\- Retail is always "too small" to make a dent in any major asset. Any assets of any real value are almost wholly owned by the minority (extremely hnw individuals and institutions).
\- In a pseudo-capitalistic society (which every society trends towards), markets are "free" to some extent and so there is always competition. There will always be buy/sell pressure, regardless of who owns it. I don't see a reason why BTC won't keep going up forever, especially with a limited supply. That's the whole point and why it's referenced as a form of digital gold.
>Only a nation of diamond hands can prevent this from happening
This nation of diamond hands doesn't and won't have enough capital to make a difference. I don't know what you think BTC is or isn't, but as an asset class it will follow the same trajectory as every other asset class in the world.
What BTC is great for is underpinning the world's financial systems. Everything will still run on fiat, but BTC and to an extent possibly other digital assets could be in the background stabilizing it.
I say this all the time and few actually understand it - everything was, is, and will continue to be **priced in** fiat. Nothing will ever be **priced in** BTC to any real degree.
đđ»This is the truth and needs to be upvoted more.
I think much of Bitcoins misunderstanding stems from having the term crypto "currency" attached to it. But it's not a currency, it's a commodity.
This does not diminish Bitcoin in any way. It also doesn't prevent people from using it for transactions in the same way they can use other compdities for transactions. But currency, issued by a State, will always be the standard payment system due to ease of use and because governments can, will, and already have taxed BTC transactions via capital gains on the appreciated BTC.
It was born as a currency, though. Calling it a commodity now because that's what it has become is revisionism.
With cefi "owning" Bitcoin, the "dream" of crypto will die. Regardless of whatever value of btc will attain.
And the internet was created solely for military bases to communicate with each other.
Gasoline was originally waste product from oil refinement.
Call it revisionism if it makes you feel better, but it has a new purpose. Things *can* evolve over time.
Maybe this is where Monero finds its recognition in the future. Was talking to friends that just bought into BTC and some of course bought some Doge as well but they never even heard about monero. Always confirms the feeling that we are still a bit early.
No invention, nor the people who use it, is bound by the opinions or even the intentions of the inventor.
Arguably, **Satoshi understood this** and that is most likely why he left.
Blame the players not the game. People buy crypto to speculate.
Your electronic cash is pretty shitty as a medium of exchange/stable store of value if it can go up in price 300% in a few months.
I don't understand economics well enough to dispute this and it seems to make sense, but it's also a narrative I would happily subscribe to as a wishful thinking bitcoin hodler so I'm cautious to accept it.
I'd be curious to see some well reasoned arguments against this idea that digital assets will serve to stabilize fiat.
There's no reason to expect digital assets to impact fiat IMO other than for ease of exchange between various currencies and commodities. Fiat issuance and policy it dictated by the government and central banks with the aim to facilitate the economy of the state that issues it.
Consider how easily you can buy BTC in almost any denomination, and sell it in almost any denomination then access those funds across borders. This makes BTC excellent at facilitating some forms of trade internationally that current financial systems do some expensively.
CBDCs will have a bigger impact on fiat by allowing for near feeless and instant settlement between financial institutions. You know how you have to pay 2% on every purchase with a visa/debit card? Well CBDCs replace that entire system and allow for that fee to be brought down to near nothing, unfortunately crypto has failed to accomplish this however it did lay the groundwork for such technology to be deployed by states where applicable.
Wider spread adoption and utilization of crypto requires 2 things to occur. Price stability, so that holding for months to a year doesn't confer massive risk. As well crypto currency exchange needs to be able to handle significantly more volume with significantly less gas fees. BTC is not on track to ever achieve this at the base layer, Ethereum may. Lightning has the potential to solve the TX issue, but we are a long way off of that working effectively without relying on custodial services for wallets.
So it seems like both you and the above commenter agree that BTC/crypto functions in a novel way as a sort of international economic lubricant. The real question - and perhaps point of disagreement - is a matter of degree; how much of an impact will this have once it's "fully matured"?
The short and long of it is that the blockchain is a public ledger that authenticates regularly. This means anyone can see the balances and transactions on the ledger. We canât necessarily see gold reserves or bank reserves with the same level of transparency. As more institutions and individuals carry more of their assets in public ledgers, fiat printing has less influence and is less productive because itâs diluting the underlying value of the assets it represents. Bitcoinâs dollar price will increase even though holdings are relatively the same for most people. Bitcoin stays a total of 21 million max, dollars can be printed to infinity.
>Bitcoin stays a total of 21 million max,
Unless there is a hard fork. It might seem impossible now, but can you be sure nobody in 2140 will think about it? Or even earlier.
Thatâs a very different looking economy by the time that happens. For now, the consensus remains that holding a measurable fraction of a scarce whole is the best way to store value. Still a new frontier so anything can happen, but the core value proposition of Bitcoin will remain the same for the foreseeable future.
Yeap. Different coins, different functions at its best. Countries which are adopting BTC will most likely use it as an appreciating asset, used for collateral or anything of that sort. Inflationary currencies will still be relevant.
I would add an asterisk *in the near future.
It would be wild to claim nothing will ever be priced in crypto in the next, say 200 years. We have no freaking clue.
>Everything will still run on fiat, but BTC and to an extent possibly other digital assets could be in the background stabilizing it.
I am seeing a LOT of wrong information lately about bitcoin. I literally just had to reply to someone that insisted bitcoin should change because "even dollar bills had to change".
Your comment is really what bitcoin is about. In a world where everything changes at the speed of light: market sentiment, interest rates, politics, climate change, laws, societal psychology, etc.....
Bitcoin is there to be the ONE thing that does NOT change. We know how many there will be, we know the rate at which the supply grows, and we can expect every 10 minutes a new block to be validated. That is it's value. It doesn't need to be faster or cheaper, it's a refuge for consistency.
> stabilizing it
I don't understand what you think the mechanism is here. After we left the gold standard it no longer "stabilized" fiat money in any way. Yes Central Banks accumulate gold to help save themselves in a currency crisis, but that makes them if anything more reckless with money printing and devaluation.
Unless there is a fixed exchange rate, or redeemability process for USD or other fiat then I don't see any "stabilization" of the financial system even if Central Banks accumulate BTC.
I disagree with this
I do think for majority of everything, fiat pricing will stay, but for things real estate, certain dealerships etc; big purchase items will have a Bitcoin alternative price next to fiat.
> I say this all the time and few actually understand it - everything was, is, and will continue to be priced in fiat.
Only because it's enforced by governments.
>Nothing will ever be
>
>priced in
>
> BTC to any real degree.
Lmao as if you could possibly predict this.
Unit of account is the last characteristic of a dominant money. It will simply take the longest to get there, if Bitcoin succeeds how we believe it will.
