My splendid blog 3737


My splendid blog 3737

Accueil | Profil | Mon itinéraire | Livre d'or | Album photos | Archives | Amis |


Miley Cyrus and FAST WITHDRAWALS: 10 Surprising Things They Have in Common

Publié le 7/09/2018, à 10:47,

Bitcoin is a payment system invented by Satoshi Nakamoto who released it in 2009 as an open-source software. Claims to the identity of Nakamoto have never been verified, but the Bitcoin has progressed from obscurity to the largest of its kind, a digital asset now being called the 'cryptocurrency'.

The most significant characteristic of Bitcoin is that unlike conventional and traditional printed currency, it is an electronic payment system that is based on mathematical proof. Traditional currencies have centralized banking systems that control them and in the absence of any single institution controlling it, the US Treasury has termed the Bitcoin a 'decentralized virtual currency'. The underlying idea behind Bitcoin was to produce a currency entirely independent of any central authority and one that could be transferred electronically and instantly with almost nil transaction fees.

By the end of 2015, the number of merchant traders accepting Bitcoin payments for products and services exceeded 100,000. Major banking and financial regulatory authorities such as the European Banking Authority for instance have warned that users of Bitcoin are cryptocurrency not protected by chargeback or refund rights, although financial experts in major financial centers accept that Bitcoin can provide legitimate and valid financial services. On the other hand, the increasing use of Bitcoin by criminals has been cited by legislative authorities, law enforcement agencies and financial regulators as a major cause of concern.

The owner of Bitcoin voucher service Azteco, Akin Fernandez comments that there will shortly be an important game-changer in the manner Bitcoin is generated. The rate of Bitcoin generation every day will be literally 'halved' and this may alter the perception of Bitcoin completely, although it will be almost impossible to predict how the public at large and the merchants will react to such a move.

Against the backdrop of such a move, the predictions are that the transaction volume of Bitcoin is set to triple this year riding on the back of a probable Donald Trump presidency. Some market commentators are of the view that the price of the digital currency could spike in the event of such a possibility leading to market turmoil globally.

The Panama Papers scandal which broke out in May this year has spurred the European Union to fight against tax avoidance strategies that the rich and powerful use to stash wealth by bringing in new rules. The current rules seek to close the loopholes and among the measures proposed are efforts to end anonymous trading on virtual currency platforms like Bitcoin. A lot more research has to be done by the European Banking Authority and the European Central Bank on the best strategies to deal with digital currencies as currently there is no EU legislation governing them.



Is My Money Safe?

Publié le 7/09/2018, à 07:33,

Banks are institutions where miracles happen Bitcoin regularly. We rarely entrust our money to anyone but ourselves and our banks. Despite a very chequered history of mismanagement, corruption, false promises and representations, delusions and behavioural inconsistency banks still succeed to motivate us to give them our money. Partly it is the feeling that there is safety in numbers. The fashionable term today is “moral hazard”. The implicit guarantees of the state and of other financial institutions move us to take risks which we would, otherwise, have avoided. Partly it is the sophistication of the banks in marketing and promoting themselves and their products. Glossy brochures, professional computer and video presentations and vast, shrine-like, real estate complexes all serve to enhance the image of the banks as the temples of the new religion of money.

But what is behind all this? How can we judge the soundness of our banks? In other words, how can we tell if our money is safely tucked away in a safe haven?

The reflex is to go to the bank’s balance sheets. Banks and balance sheets have been both invented in their modern form in the 15th century. A balance sheet, coupled with other financial statements is supposed to provide us with a true and full picture of the health of the bank, its past and its long-term prospects. The surprising thing is that despite common opinion it does.

But it is rather useless unless you know how to read it.

Financial statements (Income or Profit and Loss – Statement, Cash Flow Statement and Balance Sheet) come in many forms. Sometimes they conform to Western accounting standards (the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, GAAP, or the less rigorous and more fuzzily worded International Accounting Standards, IAS). Otherwise, they conform to local accounting standards, which often leave a lot to be desired. Still, you should look for banks, which make their updated financial reports available to you. The best choice would be a bank that is audited by one of the Big Four Western accounting firms and makes its audit reports publicly available. Such audited financial statements should consolidate the financial results of the bank with the financial results of its subsidiaries or associated companies. A lot often hides in those corners of corporate holdings.

