Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
The Honest Money Show is your guide to understanding what money really is — and why today’s system isn’t working. Hosted by Anja Dragovic, this show cuts through the noise to explore how money shapes our lives, where it’s gone wrong, and what a better future could look like. Along the way, you'll discover how Bitcoin fits into the bigger picture — not as hype, but as a serious response to a broken system. Whether you're curious, skeptical, or already down the
Welcome to Honest Money.
Speaker: Alright, before we dive in,
a quick note on the news block format.
Each week I'll walk you through the
most important Bitcoin developments
across Australia and New Zealand, and
I'll also highlight global news that's
especially relevant to our region.
No noise, no hype, just what actually
is worth paying attention to.
Now, if you've been following Bitcoin
throughout 2025, you'd be forgiven
for feeling a little bit flat.
After all the noise, all the
predictions and all the expectations,
Bitcoin mostly went sideways.
Plenty of people were
positioned for fireworks.
Instead, what they got was chop,
solidation, and long stretches of boredom.
At the start of the year, there was a
fairly clear institutional consensus
forming with many large analysts and
funds clustering around a 200,000 US
dollar mark as a potential cycle top.
The debate wasn't really about the number.
It was about the timing.
Some expected it by the end of 2025 while
others pushed that expectation into 26.
Instead, it stalled.
At one point the Fear Greed Index
dropped to extreme fear levels last
seen during the FTX collapse when market
confidence broke down almost completely.
And yet despite that, something very
different was happening under the surface.
Bitcoin turned 16 in January of
last year and without much fanfare
crossed a 2 trillion US dollar
market cap in December, 2024.
With that milestone passed with far less
excitement than earlier cycle highs, which
says a lot about how the asset is treated.
Now.
Bitcoin isn't new, it isn't fringe
and it's no longer something
governments or institutions can ignore.
And while price spent much of the year
going nowhere, fast ownership didn't.
Public companies, funds, institutions
and even nation states continued
accumulating at a steady pace.
At several points last year,
businesses went buying businesses
were buying more Bitcoin per
day than miners were producing.
Exchange balances kept falling.
Long-term holders.
Even the OGs felt sell.
Pressure at times, but overall,
supply remained historically
tight and conviction largely held.
When we zoom out from price and
look at what actually changed in
Bitcoin over 2025, a few themes
stand out and they're less about
drama and more about maturation.
First 2005 was the year Bitcoin continued
to cement itself as infrastructure
rather than speculation, the conversation
shifted away from if Bitcoin survives
to how Bitcoin fits in large players
didn't disappear during drawdowns.
Instead, activity slowed, repositioned,
and became more deliberate.
Bitcoin started to look, less like a trade
and more like a long-term monetary asset.
Second, long-term holder behavior became
one of the most important signals.
Despite volatility and periods of
extreme fear, long-term holders largely
stayed, put this aligns closely with
James Check's framework cycles driven,
not by hype, but by who holds Bitcoin,
why they hold it, and whether conviction
breaks in 2025 it bent, but it didn't break.
Another key feature of the year
was growing disconnect between
headlines and on-chain reality.
Negative news increasingly
failed to produce the kind of
capitulation seen in earlier cycles.
Volatility didn't disappear,
but it changed character.
Bitcoin is now held by participants who
better understand its purpose and are
less reactive to short term narratives.
And then there was Australia finally
dominating the global Bitcoin
conversation, not with groundbreaking
policy, not with technical innovation,
but with courtroom confusion
and culinary investment advice.
First, Senator Gerard Rennick made
international headlines by declaring
Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme, because
in his words, you can't eat it.
A devastating critique.
Apparently, if an asset isn't
digestible, it is worthless.
Gold inedible shares bad for your
teeth, bonds, zero nutritional value.
Someone alert.
Global markets.
The food pyramid has
replaced monetary theory.
Just as the spotlight warmed up,
the Australian Financial Review
lit the fuse on a full blown fren.
Came claiming a local magistrate's
ruling might exempt Bitcoin
from capital gains tax.
According to the headlines, one criminal
case involving a rogue police officer and
stolen Bitcoin was apparently about to
dismantle the ATO's entire tax framework.
Reality, of course, is far less exciting.
The ruling wasn't final and it wasn't
a federal court, and it had nothing
to do with tax law in it was a narrow
finding in a criminal case about theft,
not a sweeping reclassification of
Bitcoin under Australian tax policy.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of
Victoria has already ruled that
Bitcoin is intangible property, the
kind you absolutely do pay tax on.
That didn't stop the speculation,
the clickbait or the fantasy of
a billion dollar refund bonanza.
So yes, Australia made waves globally
in 2025, not by understanding Bitcoin
better, but by misunderstanding it loudly
and hoping a technicality and theft
law might undo a decade of tax policy.
Still beneath the noise,
real things were happening.
One of the more consequential
shifts, though far less
sensational was regulatory.
By the end of 2025, Australia confirmed
that Bitcoin and digital asset
exchanges will be required to operate
under an Australian financial services
license For users, that means clearer
obligations around custody, disclosure,
and consumer protections for exchanges.
It marks a move firmly into the
traditional financial services perimeter.
One of the more meaningful local
developments was the launch
of several Australian Bitcoin
collateralized loan products.
