Within the realm of technology, few industries spark as much debate and fascination as blockchain. Initially overlooked in its early stages, the sector garnered significant attention from investors, developers, and the general public approximately five years ago, fostering a passionate community of advocates reminiscent of the pioneering days of the World Wide Web and the dot-com surge. While a period of instability followed, certain companies persevered, notably Coinbase.

Currently, Coinbase maintains a valuation of $8 billion, mirroring its 2018 assessment, and is anticipated to become a publicly traded company in the near future. Despite facing scrutiny regarding its core principles and diversity initiatives, the company continues to be a leading force among blockchain and cryptocurrency businesses geared towards individual consumers.

This trajectory makes the story of its beginnings and subsequent growth particularly compelling. Jeff John Roberts, a staff writer for Fortune, meticulously details this narrative in his recently published book, “Kings of Crypto,” released by Harvard Business School Press. The book chronicles the history of Coinbase, Brian Armstrong, and the vision of a cryptocurrency-driven economy. Considering the ongoing discussions and controversies surrounding the company, coupled with Bitcoin’s recent record-breaking price gains, the book offers a more in-depth and analytical examination of a complex subject.

Last month, I had the opportunity to speak with Roberts to delve deeper into the company, the broader cryptocurrency landscape, and future prospects as we move into 2021.

This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.

TechCrunch: What prompted you to undertake this project and decide to write the book?

Jeff John Roberts: The market is already populated with numerous books on cryptocurrency, and the quality varies considerably. However, I identified a need for a new perspective, a first wave of publications addressing the subject. Nate Popper’s “Digital Gold” is exceptionally well-written, and the Wall Street Journal’s “Age of Cryptocurrency” serves as a comprehensive explanation. I sought a novel approach to storytelling. Focusing on a single company provides a compelling narrative framework, as companies can effectively illustrate the evolution of an entire industry.

I selected Coinbase as the focal point because the early stages of cryptocurrency can be challenging to grasp. Even now, the industry struggles to define itself – is it a niche subculture or a mainstream technology? Much of the initial writing celebrated its unconventional aspects. I aimed to present a more accessible, business-oriented narrative, akin to a “Hatching Twitter”-style story, and fortunately, there was ample anecdotal material to draw upon.

How did your interest in cryptocurrency initially develop?

My involvement began while working at GigaOm. In 2013, I attended a weekly gathering in New York City, held in Union Square, known as Satoshi Square. It turned out to be a meeting of crypto-anarchists trading bitcoin. Interestingly, the event also attracted Wall Street traders in expensive suits, creating a striking contrast. Observing this collision of cultures – the blend of ambition and countercultural ideals – was particularly memorable.

I covered Bitcoin’s initial foray into mainstream attention, but that momentum subsided before resurfacing in 2015 and 2016, coinciding with another market surge. I’ve continued to follow its progress, and interest has once again increased. Therefore, the timing of the book, despite the pandemic’s impact on launch events, proved opportune, as prices have soared recently.

Having observed the cryptocurrency industry for many years, what storyline do you find most captivating at present?

I believe the most compelling narrative revolves around the inherent tension between Wall Street and Silicon Valley. While they often operate independently, they are mutually dependent in the context of cryptocurrency. It’s fascinating to witness their interactions as they attempt to bridge these two distinct worlds.

Bitcoin consistently promises to revolutionize the financial system, but its impact has been limited thus far. However, I anticipate that blockchain technology will play a more significant role in addressing critical needs in the coming decade. This convergence of Wall Street and Silicon Valley appears inevitable.

Furthermore, the involvement of major corporations like Facebook with Libra, Square, and PayPal is noteworthy. I suspect Apple will also enter the market, leveraging its expertise in privacy, existing wallet infrastructure, and substantial transaction fee payments. This evolving landscape, with Coinbase positioned at its center, provides a rich subject for exploration.

You specifically chose Coinbase as a central company for your book. What led to that decision?

There’s a great deal of current discussion surrounding the company’s culture, but I was drawn to it because of a fundamental question: Does one aspire to be a rebel within a subculture, or to effect real change?

I believe Coinbase was the first and most successful in pursuing the latter. Brian Armstrong, even among many Valley CEOs, possesses a unique perspective. He recognized early on the necessity of bringing cryptocurrency into the mainstream. This tension persists within the crypto world – and within Coinbase itself – between the purist, libertarian ideal of self-custody and the practicalities of widespread adoption. I think Coinbase astutely recognized the direction things were heading and built its platform accordingly, essentially creating the crypto equivalent of online banking.

They consistently present themselves as the champion of cryptocurrency, and Andreessen Horowitz and Fred Wilson played a significant role in shaping that narrative. However, their approach has been largely successful, which I find particularly interesting.

What was the experience of building Coinbase in its early days like? Were there any notable anecdotes from that period?

The early days were intriguing, particularly given their commitment to overcoming obstacles. One memorable instance involved Apple. They were briefly available on the App Store but were removed due to Apple’s policy prohibiting cryptocurrency wallets. Fred Ehrsam, one of the co-founders, devised a clever workaround by geofencing the app to exclude Cupertino, and this actually worked for months, allowing users to buy and trade without Apple’s knowledge.

