|
I've had 7 posts disappear due to a self-moderated thread from last year being deleted. Can you adjust my starting post count for this week down to 1770 from 1777? Otherwise, I am not receiving credit for the first 7 posts of this week.
|
|
|
|
there are many bitcoin out in the market and we are still not half way of the bitcoin that is needed to be collected.
wrong, we are already at 15-16M so more than half way, to the full supply, which is roughly 21M Full supply isn't roughly 21 million. It's exactly 21 million. That's true it is exactly 21 million and I have read a post that most people that accumulate the most bitcoins are Chinese. And they are the miners that mining it most. They may be mining much of it, but I don't know about accumulating it. Miners have to constantly sell in order to pay the expenses of mining. |
|
|
|
Obviously things didn't worked out the way they had hoped for. Most of the American shale oil producers are still there, pumping out the oil. Iran and Russia have also increased their daily output. The problem is they can't control spending to the point they need to. They are selling off a piece of Aramco to raise funds in light of their massive deficits and a need to transition the economy away from oil and not currently having the resources to do it.
I have seen many articles in Bloomberg and Google Finance claiming that Aramco might be worth up to $3 trillion. I am quite skeptical about this. Rosneft produces about 4.5 million barrels a day, and still its market cap is only around $50 billion. What makes Aramco 100 times more expensive than Rosneft? Well, I think the value has less to do with how many bpd it produces and more to do with total assets. The oil reserves Aramco owns are where the 2-3 trillion dollar valuation would come from. When Aramco files an IPO, they will have to disclose with the SEC exactly what their reserves are in their S-1 statement, which will give investors a clear picture of the financial asshets of the company, and let everyone calculate for themselves what the valuation should be. And also, if the company is only selling 5% of itself publicly, a 2 trillion dollar valuation would raise $100 billion dollars. That's a phenomenal asset to be able to monetize. From what I've read, the prince wants to use all the proceeds from the sale in the sovereign wealth fund, which will be used to help transform the economy from an oil-dependent one. Currently, 70% of GDP comes from oil production. |
|
|
|
Obviously things didn't worked out the way they had hoped for. Most of the American shale oil producers are still there, pumping out the oil. Iran and Russia have also increased their daily output. The problem is they can't control spending to the point they need to. They are selling off a piece of Aramco to raise funds in light of their massive deficits and a need to transition the economy away from oil and not currently having the resources to do it.
I have seen many articles in Bloomberg and Google Finance claiming that Aramco might be worth up to $3 trillion. I am quite skeptical about this. Rosneft produces about 4.5 million barrels a day, and still its market cap is only around $50 billion. What makes Aramco 100 times more expensive than Rosneft? Well, I think the value has less to do with how many bpd it produces and more to do with total assets. The oil reserves Aramco owns are where the 2-3 trillion dollar valuation would come from. When Aramco files an IPO, they will have to disclose with the SEC exactly what their reserves are in their S-1 statement, which will give investors a clear picture of the financial asshets of the company, and let everyone calculate for themselves what the valuation should be. |
|
|
|
|
You: there are no such things as known oil reserves.
You: Saudi Arabia doesn't disclose oil reserves because it's a "top state secret."
Ignoring the fact that your two premises directly contradict each other, I demonstrated both to be wrong, and yet you persist in posting garbage about how right you are. It's tired, and you haven't had an intelligent or thoughtful post in several weeks on the topic, so welcome to my block list. It's very sparse, but you've definitely earned it. I'll check back after awhile to see if you've improved the quality of your posts any to warrant unblocking, but I won't be engaging any more of your nonsense posts.
|
|
|
|
there are many bitcoin out in the market and we are still not half way of the bitcoin that is needed to be collected.
wrong, we are already at 15-16M so more than half way, to the full supply, which is roughly 21M Full supply isn't roughly 21 million. It's exactly 21 million. |
|
|
|
No the economy will not collapse for sure, I even think the bitcoin is gonna rise and the economy will also rise this year.
I think we can see some light bulbs at the end of the tunnel with the economical crisis.
Yep, $17 trillion debt and climbing. More QE on the way. Zero interest rates. Negative interest rates now becoming a reality in some countries. Venezuela just defaulted. Greece just been refused latest bail out. EU about to fall apart (brexit hopefully) But everything is fine lol. Truth is the world economy is broken and there is no fixing it without a reset of world debt. There currently is no QE in the US, and interest rates are not zero either. And although a Venezuela default may be imminent, it hasn't happened yet. |
|
|
|
No I think not. If this was the case we would have heard this on the news already. I believe it goes better with most countries and the economy. There are of course some countries that life in a financial crisis.
