Mr. Schaaf, in times of Bitcoin euphoria you always warned of possible setbacks.

Do you currently feel confirmed?

Christian Siedenbiedel

Editor in Business.

  • Follow I follow

Unfortunately yes.

I was more surprised that the accelerated decline was so long in coming.

But it is always very difficult to predict when such speculative bubbles will burst.

From my point of view, bitcoins are pure speculation: As an investment, they do not earn any interest, no dividends, and they have not established themselves as a means of payment outside of the illegal area.

Hardly anyone pays with Bitcoin in everyday life.

The business model works according to a kind of snowball principle, so new money must always follow.

But of course there are people who have a great interest in the system continuing to run;

For example, early investors who have not gotten out yet, or the miners who create Bitcoin, or crypto exchanges who make a living from the business with it.

You wrote at the time that the intrinsic value of Bitcoin was zero.

But doesn't that also apply to fiat money, the money from the European Central Bank, which has recently lost purchasing power?

No, there are major differences.

With bitcoin, there is no liability bearer, and there is no issuer that further worries about stability.

Behind the euro stands the entire political capital of the European Monetary Union.

The euro is also the legal tender.

It connects business, citizens and society.

Bitcoin, on the other hand, has a mathematically fair value of no more than zero, and in my view the social value is even negative: Just think of the high energy consumption for production.

It currently corresponds to the consumption of a country like Austria.

With the crash, this should decrease somewhat, since a high price increases the financial incentives for mining.

Do you see risks from this so-called crypto crash for general financial stability?

In any case, the size of the bubble is now quite threatening.

However, the interconnectedness of the crypto sector with other parts of the financial industry is apparently not particularly high.

This is an advantage in such situations.

However, little is known about the role of internal and external loans with Bitcoin, it is all non-transparent, the sector is hardly regulated and monitored.

As long as the crisis remains within the crypto sector, the consequences will probably be limited - except for the cheated investors.

Are there plans to regulate bitcoin more tightly now?

Absolutely, and Europe is a pioneer here.

A provisional agreement was reached between the EU Council and the European Parliament at the end of June.

An official text will probably be available in early 2023.

Specific legal provisions will then come into force twelve months later at the earliest.

Of course, this all takes a long time given the dynamics of the market - but in other areas of law people are still lagging behind.

Do you see the effects of the current development on the plans of the central banks themselves to develop new digital currencies?

In the United States there have recently been critical voices in this regard...

I do not think that the recent development harms the plans for CBDC like the digital euro.

On the contrary: From my point of view, the crypto crash is grist to the mill of the advocates of the digital euro.

Since payment is becoming more and more digital, you need a stable medium and a reliable process.

With digital central bank money, CBDC for short, the user acquires a claim directly against the central bank, an institution that cannot become insolvent and is committed to stability.

A digital exchange like FTX had $9 billion in liabilities versus only $900 million in liquid assets.

For Bitcoin as a whole, the ratio is even worse, as there are $320 billion in liabilities and $0 collateral.

Well from my point of view