BITCOIN

silvercue

Frequentlyhere said:

The other element of pointlessness (though amusing) to this debate is that the Bitcoin market is manipulated at present. It's in no small part the reason why the SEC keeps rejecting a Bitcoin spot ETF.

Further, the liquidity of the market largely revolves around a highly contentious stablecoin, Tether, the one run by an ex-cosmetic surgeon. Ongoing progress of stablecoin regulation might make for a more bumpy ride than usual in future.

So I wouldn't even necessarily trust "fair market value" in this arena anyway. 

Bitcoin market is supply v demand, just like other markets.  The SEC, under Gary Gensler and Biden administration, have Crypto in their sights and are doing what they can to make thing difficult in the US. 

Nothing they have done so far has caused a sell off.    There are politicians starting to put their names forward for next Presidential race who are very pro crypto, so the attitude of the SEC would most likley change if one of them got in.  

Including Democrats like Robert F. Kennedy Jr, so it is not a Red or Blue thing.

aaj123

And if indeed we are discussing the SEC then let's not forget that Gary G and the SEC overall have repeatedly signaled that Bitcoin is NOT one of the coins where classification as a security or not is under debate. So while I also hold eth, I do acknowledge that in this respect, BTC has a bluer sky ahead. 

silvercue

aaj123 said:

And if indeed we are discussing the SEC then let's not forget that Gary G and the SEC overall have repeatedly signaled that Bitcoin is NOT one of the coins where classification as a security or not is under debate. So while I also hold eth, I do acknowledge that in this respect, BTC has a bluer sky ahead. 

This is true.  But what is apparent is that the SEC seem to have a seemingly random method for selecting which "securities" or stablecoins they decide to go after.  They have even turned on coins that they have previously talked positively about.  Some clarity and clear understanding of where they are heading would be good.  And protecting investors should be part of their agenda, so clarity is essential

Section62

aaj123 said:

 

Why would you think a comment starting with 'No idea' is worth posting at all?

Because 'No idea' is the closest to being the right answer to the OP's question?

This is a consumer forum with a broad cross-section of users.  The most important thing is nobody goes away from this thread (the sub-thread merged into the big one) thinking the only way is up, or that making guesses what the value of Bitcoin might be in two years time represents a good investment strategy.

Bitcoin could be a good investment.  But if someone needs to ask random internet strangers what it might be worth in 2025 then the fair answer should be "Are you sure this is right for you?".

You've been criticising others for being "misleading", but "In the neighbourhood of $150k" is no more accurate than anything else which has been posted by those you criticise.

aaj123

Section62 said:

aaj123 said:

 

Why would you think a comment starting with 'No idea' is worth posting at all?

Because 'No idea' is the closest to being the right answer to the OP's question?

This is a consumer forum with a broad cross-section of users.  The most important thing is nobody goes away from this thread (the sub-thread merged into the big one) thinking the only way is up, or that making guesses what the value of Bitcoin might be in two years time represents a good investment strategy.

Bitcoin could be a good investment.  But if someone needs to ask random internet strangers what it might be worth in 2025 then the fair answer should be "Are you sure this is right for you?".

You've been criticising others for being "misleading", but "In the neighbourhood of $150k" is no more accurate than anything else which has been posted by those you criticise.

To be honest, that 150k comment was largely triggered by the response from the first reply and a desire to neutralise the damage done by that.

zagfles

aaj123 said:

Section62 said:

aaj123 said:

 

Why would you think a comment starting with 'No idea' is worth posting at all?

Because 'No idea' is the closest to being the right answer to the OP's question?

This is a consumer forum with a broad cross-section of users.  The most important thing is nobody goes away from this thread (the sub-thread merged into the big one) thinking the only way is up, or that making guesses what the value of Bitcoin might be in two years time represents a good investment strategy.

Bitcoin could be a good investment.  But if someone needs to ask random internet strangers what it might be worth in 2025 then the fair answer should be "Are you sure this is right for you?".

You've been criticising others for being "misleading", but "In the neighbourhood of $150k" is no more accurate than anything else which has been posted by those you criticise.

To be honest, that 150k comment was largely triggered by the response from the first reply and a desire to neutralise the damage done by that.

The "damage"? The damage to what? Your investments? They're probably more damaged by people getting so defensive with those who disagree with them. Not that anything anyone says here is likely to shift the price, so I wouldn't worry too much about "damage".

Besides, the "£3-3.50" post was so obviously taking the p. If someone seriously expected bitcoin to plummet, they might have said "under £100" or £1, or even zero. Being so specific as "£3-£3.50", really, you thought that was a serious prediction?

aaj123

zagfles said:

aaj123 said:

Section62 said:

aaj123 said:

 

Why would you think a comment starting with 'No idea' is worth posting at all?

Because 'No idea' is the closest to being the right answer to the OP's question?

This is a consumer forum with a broad cross-section of users.  The most important thing is nobody goes away from this thread (the sub-thread merged into the big one) thinking the only way is up, or that making guesses what the value of Bitcoin might be in two years time represents a good investment strategy.

Bitcoin could be a good investment.  But if someone needs to ask random internet strangers what it might be worth in 2025 then the fair answer should be "Are you sure this is right for you?".