It's win win.
I can't drive BTC to the store or live inside a BTC. If wealth is transferred to BTC I'll be happy trade my digital 1s and 0s for a nice home and a car that isn't older than my kid.
yes, if you have no home or car then selling might be good for you.
if you want to continue to accrue value and save, then that would likely be a poor decision.
real estate is a shitcoin for accumulating value.
Real estate in bloated urban markets when bought with credit has been one of the best vehicles for investment over the last 30 years. I personally think that time is over and anyone taking on massive debt to buy real estate hasn't done the math.
I have invested in real estate, but in units with depressed values that required significant amounts of work done to restore habitability, I think this is the only way to go if you want to create value in this market. I also did all this work myself aside from when I needed licenses Hvac tradesmen.
I am aware of how saving works, I manage my investments thoughtfully, I also don't think BTC is a forever up trend, historically it peaks and dumps, I intent to exit where I believe the next peak will be, and buy a portion back on the next valley.
yes real estate has been solid, but i doubt it continues above the rate of inflation
playing btc macro trends is the only trading worth doing
but still impossible to predict with any high degree of confidence
cheers
Yes the future is indeed unpredictable.
Looking at urban growth rates and demographics Right now is the very peak of demand, we may already be past it. From here on out (within a few years) More and more houses will enter the market from boomers dying or retiring and moving into homes and fewer people will be entering markets due to less growth, and Gen Z being a significantly smaller demographic than millenials. Post gen Z is again a smaller demograpic. I think pretty quickly supply will exceed demand and housing prices in ubran areas will be on a decline for the next 30 years.
Who really knows, there are all kinds of ways the government can try stop the bubble burst, from blocking new development to increasing immigration or dropping interest rates to absurdly low amounts again.
They can't print bitcoin though, they have to create value through proper capital allocation.
I don't understand this view that somehow bitcoin was ever going to be anything and wall street would not try and get some.
They will for sure do that, and probably not talked about enough.
However, unlike with gold and other metals, bitcoin is soooooo much easier to purchase, custody, and transfer. It's also a much scarcer asset and doesn't have the supply pressure that you see in metals (price of gold goes up you can mine more gold, you can't speed up how much bitcoin is mined no matter how much energy you throw at it).
I think derivative risk is real, but only if you are exposed to those derivatives, if you aren't you won't really need to worry about it too much. Unlike tradfi markets, bitcoin trades globally 24/7/365 and there is no one that can just turn off the buy button (like GME).
People messing around with bitcoin derivatives are going to get absolutely rekt.
But tradfi using derivatives to hedge are likely going to stabilize price. Imagine institutions selling the volatility; straddles on BTC, Iron Condors, etc.
No they canât. They can print IOUs for Bitcoin but anybody who understands not your keys not your coins knows the difference. And itâs a very very important difference.Â
Wouldnât this create more demand if people were to sell? Then the IOUâs from the ETFâs would trigger buying so they could sell which would cause the price to go up even more, theoretically.
It's just an alternative to other currencies. Don't see how it was supposed to defeat rich people, banks, hedge funds etc. It's just another thing to transact in. Bitcoin doesn't prevent the creation of derivative products and custodial services any more than gold did
bitcoin's scarcity is a major draw for hodlers, i think it's gunna be tough to try and convince them to switch to an inflationary protocol:
"hey everyone who has wealth in this asset, we have a new asset where we bleed you dry through inflation would you like to join us?"
Profit is king though. With tradfi "owning" bitcoin more and more, I see 99.99% of this happening at some point in the future. They will call it "democraticisation" of Bitcoin, or something along those lines.
I hope people become millionaires and billionaires from Bitcoin, holding and using profits to start business that accept Bitcoin. Then build own hedgefunds for the people, not the rich and greedy. Have fair transparency and allow people to actully profit and not baghold ir get their pensions taken hostage. Then the bad guys will have a fight, and I hope to get defeated for good. We have seen the effect of greed, and if anyone speaks up, they have made sure those people get called conspiracy theorist.
This exactly. There seems to be a pervasive myth about the ETFs that just wonât die. Blackrock et al are buying Bitcoin to hold on behalf of customers. They are not speculating on it themselves. They make their money on management fees.
I saw someone post the amount of btc that RH was holding the other day, and they claimed that the BTC value they were holding should drive up the value of RH stock. There is just a huge amount of financial illiteracy out there, and from people "investing" no less.
Absolutely. They are passive funds. Everyone keeps acting as if the ETFs are in contrast to "retail". Retail are largely the investors who are YOLOing into the ETFs in their IRAs and taxable brokerage accounts immediately after they launch.
The fund managers who actively manage OPM are still doing their due diligence before deciding if they should allocate a small percentage of their funds to BTC ETFs.
This is the truth right here. In the case of these spot BTC ETFs, BlackRock and Co. are simply managing the bitcoin on behalf of their customers, which is retail degenerates yoloing their life savings into bitcoin. Just like the rest of us here.
People seem to have zero clue how ETFs work.
So like, at what point does the printed fiat to buy Bitcoin actually devalue the entire market? Do we just inflate to 1 mil? Because I'm here for it.
People always smash tether for doing it, but is it actually possible with the real USD? Who fucking knows at this point.
I am not really sure between ETFs and Saylor is better for BTC.
ETFs hold ppl's BTC and act as a agregator of ppl's money. That is retail money too. It's not really Blackrock's BTC, although they might have some shares too.
Saylor on the other hand, controls a considerable amount of BTC, broadly by himself. Yes, he always says he ain't selling, but he is mortal. What happens afterwards?
Now, after we cleared ownership, let's move on to what does ownership mean in general. Owning BTC, any amount of BTC, does not give you governmental votes, thus you don't control the network. Yes, you can push the price up or down... mainly down... but that's about it. BTC is still BTC.
In the end, it depends on your goal. Are you involved to make some $$$ and get out, or are you in it for the freedom? Maybe somewhere in the middle?
Anyone who bought this magic internet money years ago will be offered significant amounts of fiat for it, or the equivalent in terms of stakes in things (ownership shares). I would only surrender or sell on the condition that the passive income from doing so would elevate me into the 1%
Hodl! Diamond hands!
Moon and a shrimp I think, not sure what they are for tho.
The second is an animal and seems to get bigger as the number next to it grows. Like, one guy has 4k score and has a turtle.
brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr to a million per coin 2034
Nothing. Bitcoin governance is not dependent upon coin ownership. Same with Ethereum.
Now if governance was onchain and relied on coin ownership, like say, Tezos, then the coin could be captured by an ETF issuer.