Banks are rated by independent agencies. The most famous and most reliable of the lot is Fitch Ratings. Another one is Moodys. These agencies assign letter and number combinations to the banks that reflect their stability. Most agencies differentiate the short term from the long term prospects of the banking institution rated. Some of them even study (and rate) issues, such as the legality of the operations of the bank (legal rating). Ostensibly, all a concerned person has to do, therefore, is to step up to the bank manager, muster courage and ask for the bank’s rating. Unfortunately, life is more complicated than rating agencies would have us believe.

They base themselves mostly on the financial results of the bank rated as a reliable gauge of its financial strength or financial profile. Nothing is further from the truth.

Admittedly, the financial results do contain a few important facts. But one has to look beyond the naked figures to get the real often much less encouraging picture.

Consider the thorny issue of exchange rates. Financial statements are calculated (sometimes stated in USD in addition to the local currency) using the exchange rate prevailing on the 31st of December of the fiscal year (to which the statements refer). In a country with a volatile domestic currency this would tend to completely distort the true picture. This is especially true if a big chunk of the activity preceded this arbitrary date. The same applies to financial statements, which were not inflation-adjusted in high inflation countries. The statements will look inflated and even reflect profits where heavy losses were incurred. “Average amounts” accounting (which makes use of average exchange rates throughout the year) is even more misleading. The only way to truly reflect reality is if the bank were to keep two sets of accounts: one in the local currency and one in USD (or in some other currency of reference). Otherwise, fictitious growth in the asset base (due to inflation or currency fluctuations) could result.

Another example: in many countries, changes in regulations can greatly effect the financial statements of a bank. In 1996, in Russia, for example, the Bank of Russia changed the algorithm for calculating an important banking ratio (the capital to risk weighted assets ratio).

Unless a Russian bank restated its previous financial statements accordingly, a sharp change in profitability appeared from nowhere.

The net assets themselves are always misstated: the figure refers to the situation on 31/12. A 48-hour loan given to a collaborating client can inflate the asset base on the crucial date. This misrepresentation is only mildly ameliorated by the introduction of an “average assets” calculus. Moreover, some of the assets can be interest earning and performing others, non-performing. The maturity distribution of the assets is also of prime importance. If most of the bank’s assets can be withdrawn by its clients on a very short notice (on demand) it can swiftly find itself in trouble with a run on its assets leading to insolvency.

Another oft-used figure is the net income of the bank. It is important to distinguish interest income from non-interest income. In an open, sophisticated credit market, the income from interest differentials should be minimal and reflect the risk plus a reasonable component of income to the bank. But in many countries (Japan, Russia) the government subsidizes banks by lending to them money cheaply (through the Central Bank or through bonds). The banks then proceed to lend the cheap funds at exorbitant rates to their customers, thus reaping enormous interest income. In many countries the income from government securities is tax free, which represents another form of subsidy. A high income from interest is a sign of weakness, not of health, here today, gone tomorrow. The preferred indicator should be income from operations (fees, commissions and other charges).

There are a few key ratios to observe. A relevant question is whether the bank is accredited with international banking agencies. These issue regulatory capital requirements and other mandatory ratios. Compliance with these demands is a minimum in the absence of which, the bank should be regarded as positively dangerous.

