Decentralized Applications Are Market Serial Killer

Featuring Dan Morehead

Dan Morehead from Pantera Capital was one of the first major investors in Bitcoin and the early cryptocurrency technology. With the advent of tokenization, Dan assesses the impact that the next wave of decentralized applications will have on the world’s most valuable data monopolies and where the winners will emerge, as the Blockchain disintermediates venture capital in a post-capitalist era. Filmed on July 10, 2017, in San Francisco.

Published on
20 July, 2017
Topic
Crypto-currencies, Business Strategy, Technology
Duration
62 minutes
Asset class
Crypto-currencies
Rating
39

Comments

  • BT

    Brian T.

    21 6 2018 14:28

    0       1

    a RV Token perhaps? A penny for your thoughts anyone?

  • BT

    Brian T.

    21 6 2018 14:28

    0       0

    a RV Token perhaps? A penny for your thoughts anyone?

  • bs

    bob s.

    18 1 2018 19:41

    1       1

    Thank you Dan, you are brillant. Mike is very smart and likeable too but maybe RV can interview you next time with someone who understands your subject matter better and directs the interview less. Congrats on a great return year!

  • LK

    Lyle K.

    8 1 2018 02:22

    0       0

    DAN MOREHEAD + MIKE GREEN=Picasso painting

  • RD

    Ryan D.

    5 10 2017 15:03

    2       0

    MIke's questions and analogues were insightful but Morehead's responses were a little guarded and vague. He didn't deliver an example of a killer app or deep message about blockchain that makes a skeptic step back and go 'ok I can see how that could play out or really be a game changer'. I enjoyed some of Moorhead's original work on RV but this was a little weak.

  • AG

    Alexander G.

    4 10 2017 15:09

    0       0

    I liked new interesting ideas

  • RF

    Ryan F.

    29 9 2017 15:23

    0       1

    Goldmoney.com “The announcement means Goldmoney is the world’s first publicly traded and regulated financial service to offer insurable, auditable and anti-money laundering compliant exposure to cryptocurrencies.”

  • MS

    Matt S.

    19 9 2017 14:36

    0       0

    Interesting that he promotes Bitstamp as being the only regulated exchange in Europe... and he just happens to be the chairman of the board of directors!

    https://www.bitstamp.net/about_us/

    So he's saying we're headed for a Neo-Communist culture with the blockchain? I feel there is some truth to that. Caveat Emptor.

  • MN

    Marcus N.

    16 9 2017 10:23

    0       0

    I would have liked to have heard some discussion about the recent forks, or clones of Bitcoin / Bitcoin Cash BTC / BTH, and Ethereum ETH / ETC.

    If you regard these cryptos as 'equity', then it's a stock split, if they are currency, it's money-printing. A currency stock is not finite if a minority of stakeholders can ram through, by fiat, a doubling of the stock of money.

    Either way it is inflationary, something that is not possible in the pm space absent the discovery of a transmutation alchemy process, or 10 new Grasbergs.

  • CM

    Corey M.

    1 9 2017 05:14

    3       2

    Guy seems a bit impetuous and indifferent to his own biases rather than trying to interrogate them.

  • HK

    H K.

    23 8 2017 21:15

    2       0

    A system that could actually reward the hard work and original thought of the creators instead of the ones who recognized greatness and marketed the idea to the masses. Hope this or some derivative of the system comes to fruition.

  • SL

    Seth L.

    23 8 2017 17:51

    0       0

    Can someone kindly post the direct web links for the material referenced in this interview directly to the comments? The Milton link doesn't seem to work for me. Thanks

  • fT

    forecast T.

    2 8 2017 08:34

    1       0

    Why ripple?

  • fT

    forecast T.

    2 8 2017 08:19

    0       0

    12.5 btc every ten minutes is 1,800 / day , 657,000 annually ; by his word - however, is he speaking wrong a white paper ? Ive got to find that!

  • RM

    Ross M.

    30 7 2017 05:42

    1       7

    In the fullness of time the only useful thing of value coming from cryptos is blockchain. The more I watch people trying to convince us that crypto money is here to stay the better Gold looks. This is just a case of enough rope and another form of pretend money (FIAT) will go by the wayside. It's just like Tulips, South Sea, etc. bubbles.

  • GM

    Greg M.

    27 7 2017 13:19

    0       3

    He is either wrong or lying about these companies being founded with no capital. Mike Markkula provided 250K to fund Apple Computer. Jobs, Woz, and Wayne received financing to start the company. Wayne had assets they could seize. This is basic econ - capital is never going away.

