World Gold Council Hits Back at #DropGold Campaign: Crypto Can’t Replace Gold

Siamak Masnavi

On Thursday (May 2), Adam Perlaky, Manager of Investment Research at the World Gold Council, hit back at Grayscale Investments' recent #DropGold campaign by explaining why his organization believes that "cryptocurrencies are no replacement for gold."

As CryptoGlobe reported earlier, on Wednesday (May 1), New York-based cryptoasset investment firm Grayscale Investments ("Grayscale"), a subsidiary of Barry Silbert's incubator and venture capital firm Digital Currency Group (DCG), launched a #DropGold campaign that features a funny TV commercial, which tells investors that "in a digital world" they should not allow their portfolios to be "weighed down" by gold and "digital currencies, like Bitcoin, are the future":



Grayscale's commercial says that cryptocurrencies are better than gold because "they are secure, borderless, and unlike gold, they actually have utility."

Michael Sonnenshein, Grayscale's Managing Director, told The Block that "Barry Silbert, CEO of the fund's parent company DCG, had the idea for the campaign, hoping to target the older generation in particular":


"We're going after a narrative around gold being where investors should go when markets turn south or as a hedge against inflation...We're highlighting the absurdity of gold."


Well, today, the Wold Gold Council hit back at the #DropGold campaign by publishing a blog post titled "Cryptocurrencies are no replacement for gold". In this post, Perlaky, who is the Manager of Investment Research at the World Gold Council, tries to explain that "although cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology look promising as a whole, they clearly do not represent a substitute for gold either in theory or in practice."

Perlaky argues that gold is better than cryptocurrencies for the following reasons:

  • "is less volatile"
    • "Cryptocurrencies extreme daily and intraday volatility disrupts its use as a medium of exchange and discourages strategic investments"
    • "Gold’s volatility is slightly above the stock market as a whole, in line with most fiat currencies over time."
  • "has a more liquid market"
    • "Gold trades $150bn a day, nearly 100x that of bitcoin"
    • "Gold pricing is consistent across exchanges in all forms "
  • "trades in an established regulatory framework"
    • "We have seen how lack of regulation has led to multiple crypto exchange defaults and fraudulent activity, resulting in losses amounting to billions"
    • "... gold trades in a widely authorised and regulated market with transparency"
  • "has a well understood role in an investment portfolio"
    • "has been a source of returns rivaling the stock market over the long-term"
    • "protects against inflation"
    • "is a portfolio diversifier, useful during downturns in the market"
  • "has little overlap with cryptocurrencies on many sources of demand and supply"
    • "Gold demand is diverse, coming from jewellery, investment, technology and central banks"
    • "Cryptocurrency demand is highly speculative or investment related, as there is little proof of its use as a medium of exchange"
    • "Gold has a track record dating back to 600 BC, whereas bitcoin has only a 10-year track record."
  • "is a safe-haven investment"
    • "Gold has a track record dating back to 600 BC, whereas bitcoin has only a 10-year track record."
    • "Cryptocurrency performance has been remarkable over the long-term but has seen massive haircuts during some periods and has failed during periods when it should have thrived"
    • "... there is nothing to prevent an enhanced cryptocurrency from being launched, devaluing those already in existence."

Perlaky concludes his post by saying that although "they continue to acknowledge the innovation taking place in the cryptocurrency and blockchain spaces and believe there will be a role for this technology in the future," they believe that "cryptocurrencies are not a replacement for gold and gold should remain a component in all investment portfolios."

Featured Image Credit: Photo via

'We Are All Satoshi' Says Early Bitcoin Miner Calling out Craig Wright

Francisco Memoria

An unknown bitcoin miner has signed a message on the Bitcoin blockchain with over 140 different wallets, calling self-proclaimed Satoshi Nakamoto a “liar and a fraud” and singing off with “we are all Satoshi.”

The message was then spread on a debian with a list of 145 different BTC addresses and their corresponding signatures. Verifying several addresses shows the signatures match, which does mean the miner owns all of the listed addresses and has the private keys to sign a message with them. The message itself reads:

Craig Steven Wright is a liar and a fraud. He doesn't have the keys used to sign this message. The Lightning Network is a significant achievement. However, we need to continue work on improving on-chain capacity. Unfortunately, the solution is not to just change a constant in the code or to allow powerful participants to force out others. We are all Satoshi

The addresses can notably be found in a list of thousands Craig Wright claimed to own in the case against the estate of the late Dave Kleiman. Kleiman’s lawyers have, however, recently said Wright has access to his BTC fortune but won’t access it because he knows its contents “will include partnership records.”

Wright has failed to prove the ownership of these addresses on several occasions, as he has not signed a message with the private keys to these addresses yet. Last year, a post on Memo.Cash signed a message for another address owned by Wright, saying it did not belong to him and he is a “liar and a fraud.”

This recent messages echoes one sent from Satoshi Nakamoto’s email address back in 2015, claiming he is not Craig Wright and “we are all Satoshi.” On social media users have been speculating the message was sent by Satoshi Nakamoto himself over the similarities.

Did Satoshi Send the Community a Message?

Users have been relying on the analysis of the “Patoshi” pattern to identify whether an address is associated with Satoshi Nakamoto himself. The analysis gained fame earlier this month after a miner moved coins mined in 2009, sparking discussions Satoshi was active once again. Blockchain analysis does indicate it was unlikely Satoshi moved his coins then, and it’s unlikely he signed this recent message.

It’s worth noting, however, the early miner that signed these messages has advanced knowledge and was very careful. Every address independently checked by CryptoGlobe has received a Coinbase reward of 50 BTC and hasn’t moved the funds since they were mined. All of the transactions date back to 2009 and 2010.

It’s unlikely the miner never used bitcoin – or the bitcoin cash airdropped in 2017 to these addresses – after holding onto it for over a decade. Instead, it’s likely the miner chose addresses from which the funds haven’t been moved to avoid being identified by sleuths.

Featured image via Pixabay.