The return on the bank’s equity (ROE) is the net income divided by its average equity. The return on the bank’s assets (ROA) is its net income divided by its average assets. The (tier 1 or total) capital divided by the bank’s risk weighted assets a measure of the bank’s capital adequacy. Most banks follow the provisions of the Basel Accord as set by the Basel Committee of Bank Supervision (also known as the G10). This could be misleading because the Accord is ill equipped to deal with risks associated with emerging markets, where default rates of 33% and more are the norm. Finally, there is the common stock to total assets ratio. But ratios are not cure-alls. Inasmuch as the quantities that comprise them can be toyed with they can be subject to manipulation and distortion. It is true that it is better to have high ratios than low ones. High ratios are indicative of a bank’s underlying strength, reserves, and provisions and, therefore, of its ability to expand its business. A strong bank can also participate in various programs, offerings and auctions of the Central Bank or of the Ministry of Finance. The larger the share of the bank’s earnings that is retained in the bank and not distributed as profits to its shareholders the better these ratios and the bank’s resilience to credit risks.

Still, these ratios should be taken with more than a grain of salt. Not even the bank’s profit margin (the ratio of net income to total income) or its asset utilization coefficient (the ratio of income to average assets) should be relied upon. They could be the result of hidden subsidies by the government and management misjudgement or understatement of credit risks.

To elaborate on the last two points:

A bank can borrow cheap money from the Central Bank (or pay low interest to its depositors and savers) and invest it in secure government bonds, earning a much higher interest income from the bonds’ coupon payments. The end result: a rise in the bank’s income and profitability due to a non-productive, non-lasting arbitrage operation. Otherwise, the bank’s management can understate the amounts of bad loans carried on the bank’s books, thus decreasing the necessary set-asides and increasing profitability. The financial statements of banks largely reflect the management’s appraisal of the business. This has proven to be a poor guide.

In the main financial results page of a bank’s books, special attention should be paid to provisions for the devaluation of securities and to the unrealized difference in the currency position. This is especially true if the bank is holding a major part of the assets (in the form of financial investments or of loans) and the equity is invested in securities or in foreign exchange denominated instruments.

Separately, a bank can be trading for its own position (the Nostro), either as a market maker or as a trader. The profit (or loss) on securities trading has to be discounted because it is conjectural and incidental to the bank’s main activities: deposit taking and loan making.

Most banks deposit some of their assets with other banks. This is normally considered to be a way of spreading the risk. But in highly volatile economies with sickly, underdeveloped financial sectors, all the institutions in the sector are likely to move in tandem (a highly correlated market). Cross deposits among banks only serve to increase the risk of the depositing bank (as the recent affair with Toko Bank in Russia and the banking crisis in South Korea have demonstrated).

Further closer to the bottom line are the bank’s operating expenses: salaries, depreciation, fixed or capital assets (real estate and equipment) and administrative expenses. The rule of thumb is: the higher these expenses, the weaker the bank. The great historian Toynbee once said that great civilizations collapse immediately after they bequeath to us the most impressive buildings. This is doubly true with banks. If you see a bank fervently engaged in the construction of palatial branches stay away from it.

Banks are risk arbitrageurs. They live off the mismatch between assets and liabilities. To the best of their ability, they try to second guess the markets and reduce such a mismatch by assuming part of the risks and by engaging in portfolio management. For this they charge fees and commissions, interest and profits which constitute their sources of income.

If any expertise is imputed to the banking system, it is risk management. Banks are supposed to adequately assess, control and minimize credit risks. They are required to implement credit rating mechanisms (credit analysis and value at risk VAR – models), efficient and exclusive information-gathering systems, and to put in place the right lending policies and procedures.

Just in case they misread the market risks and these turned into credit risks (which happens only too often), banks are supposed to put aside amounts of money which could realistically offset loans gone sour or future non-performing assets. These are the loan loss reserves and provisions. Loans are supposed to be constantly monitored, reclassified and charges made against them as applicable. If you see a bank with zero reclassifications, charge offs and recoveries either the bank is lying through its teeth, or it is not taking the business of banking too seriously, or its management is no less than divine in its prescience. What is important to look at is the rate of provision for loan losses as a percentage of the loans outstanding. Then it should be compared to the percentage of non-performing loans out of the loans outstanding. If the two figures are out of kilter, either someone is pulling your leg or the management is incompetent or lying to you. The first thing new owners of a bank do is, usually, improve the placed asset quality (a polite way of saying that they get rid of bad, non-performing loans, whether declared as such or not). They do this by classifying the loans. Most central banks in the world have in place regulations for loan classification and if acted upon, these yield rather more reliable results than any management’s “appraisal”, no matter how well intentioned.

