By the laws of mathematics and the rules of English grammar, it is clear that the Winklevoss twins were never bitcoin billionaires, because there are two of them and $1 billion worth of bitcoins split two ways does not two billionaires make. After the last few weeks, however, the Winklevii do not even constitute a single collective bitcoin billionaire, since bitcoins are worth about 40% of what they were when they briefly made each Winklevoss a singular half-billionaire. Do you think that this dramatic turnaround has instilled a little humility in the duo? Perhaps it has made them a bit more reticent about making bold predictions about the cryptofuture? If you believed either of these things, you clearly do not know much about the Winklevoss twins.
"These technologies can’t flourish and grow without thoughtful regulation that connects them to finance," Tyler Winklevoss, chief executive and co-founder of the Gemini Exchange, said in an interview on Bloomberg Television. "As long as jurisdictions strike the right balance, we think that its going to be a huge boon and win for cryptocurrencies."
When asked to respond to criticism leveled at digital coins from leading business figures such as investor Warren Buffett, International Monetary Fund head Christine Lagarde and J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon, Winklevoss said such negativity was a "failure of the imagination…."
In comments that some might construe as ageist, Tyler Winklevoss said: "As you get older your brain loses its plasticity at some point and you get wedded to the frameworks that you have….
"It's also a framework that's been embedded in, burned into your brain for let's say 65-70 years and maybe in some of these cases, examples, you're talking about 80 years. It's hard to like unlearn that or think about something new and look, if you're those individuals, the status quo is really good."
I’m enthusiastic about the blockchain technology that makes Bitcoin possible. In fact, Vanguard is using such technology. As for Bitcoin the currency? I see a decent probability that its price goes to zero….
The investment case for cryptocurrencies is weak…. Cryptocurrency prices… are generally not based on economic fundamentals. To date, their prices have depended more on speculation about their eventual adoption and use. The speculation creates volatility that, ironically, undermines their value as a currency.
Nice try, Vanguard global chief economist Joe Davis, but Tyler Winklevoss has no use for facts or analysis emanating from such turgid, unmalleable muscle as your brain.
“We’re in this for the long haul, whether that’s a decade or many decades,” Tyler Winklevoss said. “We remember when Bitcoin was $8, so as far as we’re concerned, it’s all gravy from here."