January 9, 2026
Last week, Peter joined Jennifer Sanasie on the CoinDesk YouTube channel to push back against the crypto crowd and explain why he thinks gold-not Bitcoin-will be the long-term safe haven. He walks through how gold's breakout in 2024 carried into 2025, why central banks are buying bullion, and what true sound money really means in contrast to fiat and tokenized claims. Along the way he admits an ironic role in shaping crypto adoption while urging readers to consider real commodities and trustworthy custody in hard assets.
He opens by noting an ironic personal effect: even as a critic of crypto, he has helped popularize Bitcoin for some people:
I don't remember where it was where they listed me as being one of the most influential people in crypto, even though I was the only person on the list that was critical of crypto, but they still acknowledged the fact that I was influential. And in fact, you know, I know firsthand that despite my criticism of crypto, a lot of people own Bitcoin in particular because of me. So I have influenced a lot of people to buy Bitcoin, even though that was not my intention. I may have influenced a lot more people to buy Bitcoin than the people who have advocated Bitcoin.
From there he turns to markets, framing 2025 as a continuation of the bullish momentum that began in 2024 for gold. He explains how political events shifted sentiment and how that affected gold stocks:
I think that the events of 2025 are really a continuation of the events of 2024 because gold had a huge year then as well. That's when gold really broke out above 2000 and went from 2000 to 3000. And then it went from 3000 to 4000. Obviously, the election of Donald Trump, a lot of people thought that would be a game changer for gold. A lot of people got bearish on gold after Trump won and gold stocks in particular got sold off pretty hard in the fourth quarter of last year, mainly because of the Trump victory, which people thought would be perceived as being gold negative.
He sketches a broader thesis: when gold starts producing consistent returns, the Bitcoin story loses its appeal. He sees a multi-year gold phase ahead, comparable to the run from 1999 to 2011:
Because look, everybody is making money buying Bitcoin and no one's making money in gold. And that changed in 2024 when gold finally broke out. And I think gold is now in another phase, similar to what we saw from 1999 to 2011, where we're going to see steady and substantial gains. And I think that's the environment where the whole Bitcoin narrative is going to fall apart. Because once gold is performing and gold bugs are being rewarded, they don't need to look for an alternative.
Part of the case for gold, he says, is what sovereign actors are doing. Central banks are increasing bullion holdings because holding dollars is a losing proposition if inflation outpaces nominal yields:
And in fact, central banks, why are central banks buying gold ? Because they know that they will lose if they hold dollars, because inflation will erode away the value. The yields on treasuries are not high enough to compensate holders for what they're going to lose to inflation. So foreign central banks have been moving out of dollars into gold, because inflation expectations are anything but contained. So this is a negative.
That leads him into a concise definition of sound money versus fiat or tokenized claims: real money is a commodity with intrinsic value, not merely something whose worth depends on confidence:
From that perspective, yeah, it's not sound money. But what really differentiates sound money, right, other than the substance of it versus paper money, which when you drop it on the table, makes no sound at all, is that real money, sound money, is a commodity, whether it's gold or something else that's been used as money. It has its own intrinsic value separate and apart from the fact that it is a medium of exchange or a unit of account. And it derives its value from those properties that it has, right ? Whereas a fiat currency, its value is derived by confidence.
Finally, he reminds listeners that commodity money has been stored and trusted for millennia, and that modern custodians and competing reputations make gold ownership practical and secure-if you choose reputable providers:
We were on a gold standard for thousands of years and people had other parties that stored their gold and it worked, right ? Were there occasions where the custodian stole the gold ? Sure. But, you know, I talk about Brinks, which has been around for 160 years as a gold custodian and has never lost an ounce. So, you know, in capitalism, companies compete for reputation, for brand, and yes, make sure that if you own a token, you trust the issuer and the custodian that they are going to hold on to your gold.
This article was originally published on SchiffGold.com.