There's something strange about your framing of the issue, adzino. The future is not known and is not knowable, especially regarding some kind of dynamic (BTC price performance) that relies on a variety of happenings and the behavior of many other humans.  The best that any of us could do is to assign some kind of a percentage probability, and sure there could be a 90% likelihood that the BTC price had been 12% or more higher ($52,864) in two years (as compared to what it was at the time of the origination of the loan (let's say $47,200)), but most likely the odds are not even going to be close to 90%, they are going to be more like 45% at best, but maybe out of the range of possibilities, 45% seems quite high.. because there might be a 24% chance that the price goes down, and 31% chance that BTC price goes sideways or UP and never sufficiently surpasses supra 12% levels for a long enough period that OP ends up cashing out in such a way to make his loan profitable.  Of course, the plan should be to be able to pay pack the loan no matter how bitcoin performs in the next two years, and surely the calculation of odds might be that the BTC price is likely to be high enough to be profitable.

Let's take the 45% chance of UP more than 12%, and I am not even sure if that is a realistic number, but if the odds can be divided up that the BTC price could get to:

$52,864 or higher = 45%

Between $53k and $80k = 9%

Between $80k and $120k = 15%

Between $120k and $300k = 9.5%

Between $300k and $600k = 6.5%

Between $600k and $1.5million = 3.5%

$1.5million or higher = 0.5%

So, even with these kinds of odds, there is potential that such employment of a loan could pay off stupendously, even though the odds for getting 12% or greater higher than today's price might only be around 45%, but those odds of getting above $52,864 might be considered amongst the most likely of all of the possible scenarios with some potential of achieving some way higher price points to the upside, but still far from guaranteed for any of this, because there are down scenarios, too.. but just based on a series of possibilities that ultimately are not known currently the scenarios end up becoming known after the next two years plays out.

Overall aspects of this idea of free trade sounds like it is in the ballpark of correct, but bitcoin seems to be more than just a pigeon-holing of "free trade."

and, I am of the opinion that there is not necessarily anything bad with some of the taxing ideas that allow for government.. because government implies some abilities to go beyond individuals in terms of some goods and resources that have community (public) aspects to them.

To me, it seems that  some matters, interactions and use of resources do not get resolved in and of themselves. .. and of course, bitcoin can bring a lot of accountability to various governmental systems, but it does not take away the idea of public goods or the fact that if some individuals were left to their own devices they would consume way more than anything even close to their fair share...   I don't claim to know the solution, even though part of consensus as well would be that no one would necessarily know the solution either except for finding some balances.. and bitcoin likely brings a lot more fairness to this process over the status quo systems in which balances are frequently found in ways that hide some of the value robbing that is taking place over the public and ends up benefiting a narrow swath of disparately influential people.


Not always exactly the same.

there is newbie variance

and sure there are some dumb-ass commonalities, too.

.. Accordingly, we (royal-ish) try to NOT be too judgmental or even to hold grudges against some of the newbie patterns that arise from time to time.   

 

Actually, you seem to be making another decent point, rhodelmabanal.  There is a certain aspect of bitcoin in which you do not need to use any kind of leverage in order to have the potential of profiting stupendously from even being involved in bitcoin. 

There are so many normies who have failed/refused to take any kind of meaningful stake in bitcoin, so even a less aggressive BTC accumulation strategy may well end up contributing a lot of UPside in the future.  Of course, more aggressive BTC accumulation strategies are likely to fair somewhat better, but there are not guarantees of course, but the nature of an asymmetric bet does involve appreciating the asymmetric nature of it allows for multiples of possible price appreciation based on whatever value does end up getting put into it.

Oh gawd....  

Have you even heard of the thingie of this thread.. king daddy?

(no I am not calling you king daddy, I am calling you capswock, the cooking tool.. yes, tool of a fool
 --  #nohomo)

Of course, many longer term bitcoiners recognize and appreciate the value in direct bitcoin ownership and the ability to claim your coins, upon request.  

For sure a lot of people want to gain exposure to bitcoin through various financial instruments, and they do not know, appreciate or understand the value of direct custody or abilities to demand custody.  Sure through the years we might well have to learn more about these kinds of direct custody values and the abilities to demand immediate custody.. and people tend to contract away those kinds of rights, and sure financialization of bitcoin is still likely to create UPwards and UPpity price pressures on the corn, but we should not be fooling ourselves into believing that a lot of those instruments create more corn than exist, and some of those third party custodians are increasing their chances of getting their asses handed to them if they don't adequately protect their lil selfies with enough actual corn in their holdings in the event that king daddy decides to go on a bit of a face-melting UPpity that could end up punishing some of those kinds of folks.. perhaps? perhaps?


