Bitcoin: Platzt er am Ende wie die Tulpenblase?

Kein Tag vergeht, an dem ich nicht zu Bit­coins gefragt werde. Ein kla­reres Bla­sen­zeichen kann ich mir gar nicht denken. So erging es wohl auch John Authers von der FT, der die Ent­wicklung von Bit­coins mit der Tul­pen­blase vergleicht:

  • „Bitcoin nearly broke the $10,000 barrier on Monday, having only broken $2,000 for the first time earlier this year.“
    Fazit: Das kann man wohl sagen. Ich war nicht dabei, gestehe ich an dieser Stelle.


  • „This is quite some­thing, but still, claims that the bitcoin boom of the past year is in some way a repeat of the Nasdaq Bubble which finally popped in March 2000 are well wide of the mark. Here is a com­pa­rison of the two:“
    Fazit: Ver­glichen mit der New Economy Blase ist es etwas ganz anderes. Und das für eine elek­tro­nische Währung, die man nicht anfassen und ver­stecken kann …

Quelle: FT

  • „Its average annual real return since people started trading it in 2010 is 411 per cent. (…) The fol­lowing chart com­pares bitcoin returns (as cal­cu­lated by Bloomberg) with returns on global stock markets since 1900, (…) Bitcoin has made money for its backers in a way never enjoyed by stock investors:“
    Fazit: Das alleine muss natürlich nicht bedeuten, dass es eine unbe­rech­tigte Preis­ent­wicklung ist. Dennoch …

Quelle: FT

  • „Going further back in history, (…)  there do seem to have been some investment manias that went even further. Let us start, ine­vi­tably, with the Net­her­lands‘ Tulip Mania. (…) The maximum price reliably recorded for a tulip bulb during the mania was 5,200 guilders. (…) a 12lbs loaf would at the time have cost 0.4 guilders. So at the very top, you could have exch­anged one tulip bulb for appro­xi­m­ately 156,000lbs of bread, (…) Nowadays a packet of 100 tulip bulbs can be bought on Amazon for  $32.98, while a 1.25lbs loaf of Sara Lee white bread will cost $1.98, so you can get roughly 5 bulbs per pound of bread.“
    Fazit: Diese Rela­tionen waren mir so nicht klar. Das ist doch wirklich beeindruckend.


  • Jetzt kommt es aber: “ But note that a bulb phy­si­cally exists, and that its price can be com­pared with other phy­sical objects. It is not clear that any such fun­da­mental valuation is pos­sible for bitcoin which is vul­nerable to the risk of action by governments.“
    Fazit: Das ist auch ein Argument in meinem Artikel für die WiWo in dieser Woche.


  • Tul­pen­zwiebeln gewannen: „(…) in four months of a little over 2,200 per cent. Over the past four months, bitcoin has only gained 253 per cent. So cryp­to­cur­rencies are still not as crazily over­bought as tulip bulbs used to be alt­hough tulip bulbs do of course have the advantage that they could grow into very pretty flowers in your garden.“
    Fazit: Es kann also noch fröhlich wei­ter­gehen. Kaufen würde ich sie dennoch nicht, weil sie auf dem „greater fool“ basieren.


  • „A broader lesson is that bitcoin as an investment or spe­cu­lation phe­no­menon is unlike any­thing that has been seen in a long time. It is behaving even more dra­ma­ti­cally than most of the best docu­mented bubbles, alt­hough it has not yet reached the excesses of the tulip bubble.“


  • „History as inter­preted by many of us (including me) sug­gests that prices will even­tually come down to earth with a bump. But it gives us no steer on how much further this could go on, or on timing. Maybe bitcoin could yet match Bizarden tulip bulbs before it is done.“ Fazit: Finger weg!

FT (Anmeldung erfor­derlich): „Tulip bulbs vs bitcoin: a bubble com­pa­rison“, 27. November 2017

Dr. Daniel Stelter /