  • CE

    Carl E.

    24 7 2017 16:47

    3       2

    Long term, I'll take the opposite side of the short gold/long bitcoin trade mentioned in this video.

  • ww

    will w.

    24 7 2017 01:45

    4       0

    Some very thought-provoking societal-organizing-principle ideas that Dan and Michael bring up. But also, several instances of dangerously muddled beliefs:

    1] in Dan's thoughts on a 'post-capitalist' era - Dan cites a
    very flawed Oxford Amer Dict definition of 'capitalist': the irrelevant term 'WEALTHY' of that definition is a relative adjective, but rife w/ pejorative sentiment among a growing portion of the public. Yes, there has to be at least SOME forbearance of immediate consumption (to accumulate any capital in the first place). But a person need not already be "wealthy" - as the term is understood by the ordinary person - to practice capitalism. Ever heard of 'sweat equity', 'human capital' or 'intellectual capital'?

    2] a bit later, when Michael says he's not sure why it (Dan's
    vision of a contribution-based distribution of wealth) has to be
    'post-capitalist':
    Dan speaks of a society where "to each according to their
    contribution", then in the next paragraph he says that's why
    communism failed and all the other bastardizations of that* idea
    failed because it actually wasn't possible. [to operate socially
    that way]

    Here Dan has apparently conflated the concept of 'a society
    where distribution of money is based on contribution' with a
    supposed bastardization of that organizing principle ('Communism').

    But, Marx's communist organizing principle was "FROM each
    according to his abilities" (contributions), not TO each according to his abilities" (contributions)!

    * possibly unclear antecedent: presumably, Dan is referring here
    to a society where distribution of money is based on contribution?

    These points may seem somewhat academic or of little importance. But they're NOT! Muddled thinking leads to muddled conclusions, and ideas most definitely have consequences.

  • JM

    James M.

    23 7 2017 13:43

    2       0

    A useful overview of the space for some people but to me it was very VC slanted and not focused on the token/crypto market as I hoped. There was little new content. The first question asked was the best in my opinion - investing in the company vs. the coin/token. "It depends" was the answer. IMHO ripple and likely ether are the former and people need to be wary. Its a partisan space with many pumping up their investments, but I think most would agree, start with bitcoin and migrate from there. Dollar average over time, its a crazy market right now with lots of room to go either way.

  • AL

    Alex L.

    23 7 2017 03:08

    4       0

    One thing I'd like to point out. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Bitcoins are subdivisible down to something like 0.00000001 BTC. So it's not exactly accurate to throw around "There are only 21 million of them", now is it? Surely if you can send 1 BTC as 10 transactions of 0.1 BTC, then each of those has their own address and thus digital real estate?

  • JM

    James M.

    22 7 2017 06:56

    5       0

    Excellent interview! I think blockchain technology is incredibly exciting and maybe revolutionary. I do not want to suggest a gold v Blockchain currency comment. I would hold both. However there is a value to Gold especially due to volume/value/privacy/logistics that I dont think is being appreciated enough in the current crytpo/gold debate specifically as opposed to the value of blockchain in its own right. That is gold can be held of the grid and by far the most private available store of value at the moment and for the last 5000. Yes there are security issues but then there is with every asset digital or physical. Due to its low volume to value it can be be moved fairly easily (at the moment) and is a trusted, well recognized internationally median of exchange. Yes the powers that be could put significant or total constraint on it as they can with almost any asset crypto included I would suggest , however I know others would say I am wrong on that. I find that unlikely as the rich and the powerful need that asset that is gold for diversity in their immense wealth. And the fact that most people in the west dont hold any gold. Add to this the increasing threat of cyber warfare and cyber criminality and I think Gold comes out way ahead in the wealth protection question. If Dan is correct and we see an ever diminishing ownership of gold in favor of blockchain currency then I think peoples wealth will be more vulnerable than if it was held in physical product like gold. However the comment Dan makes on the madness of hoarding a useless piece of metal in exchange for millions of manual labor hours I can totally agree on, but as they say from where I,m from "You can only piss with the cock you've got" and this is the system we have so we must operate within it while incrementally trying to improve it collectively.

  • JS

    John S.

    22 7 2017 06:29

    1       0

    Spread the word: We want the brightest blockchain companies in the USA. Trump admin is friendly and go to spots are SF, NYC, Scottsdale, AZ, Austin, TX

  • JS

    John S.

    22 7 2017 04:58

    9       1

    More interviews of crypto/blockchain power players. Please use an interviewer that has at least conducted a transaction in it.

  • TL

    Tianyun L.