Yes.  And, some peeps would love to receive more details regarding what you be up to.  I suppose you don't have any problems with that because you have nothing to hide, right?  You know that we need to keep track of some of the details in order that the information is credible and we can get a rating for our jurisdiction, and I know that you gots no problem with that either, right?  It's not a BIGGie, right?  It's zero problem, right?

Sure, go ahead and have your "ZERO" problem.. it's a free country.. last time I checked.

However, I consider the dealing with money, security of a decentralized system to be a wee bit more nuanced than from where you got your apples..

Get a grip..

The more and more people reporting their supposed "cleanliness" becomes problematic in terms of reporting requirements.. and sure, people can report whatever the fuck they want.. they don't have nothing to hide right?  they don't need to hide the fact that they are mining bitcoin, right? or how big their operations might be, right?  or what jurisdiction they might be in or not in or overlapping, right?  No problem right.  Governments and status quo industries are not hostile to bitcoin at all, right ?  We be like one BIG happy family, no?


How do you get to knowing that information.  Is it relevant?   Sure it is relevant to some peeps.  It is especially relevant to peeps who have hardly any fucking clue about what bitcoin is and what purposes in society bitcoin might serve.  It is also relevant to people who know what bitcoin is and they would prefer to have either a weaker version of bitcoin, some shitcoins or no bitcoin at all.  Is it relevant to decentralization?  whatchu thinkening?

It's not a problem.. It's zero problem, right?


O.k. zero problem seems to be a slippery slope, doesn't it?  Of course, they are not going to leave their curiosities about bitcoin out of the fungibility questions.. they would like to express some concerns about fungibility.. and did I mention privacy?  Is there such a thing as voluntary disclosure that is helpful for everyone in terms of how many bitcoins you have?


Of course it is a kind of attack that already rises to the level of greater than zero problemas.

Oh no... We should just wait.. and let the voluntary disclosures about greenie weenie happen first, no?  Voluntary disclosure doesn't hurt nobody, right?  Are your nodes green capswock (Chinese cooking instrument)?  What about dee lighting ones?  The word lightning does not sound very green to me, either.   

"carbon negative" mumbo jumbo.. what a bunch of baloney.. I was on the fence whether to send a merit for a bitcoin related link.. but jeez.. I just get negatively affected by the content sometimes..and not really sure what I should say.. it's almost like in the earlier days when we used to get excited about anything mentioning bitcoin, and it took some of us a bit of time to realize that they weren't really saying bitcoin in some of the articles.. they were talking mumbo jumbo talk.. .. such as referring to blockchain or some other gobbledy-gook  ways of dancing around the bitcoin topic.. and sure some people say that anything is good for bitcoin, so I am not completely hostile towards any which way this pig might take me... (thanks again billyjoelallen)

Fair enough.

First of all, there have been a lot of posters here posting about crypto or talking about crypto, and we are not talking about "crypto" in this thread.

Op specifically asked about bitcoin, so fuck the nonsense talk about crypto, even if some of the similar principles regarding use of credit could be applied.

Surely, it is not weird to borrow money to invest, whether we are referring to investing in bitcoin or anything else, but it would be irresponsible (and unduly) risky to borrow without some kind of decently concrete plan regarding how the money is paid back, and having some back up ways to pay back, in the event that the investment goes south.

Of course, many forum members are likely familiar with various terms that Michael Saylor created or structured with various Microstrategy loans that were 4 years or more and some of his financing went to 7 years or did not constitute a loan at all but a possible dilution of MSTR share prices.  With bitcoin as the underlying investment there can be a lot more confidence that having loans that play out for 4 years or longer will have much higher likelihoods of being able to pay back the loan with the proceeds in the investment itself (referring to bitcoin, here)..

There are surely advantages and likely more options when having enough credit or collateral to be able to structure loans for longer periods of time.

The three most sound ways to buy/accumulate bitcoin is to lump sum invest, DCA and buy on dips.  Many times normies do not have a lot of money in order to lump sum invest into bitcoin or anything else, so they will resort to a combination of DCA and buying on dips, and even buying on dips requires some holding of value in reserves in order to take advantage of price drops when (or if) they occur.

Surely, getting a loan does allow people to leverage more of the ability to lump sum invest and buy on dips, and perhaps there would be a tendency to attempt to use the money for lump sum investing or frontloading, but there might also be some utility that could come from holding some value in reserve to buy on dips, even though we can never really have a lot of confidence if a dip will occur, how far it will go or how long it will last.

