BITCOIN

User232002

Linton said:

From your description Sushi and AAVE are companies which could make a profit and distribute dividends.  If Sushi and AAVE were quoted cpompanieds (I dont know whether they are or not) you could calculate a P/E and Yield.  

So we are agreed that some crypto assets can be assessed on P/E measures. I believe this was the original point of contention wasn't it when you implied that no crypto could have earnings?

In an earlier post, you stated that:

Linton said:

 Yield is dividend/price

This is how to calculate yield on a stock; yield more generally is a measure of return in proportion to what was invested. 

Linton said:

You cannot claim that somehow Bitcoin is doing it.

You can earn a return on Bitcoin in a few different ways. By this, I do mean a direct return on the asset itself by capturing a variety of arbitrage spreads. However, it does require some knowledge and last time it was a painful conversation so I don't wish to repeat it. As Adyinvestment stated, its probably best done by giving your money to a company that specialises in doing this for you and taking a cut. This obviously incurs counter party risk and lowers your yield though. Some people choose not to pursue this and accept 0% on their Bitcoin because 'not your keys, not your coins.' 

Linton said:

You cant work out a reasonable price of gold from the  profits a gold miner makes and you cant work out a reasonable price for Bitcoin from the P/E and Yields of the companies that happen to "process" it.  

I've never claimed this at all. Bitcoin price models aren't based on the yield generated by the asset. I keep pointing out that its a strawman argument to say 'Bitcoin isn't a stock.' Like, obviously it isn't. It isn't trying to be. If you judge children by their ability to juggle, you'll end up with a load of clowns and no scientists.

The fundamental use case of Bitcoin is of providing a store of value as hard money. That it can do that and provide an opportunity to capture a yield currently is quite nice. But this yield will probably trend to zero over time as markets become more efficient and liquid.

User232002

tebbins said:

I really can't be bothered with this anymore it's just boring.

What does it say about the strength of your arguments that you can't find faults in a few hundred word post? Perhaps its time for a bit of humility and introspection.

tebbins said:

Clearly the only thing that will convince you you're wrong will be when the Crypto bubble/craze finally bursts/passes but by then you'll feel a bit embarrassed about how you got suckered in. 

Like it did in 2013? 2017? Bubbles don't pop and then re-inflate repeatedly. And yes, it'll do the same in 2021/22.

Unlike yourself, I am completely dispassionate regarding my Bitcoin. I want it to work, but I have very clear invalidation points.

Wheres yours? If in 2026 BTC is approaching $300k and is commonly held by large multinational companies as a reserve asset and many sovereign wealth funds or central banks, do you change your opinion on it?

tebbins said:

The language you're using and the enthusiasm you're demonstrating about Crypto are no different to .com stock traders in the 90s.

No idea what language you are talking about, but lets be clear that people in the 90's were correct. Right now, I'm sure there is a completely online billion dollar pet company somewhere and I think its fair to say that you'd struggle to live a productive life nowadays without the internet and the businesses that run on it. It gave us FAANG who, for all their Orwellian faults, have been drivers of immense value creation over the last decade.

They were just getting ahead of what the technology was actually capable of at the time. There were sites very similar to YouTube started in the early 00's and some started in the late 00's. YouTube succeeded partly because it launched at a crossover point in adoption and internet speed. However, the user network of cryptocurrencies is growing at a faster rate than the internet did. 

Everybody in crypto knows the technology is ahead of its time and knows that a crash is coming when valuations as a whole get out of hand. I'll be the person here when Bitcoin is at $150k telling people that buying here might not be a good financial decision. AAVE as an example is great, but for starters it needs (1) a more user friendly and less crypto native UI/UX for mass adoption and (2) a decentralised, fair and blockchain based reputation system similar to a credit score. How those problems get solved I don't know. Perhaps AAVE solve them or perhaps another protocol solves it before them. The innovation and the uncertainty around it is what makes this space incredibly profitable.

tebbins said:

Quoting this for the benefit of the forum just to serve as a reminder of the... Let's say acumen of the pro-crypto posters. While his posts have become longer and look cleverer, the substance and quality remains unchanged. Just read though these threads carefully and you'll see how these hacks have been exposed as the BS merchants by the real heavyweights.

You do realise we are two different people right? In any event, I am sure it was a joke. At some point, Bitcoiners tend to become exasperated at debating the same trivial points over and over again. Your points were understandable in 2013, tired and stubborn in 2017; now they are simply evidence of being unwilling to accept the reality in front of you.

Can you please point out the parts in this thread where 'these hacks have been exposed as the BS merchants by the real heavyweights,' please?

Zola.

There comes a point when those who refuse to get it, and clearly don't want to get it, should be left to their own devices. Not worth the effort. Im happy for many to not get it. More bitcoin for us. 

As Michael Saylor said "you get bitcoin at the price you deserve" 

Also...as Satoshi Nakamoto said on the bitcoin talk forum way back when bitcoin was barely even a penny 

“If you don't believe it or don't get it, I don't have the time to try to convince you, sorry.”

Scottex99

Yep at this stage Tebbins you’re just cluttering up your precious forum by replying to every BTC/Crypto thread with some random thoughts that seem to be falling out of your brain.

You don’t get it, you refuse to get it, that’s fine, nobody that pro crypto cares what you do. We’ve all give reasonably good answers to people asking how to invest or where to stake etc, the rest of the time is trying to explain the potential value of crypto to you which is a useless endeavor pretty much, although Darren has done an excellent job.

We’re all prepared for the volatility, for the blow off top, for the rapid gains and losses and what they mean for us personally. What are you planning to do when BTC hits $150k-250k and the whole industry market cap is catching up with Gold? You might want to start planning because, on this side WAGMI.

