A recent opinion piece from the Financial Times has stirred strong reactions across the crypto industry, reigniting the long-running debate over Bitcoin’s value and future.
The article, written by FT columnist Jemima Kelly, argued that Bitcoin remains significantly overvalued and could ultimately fall to zero. The piece came in the wake of a sharp market correction that briefly pushed Bitcoin toward the $60,000 level before it rebounded back toward the $70,000 range. While the column was intended as a critical take on the asset, the response from the crypto community was swift and highly critical in return.
Much of the backlash focused on the tone of the article, which used vivid metaphors to describe Bitcoin’s trajectory. Industry participants across social media dismissed the argument as outdated, with some accusing mainstream financial media of repeatedly misreading the asset class over the past decade.
For many traders and long-time Bitcoin investors, the article was interpreted not as a warning, but as a contrarian signal. The idea that strongly negative mainstream coverage often coincides with market bottoms has become a common narrative in crypto circles. Several market participants pointed out that previous “Bitcoin is dead” headlines have historically appeared near periods of price weakness, only to be followed by major rallies.
As a result, some investors even described the column as a bullish indicator, suggesting that such criticism reflects lingering skepticism that could eventually be converted into new demand. Others used the moment to highlight what they see as a widening gap between traditional financial commentary and the growing adoption of digital assets.
With Bitcoin still trading far above levels seen just a few years ago, the clash between skeptics and believers shows little sign of fading. If anything, the reaction to the Financial Times column suggests that the debate around Bitcoin’s role in the global financial system is as intense as ever.