In some countries the Central Bank (or the Supervision of the Banks) forces banks to set aside provisions against loans at the highest risk categories, even if they are performing. This, by far, should be the preferable method.

Of the two sides of the balance sheet, the assets side is the more critical. Within it, the interest earning assets deserve the greatest attention. What percentage of the loans is commercial and what percentage given to individuals? How many borrowers are there (risk diversification is inversely proportional to exposure to single or large borrowers)? How many of the transactions are with “related parties”? How much is in local currency and how much in foreign currencies (and in which)? A large exposure to foreign currency lending is not necessarily healthy. A sharp, unexpected devaluation could move a lot of the borrowers into non-performance and default and, thus, adversely affect the quality of the asset base. In which financial vehicles and instruments is the bank invested? How risky are they? And so on.

No less important is the maturity structure of the assets. It is an integral part of the liquidity (risk) management of the bank. The crucial question is: what are the cash flows projected from the maturity dates of the different assets and liabilities and how likely are they to materialize. A rough matching has to exist between the various maturities of the assets and the liabilities. The cash flows generated by the assets of the bank must be used to finance the cash flows resulting from the banks’ liabilities. A distinction has to be made between stable and hot funds (the latter in constant pursuit of higher yields). Liquidity indicators and alerts have to be set in place and calculated a few times daily.

Gaps (especially in the short term category) between the bank’s assets and its liabilities are a very worrisome sign. But the bank’s macroeconomic environment is as important to the determination of its financial health and of its creditworthiness as any ratio or micro-analysis. The state of the financial markets sometimes has a larger bearing on the bank’s soundness than other factors. A fine example is the effect that interest rates or a devaluation have on a bank’s profitability and capitalization. The implied (not to mention the explicit) support of the authorities, of other banks and of investors (domestic as well as international) sets the psychological background to any future developments. This is only too logical. In an unstable financial environment, knock-on effects are more likely. Banks deposit money with other banks on a security basis. Still, the value of securities and collaterals is as good as their liquidity and as the market itself. The very ability to do business (for instance, in the syndicated loan market) is influenced by the larger picture. Falling equity markets herald trading losses and loss of income from trading operations and so on.

Perhaps the single most important factor is the general level of interest rates in the economy. It determines the present value of foreign exchange and local currency denominated government debt. It influences the balance between realized and unrealized losses on longer-term (commercial or other) paper. One of the most important liquidity generation instruments is the repurchase agreement (repo). Banks sell their portfolios of government debt with an obligation to buy it back at a later date. If interest rates shoot up the losses on these repos can trigger margin calls (demands to immediately pay the losses or else materialize them by buying the securities back).

Margin calls are a drain on liquidity. Thus, in an environment of rising interest rates, repos could absorb liquidity from the banks, deflate rather than inflate. The same principle applies to leverage investment vehicles used by the bank to improve the returns of its securities trading operations. High interest rates here can have an even more painful outcome. As liquidity is crunched, the banks are forced to materialize their trading losses. This is bound to put added pressure on the prices of financial assets, trigger more margin calls and squeeze liquidity further. It is a vicious circle of a monstrous momentum once commenced.

But high interest rates, as we mentioned, also strain the asset side of the balance sheet by applying pressure to borrowers. The same goes for a devaluation. Liabilities connected to foreign exchange grow with a devaluation with no (immediate) corresponding increase in local prices to compensate the borrower. Market risk is thus rapidly transformed to credit risk. Borrowers default on their obligations. Loan loss provisions need to be increased, eating into the bank’s liquidity (and profitability) even further. Banks are then tempted to play with their reserve coverage levels in order to increase their reported profits and this, in turn, raises a real concern regarding the adequacy of the levels of loan loss reserves. Only an increase in the equity base can then assuage the (justified) fears of the market but such an increase can come only through foreign investment, in most cases. And foreign investment is usually a last resort, pariah, solution (see Southeast Asia and the Czech Republic for fresh examples in an endless supply of them. Japan and China are, probably, next).

