"Orange Pilling: The act of convincing a person skeptical about Bitcoin that it is valuable as a form of money."
I had the opportunity to meet an ex-colleague of mine a couple weeks back. He's 10 years my senior, super competent and professionally successful. He's at a phase in life where money is not an issue any more: His house is paid off and he has enough in savings for his kids' higher education and his retirement.
When we worked together, we'd have lengthy discussions on investing, interest rates and options. He's someone who has never believed in diversification. He approaches investments methodically, and does a lot of research before putting in a lot of capital into his convictions. He also typically invests in tech adjacent areas that he is very comfortable with and knowledgeable about.
During our recent discussion, the topic of interest rates came up. After a fair bit of talk, we landed on the topic of the suitability of Bitcoin as an investable asset. He had done some research into Bitcoin, before deciding not to put any money in it.
I was naturally curious as to why given my pro-Bitcoin stance.
His stated reason - "There's no adoption, only speculation!".
I was curious to know why he thought there was no adoption. He thought that after 15 years of its inception, Bitcoin should have had a "killer app" beyond speculation.
I then asked him a fairly simple question - "What do you think Bitcoin is? A technology platform or a form of money?"
His answer was quite revealing. He said, "Neither, it currently feels like a vehicle for speculation". I then proceeded to list out the properties of a valuable money and asked him if he felt gold was a valid form of money. He agreed that given these properties, Bitcoin could be considered as a form of money.
Then came the question that I've asked a number of people that makes them pause and reconsider their stance: "If a new, potentially valuable form of money was born and grew right before your eyes, what do you think adoption would look like?".
At this point, people usually take a step back and think about it, because this is the kind of question that needs a bit of examination. After a bit of prompting and back-and-forth, we agreed that speculative activity would almost be a feature, not a bug, of the adoption process in the presence of other accepted forms of money with established histories.
We also agreed that that adoption and acceptance for a new, potentially valuable form of money should look like a steadily improving number of persons holding it with greater conviction and a continuous increase in the amount of stuff it could buy.
I then directed him towards resources that would help him study this further. You know, the usual places: Glassnode, Lyn Alden's articles, Real Vision's Institutional Guide to BTC Allocation and so on.
I received a text later that week from him that said "Excellent Articles. You've successfully convinced me that Bitcoin should be a part of my portfolio". It made me chuckle a bit and also a bit concerned, because in a subsequent message he said "Dude, you should start a Bitcoin investment firm on the side, you will make way more money!".
While this wasn't my first rodeo when it comes to Orange Pilling, I found it pretty satisfying nevertheless. It was the first time I felt like I had convinced a person who had as much investment knowledge as myself. Jesse Myers' excellent article on why conventionally successful and wealthy people dismiss Bitcoin came to mind immediately.
I always enjoy Orange Pilling. There's an element of satisfaction inherent to convincing another person to your side of an argument when you've thought about something deeply. But in every argument, there is always the chance that your opponent makes a deep point or introduces another way of thinking about the issue that has escaped you. These are extremely valuable since they have the potential to completely change your mind on a given topic.
Anyhoo, that's all from me for now. Happy Bitcoin ETF approval week to all of you who celebrate! The wheels are in motion!