. It is still way too complicated for everyday people to understand and use. But user friendlier applications are being developed as we speak. In the not too distant future, I bet, Sir, you will be using Bitcoin to make purchases without knowing your payments are traveling over Bitcoin network.

        1. > But I bet 30 years ago, when people could only send emails via Unix command line, you would say what was the purpose of email? Way too complicated to use.

          I probably would. But after six years email was far more developed and user friendly. Are you implying that Bitcoin is too underdeveloped and not ready for use? Seems to undercut your point.

          The thing is that the technology for fast transfer of money already exists. It is mainly for security reasons that there is a delay. So even if banks did switch to Bitcoin, there would still be a need for a delay. Also, Bitcoin is not instant as there is a delay in actually getting your money from the exchange.

          1. “But after six years email was far more developed and user friendly.” Not sure what you are talking about? Email started on computer mainframes in 1960s to 1970s. It took several decades to finally reached mainstream. When I was in college ~ 30 years ago, email was still not very user friendly. Bitcoin is only an infant. “the technology for fast transfer of money already exists”. No it doesn’t. You need a centralized organization to verify the transaction. The verification takes hours even days. That is why when you wire money even to yourself, you cannot withdraw the money from the receiving account right away. Bitcoin in its current form requires ~10 minutes for a confirmation. Zero confirmation app is under development. I agree Bitcoin is not yet ready for average persons. But it is a lot more advanced than early stage of emails even after a couple of decades into existence. Shooting an infant to death simply because you don’t think he has potential is very harsh and short-sighted at best.

            1. Coinbear, remember: “I’ve only done a bank transfer once in my life and that was between two accounts of mine.” You’re not talking to an expert, you’re talking to an amateur who is passionately intense in his opinions.

  3. 51% attack ohh my! Ye that happened and nothing bad happened to the network.

    If a 51% attack actually occurred you could double spend once. Do it again and you would be kicked off the network and banned. Great 100 million dollar investment..

  4. The next time you use my data to support your thesis, you might as well at least give me credit. Everyone is drawing completely the wrong conclusion from that data.

    First of all, somewhere around 20% of all bitcoins in existence are extremely dormant, and have a strong possibility of being lost forever.

    Of those which remain, a very healthy amount participate in regular movement on the blockchain.

    The fact that 30% of all bitcoins in existence move over a relatively short time period is quite impressive. I doubt very seriously if 30% of all gold changes hands every six months.

    Bitcoin is a hybrid animal. It acts as a payment network (very well and very efficiently) and as a store of value at the same time.

    1. “The next time you use my data to support your thesis, you might as well at least give me credit.”

      I did, I linked back to the original Reddit post where I found it. I didn’t know of any other source for it.

      Nothing I said was wrong, 70% of Bitcoins hadn’t been moved in six months. The fact that so many are lost or dormant is not a defence but rather a flaw. After all the whole point of a currency is to be used so its a problem if so many have been lost.

      “The fact that 30% of all bitcoins in existence move over a relatively short time period is quite impressive. I doubt very seriously if 30% of all gold changes hands every six months.”

      I don’t find anything impressive about that at all. For such a new currency its a serious problem that so few Bitcoins are being used. I’d say that a large proportion of these unused coins have either been lost or their owners have lost interest in them.

      Also gold is a poor comparison as its not used as a currency so we wouldn’t expect to see frequent trading. Its solely a store of value and a source of speculation so sticking some in the bank for a couple of years doesn’t undermine its chief aim. Bitcoin, which aims primarily to be a currency, should be used on a regular basis to fulfill its aim. It can hardly grow if people are merely sitting around and waiting for its price to rise.

  5. What is your view on a government funded cyrptocurrency, for example tied to the UK pound? This would remove some of the issues.

  6. So do you admit being wrong? – “The Bitcoin network is fading away and the price is destined to continue its downward march. “

  7. Eagerly awaiting your next “Bitcoin is dead” article so I’ll know when to buy the bottom! That last one was timed perfectly.

    1. So true, I started buying Bitcoin after reading this article years ago. It’s been the best investment I’ve ever made.

        1. Yes, I use DCA. So when the price is higher I buy less, when it’s lower I buy more. It works as intended.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: