Bitcoin and the Financial Times: between skepticism and the historic rise to $100,000

The Financial Times, through FT Alphaville, has long maintained a critical position towards Bitcoin, defining it as an unsuitable asset both as a means of exchange and as a store of value. Since 2011, the newspaper’s articles have often highlighted the structural weaknesses of cryptocurrencies, considering them a negative-sum game that lacks true economic utility. 

The critical relationship of the Financial Times with Bitcoin

Despite these criticisms, Bitcoin has recently reached and surpassed the symbolic threshold of $100,000, a result that has reignited the debate on its real value and the future of cryptocurrencies. 

In response to those suggesting a reconsideration, FT Alphaville published an irony disguised as an “apology,” sarcastically apologizing to those who might have missed profit opportunities by following their skepticism. This provocative tone reaffirms the newspaper’s position, which does not see Bitcoin as a sustainable solution for the problems of traditional finance, nor a credible alternative as a store of value.

Despite the apparent self-criticism, the central message remains unchanged: the rise of Bitcoin is seen more as a speculative bubble fueled by contingent factors than as a structural phenomenon capable of revolutionizing the global economy.

According to the post published on FT Alphaville, readers of the Financial Times who over the years have been influenced by the newspaper’s negative outlook might have avoided investing in Bitcoin, thus missing out on potential significant gains.

The skeptical approach of the newspaper, which has always questioned the sustainability and real value of cryptocurrencies, may have dissuaded many from entering a market that, although volatile, has demonstrated exponential growth. 

This theme emerges with irony in the article, which alludes to a sort of moral responsibility for having contributed to creating a negative narrative, depriving some investors of economic opportunities. However, the intent of the post is to maintain a critical position, emphasizing that, although the profits have been significant for many, the risks and uncertainties intrinsic to Bitcoin remain central elements of the discourse.

The elements behind the success of Bitcoin

The recent peak of Bitcoin above $100,000 is the result of a combination of economic, political, and market factors. Firstly, the regulatory and political context has played a crucial role. 

The administration of President-elect Donald Trump, thanks to the appointment of supporters of criptovalute in key positions like the SEC, has generated a climate of trust among investors. At the same time, the growing involvement of financial institutions, as demonstrated by the launch of ETF funds supported by giants like BlackRock, has given further momentum to the growth of the cryptocurrency. BlackRock, with a dedicated fund valued at 45 billion dollars, represents a clear example of the growing interest of institutional investors in Bitcoin.

However, uncertainties are not lacking. Analysts and experts continue to question the sustainability of Bitcoin’s current value, using predictive models such as the Stock-to-Flow or Metcalfe’s law to estimate its long-term potential. Although some see the milestone of $100,000 as a confirmation of Bitcoin’s role as “digital gold,” others consider it a phenomenon linked to short-term speculation. 

The debate remains open, but one thing is certain: Bitcoin continues to polarize opinions, pushing observers to confront a phenomenon that redefines the boundaries of modern finance.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the debate on Bitcoin and its real value remains complex and polarizing. The article from FT Alphaville represents a moment of ironic self-analysis, but also an opportunity to reflect on the impact that a skeptical narrative can have on readers and investors. 

The growth of Bitcoin beyond $100,000 demonstrates how, despite criticisms and uncertainties, the cryptocurrency market continues to attract attention and capital, driven by global dynamics, technological innovations, and regulatory changes. 

However, the issues of sustainability and economic utility remain at the center of discussions, especially in light of the growing involvement of financial institutions. 

The irony of the article does not deny the historical doubts of the Financial Times, but highlights the need for a more nuanced approach towards phenomena that, regardless of opinions, are transforming the traditional paradigms of finance. Bitcoin is not just an asset, but a lens through which to observe the contemporary economic evolution.