Is it a scene from the future "Housewives of Beverly Hills" episode? There are currently only 2.8-3.5 mil btc owners with more than 1 BTC. I doubt that there will be many more. Compare it to more than 40mil millionaires in the World and about 5 million millionaires with wealth above 5mil (3.2885 mil with wealth of $5-10mil). So, basically, having ONE btc is the equivalent (in rarity) of having $5-10mil in fiat wealth. https://medium.com/@BambouClub/are-you-in-the-bitcoin-1-a-new-model-of-the-distribution-of-bitcoin-wealth-6adb0d4a6a95+ google global wealth report, there is a pdf link there. |
|
|
|
An OG with 50k coins will have more power than most countries do now.
~150 of them will have half the world's wealth.
By far the most people will not have any money at all.
Bitcoin will bring about a new feudal technocracy.
But first, complete chaos.
That very well may be, but how exactly would you exert that wealth without spending precious bitcoin and thereby reducing your bitcoin stash? Bitcoin lending? Why would some lend a deflationary asset? Borrowing cash against your btc stash? That can turn ugly at 80% drawdown. Bitcoin interest-a ridiculous idea that is not even practical without someone rehypothecating bitcoin, which should be a bad habit. I am close to 100% certain that blockFi will kick the bucket at one point or another. |
|
|
|
While solidly behind bitcoin, I cannot be at the position of "only bitcoin forever".
Here is my purely behavioristic argument:
1. Wall Street (WS) largely "missed" bitcoin as more than 84% is already issued with very small (anecdotally) institutional ownership.
2. WS knows how to do "promotions".
3. Would it be easier for WS to promote a new token/coin/entity that is not almost fully subscribed yet vs the one that is already owned? I think that the answer is "probably, yes"
4. WS don't like chasing, but they do like sweet early deals.
Conclusion: BTC will be pushed first and will dramatically appreciate, but then the momentum might switch to "shitcoins".
Which ones's?
IMHO, the one's that are under-issued: XRP (since Ripple can make sweet deals at 40C now with appreciation later), watch out for Ripple issuing billions of coins from their 66 bil "stash", maybe ZEC as only 6mil out of 21 mil were mined so far. Don't want to mention newcomers, but watch out for large tranches of coins being allocated to WS hedge funds and institutions from some new and upcoming chains.
Personally, I don't think that ethereum would show large appreciation due to much competition in the area (POS) where it wants to compete.
One can, hopefully, design a strategy where potential profits in "shitcoins" would be transferred to bitcoin in due course.
I don't intend to sell any bitcoin (and certainly not for shitcoins), hopefully, until retirement or some unforeseen urgency, but some cash allocation along the lines that were mentioned above could be interesting. We shall see.
So, you are basically saying "buy ripple" because it's centralized bank money? Not cool bro... Pal, if you have CASH and use it, then you already have centralized bank money, lol I am not giving an advice of what to buy, just looking at it from a cost-benefit angle. Don't spend bitcoin, but if you have cash (aka centralized bank money as we established already, and after you did not spend your cash on btc in the next year or so), then it could be profitable. Or not. Make your own decisions. |
|
|
|
|
While solidly behind bitcoin, I cannot be at the position of "only bitcoin forever".
Here is my purely behavioristic argument:
1. Wall Street (WS) largely "missed" bitcoin as more than 84% is already issued with very small (anecdotally) institutional ownership.
2. WS knows how to do "promotions".
3. Would it be easier for WS to promote a new token/coin/entity that is not almost fully subscribed yet vs the one that is already owned? I think that the answer is "probably, yes"
4. WS don't like chasing, but they do like sweet early deals.
Conclusion: BTC will be pushed first and will dramatically appreciate, but then the momentum might switch to "shitcoins".
Which ones's?
IMHO, the one's that are under-issued: XRP (since Ripple can make sweet deals at 40C now with appreciation later), watch out for Ripple issuing billions of coins from their 66 bil "stash", maybe ZEC as only 6mil out of 21 mil were mined so far. Don't want to mention newcomers, but watch out for large tranches of coins being allocated to WS hedge funds and institutions from some new and upcoming chains.
Personally, I don't think that ethereum would show large appreciation due to much competition in the area (POS) where it wants to compete.
One can, hopefully, design a strategy where potential profits in "shitcoins" would be transferred to bitcoin in due course.
I don't intend to sell any bitcoin (and certainly not for shitcoins), hopefully, until retirement or some unforeseen urgency, but some cash allocation along the lines that were mentioned above could be interesting. We shall see.
|
|
|
|
If you throw in a century of economic growth then 9 digits could be plausible as well as follows:
Suppose Bitcoin absorbs 10% of M2 and the M2 growth rate of roughly 4% persists for a century.
That would imply 1.04^100 = 50.5x growth over 100 years.