As far as use of loan money to buttress a cashflow or investment, there should be some need to consider cashflow for the term of the loan and back-up payback resources, and surely the terms of the interest rate of the loan should also be considered, so if someone is able to land a loan for $24k for 2 years with an annual interest rate of 6%, the minimum monthly payments may well be over $150 per month, and at the end of the two years of monthly minimum payments, nearly $3k would have gone towards interest, and $23.3k would still be needed to pay off the balance of the loan at the end of the two year term.

There are a variety of ways to attempt to assess whether such a loan would be valuable, and surely any loan can help with managing of cashflow, and some loans might require payments to be spread out through the term of the loan rather than allowing for a lump sum payment at the end, so the same loan for $24k might require $1,064 monthly payments in order to fully service the loan by the end of the 24 month period.

Terms of the loan may well depend on your credit, and surely some loan terms are going to cause the loan to be more manageable and potentially profitable than other terms, and I don't mind the idea of using leverage so long as you sufficiently understand the payback obligations and you account for the ability to pay back the loan in its entirety without relying on upwards performance of the asset.

I do also understand and appreciate the shorter-term scenario (and loan) of only 4 months set forth by Arriemoller in his earlier post in this thread, and surely there is a bit of gambling on a short-term theory that is described, and sure the odds could be a wee bit in his favor, and if he is prepared to pay back the loan from other sources in the event that his gamble does not pay off, then he is preparing himself financially and perhaps psychologically for the risk that he is undertaking..

By the way, I am surely familiar when guys assign probability values to their expected scenarios that are quite a bit higher than reality, so in the cases in which the bet (BTC price in this case) moves against them, then they end up being damaged both financially and psychologically ... surely having the financial preparations in place can help with the psychology in the event that the market were to move opposite of expectations.

You know that there are some guys in the lightning network threads who are connecting with each other too, right? 

Maybe other threads as well, but this one:
The Lightning Network FAQ


Well getting above $55k-ish puts us into a deadman's zone that goes until about $80k.

I have been considering that the longer that we hang out in sub $55k, then the easier it might be able to pass all the way through deadman's zone but also just spending so much time sub $55k will also help to lessen a need for any kind of down before up.

Surely a variety of scenes could end up playing out, so many of us likely can appreciate not only the amount of time that we ended up spending largely in the lower $30ks and then our subsequent time getting above $43k and staying above $43k for nearly a month now.. and also no real major corrections ever since we started moving up from $29,296 about 6 weeks ago.... ...

So a lot of those price support forces are happening and likely giving some ammunition to potentially get through no man's zone of $55k to $80k once passing into it.


This thing is in the midst of having already having had taken off, so Western Union (WU) is already toast in terms of their old business model, so if they want to continue to survive as a business they are likely going to have to figure out ways to incorporate bitcoin into their operations.. not an impossible tasks - even if a wee bit less ability to suck off a lot of profits if dealing directly in bitcoin is either zero fees or close to zero fees.. at least in some areas.

Of course, there are learning curve matters, and people sometimes are creatures of habit and will sometimes remain reluctant to learn the most basic of things, so WU could take some advantage of systems already in place and reluctances to learn of some people, but maybe it there is such a difference between gouging and free.. the transition might become more violent than WU is able to transition into and figure out how to retain much if any profitable channels.. the gradual and then suddenly model with suddenly coming up soon.^tm

Probably Fillippone's thread captures some of the contemporary discussions of various MSTR BTC acquisition strategies as they were unfolding, including their public disclosures in the early days (some of those public disclosures of the BTC that were bought would involve MSTR purchases, as well as Saylor having had bought a little bit before MSTR bought.. so Saylor might have described some of his own purchases (17k BTC) as a kind of "test case" to make sure the process works.. blah blah blah...

If that Fillippone thread does not contain detailed enough information, there are probably areas in which you (or anyone else) could drill down into the thread links or the links to twitter threads that might end up giving some further details about what happened, to the extent anything might be out there regarding actual disclosures of actually what happened, rather than summaries of what they claimed to have had happened.

MicroStrategy Buys $250M in Bitcoin, Calling the Crypto ‘Superior to Cash’

I remember Saylor or someone like that going into some details that created some impressions that he was buying retail like everyone else, but maybe even Saylor's newbie aspect could have been him winging it in terms of just describing the process that coinbase goes through to make sure that the BTC price did not move.  

I never did imagine Saylor doing any of the potentially tedious number of buys himself, but I did imagine some kind of assistant of his engaging in such process, and afterwards, Saylor could review the account transactions to see thousands of transactions.. and sure it is also possible that some Coinbase bots were doing such transactions (and MSTR/Saylor paid a fee for such service), but Saylor embellished a wee bit to vaguely make it seem as if either he or one of his guys was making such transactions.  

