Billionaire ‘Shark’ Mark Cuban explains why Bitcoin is better than gold

CryptoGlobePublicado em 2022-12-27Última atualização em 2022-12-27

Resumo

In a recent interview, billionaire investor and entrepreneur Mark Cuban shared his thoughts on Bitcoin and gold.

In a recent interview, billionaire investor and entrepreneur Mark Cuban shared his thoughts on Bitcoin and gold.

Cuban is the majority owner of the professional basketball team Dallas Mavericks, as well as one of the “sharks” on the highly popular reality show “Shark Tank” (which is aired on the ABC television network).

Cuban’s comments were made during an interview on the “Club Random with Bill Maher” podcast.

According to a report by Decrypt, Cuban still seems bullish on Bitcoin:

“I want Bitcoin to go down a lot further so I can buy some more.“

As for why he thinks Bitcoin is a better store-of-value asset than gold, Cuban said:

“Gold is a store of value and so is Bitcoin… If everything went to hell in a hand basket and you had a gold bar you know what would happen? Someone would beat the f*** out of you or kill you and take your gold bar. It’s useless.“

According to a report by The Daily Hodl, during an interview with Forbes that was released on September 26, Cuban said the current state of the crypto space is kind of like the state of streaming services in the 90s:

“With crypto, it’s very analogous to that. We’re in the early ‘hassle’ phases. Now the very earliest of crypto – however you want to decide the beginning, with Bitcoin or whatever – has been around 12 years. But in terms of applications with smart contracts, that’s only 2017 for the most part. And so we’re really only five years in...

“So I’m still really bullish on crypto. We had some early wins, just like streaming audio with sports and news. Now with crypto you have DeFi (decentralized finance), and you have money transfer and some other applications, but you haven’t had any mainstream applications where your mom says, ‘Okay, we’ve got to get a wallet because I have to do A, B or C.’ It’s been DeFi, NFTs (non-fungible tokens) and money transfer. And so it’s kind of boring right now. We’re waiting for that next round of applications, and there’s a lot of people working on them.“

With regard to NFTs, Cuban had this to say:

“NFTs as books, I think particularly for textbooks. Now, whether or not we can get the college textbook publishers to go along is another issue but the idea of kids buying books for classes… The whole process of buying books.

“First, do you want new or used? Then, you lug these books back, then at the end of the semester – because they’re only good for the time you’re in the class – you make the decision, ‘Yeah I’m going to sell it. How do I sell it? Do I ship it off? Do I take it to the bookstore?’ It’s just a pain in the ass and in a digital world, it’s ridiculous.

“With those as NFTs, well the NFTs allow you to apply royalties so that when that book is resold, the author and the publisher and whoever else is involved can get a set royalty fee. That means that the publishers who created the book can keep on getting paid, whereas when there’s a physical book that’s sold and resold they have to hope that book falls apart, so that they can sell a new one. So I think that’s a great application.”

Leituras Relacionadas

EF's Epic Reorganization: 20% Layoffs, Budget Halved, Is Ethereum Gearing Up for a Leaner Future?

The Ethereum Foundation (EF) has announced a major organizational restructuring, involving a 20% staff reduction (approx. 54 employees) and a division into functional clusters like Protocol, Access, User, Community, and Institutional layers. Co-founder Vitalik Buterin further revealed plans to cut the EF's budget by around 40% over the coming years, aiming to reduce its annual spending rate from about 15% to roughly 5% by 2030, transitioning to an endowment-driven model. This overhaul is seen as a long-overdue correction to the EF's ambiguous role. As Ethereum grew, the foundation faced persistent criticism over ETH sales, perceived lack of execution, and unclear strategy, often becoming a focal point for community frustration amid ETH's price stagnation. The reform aims to redefine the EF's boundaries, narrowing its focus to core protocol research, public goods funding, and ecosystem coordination, while offloading more applied development work to the broader market. Concurrently, ecosystem forces like the newly formed Ethlabs (founded by ex-EF researchers) and other independent groups are stepping in to fill the space, signaling a shift from a centralized model to a more distributed, collaborative ecosystem structure. The move was notably praised by Solana co-founder toly, who viewed a "leaner" EF as potentially more decisive and agile.

Odaily星球日报Há 25m

EF's Epic Reorganization: 20% Layoffs, Budget Halved, Is Ethereum Gearing Up for a Leaner Future?

