The Bitcoin Bullish Trend: A Mirage?

Since January 2023, Bitcoin (BTC) has seen several breakthroughs, causing its valuation to soar. The asset has repeatedly reached the $30,000 mark. A resistance level it has vigorously broken through to reach $40,000 — doubling its price since the beginning of the year. The asset is now trading at about $43,655 after gaining 4.52 % in the last 24 hours. Bitcoin (BTC) is thus showing dynamism that we haven’t seen in months. However, in this context, some financiers believe that all this hype around the flagship crypto is biased. Let’s see what this is all about in the lines that follow. 

Bitcoin (BTC), A Popular Crypto Unsuitable for the Public?

Back in the top 10 of the most significant assets of the global financial ecosystem, Bitcoin (BTC) is on a roll. The situation is such that some analysts no longer see the flagship crypto stepping down from this pedestal. And this perspective is underscored by several arguments.

However, some experts do not see things the same way. That’s the case with Ulrich Bindseil and Jürgen Schaaf, two European central bankers. In a recent blog post published on the European Central Bank (ECB) website, the two specialists criticized BTC extensively.

The asset would be at the end of its course. A reasoning that holds, according to them, due to its structural weaknesses. The bankers argue that from an operational standpoint, BTC reveals signs that make it unsuitable for real meaningful use. BTC is, they explain, too cumbersome, too slow, and too expensive in gas fees for mass public use.

Intrinsic problems that prevent it from effectively fulfilling its role as a decentralized digital currency alternative to traditional monetary systems. What the bankers are saying, in essence, is that beyond the attraction it generates, Bitcoin has not succeeded in establishing itself as a means to perform legal transactions. But that’s not their only complaint against the flagship crypto.

Bitcoin, an Investment Devoid of Reliability?

We previously mentioned that initially, Bitcoin (BTC) was meant to offer an alternative to the classic financial and monetary system. According to the arguments by Ulrich Bindseil and Jürgen Schaaf, the flagship crypto seems to have strayed somewhat from this initial goal.

In fact, throughout the 2010s, BTC, which started as a rather viable investment, emerged as a speculative asset. This means that it was essentially speculative fervor that determined Bitcoin’s valuation in the crypto market. This could be understood because BTC, compared to other asset classes, lacked financial flows, dividends, productivity potential, or intrinsic social benefits.

Except that the problem with speculation is that it requires capital inflows to thrive. This explains the periods of substantial price increases that Bitcoin (BTC) has experienced since its existence. The asset achieving periodic increases related to waves of new investors. Is the current surge of Bitcoin therefore related to this fact?

Bitcoin, a Manipulated Market?

This is probably the high point of the market experts’ criticism of the Bitcoin (BTC) market. According to them, it is manipulated. They particularly mention the role that exchanges and stablecoin issuers could have played in this regard during the asset’s initial increases. Ulrich Bindseil and Jürgen Schaaf furthermore argue something else. The fact that the main investors in Bitcoin have a significant influence on the continuation of the excitement around the flagship crypto. According to them, several companies have actively promoted Bitcoin at their own expense, late 2020.

Meanwhile, numerous venture capital firms have maintained substantial investments dedicated to the flagship crypto. This, even as the bear market was in full swing. In July, venture capital investments in the crypto and blockchain ecosystem totaled $17.9 billion. A sign of continued interest despite market fluctuations.

The other persistence in this ecosystem, further reinforcing skepticism about Bitcoin’s (BTC) rise, is the issue of innovation. In particular, the belief that innovation should be the determinant of crypto regulation. This belief is especially evident in the case of assets like Bitcoin, which relies on distributed ledger technology and blockchain. For the two ECB experts, it is necessary to question the unshakable faith in unbridled innovation. Because, despite the transformative potential attributed to these technologies, their actual societal value remains limited, which casts doubt on the future benefits of these technologies.

Given the perceived flaws of Bitcoin as a payment and investment system, the experts believe that legitimizing Bitcoin (BTC) through regulation seems delicate. Indeed, investments in BTC generate short-term profits. But their long-term consequences, such as tensions with users and damage to the reputation of the crypto sector, cannot be ignored, as they could potentially be considerable. Consequently, instead of hasty endorsement, caution is recommended. A stance deemed necessary to protect against potential pitfalls associated with the uncertainty surrounding Bitcoin’s trajectory.

Conclusion

The criticisms from European bankers Ulrich Bindseil and Jürgen Schaaf highlight the fundamental concerns surrounding the rise of Bitcoin (BTC). They question its adaptability as a mainstream transaction method due to its intrinsic weaknesses. In addition, BTC’s transformation into a speculative asset raises concerns about its reliability as an investment. Concerns, reinforced by allegations of market manipulation and influence from large investors. Overall, the financial community is called upon to adopt a cautious approach to the uncertainties surrounding Bitcoin’s future trajectory. Regardless, the asset has reached another milestone, with a valuation of 44 080 dollars.