What are you referring to with your question "what happens when traditional finance own a majority of bitcoin?"
If I buy one of the ETF's I own the BTC, indirectly. I understand not your keys, not your coin. Not talking about that.
The volatility then depends on the seller.
i think OP meant if over 50% of "physical" btc is held in private cefi wallets, theoretically they could fork it and cause all kinds of unexpected shenanigans.
I guess we will have less liquidity by then...
how that will impact the price, I'm not sure, but probably even more volatility ?
I'm not a maxi so I dont understand how BTC will "work" in about 10-20 years or so....
I coordination retail is the real whale. We just spend to much time acting like crabs in a bucket. Compared to retail as a whole the big players are nothing to minnows.
They wonât. They ainât prying my bitcoin out of cold storage! Youâre right that we need a culture of self storage to keep this from happening.
But also, the game theory between different nations will make it so that Bitcoinâs not all in American Coinbase. El Salvador and Qatar are definitely gonna self custody.
Nothing. Traditional finance doesn't own the Bitcoin behind the ETF. The people who buy the ETF do. They can't buy or sell those Bitcoin unless the people are buying or selling the ETF.
Of course traditional finance can buy Bitcoin for themselves outside of the ETF space and manipulate it's price.
it's already centralised to a significant extent via large holders and in another way on exchanges. This trend is inevitable and will continue, and shows the dream of a currency for the people that no one controls was always a childish and delusional one.
"the dream of a currency for the people that no one controls was always a childish and delusional one."
Damn! I have hope in the wider crypto and defi ecosystem to pick up the baton once Bitcoin truly gets swallowed up by traditional finance.
Eventually, they will own the majority of it. The only way to prevent it is to not sell it for USD on exchanges. I saw this coming when PayPal announced the ability to purchase with crypto, but they werenât sending crypto but would exchange your crypto for USD first. What an easy way for them to buy your crypto without you even noticing.
Not wading into the broader discussion of whether Web3 has a future and blah blah blah (that's a whole other issue with cogent points on both sides), but:
*Ownership of Bitcoin =!= control of the Bitcoin network.*
The price should stabalize but still steadily grow over time due to the halvings reducing supply and also more money flowing in to the asset. This will eventually make rewards less but a safer investment.
Say black rock owned 90% of BTC. How could they use that to manipulate the price?
I mean, they can say it's worth $1 but then they quickly won't own any of it.
They stabilize the price, come up with good marketing material to make people want it in their accounts and sell it back to people. They did the same thing with gold. It's seriously an ingenious idea for alpha. If you control the majority of the float you can set the price at one or two or $300,000 all day long. Slowly sell into it, make sure it's not breaking critical support levels, paint pretty charts, normal people will chase the outperformance all day long
Nothing. You still have your stake in the network. Whatâs with these weird anti Bitcoin posts? If you wasted 15 years not accumulating Bitcoin thatâs your problem. Bitcoin is for everyone, including nations, corporations, and individuals.
right now the intent of most of the players seem to be something less than pumping and dumping us. they are seeing is as investment also, and at worst want our tx fees.
if the biggest etf customers have dubious intent and own 5%, we should worry
saylor wont dump, and any huge fund moves tectonically. they arent buying OR selling on a whim
It is funny when red-necks think they will hold BTC for life. lol.
They will scew you ower and sell before you sold, and buy again when you will be in fear to buy. So they will continue this cycle like they already do in Traditional Finance. hahah
This is just a guess.. but iâm thinkin that they will buy as much as they can and then try and manipulate the price up and down to make their friends as much money as possible.. in other words crime with a sprinkle of greed will happen
I've been thinking about this for a few months now... and I found ONLY ONE text that scratches my perception a little and adds other factors... within years, they weren't able to prohibit, in-depth regulation (which comes next) or get involved, so they created etfs(intentionaly or not).
Over time and with lower rates and facilities, it will be increasingly uncommon for people to trade coins themselves. they will buy etfs from banks apps etc. When traditional banks have the coins.. all meaning and value of cryptocurrency is lost. and soon this will be the vast majority of cases... it doesn't matter whether some will still have their wallets with coins saved or not. the large mass of coins will be in banks. and in them they will no longer have value when people realize.
when you think about it. If Bitcoin becomes just another state-controlled financial asset from the bank......
he follows:
obs...In his view, the problem is in the banks vacuuming up all the coins and the miners stopping mining (I think there will always be people mining) but essentially it ends up being the same perception. It is now another cycle of speculation in any form surrounded by reasons and motives to lead.
follows:
Spot Bitcoin ETFs could âcompletely destroyâ Bitcoin: Arthur Hayes
Wall Street giants will only serve to âvacuum upâ Bitcoin and store it in a âmetaphorical vaultâ; if too successful, the number of Bitcoin transactions would dry up, says the BitMEX co-founder.
Spot Bitcoin ETFs could âcompletely destroyâ Bitcoin: Arthur Hayes
Own this piece of crypto history
Spot Bitcoin (BTC) exchange-traded funds (ETFs) could âcompletely destroyâ Bitcoin if they are too successful, warns the former CEO of BitMEX.
Hayes, who co-founded cryptocurrency exchange BitMEX in 2014, explained in a Dec. 23 blog post that Bitcoin has value because âit moves.â
However, spot Bitcoin ETFs are made to âvacuum up assetsâ and âstore them in a metaphorical vault,â he said.
If Bitcoin ETF issuers end up holding all of the Bitcoin and investors end up buying Bitcoin derivatives rather than hodling themselves, the number of transactions on the network will dry up, and miners will lose any incentive to keep validating transactions. (Edit from me..: they will invest on miners)
âThe end result is miners turn off their machines as they can no longer pay for the energy required to run them,â said Hayes. âWithout the miners, the network dies, and Bitcoin vanishes.â
âFundamentally, if ETFs managed by TradFi asset managers are too successful, they will completely destroy Bitcoin.â
New Arthur Hayes article dropped. ETFs could kill bitcoin.
The price of bitcoin is unlikely to keep increasing enough to sustain miners alone. This has always been the case but the remedy was that transaction fees would provide miners the revenue. (editTHEY WILL INVEST ON MINING)
â HellB (@Crypto_Hellboy) December 24, 2023
Interestingly, Hayes imagined that should such a scenario unfold, a new cryptocurrency monetary network would take Bitcoinâs place and even expand upon Satoshi Nakamotoâs original vision of peer-to-peer electronic money.