Odaily星球日报Há 25m

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

Dragonfly partner Haseeb explores the distorted economics of AI model pricing, drawing parallels to tax policy. He notes that startups and small teams (under 150 users) enjoy heavily subsidized, fixed-price AI subscriptions (like Claude Code), where the marginal cost of an additional token is effectively zero. This creates a powerful incentive for them to maximize token usage ("token-maxxing") and innovate aggressively with AI automation. In contrast, large enterprises (over 150 users) are forced onto "Enterprise" plans, paying per-token API fees with high (~75%) markups. This acts like a steep "tax" on AI-powered labor, disincentivizing marginal automation and experimental use, and encouraging them to retain more human workers. Haseeb argues this pricing creates a "150-person cliff," a regulatory notch similar to labor laws in France that discourage firms from growing past 50 employees. He predicts the fastest-growing future companies may deliberately cap their headcount at 149 to avoid the punitive enterprise pricing. This would foster an "AI-first" management philosophy obsessed with automation and outsourcing to stay lean. While not intentionally designed, this bifurcated pricing could become one of the most influential de facto tax policies, shaping how AI replaces labor—not through mass layoffs at big firms, but through agile, AI-native startups outcompeting them.

marsbitHá 37m

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

marsbitHá 37m

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

xBubble: Addressing the Structural Gap in the VC-Backed OPC Economy The concept of OPC (One Person Company) is evolving from a buzzword to a significant AI-driven market. While AI coding tools like Replit and Lovable have validated demand from non-technical users wanting to build applications, a key gap remains: the leap from creating a demo to running a stable, evolving business. These tools still require users to manage the development process, including technical judgments for integrations, modifications, and deployments—a major hurdle for OPCs. xBubble, by DAPPOS, tackles this by shifting from "Prompt-to-Code" to "SOP-to-Business." Instead of generating code from instructions, its core is a system of pre-organized SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) that translate business goals—like "sell World Cup merchandise"—into complete, executable workflows. This includes generating cohesive assets, pages, payment systems, and backend logic. The platform is augmented by a network of third-party service providers who handle infrastructure (hosting, domains, payment setup), acting like "on-site service engineers." Users can pay for these services directly with xBubble credits, simplifying onboarding. This ecosystem aims to deliver not just an app, but a complete, modifiable business launch path. xBubble targets a clear OPC segment: small commercial nodes (e.g., creators, merchants) with existing products, customers, or channels, but for whom a full tech team is unjustifiable. Its potential lies in SOPs accumulating expertise from real cases, improving reliability and reducing delivery costs over time. Additionally, its native support for crypto payments caters to global or digital-native OPCs. In summary, as AI democratizes software creation, xBubble's opportunity is to prove that "SOP-to-Business" provides more immediate value for launching a real, operational business than a powerful but unstructured AI coding tool.

链捕手Há 39m

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

链捕手Há 39m

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

**"Invest Only When Certain": A Nine-Year Retrospective from a VC Across Four Cycles** IOSG founder Jocy shares hard-earned lessons from nine years and over a hundred investments in Web3. The core challenge isn't identifying successful founders, but understanding why talented founders with solid ideas still fail. Through building a "failed founder database," IOSG identified six recurring failure patterns. **Founder Trait Red Flags:** 1. **Emotionally Unstable:** Founders who react defensively to criticism or publicly lash out under pressure (e.g., 80% drawdowns) often fail. Resilience is key. 2. **Lacking Hunger / Having a Fallback:** Founders with significant safety nets (family wealth, cushy fallback jobs) may lack the "do-or-die" commitment needed to survive crypto's brutal cycles. 3. **Unchecked Ego:** Includes "polished execution machines" who excel in known frameworks but struggle when paradigms shift, and "professor-types" who are technically brilliant but resistant to commercial feedback or coaching. **Project Structure Red Flags:** 4. **Token-First, Not Product-First:** Treating the token solely as a fundraising tool with no real utility or connection to product value is a major warning sign. The project should have value even if the token goes to zero. 5. **No Day-1 Exit Thesis:** Founders must have a clear, staged capital strategy from the start, understanding what each funding round needs to prove to unlock the next. "Exit before entry" is crucial. 6. **No Full-Cycle Experience:** Founders who haven't lived through a complete crypto bull/bear cycle (e.g., 2018, 2022) often underestimate their vulnerability. IOSG limits initial checks for such teams to $250k, sizing for risk. **The Positive Flipside: Desirable Founder Traits** The ideal candidate exhibits: obsessive problem-depth, being a second-time founder with a non-consensus vision, strong communication skills with *controlled* ego, relentless perseverance, and a global perspective with agency and taste (increasingly vital in the AI era). **Three Survival Tips for Founders:** 1. **Cash Flow Over Narrative:** Real revenue is what sustains projects, not vanity metrics. 2. **Tokens Are a Liability:** Avoid issuing a token unless absolutely necessary. The hidden costs (market making, liquidity, compliance) are immense, often a multi-million-dollar burden. 3. **Respect Liquidity:** Sell during peaks to build treasury, buy back to support the protocol during troughs. Be realistic about valuations and your ability to deliver for the next round. The final principle is simple yet paramount: **"If it's a borderline 'yes' or 'no,' don't invest."** In an industry that reinvents itself every few years, the discipline to consistently say "no" is the ultimate secret to longevity.

Foresight NewsHá 1h

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

Foresight NewsHá 1h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片