    21 7 2017 16:07

    7       0

    I wonder if Mike can persuade Peter Thiel to do an Interview. I think he is probably one of the greatest minds on big picture thinking.

  • JB

    John B.

    21 7 2017 11:43

    0       0

    4:30 check

  • GD

    Gustavo D.

    21 7 2017 07:51

    0       0

    @Gordon there will always be narratives, but understand that the miners are only custodians for transactions. At the its purest level, Bitcoin does not even require inexpensive transactions to succeed. It just needs to be secure. If you do not have security of ownership, then you are not the owner of that asset. One day, we will recognize the importance of this.

  • KB

    Kenneth B.

    21 7 2017 05:33

    0       0

    Dem 15 year olds gonna go catnip on the sea crypto monkeys

  • RA

    Robert A.

    21 7 2017 00:11

    7       0

    Another great job by Michael Green and a big thank you to him for his continuing efforts on our behalf. Not many have the background and gravitas to handle this cutting edge interview which I happened to view on the day Goldman Sacks promoted Bitcoin which jumped 15% on the promo. What a great interview; interweaving crypto currencies, Economics and Political Science. RV remains on the top of it's game!

  • js

    jacob s.

    21 7 2017 00:02

    10       0

    hands down. real vision is worth more than my college degree.

  • KS

    Kim S.

    20 7 2017 22:12

    2       1

    I see both pros and cons to crypto. Great technology not a reliable store of value. During this interview what suddenly popped into my head was "Pokemon cards "....
    But seriously enjoyed some of the comments in the interview but can't take him seriously on "store of value" nor monetary history. The US has defaulted 3x. And ironically that should be evidence in favor of cryptos.

  • KA

    Kristian A.

    20 7 2017 21:10

    12       0

    Any interview involving Michael Green is excellent...more please!

  • NG

    Nicolas G.

    20 7 2017 20:49

    12       0

    Please vote (Google Form) if you wish to have Andreas Antonopoulos being interviewed in RV TV. A two questions survey (Y/N and Interviewer). Results will be sent to Milton by 31.08.2017. No email or sign in required so please vote just once. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSepxvm3u6mL2bN4vsZ86Tt9SQQj1XBuKHZjGKkKcKfkowuV-A/viewform?c=0&w=1&includes_info_params=true

  • TK

    Thomas K.

    20 7 2017 20:33

    7       0

    Best Cryptocurrency interview on RVTV so far by a mile.

  • RB

    R B.

    20 7 2017 19:14

    0       0

    Fantastic insight on cyrpto!

  • DS

    David S.

    20 7 2017 17:58

    3       0

    Major risk is political. With the stroke of a pen, China could eliminate Bitcoin as a currency for Chinese like the state of Hawaii did for different reasons. As I recall, a Chinese banking official said Bitcoin might be used in a saving account, but it is not a currency (CNBC). In Bitcoin's wild west days it could worth a great deal more than today, but long term governments will not allow it to interfere with their monopoly if there is any way to stop it. DLS

  • TH

    Timo H.

    20 7 2017 17:12

    6       0

    No word about the scalability of the networks. Ethereum is able to process less than 50 transactions/sec globally. to be shared by all the applications running on the ledger. Any popular app will bring the entire network onto its knees. One ICO already did it.

  • JH

    Joel H.

    20 7 2017 16:51

    3       1

    Many interesting points on crypto, thanks for that. So much food for thought. Feels some what undermined unless you show me you understand gold. I feel like you can't contextually understand gold unless you show me you understand the banking system, the bond markets, and currencies and where we're at in the cycle. The analogy of burying gold under a pyramid makes me worry about the validity of other thoughts. Also weird that ethically speaking humanity is at a point were a 90% devalue of 'money' isn't considered a default. I don't know.

  • KA

    Kevin A.

    20 7 2017 16:49

    1       0

    I thought there were many tech companies that lose billions of USD quarterly... Netflix, Snapchat, Uber...etc. Doesn't mean they require capital?

  • KA

    Kevin A.

    20 7 2017 16:01

    7       0

    "The AVERAGE American spends $23 of their data plan on the adds and malware that are being downloaded on their devices" ... Hilarious!

  • SS

    Stefan S.

    20 7 2017 15:30

    3       8

    Bitcoin up 3,000% in four years, therefore it is a "great store of wealth". NO, it's an unregulated penny stock, which you cannot short.

  • M.

    Milton ..

    20 7 2017 15:12

    17       0

    Exclusively for Real Vision viewers, Dan has curated a list of must-read Bitcoin resources for those who want to dig deeper into the cryptocurrency.