In the past, the thinking was that some of the risk could be ameliorated by hedging in forward markets (=by selling it to willing risk buyers). But a hedge is only as good as the counterparty that provides it and in a market besieged by knock-on insolvencies, the comfort is dubious. In most emerging markets, for instance, there are no natural sellers of foreign exchange (companies prefer to hoard the stuff). So forwards are considered to be a variety of gambling with a default in case of substantial losses a very plausible way out.

Banks depend on lending for their survival. The lending base, in turn, depends on the quality of lending opportunities. In high-risk markets, this depends on the possibility of connected lending and on the quality of the collaterals offered by the borrowers. Whether the borrowers have qualitative collaterals to offer is a direct outcome of the liquidity of the market and on how they use the proceeds of the lending. These two elements are intimately linked with the banking system. Hence the penultimate vicious circle: where no functioning and professional banking system exists no good borrowers will emerge.



How to Outsmart Your Peers on Bitcoin

Publié le 5/09/2018, à 16:56,

They left The Denver Post amid newsroom layoffs and interference in the editorial process by the newspaper’s hedge-fund owners. And now those reporters and editors are creating their own news outlet, The Colorado Sun.

They will be partnering with the Civil Media Company, an ambitious New York start-up that aims to use blockchain technology and crypto economics to start 1,000 publications nationwide by the end of the year.

“It is absolutely exciting,” said Larry Ryckman, a former senior editor at the beleaguered Denver daily, who will serve as the editor of The Colorado Sun. “We have been so eager to get moving.”

The editor has assembled a team of former Post employees, including five reporters — Kevin Simpson, John Ingold, Tamara Chuang, Jennifer Brown and Jason Blevins — and two senior editors, Eric Lubbers and Dana Coffield.

Mr. Ryckman and Ms. Coffield resigned in May from The Post, which has suffered low morale under the ownership of a New York hedge fund, Alden Global Capital. The company took control of the newspaper in 2013, after acquiring its bankrupt parent company, MediaNews Group, and runs it through a subsidiary, Digital First Media.

“None of us wanted to continue dismantling the Denver Post newsroom,” Mr. Ryckman said.

Tensions between The Post’s newsroom employees and Alden peaked in April, when the paper published a special Sunday opinion section comprising articles that were critical of ownership. The lead editorial in the section was blunt: “Denver deserves a newspaper owner who supports its newsroom. If Alden isn’t willing to do good journalism here, it should sell The Post to owners who will.”

Chuck Plunkett, the editor who oversaw the section and resigned from the paper soon afterward, has agreed to contribute to The Colorado Sun.

The new publication will have a conventional website whose data will be written permanently into the secure digital ledger known as the blockchain. Expenses for the fledgling outlet will be covered by a grant from Civil, whose sole investor, for now, is ConsenSys, a Brooklyn-based blockchain software technology company founded by the Canadian entrepreneur Joseph Lubin. Mr. Lubin is also a co-founder of the Ethereum, a virtual currency and blockchain database platform. As part of its plan to fund new media entities, Civil plans to unveil a new token this summer called CVL.

People who purchase the CVL token, a form of cryptocurrency, will have a say concerning the projects hosted by Civil — meaning that they can vote on whether one of its websites violates the company’s journalism standards, which are outlined in the Civil Constitution.

Matthew Iles, the chief executive of Civil, said that by selling ownership stakes to the public, the company seeks to eliminate the possibility of one company or a small group of investors exerting power and influence over a journalistic organization and compromising its mission — exactly what many employees of The Denver Post accused Alden of doing.

“We hope that Civil is going to become this publicly owned domain for journalism that anyone who’s interested in the promise of sustainable, independent journalism around the world should be in possession of, to maintain and support it,” Mr. Iles said.

The Civil cryptocurrency chief executive had his first discussions with Bitcoin Mr. Ryckman in April, a time when Alden had ordered more layoffs at The Post.

