A few days ago, Jemima Kelly (Financial Times) published a stormy article on FT: “Bitcoin is worth 0.” CNBC invited her on air to confront – and the result… was even more shocking!
Highlight of the interview:
❓The host opens “friendly”:
“Many guests have previously predicted BTC to reach 1 million USD to attract attention, while she talks about 0. So according to her, what is a reasonable price for Bitcoin?”
🗣️ Jemima still stands firm: 0 USD.
The reason? 'At some point, everyone will realize it's worthless, they will all sell off, and the price will go to 0.'
She calls the story of the scarcity of 21 million BTC 'fabricated'... even though she immediately acknowledges the fact that Bitcoin has a maximum of 21 million coins (while altcoins are countless).
❓When asked: 'Currently, BTC is being held by millions of people, and many billionaires have gotten rich from it, so why do you still say it's worthless?'
🗣️ She admits: 'There are many people who believe and hold large amounts... but I am not betting BTC will go to 0 right now.' (Sounds incredibly contradictory!)
❓The reason for writing this article?
🗣️ She says: 'Only billionaires make money from BTC, while most lose money. I feel responsible to speak out.'
But... this argument applies to stocks, gold, silver, real estate – why don't you write a similar article about them?
The biggest question the community is raising:
Is Jemima (or FT) being paid to FUD Bitcoin? Or is it just an extreme personal opinion?
What do you think about this confrontation? Is Jemima 'trolling' or does she really believe BTC will go to 0? Is this intentional FUD or just a personal opinion?
Comment below, tag your friends to 'laugh until crying' with this argument!
