From bullish to bearish? Why do well-known analysts change their stance on Bitcoin?

Question

【Crypto】Macro economist Luke Gromen was once a staunch supporter of Bitcoin. During the price dip below $30,000 from late 2022 to early 2023, he heavily accumulated and has held onto his position ever since. But recently, he has changed his stance—turning bearish on Bitcoin.

There are several considerations behind this shift. First, the high correlation between Bitcoin and tech stocks is inherently a risk. More concerning is that the real bottleneck in AI competition is not chips, but electricity. This means that the outlook for both tech stocks and Bitcoin may not be very optimistic in the future.

Second, in terms of relative performance, Bitcoin against gold has not shown any breakthrough moves. Looking ahead, the liquidity environment remains—unless there’s nuclear-level money printing, we are in a tightening cycle. This is unfavorable for Bitcoin.

There is also a longer-term threat: quantum computing. Luke believes this could become a real problem within 2 to 9 years.

Notably, Tether’s recent actions are quite interesting. The company is increasing investments in AI and gold, and its gold holdings on the balance sheet have already surpassed Bitcoin. From these signals, it seems that smart money in the market is making a subtle asset adjustment.

MetaverseLandlord · Accepted Answer

Sold too early? This guy still hasn't escaped the curse of the cycle after all.

---

I didn't expect the logic of power being a bottleneck, but it feels a bit presumptuous. AI consuming electricity doesn't mean Bitcoin has no future.

---

The threat of quantum computing is a recurring topic every year. When it actually arrives, I guess our other assets won't have anywhere to run.

---

You only changed your tune after going from 30,000? That time gap is a bit awkward, brother.

---

Liquidity tightening is indeed a hidden concern, but why doesn't he mention Bitcoin's own hedging properties?

---

AI, quantum, electricity—feels like he's just looking for reasons to justify his stop-loss.

---

Being bearish is fine, but using the argument of tying Bitcoin to tech stocks to criticize it is a bit flimsy.

CommunityJanitor · Answer

Wow, this guy invested 30,000 and now wants to sell. Feels a bit like a contrarian indicator.

SatoshiNotNakamoto · Answer

Big boss, this reversal move from a long to a short, I really didn't expect the power outage to be the choke point.

Tokenomics911 · Answer

Wow, from holding firmly at 30,000 and now changing your tune? This repetitive face-slapping rhythm is really something... But I've never heard of the power bottleneck angle before; Bitcoin and AI competing for electricity—this script is quite interesting.

ShitcoinArbitrageur · Answer

Haha, another convert turned traitor. Luke's recent change of stance is truly outrageous. The explanation about power bottlenecks really can't hold up anymore.

---

Quantum computing threats... Bro, we’ll be waiting until the Year of the Monkey or later. Bitcoin will have already collapsed by then.

---

Sounds nice, but actually it's just pessimism about tech stocks. Bitcoin is caught in the crossfire.

---

No one can escape liquidity tightening. Just look at the Russians now trying to scalp some profits. It still needs to fall if it’s going to fall.

---

Bought at 30,000 and now just shorting... This mindset definitely comes from someone who has experienced a bear market.

---

Power issues? Listen to this argument—if AI has been consuming so much electricity for so long, why hasn't anyone said anything earlier?

---

Quantum computing is a real threat within 2-9 years? That time span is way too exciting.

---

Forget this analysis. Let’s see who still genuinely treats BTC as a store of value.

---

Wow, it’s another macro analyst. These people keep changing their tune every day, I’m getting tired of listening.

---

The fact that it hasn't broken through relative to gold really hits the point home. No wonder there’s not much hype this time.

MidnightSeller · Answer

Sold out, sold out, I had a premonition about this wave... The real killer is the electricity cost.

QuietlyStaking · Answer

Another former believer has turned away. I feel like I've seen this routine before.

I really didn't expect the threat of quantum computing, but the idea of a power bottleneck... seems more accurate.

How did he build the position with 30,000 yuan initially, and how is he exiting now? That's the real point.

The tightening cycle is indeed tough, but isn't Bitcoin's past pitfalls fewer?

Can quantum really be solved in 2-9 years? That's a bit uncertain.