However, my favorite chapter in the book details the internal cultural conflict between two opposing factions. Balaji Srinivasan, a provocative but brilliant figure, was brought in to revitalize the company when the Winklevoss twins’ venture and Binance began to gain traction. He introduced new assets and challenged the status quo. This sparked a clash between the more established, corporate-minded team led by COO Asiff Hirji, who harbored ambitions of becoming CEO, and the original, ideologically driven developers who were deeply committed to the principles of cryptocurrency.

If time is limited, I recommend reading the chapter focusing on this cultural battle. It’s a fascinating portrayal of the conflict between a traditional corporate structure and the fervent beliefs of the early crypto community, almost resembling a cult-like devotion.

Do you believe they have successfully reconciled these differing cultures?

Yes. Their valuation speaks for itself, and the market appears to be theirs to lose. However, I wonder if Square or PayPal might challenge them in the coming years. They are actively adding more conventional banking features, and their debit card was a clever innovation, despite the inherent volatility of Bitcoin.

They could still encounter setbacks, but considering their current position, including their cultural complexities, I find it difficult to envision anyone surpassing them.

Shifting to a broader perspective, it’s striking that cryptocurrency is inherently a political technology, yet Armstrong has consistently maintained that his company should remain apolitical and focus on its mission. How do you reconcile this apparent contradiction, considering both the political nature of cryptocurrency and the broader political landscape?

Cryptocurrency is fundamentally an ideological project, and to claim otherwise is disingenuous.

I believe the underlying principles of gender equality and Black Lives Matter are entirely valid, and Coinbase has historically struggled with these issues. Nathalie McGrath, their first female employee, played a crucial role in humanizing the company and fostering a more inclusive environment. Companies that fail to attract both women as consumers and employees will inevitably face challenges, and she made significant progress in that regard.

There’s an anecdote from their first staff retreat, when the team was still small, where Brian and his co-founder proposed a hunting trip. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with that, it felt out of place as a corporate event. She worked diligently to create a more welcoming and human workplace, but I believe Armstrong’s limited perspective and inability to look beyond the confines of Coinbase will continue to present challenges.

Do you think Armstrong has evolved as a leader over time? Do you foresee further improvement in his leadership capabilities?

It’s an ongoing question. He’s hampered by his introverted nature and lack of charisma. Another recurring theme in the book is Fred Ehrsam. While not officially a co-founder, Paul Graham at Y Combinator encouraged Fred to replace the original co-founder, Ben Reeves. The Silicon Valley narrative often emphasizes the importance of a two- or three-person team, as solo ventures are considered too difficult. Brian succeeded, but then found a complementary partner in Fred, who possessed charisma. He’s unconventional, with a background in Goldman Sachs trading, professional gaming, coding, and an MBA, and is both charming and capable.

I believe Brian should adopt a role similar to Sergey Brin’s at Google, focusing on the broader vision while delegating day-to-day operations. He consistently encounters difficulties and spends considerable resources on coaching to improve his interpersonal skills. He also shares a tendency with Musk and Jobs – a relentless focus on his company. Whether he can develop the necessary social skills remains an open question, as evidenced by recent events.

How does Coinbase differentiate itself from other companies?

That’s a valid question, as every startup is unique, but as they grow, they often become increasingly similar.

Ironically, for a company that claims to be apolitical, it is deeply ideological. Especially in its early days, a genuine belief in the principles of cryptocurrency was essential. I have quotes from Fred Ehrsam stating that anyone who didn’t share that conviction should leave. This raw, ideological drive sets it apart, as the company was built by true believers, and Brian Armstrong is among them.

What brought them together was a shared commitment to cryptocurrency, without engaging in criminal or reckless behavior. That’s what distinguishes its culture.

Considering that, do you believe Coinbase is influencing regulators, or are regulators influencing Coinbase? Where is the balance of power shifting?

I have a chapter detailing an attempt by senior Coinbase executives to engage with senators and navigate the regulatory landscape, an effort that Brian Armstrong resisted. He expressed a desire to reinvent the SEC and similar institutions. He has become more pragmatic over time.

However, on a broader level, the question arises of the United States’ role in the future of money. Individuals within the Treasury Department are not oblivious to the potential of Bitcoin, but there’s also concern about falling behind China, particularly its advancements in digital currency.

The U.S. dollar remains the global standard for exchange and the world’s reserve currency, and maintaining its primacy is a critical strategic asset for the United States. Therefore, there’s a conflict in Washington regarding whether to embrace the technology while simultaneously protecting existing interests.

What’s next for Coinbase?

The IPO is the immediate focus. They are delaying the process because they aspire to conduct a token-based public offering, as Fred Ehrsam described it as their “spiritual destiny.” This ambition is somewhat idealistic, but a traditional IPO that solely benefits Wall Street bankers would be disappointing to many. They are working to establish a regulatory framework that would allow for a token offering as part of their IPO. If that proves unfeasible, they will likely pursue a direct listing.