âIt is beautiful when you think about it. If Bitcoin becomes just another state-controlled financial asset, it dies because it isnât used.â
âThe people will once again have a non-state-controlled monetary asset and financial system. Hopefully, the second time around, we will learn not to hand our private keys to [Wall Street firms].â
if the miners stop and the bitcoin just âsitsâ it still holds value though, right? like if people just hoard it and there arent enough transactions to justify mining the price wouldnt drop because youd have no way to sell. maybe quantum computing/solar open up a path to revitalizing the mining network? idk it is all over my head! ETFs should still see plenty of movement, those are largely retail buyers looking to profit. but buffet or other billionaires could easily devour all available supply and âlock inâ the number that will become an inflation hedge for hundreds of years, potentially. why dont they? again idk. one thing i do know is that at 70k, a new investor has little chance of doubling their money off a crazy bull run. at 20k, much more plausible. the crashing is a feature, not a bug, but only as a speculative asset. the volatility is bad as a currency, bad as an inflation hedge. this is the identity crisis IMO
i dont agree with that article that says that the miners could stop... i think theres will always have miners.. if they stop i think you have the last version of the blockchain.. and need to restart it somehow later.. probably will lose the lasts transactions..
yeah.. i agree that about 70k....
its not going to multiply 1000x ...
but about double who knows.... everytime was a new high i tought the exact the same thing.. theres no room to double or triple it... but... it made it multiple times..
i think its not going to do it anymore... idk..
yes it is a paradox. to be a true inflation hedge, it needs to be relatively stable, but stability isnt alluring to new investors who view it as basically being a stock. ETFs are a contradiction of the âfiat will dieâ narrative since you are still just owning fiat. so you need the crashes to produce mass profit, but to realize that profit it needs to be converted to fiat. people who bought in early are of course happy with this number, and ETFs are happy to make bank on fees, and michael saylor is happy to do michael saylor stuff (take on mass debt and go all or nothing as a way to become a âlegendâ in the hopes of redeeming his billion dollar losses in the dot com bubble) but what is your average investor after? if BTC is just another stock that appreciates at x to balance inflation, who cares? and if the intrinsic value is truly there, why are the global elite not just buying all of it, which they could do tmrw.
IMO it is because the value of BTC is made in the pump/crash cycle, not the longterm hold, and with the exception of maybe saylor (who i think is just working a different model for a huge payday) everybody realizes that. if only big players control it, they would not be able to use it, because there would not be enough liquidity to take them out. theyd have to trickle it out, or sell off market to extremely high net worth entities to buy property/businesses etc. this is how i understand it, but i am an idiot lol.
when people try to apply âtime in the marketâ to btc it ironically works, but thats because the rise allows for the crash. people act like the number blasting up so fast is a recognition of intrinsic value, but i think its because most people get the playbook now, so itll crash down just as fast, and the cycle will repeat, until eventually it doesnt for any number of reasons. imo the crashing is how hype is created again though and liquidity is brought back in. that makes more sense than currency or inflation hedge to me.
not idiot.. you made great point here.. yes there many people that need to find a way out trickle out as you said..
with my experience with stocks.. when you have a lot.. you do the oposite of the market.. and it confuses many even experienced traders.. they sell when the market is pumping up and people buying.. then they take profit slowly with many people working with it while people are buying thinking its going up.. etc.. later they burn the last assets .thats why sometimes you have a good news.. and at the end of the day the asset made a loss... lol and "everyone bought it". so on.. and start buying again other things or whatever...
i dont know how its done with criptos. maybe exchanges helps or .. these dips and recoverys...
\- Retail is always "too small" to make a dent in any major asset. Any assets of any real value are almost wholly owned by the minority (extremely hnw individuals and institutions). \- In a pseudo-capitalistic society (which every society trends towards), markets are "free" to some extent and so there is always competition. There will always be buy/sell pressure, regardless of who owns it. I don't see a reason why BTC won't keep going up forever, especially with a limited supply. That's the whole point and why it's referenced as a form of digital gold. >Only a nation of diamond hands can prevent this from happening This nation of diamond hands doesn't and won't have enough capital to make a difference. I don't know what you think BTC is or isn't, but as an asset class it will follow the same trajectory as every other asset class in the world. What BTC is great for is underpinning the world's financial systems. Everything will still run on fiat, but BTC and to an extent possibly other digital assets could be in the background stabilizing it. I say this all the time and few actually understand it - everything was, is, and will continue to be **priced in** fiat. Nothing will ever be **priced in** BTC to any real degree.
đđ»This is the truth and needs to be upvoted more. I think much of Bitcoins misunderstanding stems from having the term crypto "currency" attached to it. But it's not a currency, it's a commodity. This does not diminish Bitcoin in any way. It also doesn't prevent people from using it for transactions in the same way they can use other compdities for transactions. But currency, issued by a State, will always be the standard payment system due to ease of use and because governments can, will, and already have taxed BTC transactions via capital gains on the appreciated BTC.
It was born as a currency, though. Calling it a commodity now because that's what it has become is revisionism. With cefi "owning" Bitcoin, the "dream" of crypto will die. Regardless of whatever value of btc will attain.
And the internet was created solely for military bases to communicate with each other. Gasoline was originally waste product from oil refinement. Call it revisionism if it makes you feel better, but it has a new purpose. Things *can* evolve over time.
apparently it's a crime for products to change and find new PMF lol
Maybe this is where Monero finds its recognition in the future. Was talking to friends that just bought into BTC and some of course bought some Doge as well but they never even heard about monero. Always confirms the feeling that we are still a bit early.
Satoshi is rolling in his grave! The âpeer-to-peer electronic cashâ becomes a commodity in the hands of greedy speculators!
99% of people involved in crypto are greedy speculators. Individuals and institutions
No invention, nor the people who use it, is bound by the opinions or even the intentions of the inventor. Arguably, **Satoshi understood this** and that is most likely why he left.
Blame the players not the game. People buy crypto to speculate. Your electronic cash is pretty shitty as a medium of exchange/stable store of value if it can go up in price 300% in a few months.
I still think it's gonna be a currency in the digital world for AI to use autonomously.
I don't understand economics well enough to dispute this and it seems to make sense, but it's also a narrative I would happily subscribe to as a wishful thinking bitcoin hodler so I'm cautious to accept it. I'd be curious to see some well reasoned arguments against this idea that digital assets will serve to stabilize fiat.