I recall in early days, Saylor was publicly expressing a lot of exasperations of amazement in regards to how much liquidity existed in bitcoin in terms of the millions of dollars of BTC that were purchased over a short period of time and the BTC price/market absorbed those purchases without hardly even moving the BTC price.  Of course, he could have been looking at a Coinbase spreadsheet that got sent to him after the transactions were made on his behalf at Coinbase, rather than anything that either he or one of his associates had done.

I am not saying that you are wrong about these points, and it is even possible that MSTR has changed its ways somewhat, but based on some of its earliest of disclosures in late 2020 (several of them, in fact), I was under the impression that they were engaged in some kind of spot price multiple transactions in order to acquire their bitcoin.

Of course, on a personal level I remain constantly skeptical of representations that seem a bit out of the ordinary or difficult to pull off in reality, but there really is no concrete way to negate a claim that a person is making, such as Michael Saylor's disclosures of having had picked up his BTC (at least the first batch that he described) through a multi-tude of small transactions.  

Another somewhat contradictory claim that Saylor made was that before he began to make his relatively large-ass bitcoin transactions, he put his lil selfie in contact with some people behind the scenes at Coinbase, which also suggested that he might have been getting some special arrangements or the Coinbase folks were helping him out to make sure that he could acquire his initial purchases of personal and company BTC of around 37k BTC (which would been around $370 million), and I cannot imagine any behind the scenes Coinbase (or any other exchange) that would fail/refuse to give some personal attention to someone intending to use their services for that level of initial BTC purchases.

I recall that Saylor said that he could help any other BIG fishies, such as Elon or other executives who were considering converting decent quantities of their company treasuries into bitcoin allocations, to get in touch with the "right" Coinbase peeps to help facilitate such bitcoin acquisitions without moving the BTC price too much.

Of course, it is healthy to take these kinds of representations with a decently-sized grain of salt, while at the same time acknowledging what they are claiming that they did may well likely have some truth to it.


You are no way any kind of novel character when it comes to various kinds of speculating about OTC transactions taking place for many years.. for sure as long as I have been in the space, and likely longer than that because in the beginning there were hardly any exchanges available anyhow so sometimes there were just side deals with BIG holders.




For sure there are incentives to work off the books, too.. so no one is going to proclaim that bitcoin cannot or should not be used for various kinds of direct transactions, including BIG ASS ones, except perhaps folks who either do not understand bitcoin or are hostile to bitcoin.


To the extent that you might be saying that you do not know what the fuck the meaning of supply shock is, then I am with you on that point... but it sounds good, especially in terms of just throwing in some random phrase that helps any of us to appear that we know what the fuck we are talking about. hahahahaha


Maybe you need to 'splain ur lil selfie a wee bit moar better, philip? #nohomo

What you are implying is counter-intuitive.  Are you saying that the anticipation of lower fees will help status quo miners to profit more because such status disincentivizes new entrance from coming into mining?

Seems to me, in and of itself, lower fees means that miners should be less happy, less willing to mine, more likely to create BIGGER operations, less likely to have smaller operations even try to compete for what fees are available (presuming most of the payoff for mining thereby comes from the current 6.25 BTC rewards rather than fees).

Upon deeply assessing the various plusses and minuses contained within the squiggly lines of those two toxicmoxic charts including as much independent analysis that I am able to muster up within my weee wido selfie, I am having trouble concluding anything other than a fairly obvious supply shock that's in-progress of revealing itself.

I am mostly referring to "in this thread" when I start to become really hostile to any shitcoin discussion that is other than negative.

In other words, if you have nice things to say about various shitcoins, then probably better to take it to some other thread, because the conversation just seems to devolve if we get into comparison/contrasts regarding which shitcoin might happen to be less shitty.. and then what?  we are no longer focused in any other kind of way.

Another thing regular peeps say is that we can talk about race, intellectual superiority, sex/gender, religion, politics, diet (including what who ate for dinner), covid, blah blah blah.. and sure of course we can go all over the place on the various other (nonshitcoin) topics, but they are not likely to devolve into bullshit ideas that attempt to naysay on bitcoin for no reason at all beyond pumping some shitcoin or another.




There are threads about that in this forum, and no need to get into those details here..



Good for you.. I am glad so far that you are not getting into too many specifics, except for tempting the topic that trading shitcoins is valuable.. which is also a slippery slope area.. because ultimately it you try to talk about it very much at all, then people are going to be tempted into asking you about specifics, and then what?  We are in lalalala  fantasylandia talk.