That would bring the 10% estimate from 3m per Bitcoin to 151.5m per Bitcoin 100 years from now. These kind of valuations are highly flawed. If bitcoin ever absorbed even a fraction of "M2" growth it would be largely as a pure unit of account, not a store of value. In other words you'd (by definition of M2) be talking about BTC denominated bank deposit accounts and money market funds and all kinds of other fractional reserve derivatives. Use of bitcoin as a unit of account is something hodlers tend to ignore. If bitcoin ever became a currency we would not be exchanging actual bitcoins, but bitcoin denominated credit just as we use arbitrary units of credit today. So you can't just divide random incumbent money supply figures by 21 million to get a price for a future BTC. Since it's limited in supply it's an asset and will always be an asset. If you denominate, say, UK GDP in bitcoin then it's around 0.3 Trillion BTC. The GDP can be 0.3 Trillion BTC even though there are not that many bitcoins in existence. Maybe flawed, but only partially. If bonds are issued, then this is not a unit of account, but an actual asset that contributes to the overall size of assets, is it not? Bond market in US is 82tril, global-above 100 tril. I can redeem a bond and get currency/cash. Analogy: water in the lake is still a part of water present on planet earth. In theory it works like that but in practice it doesn't. Even in the Bretton Woods system there was a "notional" convertibility to gold. But there was still far more currency in circulation than there was gold in existence. The value of gold was simply pegged to a multiple of the dollar ($30 I think). Lets say you had 1 bitcoin and you issued a bitcoin backed bond. You now have 2 effective bitcoins in circulation - the real one and the bond. The original doesn't cease to exist just because it's backing a bond. Similarly, crypto exchanges inflate the bitcoin money supply. We deposit our bitcoin on exchanges and they create these "synthetic" bitcoins for us to trade. Meanwhile the deposited BTC are still in circulation on the blockchain. People tend to think that they're "locked away" and out of circulation, but they're not. The new synthetic ones are added to the supply. The exchange can do what they want with the deposits - it just depends on the contractural terms. So the "21 million" limit is not really a limit. The bitcoin supply can be expanded in an unlimited way and will be simply through its use as a pure unit of account, same as any other asset. I actually agree with this reasoning...and this happening eventually. I would think, however, that such derivative bitcoins would be limited in number (maybe 3-10 times more, but not 100-1000 times more). Maybe they would not even be called bitcoins, but something else. Beforehand, btc rose rapidly upon learning about upcoming futures on CBOE/CME, then declined. A similar scenario might be unfolding here: a rapid rise into BAKKT (in July), then some retreat, a temporal one, perhaps. |
|
|
|
If you throw in a century of economic growth then 9 digits could be plausible as well as follows:
Suppose Bitcoin absorbs 10% of M2 and the M2 growth rate of roughly 4% persists for a century.
That would imply 1.04^100 = 50.5x growth over 100 years.
That would bring the 10% estimate from 3m per Bitcoin to 151.5m per Bitcoin 100 years from now. These kind of valuations are highly flawed. If bitcoin ever absorbed even a fraction of "M2" growth it would be largely as a pure unit of account, not a store of value. In other words you'd (by definition of M2) be talking about BTC denominated bank deposit accounts and money market funds and all kinds of other fractional reserve derivatives. Use of bitcoin as a unit of account is something hodlers tend to ignore. If bitcoin ever became a currency we would not be exchanging actual bitcoins, but bitcoin denominated credit just as we use arbitrary units of credit today. So you can't just divide random incumbent money supply figures by 21 million to get a price for a future BTC. Since it's limited in supply it's an asset and will always be an asset. If you denominate, say, UK GDP in bitcoin then it's around 0.3 Trillion BTC. The GDP can be 0.3 Trillion BTC even though there are not that many bitcoins in existence. Maybe flawed, but only partially. If bonds are issued, then this is not a unit of account, but an actual asset that contributes to the overall size of assets, is it not? Bond market in US is 82tril, global-above 100 tril. I can redeem a bond and get currency/cash. Analogy: water in the lake is still a part of water present on planet earth. |
|
|
|
10k in 48 hours please kind Pump Masters  Time to sell some, a retracement to $6000-6500 or lower in...3...2...1. We're still in a bear market. We would need to go under 3100 to prove this is a bear market. 6k retrace would just be a bull market correction.  Bull Markets dont start with the (<snipped>Party first. Bear market rallies usually are the fiercest. But I will hold my tongue and let everyone enjoy the moment. True about bear market rallies, NOT true about bull markets. 1982-2000 US stocks bull market started ferociously: 40% jump in less than 3 mo, check it out. The rule is...there are no rules. I agree that it is a bit too vertical, but it is a SMALL market. |
|
|
|
|
Not about bitcoin...
micg is in the hodlrest, but I still don't want to give out anything but a vibe on GOT.
The last two episodes counting todays's were the dumbest, least nuanced episodes of the whole show.