“It felt good to talk to somebody who was trying to do what felt like the right way to support local journalism in a new funding model,” Mr. Ryckman said.

Matt Coolidge, a co-founder and the head of communications for Civil, said the company would not disclose how much of the $1 million it had raised for journalism projects was going to The Sun, but added, “Suffice it to say, we are committed to giving them the support they need to get to sustainability.”

Mr. Ryckman said he was looking forward to having some resources to work with as he builds a publication on explanatory journalism, feature stories and investigative articles. “We are not trying to create a mini Denver Post,” he said. “We will break news, but we’re not doing breaking news.”

Once the grant money runs out, it will be up to The Colorado Sun to sustain itself. But Mr. Iles is confident that the project will succeed.

“When we learned about Larry and what he and his team had in mind for The Colorado Sun, it became obvious that this is a project we needed to support and we needed to partner with, because we believe, ultimately, that terrific journalism is the secret here and not blockchain,” Mr. Iles said.

Josh Benson, a co-founder of Old Town Media, which has been advising Civil and will work with The Colorado Sun to build a sustainable newsroom, said of the Sun project: “What they want to do is make something that is independent, incredibly useful, long-term sustainable, possibly a model for other things, ruthlessly correct — all the things you want a first-tier news organization to be.”

By the end of June, Civil will have started 13 newsrooms throughout the country.

“My hope,” Mr. Iles said, “is that people will see The Colorado Sun as the tip of the iceberg.” He added, “I’d like to think that, if your local news organization is struggling, or if you believe Investir no mercado financeiro that independent journalism is important, but you don’t yet really know what to do about, I’d like you to see how Civil can be home for ideas.

“I want newsrooms around the world,” he said, “to see The Colorado Sun as a leader in that regard.”



The Most Underrated Companies to Follow in the Investir no mercado financeiro Industry

Publié le 5/09/2018, à 13:25,

A Russian man was charged with overseeing a black market Bitcoin exchange that helped launder billions of dollars and stood at the nexus of several criminal enterprises, according to a federal indictment.

The indictment, which was unsealed in California on Wednesday, gave a long list of illegal activities that the Bitcoin exchange, known as BTC-E, facilitated, including ransomware fraud, identity theft, drug trafficking and public corruption.

The Russian man charged in the case, Alexander Vinnik, 37, was arrested in Greece on Tuesday. Mr. Vinnik had “directed and supervised” BTC-E’s operations, according to the indictment, and is said to have had co-conspirators.

Criminals who stole or extorted Bitcoin from their victims would transfer the virtual currencies to BTC-E, which would then convert the virtual currency into traditional currency using a host of bank accounts registered under shell companies.

Justice Department officials said that the exchange appeared to have been responsible for laundering more than $4 billion for criminals, with most of the money turned into American dollars and Russian rubles.

The site served 700,000 customers around the bitcoin forever world, the officials said.

Users of BTC-E had noted this week that the exchange’s website was down, though the site’s administrators had said on social media that they were working to get it back up.

The arrest of Mr. Vinnik came shortly after law enforcement authorities in the United States and Europe took down two big online drug markets in which Bitcoin was the primary currency.

Within the Bitcoin community, it has been common knowledge Melhor rendimento that drug dealers could use BTC-E to turn their Bitcoin proceeds into dollars.

The indictment may offer an explanation for a shock to the digital coin market in 2014. Mr. Vinnik and his partners are accused of stealing funds from the Tokyo-based Bitcoin exchange Mt. Gox, which declared bankruptcy in 2014 after disclosing a hacker intrusion.

Mt. Gox’s chief executive, Mark Karpeles, said that year that it had lost more than 800,000 Bitcoins, some of which the company later said it had recovered.

The indictment unsealed on Wednesday said that hundreds of thousands of Bitcoins moved from Mt. Gox into accounts at BTC-E HIGH WEBSITE SECURITY that were directly controlled by Mr. Vinnik.

