Problem
John Brown, the fictional US hedge fund manager of the "Bitcoin: Investment or Illusion?" case read the Financial Times article: "Nouriel Roubini: bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk[1] - Elon Musk may be buying it, but that doesn't mean everyone else should follow suit" (https://www.ft.com/content/9be5ad05-b17a-4449-807b-5dbcb5ef8170). Nouriel Roubini, a prominent professor of economics at the Stern School of Business, NYU is extremely critical of bitcoin and other crypto currencies. At the end of the article, Roubini states that "Risky, volatile bitcoin doesn't belong in the portfolios of serious institutional investors".
• Summarize the elements of Roubini's argument presented in the article using bullet points.
• Solely based on the information provided in the "Bitcoin: Investment or Illusion?" case (attached), counter-argument to Roubini's position using bullet points. Cite specifics from the case.
• Based on your analysis of the Roubini's article and the counter argument that you prepared, would you recommend John Brown to invest in bitcoin? Which argument is more convincing? Why?