????風險投資家已經在比特幣相關的初創公司身上投入了大約1億美元，他們相信加密貨幣最終會在全球支付行業占據相當的份額。從數碼錢包到商業承兌匯票的一切業務都將見到它們的身影。不過，假如他們不幫忙實現美元與比特幣之間的兌換，這些恐怕都只是一個泡影。

????這些投資家們會告訴你，比特幣的廣泛采用是他們這些初創公司取得成功的關鍵。例如，風險投資家本?霍洛維茨最近與博主菲利克斯?薩爾蒙打賭稱，未來的五年內，美國國家公共電臺（NPR，National Public Radio）超過10%的聽眾都會使用比特幣購買商品。霍洛維茨打這個賭，不僅是因為他相信自己會贏，也是因為他需要贏【迄今為止，安德森?霍洛維茨基金（Andreessen Horowitz）已經在比特幣領域投資了將近5,000萬美元】。

????目前，妨礙比特幣普及的一個主要問題是它的價格波動過大。比特幣的這個特性對于“貨幣”投機者來說很棒，但同樣的事情對那些只是希望買汽油、買日用百貨時圖個方便的人來說就是災難了。甚至對商家來說也是一樣，即使買賣雙方在交易時都采用實時匯兌技術。想象一下，如果電腦只能在一半時間內處于開啟狀態，早期的因特網公司吸引顧客將會有多么困難【“糟糕，貌似我今天用不了美國在線（AOL）了”】。

????比特幣要減少價格波動，就需要一個流動性市場，讓包括機構和政府在內的大型投資者都能舒服地參與其中。這個市場一要有法律監管，二要設在美國境內（最有可能是在紐約）。不僅僅是因為流動性市場能產生流動資產，還因為它能帶來信譽，從而讓比特幣被人們所采用。

????因此，意料之中的是，筆者聽說一些風險投資家已經開始探索法律管制下的美國與加密貨幣兌換的投資機會。我還知道至少有一家風投公司支持的企業正在展開嚴肅的會談，希望借助在這方面有所進展。

????不過筆者要更進一步說明：就算風投公司最后認為這樣單獨投資的風險太大，為了他們（無論是過去已經進行的，還是未來希望進行的）其他的比特幣投資，他們仍然會虧本推動這個進程。畢竟，如果沒有先建立好自己可靠的支付體系，就不可能打破現有的支付格局。（財富中文網）

????譯者：嚴匡正

????Venture capitalists have invested around $100 million into Bitcoin-related startups, believing that the cryptocurrency will eventually take a major bite out of the global payments industry. Everything from digital wallets to merchant acceptance solutions. But if they don't help create a U.S. exchange, it all might be for naught.

????Any one of these investors will tell you that widespread adoption is key to the success of their various startups. Venture capitalist Ben Horowitz, for example, recently bet blogger Felix Salmon that more than 10% of NPR listeners will have used Bitcoin to buy something within the next five years. Horowitz made the bet not only because he believes he'll win, but also because he needs to win (Andreessen Horowitz so far has invested nearly $50 million into the space).

????A major barrier to Bitcoin adoption right now, however, is price volatility. The same thing that makes Bitcoin great for "currency" speculators is the exact same thing that makes it a nightmare for someone who just wants to have a more convenient (and possibly cheaper) way to buy gas or groceries. Same goes for merchants, even if they use instant conversion technologies on both ends of a transaction. Imagine how hard it would have been for early Internet companies to get users if PCs only turned on 50% of the time ("oops, guess I can't use AOL today").

????To reduce volatility, Bitcoin requires a liquid market where large investors -- including institutions and governments -- are comfortable participating. Regulated, and based in the U.S. (most likely in New York). Not only does liquidity beget liquidity, but it also begets reliability which begets adoption.

????Not surprisingly, I've heard that several venture capitalists already are exploring the investment case for a regulated U.S. cryptocurrency exchange. And I know of at least one VC-backed company that is in serious talks to move forward this something like this, likely via a "seat" model.

????But I'll go a step further: Even if VCs ultimately deem such an investment too risky as a standalone, they still should proceed as a sort of loss leader for their other Bitcoin investments (past and future). You can't destroy the payment rails without first creating your own reliable infrastructure.