The stolen Bitcoins were then moved to a different virtual currency exchange, Bitstamp, and sold for traditional currencies, which were deposited in bank accounts that Mr. Vinnik controlled in Latvia and Cyprus.

At least 300,000 Bitcoins followed this path. Those coins would be worth nearly bitcoin $800 million today.

Soon after news of Mr. Vinnik’s arrest became public, WizSec, a Japanese computer security firm that has been tracking the Mt. Gox theft, announced that it Earn Bitcoin had traced the stolen funds to Mr. Vinnik and had provided its findings to law enforcement authorities.

WizSec said on Wednesday that the theft of Mt. Gox’s funds began in September 2011 and continued until 2014, with most of the money ending up at BTC-E. The report from WizSec appeared to be the most complete explanation yet of the theft.

BTC-E was founded in 2011, just as Bitcoin began to gain significant value for the first time. The identity of the exchange’s operators was kept secret, even as other large Bitcoin exchanges tried to make their businesses more transparent and friendly to regulators.

BTC-E announced on its website that the exchange was complying with regulators by collecting identifying documents from all of its customers. In practice, however, BTC-E did not require anything from customers opening a new account, the indictment said.

BTC-E customers kept accounts under user names like “CocaineCowbays,” “ISIS” and “dzkillerhacker,” according to the indictment.



The 3 Biggest Disasters in Investimento de alto rendimento History

Publié le 5/09/2018, à 11:11,

WASHINGTON — Stephen K. Bannon, 10 months removed from the job of chief strategist to President Trump and five months after his ouster from the arch-conservative news site Breitbart News, is betting that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies can EliteInvesty disrupt banking the way Mr. Trump disrupted American politics.

Mr. Bannon won’t reveal very much about his cryptocurrency plans — he worries that the controversy that comes with his name could have a bad impact on projects just getting off the ground.

But he has had private meetings with cryptocurrency investors and hedge funds where he has discussed working on so-called initial coin offerings through his investment business, Bannon Company. And in his first interview on the topic, he said he had a “good stake” in Bitcoin.

In a small gathering of academics at Harvard University this spring, he even floated the possibility of creating a new virtual currency, the “deplorables coin.” The name is a nod to Hillary Clinton’s description of Mr. Trump’s supporters as “a basket of deplorables.”

The work that Mr. Bannon is doing in the virtual currency realm is still in its early stages. But he has expressed an interest in helping entrepreneurs and even countries looking to create their own cryptocurrencies — generally outside the United States.

The offbeat world of cryptocurrencies has drawn interest from all sorts over the last few years, from drug dealers and scam artists to the biggest companies in Silicon Valley and the most staid institutions of Wall Street.

It is not a shocking place for Mr. Bannon, 64, to plot his re-emergence. Cryptocurrencies have many of the characteristics that drew him into Tea Party politics: They break old rules, they exist on the periphery and they pose a challenge to the powerful figures and institutions that have long called the shots.

“It’s disruptive populism,” Mr. Bannon said in the interview at his Capitol Hill townhouse in Washington. “It takes control back from central authorities. It’s revolutionary.”

Even though he has no formal ties to the business anymore, Mr. Bannon still refers to his townhouse as the Breitbart Embassy, the nickname given to it because so much of the site’s business was done there.

While Breitbart editors and writers no longer linger at all hours inside the embassy, remnants of the website remain in Breitbart mementos hanging from the wall and coffee mugs with the signature block B logo strewn about the kitchen. Mr. Bannon still TRADE PROFESSIONAL accepts a steady stream of visitors who provide him intelligence and gossip from the conservative circles he once commanded. But these days he is just as likely to be convening meetings there on his new financial venture.

He won’t talk about a possible return to politics someday. His messy rupture with the White House over critical comments he made in Michael Wolff’s book “Fire and Fury” about colleagues and Donald Trump Jr. is still too fresh. But he does see a political component to virtual currency.

“It was pretty obvious to me that unless you got somehow control over your currency, all these political movements were going to be beholden to who controlled the currency,” Mr. Bannon said.