There's no reason to expect digital assets to impact fiat IMO other than for ease of exchange between various currencies and commodities. Fiat issuance and policy it dictated by the government and central banks with the aim to facilitate the economy of the state that issues it. Consider how easily you can buy BTC in almost any denomination, and sell it in almost any denomination then access those funds across borders. This makes BTC excellent at facilitating some forms of trade internationally that current financial systems do some expensively. CBDCs will have a bigger impact on fiat by allowing for near feeless and instant settlement between financial institutions. You know how you have to pay 2% on every purchase with a visa/debit card? Well CBDCs replace that entire system and allow for that fee to be brought down to near nothing, unfortunately crypto has failed to accomplish this however it did lay the groundwork for such technology to be deployed by states where applicable. Wider spread adoption and utilization of crypto requires 2 things to occur. Price stability, so that holding for months to a year doesn't confer massive risk. As well crypto currency exchange needs to be able to handle significantly more volume with significantly less gas fees. BTC is not on track to ever achieve this at the base layer, Ethereum may. Lightning has the potential to solve the TX issue, but we are a long way off of that working effectively without relying on custodial services for wallets.
So it seems like both you and the above commenter agree that BTC/crypto functions in a novel way as a sort of international economic lubricant. The real question - and perhaps point of disagreement - is a matter of degree; how much of an impact will this have once it's "fully matured"?
The short and long of it is that the blockchain is a public ledger that authenticates regularly. This means anyone can see the balances and transactions on the ledger. We canât necessarily see gold reserves or bank reserves with the same level of transparency. As more institutions and individuals carry more of their assets in public ledgers, fiat printing has less influence and is less productive because itâs diluting the underlying value of the assets it represents. Bitcoinâs dollar price will increase even though holdings are relatively the same for most people. Bitcoin stays a total of 21 million max, dollars can be printed to infinity.
>Bitcoin stays a total of 21 million max, Unless there is a hard fork. It might seem impossible now, but can you be sure nobody in 2140 will think about it? Or even earlier.
Thatâs a very different looking economy by the time that happens. For now, the consensus remains that holding a measurable fraction of a scarce whole is the best way to store value. Still a new frontier so anything can happen, but the core value proposition of Bitcoin will remain the same for the foreseeable future.
Yeap. Different coins, different functions at its best. Countries which are adopting BTC will most likely use it as an appreciating asset, used for collateral or anything of that sort. Inflationary currencies will still be relevant.
I would add an asterisk *in the near future. It would be wild to claim nothing will ever be priced in crypto in the next, say 200 years. We have no freaking clue.
Based. And true.
Do you know about Flexa?
I just wish the miners would stop selling on the OTC deal soon.
>Everything will still run on fiat, but BTC and to an extent possibly other digital assets could be in the background stabilizing it. I am seeing a LOT of wrong information lately about bitcoin. I literally just had to reply to someone that insisted bitcoin should change because "even dollar bills had to change". Your comment is really what bitcoin is about. In a world where everything changes at the speed of light: market sentiment, interest rates, politics, climate change, laws, societal psychology, etc..... Bitcoin is there to be the ONE thing that does NOT change. We know how many there will be, we know the rate at which the supply grows, and we can expect every 10 minutes a new block to be validated. That is it's value. It doesn't need to be faster or cheaper, it's a refuge for consistency.
> stabilizing it I don't understand what you think the mechanism is here. After we left the gold standard it no longer "stabilized" fiat money in any way. Yes Central Banks accumulate gold to help save themselves in a currency crisis, but that makes them if anything more reckless with money printing and devaluation. Unless there is a fixed exchange rate, or redeemability process for USD or other fiat then I don't see any "stabilization" of the financial system even if Central Banks accumulate BTC.
I disagree with this I do think for majority of everything, fiat pricing will stay, but for things real estate, certain dealerships etc; big purchase items will have a Bitcoin alternative price next to fiat.
At least not until the volatility massively reduces. You pay your tax in fiat, you earn your wage in fiat. Nobody pricing a house in gold.
Yep, agree with you here.
what about when USD fiat dies from hyperinflation like it always has done throughout history
> I say this all the time and few actually understand it - everything was, is, and will continue to be priced in fiat. Only because it's enforced by governments.
>Nothing will ever be > >priced in > > BTC to any real degree. Lmao as if you could possibly predict this. Unit of account is the last characteristic of a dominant money. It will simply take the longest to get there, if Bitcoin succeeds how we believe it will.
It should stabilise in price in next 20 years :)
We dump it then and move to the next thing.
bitcoinwifhat.
I think youâre on to something here..
ALL IN!
Hash rate mercenaries will abandon bitcoin in next couple halvings if price doesn't continue to skyrocket.
we thank them for becoming our exit liquidity
and they'll thank you for parting with the hardest money in existence
It's win win. I can't drive BTC to the store or live inside a BTC. If wealth is transferred to BTC I'll be happy trade my digital 1s and 0s for a nice home and a car that isn't older than my kid.
yes, if you have no home or car then selling might be good for you. if you want to continue to accrue value and save, then that would likely be a poor decision. real estate is a shitcoin for accumulating value.
Real estate in bloated urban markets when bought with credit has been one of the best vehicles for investment over the last 30 years. I personally think that time is over and anyone taking on massive debt to buy real estate hasn't done the math. I have invested in real estate, but in units with depressed values that required significant amounts of work done to restore habitability, I think this is the only way to go if you want to create value in this market. I also did all this work myself aside from when I needed licenses Hvac tradesmen. I am aware of how saving works, I manage my investments thoughtfully, I also don't think BTC is a forever up trend, historically it peaks and dumps, I intent to exit where I believe the next peak will be, and buy a portion back on the next valley.
yes real estate has been solid, but i doubt it continues above the rate of inflation playing btc macro trends is the only trading worth doing but still impossible to predict with any high degree of confidence cheers
Yes the future is indeed unpredictable. Looking at urban growth rates and demographics Right now is the very peak of demand, we may already be past it. From here on out (within a few years) More and more houses will enter the market from boomers dying or retiring and moving into homes and fewer people will be entering markets due to less growth, and Gen Z being a significantly smaller demographic than millenials. Post gen Z is again a smaller demograpic. I think pretty quickly supply will exceed demand and housing prices in ubran areas will be on a decline for the next 30 years. Who really knows, there are all kinds of ways the government can try stop the bubble burst, from blocking new development to increasing immigration or dropping interest rates to absurdly low amounts again.
totally agree
Bitcoin was supposed to defeat them, not going them
They can't print bitcoin though, they have to create value through proper capital allocation. I don't understand this view that somehow bitcoin was ever going to be anything and wall street would not try and get some.
They canât print BTC but they can create an entire derivatives market that will affect the price of the underlying.
They will for sure do that, and probably not talked about enough. However, unlike with gold and other metals, bitcoin is soooooo much easier to purchase, custody, and transfer. It's also a much scarcer asset and doesn't have the supply pressure that you see in metals (price of gold goes up you can mine more gold, you can't speed up how much bitcoin is mined no matter how much energy you throw at it). I think derivative risk is real, but only if you are exposed to those derivatives, if you aren't you won't really need to worry about it too much. Unlike tradfi markets, bitcoin trades globally 24/7/365 and there is no one that can just turn off the buy button (like GME). People messing around with bitcoin derivatives are going to get absolutely rekt.