I hope that the final would make up for this...disappointed (at the moment).
|
|
|
|
Voted 8.5K-9K...too bullish, I know, I like to take unnecessary risks |
|
|
|
This dump was expected. Let's see if it extends further or not. Win-win situation, I love it! I tried to do the same with a little part of my holdings (about 5%) yesterday, which is totally stuck in Binance for now. Sold at $7400 and thought the same thing, "if bitcoin goes down, I'll buy back from this USDC bag, if it doesn't go down, I still win with my remaining holdings". But then I bought back the BTC (FOMO'ed at the dump) at $6800 as I liked the little 0.03 BTC profit off that Binance bag.
Based on what you've just posted, your holdings must be around 6.8 BTC. Not a small amount, well done! Keep HoDLing! [...I just love playing with numbers...]Oh wow! That number is extremely close to my overall portfolio worth. We've got some nice mathematicians in this thread, I wasn't aware of that! Honestly, ADA played a big role in getting me to that number; if ADA hadn't pumped as it did, I'd have been struggling at ... kidding aside...that's a historical record as long as bitcointalk lives, tread carefully. This could be worth, say, $6.8-68 mil sometime in the future, give or take. |
|
|
|
Agree with you there JJG, no $20,000 breach until at least 12 months, probably 18 months. Moon is in sight though & we’ll get there.
How many times did I hear we didn't where gonna see 7xxx this year ........ trying to predict the price is just impossible as just wastin e of time trying  F*** 20K could happen in 1-2-3 weeks if BTC want it to be so!!! Closing in to HODLsleep It's impossible, but then... it happens. IDK.. if we are mini-bubbling here, then we could finish at around 10K, then down to 7k or even 6K (within 2-3 mo), but then pop all the way to 25-34K a la 2013 "double-pop" style. PS: funny, I posted this without looking and now I see that masterluc (in infofront's translation) said more or less the same. |
|
|
|
No one wants to see the price gallop away and explode.
Well... I think we might be able to scrounge up one or two dissenters. seconded |
|
|
|
Institutions prefer to buy direct from miners due to anti-money laundering / tainted coins concerns. A 10% premium for freshly minted coins is apparently not uncommon.
That limits the amount of coins available for sale to institutions
This is just a dumb ass nocoiner (ignoramus) behavior. When institution is buying from, say, Coinbase, prior history is of little (or no) concern since it is all going to a pool, from which Coinbase gives you your btc. But, if they want to overpay, this is on them. |
|
|
|
|
hey, Lady L., please give us something here...feeling being left out of the party.
Much thanks!
|
|
|
|
But...bbut.... I #deleteCoinbase just like u said 2  Guyzzz Coinbase cannot help you here, unless you already have cash there, otherwise you'll have to wait. Gemini, on the other hand, allows trading as soon as you sent ACH. |
|
|
|
No more toying with the bears, tonight we hit 10k please, no, that would be supra-supra exponential...will leave a hole in the ceiling, lol. $7050... any more 7050...7075 to the gentleman with a rain coat...any one 7080....7085 to the lady with a scarf...7099 anyone...7135 to a gentleman with tinted glasses... Feels like an auction house...could it be that the market sniffed out some news (ETF?) |
|
|
|
I think I've officially diagnosed myself as gun shy now. This sort of popping makes me uneasy rather than aroused.
BFX is now $1-200 cheaper than elsewhere.
yeah, be bullish when most are bearish, be <locally> bearish when everyone is bullish? However, is everyone bullish? Not yet. Proportion of shorts is declining (probably being simply liquidated), yet they are still way above mid April lows. https://www.tradingview.com/chart/?symbol=BITFINEX:BTCUSDSHORTSIt's nice that the pump was from Friday night to Saturday, otherwise I would had difficulty to work yesterday  |
|
|
|
Dumb cunt Leah Wald and retard Grandpa Tyler Jenks lost a Bitcoin in a bet today. Leah - "I don't like those terms but I am willing to entertain your action @filbfilb. @LucidInvestment and I are willing to bet 1 BTC that price trades below $1,500 on Bitstamp before it trades above $6,500." https://twitter.com/LeahWald/status/1102736805168902144HYPER-RECT! She is a former World bank econimist...what else did you expect. Lucidinvestment never made any sense with his hyperwave ideation. |
|
|
|
Not sure how the market share of EARTH can be calculated, as it is definitely not the stock market only. If you take ALL markets (sans derivatives), then it is about 200-240 tril. 5% of 200 tril is 10tril or about 500-600K/btc. |
|
|
|
I increased my BTC stash by... wait for it...
% fucking 50.
I would call it a win.
One More Thing: FUCK TONE VAYS SIDEWAYS
Right on ...and <> Tone vays and also the new bull murad who was spewing nonsense for half a year or more prior. Not going to listen to these two. They are in the same category of "WRONG" as Vinny L. HM and Toxic2040 here and Peter Brandt outside...good vibes. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