His vision for virtual currency has elements of his unorthodox ideology. He sounds like both an avowed libertarian who wants Invest Bitcoin government out of his life and a progressive who wants Wall Street held to account when he insists that virtual currencies can help citizens take back power from the central banks that “debase your currency” and make citizens “slaves to debt.”

His focus on creating new digital tokens, which are usually offered through initial coin offerings, puts him squarely in the edgiest, most scam-filled slice of the cryptocurrency business.

New companies have raised billions through these I.C.O.s, which allow them to bypass regulators and other middlemen and go straight to investors. That has also led to plenty of scams, and authorities throughout the world are starting to crack down.

Mr. Bannon’s involvement in cryptocurrencies has raised eyebrows among people trying to move the business toward the mainstream. They fear he will further cement the technology’s reputation as a plaything of fringe elements.

“It almost seems like a natural progression for a man who gained prominence by Earn Bitcoin shoveling out unfounded conspiracies to now shilling complex technology and financial instruments to an unsophisticated investing public,” said Colin Platt, a cryptocurrency researcher and adviser.

Bitcoin are stored and moved around a global network of computers that allows for the system to work without relying on a central authority. That lack of oversight has made Bitcoin a favorite method of payment for online drug markets and ransom schemes.

Bitcoin has been popular with the alt-right and nationalist communities because it has provided them with a way to receive online donations and evade restrictions put on them by banks and payment companies. PayPal and Apple Pay, for example, shut down the accounts of some right-wing groups last year.

Cryptocurrencies are also gaining mainstream interest. Goldman Sachs, where Mr. Bannon worked in the 1980s, recently said it was creating a Bitcoin trading operation. The parent company of the New York Stock Exchange has been looking at building an exchange for digital tokens. And Facebook has put top executives on a project exploring use of the technology.

These big companies are generally trying to take the technology away from its radical political roots. But Mr. Bannon is hoping to embrace those roots. “Control of the currency,” he said, “is control of everything.”

Timothy Lewis, a hedge fund manager who met with Mr. Bannon to talk about cryptocurrencies last month, said he was impressed with the degree to which Mr. Bannon had delved into the details of the technology and the challenges it faces.

“I didn’t know what to expect going in, but he had clearly done his homework,” said Mr. Lewis, who is a co-founder of the Ikigai hedge fund, which invests in cryptocurrency projects. He said they had talked about the laws governing new cryptocurrencies and a few initial coin offerings that had recently raised money from investors.

Mr. Bannon is particularly interested in the possibility that countries could create coins tied to national wealth — an Italian coin tied to marble deposits in the country, for instance.

He found his way into the virtual currency universe through Brock Pierce, a former child actor who appeared in films like “The Mighty Ducks” before starting a company in Hong Kong that sold the virtual gold that players use in the video game World of Warcraft.

The company, Internet Gaming Entertainment, or IGE, brought on Mr. Bannon as vice chairman in 2005 to help Mr. Pierce expand the business and deal with legal threats.

Mr. Bannon credits the company with introducing him to the ranks of disaffected young men who gathered online around video games, and who became pillars of the alt-right movement.

Since leaving IGE in 2007, Mr. Pierce has become involved with a wide array of virtual currency projects, including an effort to create a cryptocurrency enclave in Puerto Rico that takes advantage of the island’s low taxes, and a new virtual currency known as EOS, which has raised over $3 billion.

Mr. Bannon said he would have gotten involved with Mr. Pierce and cryptocurrencies back in 2016 if the Trump campaign hadn’t intervened.

Mr. Pierce’s big claims for cryptocurrencies — and a recent turn toward new age spiritualism — have made him a target for critics. John Oliver, on his HBO comedy show, recently held up Mr. Pierce as an emblem of the bombast that floats around the virtual currency community. After the segment, the company that created EOS said Mr. Pierce had left the company.

Mr. Bannon is not bothered by the mockery. Other causes he has taken on have worked out well despite low expectations.

“These guys are visionaries,” he said.




{ Page précédente } { Page suivante }