Australians now have homegrown options
like Loan My Coins by The Bitcoin
Adviser, Lendasat and Vield, offering
different approaches to accessing
liquidity without selling Bitcoin.
Alongside those block earner became the
most widely known name in the space.
And also the most controversial, its
structure, reliance on third party custody
and past regulatory issues, made it the
red flag option of the group and one
that demands extra caution from users.
This is where a short education
piece really matters when it
comes to Bitcoin backed loans.
Counterparty risk is everything.
A simple rule of thumb.
Never use a lender where you
lose control of your Bitcoin
if you don't hold the keys.
You are not holding Bitcoin,
you are holding a promise.
An additional red flag
is third party custody.
If a lender passes your Bitcoin to
another entity for safekeeping, you've
introduced another point of failure.
And if your collateral is being
rehypothecated or wrapped, lent
out, or reused elsewhere, you're
no longer taking market risk.
You are taking systemic risk.
Australia should also be aware
of potential capital gains
triggers depending on structure.
Transferring control of Bitcoin can
still be treated as a disposal event.
What looks like a tax efficient loan
can quietly become a CGT nightmare.
Bitcoin doesn't need leverage to
work and borrowing against it only
makes sense when you fully understand
who controls the keys and what can
happen to your coins under stress.
Convenience is never worth giving
up sovereignty, and it wasn't
all about loans and legal noise.
Australia also saw the launch of homegrown
Multisig Bitcoin wallet called Frost
Snap, giving users another option for
holding their own keys with shared
security and no reliance on custodians.
Not bad for a country of
roughly 25 million people.
In superannuation news, Australian
brokers reported increased interest from
self-managed super funds, allocating
Bitcoin alongside property and gold.
A BS data showed the median Australian
home price pushing past a million
dollars, prompting more people to
frame housing costs in Bitcoin terms.
Roughly seven at today's prices,
a perspective that resonated with
younger Australians increasingly
priced out of the market.
That way of thinking would've
sounded absurd just a few years ago.
In 2025, it barely raised an
eyebrow and without less like
equity made now comparing housing
affordability directly against Bitcoin.
The idea is slowly but unmistakably,
seeping into the mainstream.
Australia also saw Locate
Technologies, an ASX listed
company, add Bitcoin to his treasury.
The reaction was immediate and polarising.
Critics questioned the risk.
Supporters pointed to long-term strategy.
The company's share price jumped sharply
and management publicly defended the move
as compliant and focused on the long-term.
That was before the ASX began asking
questions, not about disclosure or
governance, but about decades old cash box
rules never designed for digital assets.
Ultimately, those constraints proved
stifling, locate, moved its business
offshore or more accommodating regulatory
environment, in this case, New Zealand,
where the others follow remains to be
seen, but the precedent is now set.
Across the Tasman, New
Zealand took tougher approach.
Authorities banned Bitcoin ATMs
and imposed title limits on
international transfers, citing
money laundering concerns, supporters
called it necessary enforcement.
Critics argued it targeted open
infrastructure while ignoring
failures in traditional finance.
Either way, the policy gap
between Australia and New Zealand
widened noticeably globally.
Governments also shifted from
debating Bitcoin to managing it.
In the United States courts approved
the liquidation of seized Bitcoin
even as new administration outlined
plans for a strategic Bitcoin
reserve, largely focused on custody
and use of existing holdings.
Several US states explored or
passed legislation to hold Bitcoin
at the state level, either using
public funds or unclaimed assets.
Elsewhere.
El Salvador continued accumulating
despite IMF pressure.
Pakistan announced plans for a national
reserve tied to energy monetization.
Bhutan quietly maintained large
government held Bitcoin mined
with hydropower, Thailand moved.
To accept Bitcoin in Phuket.
While Brazil debated reserve
allocations, energy and mining
remained a quiet but powerful theme.
Ethiopia generated over a billion dollars.
Monetizing excess
hydropower through mining.
South Africa explored similar ideas,
hash rate, continued shifting globally in
response to cost, climate ad regulation.
Central banks meanwhile
took very different paths.
The US effectively paused any retail
CBDC push Europe pressed ahead
with digital Euro Development.
Australia focused on wholesale
experimentation through Project Acacia
testing settlement infrastructure
rather than launching a consumer
digital dollar across jurisdictions,
the pattern was clear, cautious pilots,
slow timelines, and heavy consultation.
For Bitcoin holders, the
contrast was instructive.
Central banks debated
design and governance.
Bitcoin just kept working.
By the end of it all 2025 hadn't
delivered fireworks many expected.
But it delivered something arguably more
important, Bitcoin forced decisions.
Courts had to rule.
Banks had to choose.
Companies had to commit.
Energy grids had to adapt.
And individuals had to decide
whether they actually understood
what they were holding.
Price went sideways.
Everything else moved forward.
Speaker 2: Still here you
are one of the good ones.
We'll be back next week
with a brand new episode.
If you enjoy how we cut through
the noise, consider supporting us
directly via the Lightning QR code.
Got a question or a thought to share?
Comments are wide open.
We'd love to hear from you.
For bonus content and updates, follow
us on socials at Honest Money Show.
Until next week, take care of yourself
and your money and stay decentralised.