Two crypto experts' top predictions for digital assets in 2022
That sounds like a big number. Why is there going to be such mass adoption? Well, we already have it. Bob were already at 26 of american adults, im simply ratcheting up to 33. So a lot more people know about it and are investing in it than most realize its kind of like teenagers buying beer theyre doing it. They just dont want you to know about it. Theyre not talking about it, matt talk to us about the right way to look at all this crypto volatility rick – and i have talked about this for many years. You know we cover the horse race here at cnbc, meaning we we cover the daily price moves of virtually everything but crypto and other collectibles. As you know, there arent like stocks, unlike stocks, bitcoin doesnt, throw off a dividend: uh it doesnt have a future stream of earnings that you can discount like gold and comic books and other collectibles. It just sort of sits there. So whats the right way to look at all this price. Craziness bitcoin has a price, but how do you figure out what its value is? Its a great question bob? I do think it applies differently to crypto assets like ethereum, which do have some fundamental, intrinsic value and bitcoin, which is mostly used as digital gold. Look, it comes down to supply and demand and because the supply of bitcoin is absolutely known, there will only be 21 million. It comes down to demand how many people want to hold a digital version of gold.
How many people want a political payment rail? How many people want sort of a hedge against the fed, not getting the ease off of quantitative easing exactly right? I think most of the statistics suggest that more and more people are coming into the bitcoin economy, as rick mentioned, and so im optimistic on what the demand will be long term. But it really is a question of supply and demand. Bob and and right now were seeing a little bit of a pullback, but still some strong fundamentals underneath yeah, i feel the same way: im always agnostic on the price of things like people, ask me what bitcoins worth im agnostic on the price of it its worth. Whatever anyone will pay for it, you know i collect rock posters whats, a jimi hendrix supposed to work. It doesnt do anything. It just sits there, its worth, whatever 101 will pay for it. Uh at that moment, uh rick youre bucking the trend uh of almost everybody in the etf business on bitcoin. I know you theres a little tongue of cheap on this, but you do say the sec will approve a bitcoin etf in 2022.. Most of the industry think not. Is there a compelling reason to believe why theyll change their mind, and why would they, given that theyve turned everything down so far? Well, the sec is running out of excuses. Quite frankly, uh the industry is maturing its developing processes and systems that are resolving the bulk of the secs concerns and, at this point, its just obstinates on the secs part.
One of the big concerns that theyve raised that chairman ginsler has raised is that they cant control it well enough. Well, you know they cant control, gold or oil either. Those are 24 7 globally traded assets and they just have to get over it. We need to recognize that people are buying this asset class and in the absence of an etf which is the most popular most familiar asset structure in the securities marketplace. In the absence of that wall, streets ignored, financial advisors are excluded, and that leaves investors to their own devices and too often theyre getting themselves in trouble because they dont understand how those other assets or products work because theyre not getting the mainstream advice of the financial Community, by creating an etf, the sec will basically be allowing major wall street firms, brokerage firms, financial planning firms, major banks and insurance companies to engage for the first time ever, and this will go very far toward consumer protection. Eventually, the sec will say: yes, theres no question about it and it is kind of tongue in cheek, as you noted, ive been making this prediction for the last seven years ill one day be right, but we have to ask ourselves a simple question: bob: how can The sec say yes to a 3x inverse fund and not say yes to a bitcoin. Etf makes no sense, well, thats, something i would you, and i would agree on for sure. I dont know why the world needs a 3x inverse of anything but matt youre.
The expert here you actually have engaged the sec for many years of one of the thought. Leaders in this space does rick have a point here, like they dont regulate gold, for example, or oil, but on the other hand, theres not problems with fraud, uh necessarily in gold uh, and there isnt problems with custodial issues and outright theft going on. Is there a difference here i mean the the gensor seems to be saying there is i dont, i dont think theres a material difference, bob theres, certainly instances of fraud and manipulation in all sorts of commodity markets. I dont think theyre materially worse in the bitcoin market, and so if the same standards are applied to you know oil, natural gas, gold, silver, etc that have allowed etf to launch in those commodities if those same standards are applied to bitcoin and other crypto assets. I think crypto will get through im, actually aligned with rick ill take one step further than he said. He talked about sort of the real politic of it of it becoming increasingly untenable, of it being a huge investor, protection benefit, ill, add and while i cant speak to bitwises filings, the quality of filings around bitcoin etfs have improved dramatically over the past year. You know companies not just bitwise, but others are providing extreme amounts of data to the sec to help answer their questions, and i think, eventually, the cumulative weight of evidence will force them to move forward with an approval and, as rick said, thats going to be great.
For investors, its going to be more investor protections going to be better products, its going to be dramatically lower prices to access the crypto market that could save people billions of dollars over the long term, so im very hopeful. We get it this year. I think this may be the year that rick is finally right, but youre youre youre, going to the secs point here. They denied it several in the last several years, because it they they wanted more more data and theyre getting more data. Its the quality is improving and so, in a sense, the sec is getting what they want there, its slowly it versus having this done five years ago. The whole ecosystem is a lot more robust. Now, uh isnt it matt. I mean im not trying to argue the secs point, but they they they are getting better data. Now you, you have engaged them more and you you, you have been addressing their concerns and trying to cure, as the legal word is, the defects that they saw in the original filings, thats, absolutely right bob. In fact, i would give the sec credit. You know the first bitcoin etf filing was in 2013 from the winklevoss twins. I would say at that time the bitcoin market was not ready for an etf. There were no regulated insured custodians. There were massive arbitrage gaps. There was a lot of fake volume and wash trading in the market. There werent ways to handle broker dealer issues.
There were there werent, even tax or audit things that were cleared up, weve solved the vast majority of those problems and added more and more data demonstrating that theyre solved weve seen huge regulatory progress on the custodial side. We now have firms like fidelity that are custody. Bitcoin bitcoin has gone from the edges from the grassroots, from the retail community to an institutional, robust asset that trades 24, 7 365, with very tight spreads and institutional market makers like jane street, so youre right, the sec has gotten what it wanted. The bitcoin market has gotten better. I would just argue that, its time to get over the hump its time to deliver to the american investors, the lower cost and better protections and easier access that an etf can provide so were getting there. I think we may get over the hurdle this year.