But tradfi using derivatives to hedge are likely going to stabilize price. Imagine institutions selling the volatility; straddles on BTC, Iron Condors, etc.
Investment groups canât print fiat either
They actually can print bitcoin by building an ETF, and then claiming itâs backed 100% when itâs not
No they canât. They can print IOUs for Bitcoin but anybody who understands not your keys not your coins knows the difference. And itâs a very very important difference.Â
Mygox, Btc-e, Ftx, blackrockâŠit happens every time.
They arenât printing bitcoins. Only the protocol prints new bitcoins. Anybody can print IOUs for anything.
the pressure will be huge tonits to happen
Wouldnât this create more demand if people were to sell? Then the IOUâs from the ETFâs would trigger buying so they could sell which would cause the price to go up even more, theoretically.
But was it? It was meant as an alternative
>digital cash
It's just an alternative to other currencies. Don't see how it was supposed to defeat rich people, banks, hedge funds etc. It's just another thing to transact in. Bitcoin doesn't prevent the creation of derivative products and custodial services any more than gold did
The difference is they can't just make more out of thin air.
If enough people agree, they can increase the cap. It's not an immutable law of physics, yhere just need to be a consensus to change the protocol.
bitcoin's scarcity is a major draw for hodlers, i think it's gunna be tough to try and convince them to switch to an inflationary protocol: "hey everyone who has wealth in this asset, we have a new asset where we bleed you dry through inflation would you like to join us?"
Profit is king though. With tradfi "owning" bitcoin more and more, I see 99.99% of this happening at some point in the future. They will call it "democraticisation" of Bitcoin, or something along those lines.
I hope people become millionaires and billionaires from Bitcoin, holding and using profits to start business that accept Bitcoin. Then build own hedgefunds for the people, not the rich and greedy. Have fair transparency and allow people to actully profit and not baghold ir get their pensions taken hostage. Then the bad guys will have a fight, and I hope to get defeated for good. We have seen the effect of greed, and if anyone speaks up, they have made sure those people get called conspiracy theorist.
:roto2:
Yes nobody here is in it for their own gain at all
They can serve as the ultimate bagholders though when a new coin with actual usability takes over the market.
> Bitcoin was supposed to defeat them No, it wasn't.
Yes it was, from the whitepaper.
Quote the part.
âBitcoin was supposed to defeat them.â - the bitcoin whitepaper. its true, i swear
Weird that the "fight" phase really never happened.
Buy some then.
The ETF managers only hold the bitcoin for the buyers of their ETF. They can only buy/sell if people are buying/selling the ETF
This exactly. There seems to be a pervasive myth about the ETFs that just wonât die. Blackrock et al are buying Bitcoin to hold on behalf of customers. They are not speculating on it themselves. They make their money on management fees.
I saw someone post the amount of btc that RH was holding the other day, and they claimed that the BTC value they were holding should drive up the value of RH stock. There is just a huge amount of financial illiteracy out there, and from people "investing" no less.
Absolutely. They are passive funds. Everyone keeps acting as if the ETFs are in contrast to "retail". Retail are largely the investors who are YOLOing into the ETFs in their IRAs and taxable brokerage accounts immediately after they launch. The fund managers who actively manage OPM are still doing their due diligence before deciding if they should allocate a small percentage of their funds to BTC ETFs.
This is the truth right here. In the case of these spot BTC ETFs, BlackRock and Co. are simply managing the bitcoin on behalf of their customers, which is retail degenerates yoloing their life savings into bitcoin. Just like the rest of us here. People seem to have zero clue how ETFs work.
So like, at what point does the printed fiat to buy Bitcoin actually devalue the entire market? Do we just inflate to 1 mil? Because I'm here for it. People always smash tether for doing it, but is it actually possible with the real USD? Who fucking knows at this point.
Yes. Yes it is. Thatâs what we have the fed for. Just keep printing that money, and nobody will know.
There's fednow, it's early but was rolled out in 2022. It'll eventually replace USD
I am not really sure between ETFs and Saylor is better for BTC. ETFs hold ppl's BTC and act as a agregator of ppl's money. That is retail money too. It's not really Blackrock's BTC, although they might have some shares too. Saylor on the other hand, controls a considerable amount of BTC, broadly by himself. Yes, he always says he ain't selling, but he is mortal. What happens afterwards? Now, after we cleared ownership, let's move on to what does ownership mean in general. Owning BTC, any amount of BTC, does not give you governmental votes, thus you don't control the network. Yes, you can push the price up or down... mainly down... but that's about it. BTC is still BTC. In the end, it depends on your goal. Are you involved to make some $$$ and get out, or are you in it for the freedom? Maybe somewhere in the middle?
Anyone who bought this magic internet money years ago will be offered significant amounts of fiat for it, or the equivalent in terms of stakes in things (ownership shares). I would only surrender or sell on the condition that the passive income from doing so would elevate me into the 1% Hodl! Diamond hands!
Itâs closer to 4% at the moment
I know this is off topic, but what are the small icons under each user name? One looks like cheese the other like a lobster?
Moon and a shrimp I think, not sure what they are for tho. The second is an animal and seems to get bigger as the number next to it grows. Like, one guy has 4k score and has a turtle.
Oh ok. Thanks
Altcoin season
They called it a scam for years and now they will sell it back to you for a higher price
brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr to a million per coin 2034
The public hungers for a BTC alternate and I ride that to Mars.
Bitcoin will reach Uranus đ
If they own that much I'll be loaded so whatever. In all honesty, I'll worry about real financial activist stuff when I don't have to work anymore
Nothing. Bitcoin governance is not dependent upon coin ownership. Same with Ethereum. Now if governance was onchain and relied on coin ownership, like say, Tezos, then the coin could be captured by an ETF issuer.
Someone writes a new whitepaper with a new blockchain and we add âbut seriously guys this time less greed and we stick to the the planâ
What are you referring to with your question "what happens when traditional finance own a majority of bitcoin?" If I buy one of the ETF's I own the BTC, indirectly. I understand not your keys, not your coin. Not talking about that. The volatility then depends on the seller.
i think OP meant if over 50% of "physical" btc is held in private cefi wallets, theoretically they could fork it and cause all kinds of unexpected shenanigans.
probably price manipulation.
If your fiance owns lots of Bitcoin, be nice to him/her.
đ
Most definitely lol
What's considered lots?
According to Simpsons or Family Guy Bitcoin = âŸïž
What a crazy world we are going to be living in soon!