Yeah that is why I do not believe that the economy will collapse this year. If the economy would collapse total chaos would brake out and I have not noticed anything so that means it is going good. Yeah there would be some signs now if the world economy is about to collapse. There are some countries tho like in Europe that life in a financial crisis. But this is not going to affect the whole world. The world economy is not going to collapse any time soon I am sure of it. The chance of world war three is even bigger then the world economy collapsing. Southern Europe is in quite a lot of trouble. Between Greece and Italy, debt:GDP is unsustainable. |
|
|
|
Except Saudi Arabia is running large deficits right now, and is actively reforming the government and cutting subsidies because they're worried about their reserves. They are worried. And rightly so.
The Saudis still have a few advantages. Aramco produces crude at very low cost. In some of the fields, the cost of production is as low as $2 per barrel. No other country is having this advantage. So even if the price drops to $45 per barrel, they will still be getting a healthy profit. If they control their spending, then everything will be OK. I found this interesting: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/saudi-arabia-ousts-longtime-oil-minister/ar-BBsKjIO?ocid=ansmsnnews11Saudi Arabia has sacked their long term oil minister among a broader government reshuffling. He has presided over a controversial strategy of keeping production levels high despite the drop in prices over the past two years in an effort to drive more expensive producers in the U.S. and elsewhere out of the market. That has led to a glut of supply.
At a talk in February in Houston, he stood by that strategy, arguing that cuts by lower-cost producers like Saudi Arabia would simply subsidize higher-cost ones.
...
Lower oil prices since mid-2014 pushed Saudi Arabia into a budget deficit of nearly $100 billion last year and a projected deficit this year of $87 billion. Despite efforts to limit reliance on its main export, oil accounted for more than 70 percent of the state's revenue in 2015.
Among the changes planned by Mohammed bin Salman and announced last month was a plan to publicly list less than five percent of Aramco to create a massive sovereign wealth fund to develop its cities.
...
The deputy crown prince put the estimated value of Aramco at more than $2 trillion.
The problem is they can't control spending to the point they need to. They are selling off a piece of Aramco to raise funds in light of their massive deficits and a need to transition the economy away from oil and not currently having the resources to do it. |
|
|
|
Oil supply: 60,000 days, or 164 years.
Then apparently you say: that's dumb. But you provide no mathematical basis to contest it, yet you just keep saying the math is wrong because. Its all an estimate of course as we know for sure that world population will not be similar over 164 years. It could vary greatly as it has over the previous 164 years so its hard to say how long oil will last even if we had a hard limit for amount available. Much oil drilled is never extracted completely (or even close) as it becomes uneconomical, similar to how coal was taken from mines abandoned but later further mined as technology allowed closer mining and safer limits to how far they could expand Nobodys dumb, in 164 years I expect we rely on oil less - just a guess! You missed the point. All the numbers in that example were completely made up to demonstrate how the math works in an overly simplified hypothetical, since some people in this thread have demonstrated an inability to understand simple math. Economic modeling is actually far more complex and takes into account a great number of variables and complex data sets. But it follows that if you can't understand simple math problems, you won't understand complex ones. |
|
|
|
a projection takes into account everything we know right now and includes likely material changes that could impact the estimate. It could change in either direction, or not at all. That's completely irrelevant. What matters is how long we project the oil supply to last, because that determines economic priorities in an oil-based global economy. How that number changes over time as we get new information is as important as the number itself because it indicates whether and how quickly things are deteriorating There are no "known oil reserves", to begin (or end up) with. These are not even estimates but guesses, and wild guesses at work I'd say. The top oil producer, the Saudi, is keeping their oil reserves numbers a top state secret. The same most certainly pertains to Russia, the Saudi's match and rival. Do you really think that the math of multiplying two numbers (as well as the use of pompous language and repetition of buzzwords) would somehow give more credibility to the result thereof? What the fuck are you doing here, lol? A known oil reserve is oil we've found in the ground or countries have declared they have access to. So much for "top state secrets": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves#OPEC_countries Quit being such an ignorant fuckwit already. I stopped reading everything you wrote after that because you've proven yourself unable to post anything worth reading. |
|
|
|
|
Well, a couple weeks later and we now have a little bit of perspective. This turned out to be a gigantic move from a long-term base around 1,500 sats to a peak of about 18,000 before crashing back down. It is currently still trading well above that old long-term average, sitting around 6,300.
|
|
|
|
I think we can say that once a coin reaches this point with such traction, media attention, market cap, backing it is very unlikely to fail even if a major disaster happens like bitcoin was still alive (even though it dropped a lot) after Mt. Gox (I lost money too at that point)
Would you also say once a company reaches a certain threshold of value, it cannot fail either? Because that's a perfect analogy and multi-billion dollar companies going bankrupt is not an infrequent occurrence. I'm not saying Eth will fail. I'm just saying assuming it can't because of its current size is folly. |
|
|
|
It is doubtful it will go back to $1 anytime soon, too many miners have jumped on board with their (assumed) investments in hardware and infrastructure to simply give their Ethereum away. The cost to mine 1 ETH is approximately $1.40 based upon normal hash-rates and an electricity cost of $0.08 KWh, and this figure does not include any ROI on investments.