Scottex99

adamp87 said:

RolandFlagg said:

Today's news (stolen from Coin Bureau newsletter):

American supermarket giant, Walmart has announced plans to install a full 8,000 Bitcoin ATMs in its stores and has recently completed the introduction of an initial 200, as a pilot project.

These ATMs will allow customers to purchase and claim BTC via a redemption code but will not, for the time being, facilitate the withdrawal of BTC based funds.

Although some users have voiced concern over the transaction fees involved in utilizing these ATMs, I see this as a great step toward mass adoption. Even those who spend little-to-no time on the web, will now be exposed to cryptocurrency…

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-21/walmart-shoppers-can-now-buy-bitcoin-at-200-kiosks-in-its-stores?srnd=cryptocurrencies

I honestly just don't understand this idea, or how likely it is that someone rocks up to a vending machine and decides to buy BTC. Surely there's not a market for that, and the fees must be insane to make it worthwhile, when you can literally do it via an app on your phone much easier.

Well there's the obvious one for whoever may be walking around with 25k of cash in their pocket....

But yeah makes no sense to me either, it's more of a gimmick. If you are willing to pay 7-12% to use one then fair enough but there are hundreds of apps for that too. 

Here's one in Andalucia that I spotted yesterday

tebbins

Scottex99 said:

Yep at this stage Tebbins you’re just cluttering up your precious forum by replying to every BTC/Crypto thread with some random thoughts that seem to be falling out of your brain.

You don’t get it, you refuse to get it, that’s fine, nobody that pro crypto cares what you do. We’ve all give reasonably good answers to people asking how to invest or where to stake etc, the rest of the time is trying to explain the potential value of crypto to you which is a useless endeavor pretty much, although Darren has done an excellent job.

We’re all prepared for the volatility, for the blow off top, for the rapid gains and losses and what they mean for us personally. What are you planning to do when BTC hits $150k-250k and the whole industry market cap is catching up with Gold? You might want to start planning because, on this side WAGMI.

Oh you too then.
I am not going to be able to contain my smugness when this bubble implodes.

RolandFlagg

All bubbles burst, but as Peter Lynch once said:

“Far More Money Has Been Lost By Investors Preparing For Corrections, Or Trying To Anticipate Corrections, Than Has Been Lost In Corrections Themselves.”

Scottex99

Haha please tag me right here. What level should we set for it categorically not imploding? $100k? $250k? Or if you’re then going to claim that it could reach those levels and still go to 0, how about it’s still around after a certain time? 1 year? 2 years?

You can choose, please be my guest.

I’ve already said I’m giving money to charity on this same thread when we hit $100k so I’ll be around for that, I’ll give you a shout too, see how you’re keeping.

GL

Linton

darren232002 said:

Linton said:

From your description Sushi and AAVE are companies which could make a profit and distribute dividends.  If Sushi and AAVE were quoted cpompanieds (I dont know whether they are or not) you could calculate a P/E and Yield.  

So we are agreed that some crypto assets can be assessed on P/E measures. I believe this was the original point of contention wasn't it when you implied that no crypto could have earnings?

In an earlier post, you stated that:

Linton said:

 Yield is dividend/price

This is how to calculate yield on a stock; yield more generally is a measure of return in proportion to what was invested. 

Linton said:

You cannot claim that somehow Bitcoin is doing it.

You can earn a return on Bitcoin in a few different ways. By this, I do mean a direct return on the asset itself by capturing a variety of arbitrage spreads. However, it does require some knowledge and last time it was a painful conversation so I don't wish to repeat it. As Adyinvestment stated, its probably best done by giving your money to a company that specialises in doing this for you and taking a cut. This obviously incurs counter party risk and lowers your yield though. Some people choose not to pursue this and accept 0% on their Bitcoin because 'not your keys, not your coins.' 

Linton said:

You cant work out a reasonable price of gold from the  profits a gold miner makes and you cant work out a reasonable price for Bitcoin from the P/E and Yields of the companies that happen to "process" it.  

I've never claimed this at all. Bitcoin price models aren't based on the yield generated by the asset. I keep pointing out that its a strawman argument to say 'Bitcoin isn't a stock.' Like, obviously it isn't. It isn't trying to be. If you judge children by their ability to juggle, you'll end up with a load of clowns and no scientists.

The fundamental use case of Bitcoin is of providing a store of value as hard money. That it can do that and provide an opportunity to capture a yield currently is quite nice. But this yield will probably trend to zero over time as markets become more efficient and liquid.

I am afraid the discussion is a bit pointless as you are using technical investment terms when it appears you dont understand what they mean.

Why this is important is that shares mean ownership of an underlying asset, in this case a company.  If you own all the shares you own the company.  Both Yield and particularly P/E relate the price of the share to characteristics of the company - they help keep stock market prices broadly honest as it becomes obvious if the price is far too high or far too low.

The underlying company has 3 values:

A ) Market capitalisation - share price X number of shares
B ) Potential value as an ongoing business.
C ) Book value - what you would get if all the company's assets (property, office equipment, patent rights etc) were sold minus debts.

If A becomes less than C then it is worth someone's while buying all the shares at a premium to the current price so that the company can be asset stripped
If A becomes less than B then it is worth someone's while buying all the shares at a premium to the current price to gain ownership of the whole company.  You may have heard that Morrison's is being taken over for this reason.


So there is a solid lower value to a share price, provided of course the company does not go bust.  Crypto currencies dont have this benefit.  A Bitcoin could reasonably be worth 0.01 times or 100 times its current value in the near future.  There is no measure of whether it is undervalued or overvalued.

adindas

Good to see that the discussion is going to a much higher level now No more people are saying that BTC is a scam because Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger are saying so.

Those who are posting the performance of BTC on MSE are doing P&D.