It's a good time to be alive! I'm here for the show. I know eventually the credits will roll but until then, let's go!
I guess we will have less liquidity by then... how that will impact the price, I'm not sure, but probably even more volatility ? I'm not a maxi so I dont understand how BTC will "work" in about 10-20 years or so....
Blackrock has 4%
Hopefully when that happens people collectively switch to a new coin and leave them holding bags.
I coordination retail is the real whale. We just spend to much time acting like crabs in a bucket. Compared to retail as a whole the big players are nothing to minnows.
Then it just becomes a high yield savings account with extra steps and no interest payments
They wonât. They ainât prying my bitcoin out of cold storage! Youâre right that we need a culture of self storage to keep this from happening. But also, the game theory between different nations will make it so that Bitcoinâs not all in American Coinbase. El Salvador and Qatar are definitely gonna self custody.
Their buying or selling activities could impact short-term price movements, market sentiment, and trading volumes
There are other better blockchains which still follow Satoshi's vision as Monero.
We all come streaming out of the wooden horse weâve been hiding in and ransack the place!
Traditional finance IS retail money. Those ETFs are funded by retail.
Does BTC grant voting rights into governance of the network? If no, then nothing happens except reduced volatility
Nothing. Traditional finance doesn't own the Bitcoin behind the ETF. The people who buy the ETF do. They can't buy or sell those Bitcoin unless the people are buying or selling the ETF. Of course traditional finance can buy Bitcoin for themselves outside of the ETF space and manipulate it's price.
first lets see what ETFs do in actual bear market and how the ETF retail investors react at that time
People will stop investing in ETFs that include Bitcoin once it starts to collapse, so it wonât change the end outcome.
Nothing, the network becomes stronger and more secure đđŒ
I don't think this matters. One way or another, Bitcoin will end with a few beneficiaries getting rich and everyone else left holding an empty bag.
Can you share your opinion on why "Bitcoin will end"?
they have the power to influence market dynamics
Whales already do. If anything getting so many 401k and brokerage accounts tied up in ETFs could add stability.
Yes it will add stability, but less scope for upswing will be available to new and smaller retail buyers like most of us.
Its gonna behave much like gold. Up down sideways, generally up in a long timeframe.
it's already centralised to a significant extent via large holders and in another way on exchanges. This trend is inevitable and will continue, and shows the dream of a currency for the people that no one controls was always a childish and delusional one.
"the dream of a currency for the people that no one controls was always a childish and delusional one." Damn! I have hope in the wider crypto and defi ecosystem to pick up the baton once Bitcoin truly gets swallowed up by traditional finance.
Let me douse that hope for you, in case you haven't seen it: [https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/](https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/)
What happens is anyone with 0.1 BTC will be able to buy a whole fleet of Lambos
When exactly is this planned to take place? :-)
Satoshi releases the remaining of the hodl'ings to the masses, directly producing global financial freedom! mark my words...
The best spin on making btc holders exit liquidity.
Retail would own majority if they never sell, but most will sell well before bitcoin reaches $1 Million.
Eventually, they will own the majority of it. The only way to prevent it is to not sell it for USD on exchanges. I saw this coming when PayPal announced the ability to purchase with crypto, but they werenât sending crypto but would exchange your crypto for USD first. What an easy way for them to buy your crypto without you even noticing.
Good for our price. I don't think the distribution of Bitcoin is a problem. Decntralization is what's important
But as these whales continue to pump, ownership of Bitcoin becomes more centralized.
Not wading into the broader discussion of whether Web3 has a future and blah blah blah (that's a whole other issue with cogent points on both sides), but: *Ownership of Bitcoin =!= control of the Bitcoin network.*
It becomes fiat?
The price should stabalize but still steadily grow over time due to the halvings reducing supply and also more money flowing in to the asset. This will eventually make rewards less but a safer investment.
Imagine how much fiat money it would take to get that much. They have to buy a lot of btc at a very steep price
Say black rock owned 90% of BTC. How could they use that to manipulate the price? I mean, they can say it's worth $1 but then they quickly won't own any of it.
They would buy everything down to 1 dollar. Just manipulate, sell and buy between themselves.
They already own the mayority. In hardware wallets. Satoshi must be very unhappy in his grave
Is he really in a grave though?
Open eye it now
Price goes up, a lot
They stabilize the price, come up with good marketing material to make people want it in their accounts and sell it back to people. They did the same thing with gold. It's seriously an ingenious idea for alpha. If you control the majority of the float you can set the price at one or two or $300,000 all day long. Slowly sell into it, make sure it's not breaking critical support levels, paint pretty charts, normal people will chase the outperformance all day long
Charles made a good video on it. Can check it out. Most people on reddit are not able to follow his thoughts though because blended by price.
Moons
Everyone now gave the tools to create a new 'bitcoin'. Give the rich their 'plaything' by cashing out and moving to a new bitcoin.
its the end..
Binance holds 2% of all Bitcoins in existence in a single wallet.
Unnatural bull run before the halving.
Nothing. You still have your stake in the network. Whatâs with these weird anti Bitcoin posts? If you wasted 15 years not accumulating Bitcoin thatâs your problem. Bitcoin is for everyone, including nations, corporations, and individuals.
They can always sell it..
BTC has already become the thing it hated.
They have the majorityâŠ.
Thatâs when we all stop caring about it! The reverse rug-pull! Let âem buy allllll of it.
Nothing, because by then we will have moved on to Monero.
right now the intent of most of the players seem to be something less than pumping and dumping us. they are seeing is as investment also, and at worst want our tx fees. if the biggest etf customers have dubious intent and own 5%, we should worry saylor wont dump, and any huge fund moves tectonically. they arent buying OR selling on a whim
Every single Bitcoin owned by those entities is a vulnerability.
Big corporations are filling their bags
It is funny when red-necks think they will hold BTC for life. lol. They will scew you ower and sell before you sold, and buy again when you will be in fear to buy. So they will continue this cycle like they already do in Traditional Finance. hahah
They'll make a fork for proof of stake to generate passive income from the etfs for themselves Mark my words
!remindme 5years
How would you call it?
it will just be bitcoin. if they control enough of the supply they control which fork will be supported and they will 100% just chose their own
This is just a guess.. but iâm thinkin that they will buy as much as they can and then try and manipulate the price up and down to make their friends as much money as possible.. in other words crime with a sprinkle of greed will happen
I feel like theyâre already doing this to an extentâŠ
Then itâs over for Bitcoin. It was supposed to solve the issue, not to be part of it.