Based upon this and the fact that the mining difficulty is continuing to rise, I don't think will go much below $5.00, with $3.00 probably a pretty solid floor.
The cost to mine a coin or investments in mining infrastructure will not prevent it from dropping in price. Demand is a determinant of price, and the cost to mine the coin has nothing to do with demand. If demand for the coin goes away, the price will drop, regardless of how much it costs to mine the coin. |
|
|
|
Unfortunately paper money will probably disappear completely at some point. Digital money has a lot going for it but it also has quite a few drawbacks. I think that there is always something that is irrecoverably lost with the death of a generation. Knowledge is gained at the expense of something somewhat more fundamental.
That's right. Paper money is dirty and very costly to print and protect. Then there are the thieves who try to print money and launder money. So governements will try to get rid of it asap. Anything that has a high value is pretty expensive to protect. Also, laundering money would happen with digital money too. Those aren't criticisms unique to paper money. |
|
|
|
Math is not idle talk. You are idle talk. Math is math. If you want to prove your point, take a projection and mathematically show why it is not accurate. Since you cannot do this, your further assertions that projections are idle talk is actually the only idle talk happening here.
Triple lol. Could you please be so kind as to first show how are you going to describe real world events with math? A theory of chances? Okay, but what will a possibility of a given long-term projection outcome (100 years, as you said) be if you take into account the possibilities of changes in the factors that may and will actually happen during that time span? Infinitesimal or just laughable? Let's get real, after all. And how on earth are you going to factor in the events which you can't even imagine (to happen), i.e. can't account for altogether, but which, nevertheless, do happen occasionally, and more often than not with devastating consequences, wtf? Math is math, and it points a finger at you Here's an overly simplistic example: Known oil reserves: 6 trillion barrels. Global oil consumption rate: 100 million barrels/day Oil supply: 60,000 days, or 164 years. Then apparently you say: that's dumb. But you provide no mathematical basis to contest it, yet you just keep saying the math is wrong because. If you don't understand what a projection is or how to do math, then commenting on how useless projections are makes you look foolish. Now as I said, and you keep ignoring, a projection takes into account everything we know right now and includes likely material changes that could impact the estimate. It could change in either direction, or not at all. That's completely irrelevant. What matters is how long we project the oil supply to last, because that determines economic priorities in an oil-based global economy. How that number changes over time as we get new information is as important as the number itself because it indicates whether and how quickly things are deteriorating. Go read a projection ffs. They give a baseline and then a range based on likely changes, in both directions, so that they're giving an overall range that's statistically viable. What's clear is you're completely unfamiliar with economic modeling, but you naively continue to sit there and say "nope" and base your assessment on nothing but ignorance, coupled with a steadfast refusal to learn. |
|
|
|
It will go down to sub-40 levels. The Saudis are making unreasonable demands. They want Iran to freeze the production. How this is possible? The Saudis have increased their output by almost 50% during the past 4-5 years. On the other hand, right now the Iranian production is less than their output during the pre-sanction era. One thing that is interesting is to watch the Saudis and Iranians jockey for regional supremacy and use oil as a proxy front in their conflict. The longer they fight, the more damage they do to themselves. Both are rich countries, I doubt they care what happens in the short term. They're playing chess while we'll playing checkers. They have money right now, they'll have money later on. They aren't worried when they're only losing a few million per day and they have billions in reserve. Except Saudi Arabia is running large deficits right now, and is actively reforming the government and cutting subsidies because they're worried about their reserves. They are worried. And rightly so. |
|
|
|
Yes it is.
People always forget their passwords, send their money to the wrong address, get their computer broken etc etc...
The available number of bitcoins are decreasing every day.
I dont agree.... saying that bitcoins are decreasing is the same as saying number of lost bitcoins is higher then generated bitcoins. and its probably not. Wait, wait. I dont think we are on the same page here. Available bitcoins are the one's being mined now right? Right this moment. Yes it is decreasing. I have read that there is a limit to the maximum mined bitcoin so if there is a limit? then it will be depleted right? Not exactly. There are 25 bitcoins created every 10 minutes. In a couple months, that will drop to 12.5 new bitcoins every 10 minutes. Then in four-ish years, it will drop to 6.25 new bitcoins every ten minutes, and so on every four years or so. As you can see, it will take a very, very long time before the number of coins being "lost" ever surpasses new Bitcoin creation. We are nowhere near it now, and we won't be for the foreseeable future. |
|
|
|
Some countries have problems with the economy but this does not mean that the whole world is going to collapse. I do not believe that the world economy is ever going to collapse because the world leaders will sure come up with something to prevent that.
It's really out of their control. There's only so much you can do when the economy is falling apart. Trying to print your way out of it (money-wise) will just lead to hyperinflation. |
|
|
|
|
War hasn't helped the economy. It just drives up the debt, and they're plenty good st that without another war.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