    Download the full list here:
    https://we.tl/q35XEBr1xv

  • DB

    David B.

    20 7 2017 15:12

    13       1

    I was so excited when I saw that Mike Green was going to be interviewing Dan. Mike has clearly shown his brilliance in previous RV interviews and Dan understands Bitcoin, blockchain and digital assets like no other. A couple of things struck me as I watched and listened. First, like many of us who try to get our minds around this space, Mike kept trying to make analogies. The more I learn about these technologies, their use cases, network effects, etc, the more I realize that analogies all fall short. It may be the case that age and experience are more hurtful than helpful as those of us who have been looking at the world through the same lense for 40 or more years have to unlearn some of what we hold as "truths".

    In explaining that we may be entering a post-capitalistic world, Dan talks about the ability for tokens to reward early developers and community members in ways never before seen. Old schoolers, myself included, would argue that wages and/or equity ownership (capitalism) already provide a similar reward structure. If we only focused on the developers, that may be true (or at least more true). But Dan also made a point to reference "community members". And this is where the token model really makes a difference. Imagine if as an early user of Facebook or Google, you not only got to use the service but were rewarded for using and promoting it. Centralized models of accumulating wealth and knowledge are inferior to decentralized, tokenized models because they effectively hoard wealth and knowledge. Tokenization is likely to spur creativity through shared knowledge and incentives. Very exciting stuff! Terrific interview!!

  • PU

    Peter U.

    20 7 2017 14:59

    1       0

    could really make out the name of the white paper . . . is it Ken White Paper?

  • AD

    Arvydas D.

    20 7 2017 14:27

    0       0

    Excellent Interview

  • PN

    Paul N.

    20 7 2017 14:18

    7       1

    The positive discussion on ICOs is very troubling to me. The tokens arent decentralized or immutable, the issuer can make as many of them as they want, and they dont give you a claim over company assets or a share of the profits. Their only "value" is that the issuer forces you to buy them in order to purchase their services, an artificially contrived bottleneck which makes transacting less efficient and adds exchange risk in an already highly volatile low liquidity environment. Theyre clearly just vehicles for speculation and making the issuers rich. In fact they add unnecessary complexity to what would otherwise be interesting projects. Fortunately for them the new money in this space cant distinguish between centrally issued digital ponzi tokens and genuinely decentralized bearer assets with real use cases.

    In addition it seems obvious to me that these tokens are unlicensed unregistered securities and every financial regulator in the world is going to be looking at the Companies issuing them when things start to go wrong. I think the consequences of this mania will be dire.

  • TL

    Tianyun L.

    20 7 2017 14:12

    2       1

    Good interview by Michael, pointed at all the flaws of bitcoin/crypto without being overly insulting to the coolaid drinkers.

  • PN

    Paul N.

    20 7 2017 13:17

    14       0

    I often wonder whether Gresham's Law is even true. We've seen in bitcoin that when the price is in one of its bubbles, transaction volumes and ecommerce activity skyrocket. This is because bitcoin holders become genuinely wealthier and can spend more. It's also a form of cashing out.

    We also see that when interest rates on deposits get to near zero or negative in real terms, savings rates increase because people need to save more money to reach their savings goals and their consumption falls.

    Also, keep in mind that for bad money to continue circulating, people have to continue to be willing accept it and hot potato it to someone else. If I'm running a store in Venezuela would I continue to accept the hyperinflating peso? Or will I move to a sounder, better money like USD or bitcoin? Transactions are as much about accepting the money as spending it.

    A lot of economic theorists have predicted the collapse of bitcoin because it will become so valuable noone will spend it when actual human activity suggests the exact opposite. And hey, if bitcoin is going to collapse by reaching 6 digits I'll be hapoy to ride that wave up!

  • PU

    Peter U.

    20 7 2017 13:11

    1       7

    what's with his pupils? Is he tripping on bitcoin?

  • Nv

    Nick v.

    20 7 2017 11:49

    4       0

    Excellent and thought provoking. Refreshing to hear the perspective of people who understand money, rather than just technology

  • JS

    John S.

    20 7 2017 11:44

    2       0

    Very interesting conversation.

  • JE

    Jos E.

    20 7 2017 11:21

    7       0

    Very interesting. Fascinating to hear the perspective of a seasoned financial professional in this space. Felt somewhat like a lot of Kool-Aid had been drunk to me but as Michael says, history will be the judge. Seemed to be a lot of talking past each other with a few of the questions - I would have appreciated it if Michael had pressed him a bit harder in some areas. Great interview overall though, thanks Michael.