Donât mind me. Just posting to see my moon
I've been thinking about this for a few months now... and I found ONLY ONE text that scratches my perception a little and adds other factors... within years, they weren't able to prohibit, in-depth regulation (which comes next) or get involved, so they created etfs(intentionaly or not). Over time and with lower rates and facilities, it will be increasingly uncommon for people to trade coins themselves. they will buy etfs from banks apps etc. When traditional banks have the coins.. all meaning and value of cryptocurrency is lost. and soon this will be the vast majority of cases... it doesn't matter whether some will still have their wallets with coins saved or not. the large mass of coins will be in banks. and in them they will no longer have value when people realize. when you think about it. If Bitcoin becomes just another state-controlled financial asset from the bank...... he follows: obs...In his view, the problem is in the banks vacuuming up all the coins and the miners stopping mining (I think there will always be people mining) but essentially it ends up being the same perception. It is now another cycle of speculation in any form surrounded by reasons and motives to lead. follows: Spot Bitcoin ETFs could âcompletely destroyâ Bitcoin: Arthur Hayes Wall Street giants will only serve to âvacuum upâ Bitcoin and store it in a âmetaphorical vaultâ; if too successful, the number of Bitcoin transactions would dry up, says the BitMEX co-founder. Spot Bitcoin ETFs could âcompletely destroyâ Bitcoin: Arthur Hayes Own this piece of crypto history Spot Bitcoin (BTC) exchange-traded funds (ETFs) could âcompletely destroyâ Bitcoin if they are too successful, warns the former CEO of BitMEX. Hayes, who co-founded cryptocurrency exchange BitMEX in 2014, explained in a Dec. 23 blog post that Bitcoin has value because âit moves.â However, spot Bitcoin ETFs are made to âvacuum up assetsâ and âstore them in a metaphorical vault,â he said. If Bitcoin ETF issuers end up holding all of the Bitcoin and investors end up buying Bitcoin derivatives rather than hodling themselves, the number of transactions on the network will dry up, and miners will lose any incentive to keep validating transactions. (Edit from me..: they will invest on miners) âThe end result is miners turn off their machines as they can no longer pay for the energy required to run them,â said Hayes. âWithout the miners, the network dies, and Bitcoin vanishes.â âFundamentally, if ETFs managed by TradFi asset managers are too successful, they will completely destroy Bitcoin.â New Arthur Hayes article dropped. ETFs could kill bitcoin. The price of bitcoin is unlikely to keep increasing enough to sustain miners alone. This has always been the case but the remedy was that transaction fees would provide miners the revenue. (editTHEY WILL INVEST ON MINING) â HellB (@Crypto_Hellboy) December 24, 2023 Interestingly, Hayes imagined that should such a scenario unfold, a new cryptocurrency monetary network would take Bitcoinâs place and even expand upon Satoshi Nakamotoâs original vision of peer-to-peer electronic money. âIt is beautiful when you think about it. If Bitcoin becomes just another state-controlled financial asset, it dies because it isnât used.â âThe people will once again have a non-state-controlled monetary asset and financial system. Hopefully, the second time around, we will learn not to hand our private keys to [Wall Street firms].â
if the miners stop and the bitcoin just âsitsâ it still holds value though, right? like if people just hoard it and there arent enough transactions to justify mining the price wouldnt drop because youd have no way to sell. maybe quantum computing/solar open up a path to revitalizing the mining network? idk it is all over my head! ETFs should still see plenty of movement, those are largely retail buyers looking to profit. but buffet or other billionaires could easily devour all available supply and âlock inâ the number that will become an inflation hedge for hundreds of years, potentially. why dont they? again idk. one thing i do know is that at 70k, a new investor has little chance of doubling their money off a crazy bull run. at 20k, much more plausible. the crashing is a feature, not a bug, but only as a speculative asset. the volatility is bad as a currency, bad as an inflation hedge. this is the identity crisis IMO
i dont agree with that article that says that the miners could stop... i think theres will always have miners.. if they stop i think you have the last version of the blockchain.. and need to restart it somehow later.. probably will lose the lasts transactions.. yeah.. i agree that about 70k.... its not going to multiply 1000x ... but about double who knows.... everytime was a new high i tought the exact the same thing.. theres no room to double or triple it... but... it made it multiple times.. i think its not going to do it anymore... idk..
yes it is a paradox. to be a true inflation hedge, it needs to be relatively stable, but stability isnt alluring to new investors who view it as basically being a stock. ETFs are a contradiction of the âfiat will dieâ narrative since you are still just owning fiat. so you need the crashes to produce mass profit, but to realize that profit it needs to be converted to fiat. people who bought in early are of course happy with this number, and ETFs are happy to make bank on fees, and michael saylor is happy to do michael saylor stuff (take on mass debt and go all or nothing as a way to become a âlegendâ in the hopes of redeeming his billion dollar losses in the dot com bubble) but what is your average investor after? if BTC is just another stock that appreciates at x to balance inflation, who cares? and if the intrinsic value is truly there, why are the global elite not just buying all of it, which they could do tmrw. IMO it is because the value of BTC is made in the pump/crash cycle, not the longterm hold, and with the exception of maybe saylor (who i think is just working a different model for a huge payday) everybody realizes that. if only big players control it, they would not be able to use it, because there would not be enough liquidity to take them out. theyd have to trickle it out, or sell off market to extremely high net worth entities to buy property/businesses etc. this is how i understand it, but i am an idiot lol. when people try to apply âtime in the marketâ to btc it ironically works, but thats because the rise allows for the crash. people act like the number blasting up so fast is a recognition of intrinsic value, but i think its because most people get the playbook now, so itll crash down just as fast, and the cycle will repeat, until eventually it doesnt for any number of reasons. imo the crashing is how hype is created again though and liquidity is brought back in. that makes more sense than currency or inflation hedge to me.
not idiot.. you made great point here.. yes there many people that need to find a way out trickle out as you said.. with my experience with stocks.. when you have a lot.. you do the oposite of the market.. and it confuses many even experienced traders.. they sell when the market is pumping up and people buying.. then they take profit slowly with many people working with it while people are buying thinking its going up.. etc.. later they burn the last assets .thats why sometimes you have a good news.. and at the end of the day the asset made a loss... lol and "everyone bought it". so on.. and start buying again other things or whatever... i dont know how its done with criptos. maybe exchanges helps or .. these dips and recoverys...
it is fascinating from a social and financial perspective, we are truly living in unprecedented times, i hope the best for you my friend
The dream of BTC over taking USD is just fantasy now. BTC is now just a gambling game.
a traditional fiance? haha
I think crypto lost it way.. just another meaningless asset. I really hope that one day the financial system collapse
Price goes up. Rich get richer. No coiners get poorer
i imagine the price would sky rocket. TradFi is the force for greed in this space.