You've been criticising others for being "misleading", but "In the neighbourhood of $150k" is no more accurate than anything else which has been posted by those you criticise.

To be honest, that 150k comment was largely triggered by the response from the first reply and a desire to neutralise the damage done by that.

The "damage"? The damage to what? Your investments? They're probably more damaged by people getting so defensive with those who disagree with them. Not that anything anyone says here is likely to shift the price, so I wouldn't worry too much about "damage".

Besides, the "£3-3.50" post was so obviously taking the p. If someone seriously expected bitcoin to plummet, they might have said "under £100" or £1, or even zero. Being so specific as "£3-£3.50", really, you thought that was a serious prediction?

You and I might see the joke but someone new asking about Bitcoin and already wary due to media coverage would quite likely go away thinking there is a realistic chance of it going near zero like that reply said. 

zagfles

aaj123 said:

zagfles said:

aaj123 said:

Section62 said:

aaj123 said:

 

Why would you think a comment starting with 'No idea' is worth posting at all?

Because 'No idea' is the closest to being the right answer to the OP's question?

This is a consumer forum with a broad cross-section of users.  The most important thing is nobody goes away from this thread (the sub-thread merged into the big one) thinking the only way is up, or that making guesses what the value of Bitcoin might be in two years time represents a good investment strategy.

Bitcoin could be a good investment.  But if someone needs to ask random internet strangers what it might be worth in 2025 then the fair answer should be "Are you sure this is right for you?".

You've been criticising others for being "misleading", but "In the neighbourhood of $150k" is no more accurate than anything else which has been posted by those you criticise.

To be honest, that 150k comment was largely triggered by the response from the first reply and a desire to neutralise the damage done by that.

The "damage"? The damage to what? Your investments? They're probably more damaged by people getting so defensive with those who disagree with them. Not that anything anyone says here is likely to shift the price, so I wouldn't worry too much about "damage".

Besides, the "£3-3.50" post was so obviously taking the p. If someone seriously expected bitcoin to plummet, they might have said "under £100" or £1, or even zero. Being so specific as "£3-£3.50", really, you thought that was a serious prediction?

You and I might see the joke but someone new asking about Bitcoin and already wary due to media coverage would quite likely go away thinking there is a realistic chance of it going near zero like that reply said. 

Well, probably better than them thinking it'll go up to $150 or $300k. That could tempt them to put their life savings into bitcoin because they think it'll give them financial freedom in a few years time.

aaj123

zagfles said:

aaj123 said:

zagfles said:

aaj123 said:

Section62 said:

aaj123 said:

 

Why would you think a comment starting with 'No idea' is worth posting at all?

Because 'No idea' is the closest to being the right answer to the OP's question?

This is a consumer forum with a broad cross-section of users.  The most important thing is nobody goes away from this thread (the sub-thread merged into the big one) thinking the only way is up, or that making guesses what the value of Bitcoin might be in two years time represents a good investment strategy.

Bitcoin could be a good investment.  But if someone needs to ask random internet strangers what it might be worth in 2025 then the fair answer should be "Are you sure this is right for you?".

You've been criticising others for being "misleading", but "In the neighbourhood of $150k" is no more accurate than anything else which has been posted by those you criticise.

To be honest, that 150k comment was largely triggered by the response from the first reply and a desire to neutralise the damage done by that.

The "damage"? The damage to what? Your investments? They're probably more damaged by people getting so defensive with those who disagree with them. Not that anything anyone says here is likely to shift the price, so I wouldn't worry too much about "damage".

Besides, the "£3-3.50" post was so obviously taking the p. If someone seriously expected bitcoin to plummet, they might have said "under £100" or £1, or even zero. Being so specific as "£3-£3.50", really, you thought that was a serious prediction?

You and I might see the joke but someone new asking about Bitcoin and already wary due to media coverage would quite likely go away thinking there is a realistic chance of it going near zero like that reply said. 

Well, probably better than them thinking it'll go up to $150 or $300k. That could tempt them to put their life savings into bitcoin because they think it'll give them financial freedom in a few years time.

Life savings or a very high % into one instrument is always a bad idea... bitcoin or anything else. 

Scottex99

aaj123 said:

Section62 said:

aaj123 said:

 

Why would you think a comment starting with 'No idea' is worth posting at all?

Because 'No idea' is the closest to being the right answer to the OP's question?

This is a consumer forum with a broad cross-section of users.  The most important thing is nobody goes away from this thread (the sub-thread merged into the big one) thinking the only way is up, or that making guesses what the value of Bitcoin might be in two years time represents a good investment strategy.

Bitcoin could be a good investment.  But if someone needs to ask random internet strangers what it might be worth in 2025 then the fair answer should be "Are you sure this is right for you?".

You've been criticising others for being "misleading", but "In the neighbourhood of $150k" is no more accurate than anything else which has been posted by those you criticise.

To be honest, that 150k comment was largely triggered by the response from the first reply and a desire to neutralise the damage done by that.

Haha, ooops. That doesn’t come across well, my man.

I’ll give some money to charity WHEN it gets above $100k 😉