There are ways to stack bitcoin too.. without getting involved in either trading or talking about shitcoins.. .. but anyhow, I have no issues or concerns about people gambling or engaging in various trading tactics to get more bitcoin .. but still seems that there are other threads on this forum in which such topics can be discussed without leading many of us here into temptations of talking about various shitcoins.. rather than attempting to NOT lose our focus on various many topics about dee badger.. or perhaps how many 2x4s or carts of tbones, hookers, lambos and blow you can buy for 0.21BTC?


You are making some senses Arriemoller.    

Go figure???


Your post is testimony that every single body has an ability to lurn MOAR better...   

Some peeps just take more time dan udder peeps.

 

Well, ultimately you are the one who has to figure out both what your accumulation strategy is going to be and how you are going to attempt to maintain a decent amount of your wealth in bitcoin, if that happens to be a goal of yours and you really do believe in bitcoin.

I am not opposed to trading, but way too many people attempt to do it way too soon and way before their BTC portfolios are ready for such.  They also engage in trading with way the hell too much of their stash, including considering the possibility that always should be sufficiently and adequately prepared for UP, and it tends to not be a good strategy to sell bitcoin with the expectation of buying more back at a lower price, and of course, there are exceptions to every rule - especially if you figure out ways to sell small amounts decently high BTC price appreciation periods (on the way up in other words, and without expecting that you are going to be able to buy back at a lower price).

Of course, I have hardly any clues of your personal particulars, Subbir, beyond what small amount of information that you provided, and surely you do not necessarily need to provide too many personal particulars in order that we might be able to attempt to both brainstorm about what your strategy might be or get some ideas about whether others might learn from your sharing of information about your BTC related strategies.

Frequently I discuss the figuring out of your personal finances including how much cashflow that you have coming in, including how much of that you might be able to dedicate towards bitcoin purchases.

Once you establish that amount, then you will be in a better place to engage in your BTC accumulation strategies, which I consider lump sum investing, dollar cost averaging and buying on dips to be the three main categories of consideration.. and selling (including trading) would not be part of such initial strategies.. until you reach a certain accumulation point and/or profits point... and for sure, some guys just have very strong inclinations to try to trade and gamble with their strategies, so of course, you have to find a balance that works for you even through I personally believe that it is problematic to be fucking around too much with trying to time ups and downs until you have already gotten to a decently good BTC accumulation level largely based on the three buying strategies that I just mentioned.

If you want to continue with these considerations or even start a new thread, Subbir, then I don't mind going into more details of my thoughts on these kinds of matters, and sure there are guys with seemingly differing views, so of course it is going to make a difference if you have $12k available to you for BTC investing or $120, and having more value gives you more options, but it also can create some dilemmas too in regards to what to do... I frequently like to discuss a hypothetical person who might have $6k available now, and another $6k that comes available over the next 6 months, which can give some kind of concrete perspectives using fairly reasonably divisible amounts, and of course, anyone reading or participating in such discussion could use such numbers to attempt to adjust up or down both in regards to what s/he could do or to come to discretionary determinations regarding what kinds of strategies better fit his/her finances and his/her psychology.

Actually, I do appreciate how a current business in mainstream circles would end up attempting to equate bitcoin with gold and silver because many people have hardly any clue about what bitcoin is, and it is probably likely that gold and silver would be better explanatory accuracies rather than suggesting bitcoin to be something like master card or visa.. even though bitcoin is seeming to get more of those master card and visa functionalities through further developments of the lightning network.

For sure, it is going to take a decent amount of time to both get bitcoin to sink into the heads of the masses of normies, and even some folks who invest into bitcoin do not really understand or appreciate some of the deeper aspects of bitcoin.. and I am not going to exclude myself from the ignorant either, even though many of us longer-term bitcoiners can appreciate that there may well be a considerable amount of knowledge differences between some of us who have been following the space for longer periods, and surely we can see that even some of the quick-study folks, such as Michael Saylor may be working through some of the learning curve aspects in a public way (and of course, I am not the first to make such an observation) - and not even saying that some of us long-termers are smarter than Saylor either, but there are varying perspectives and emphases and even disagreements about what parts of bitcoin deserve emphasis or discussion..

...and surely some of the differences of opinion, perspectives and knowledge of those who are attempting to study bitcoin in detail will lead to various attempts at improving aspects of bitcoin through its growth - and not even saying that we need to presume bitcoin to be broken in any kind of way in order to presume that bitcoin will likely grow in various ways or develop in various ways that might be beyond what is currently knowable (even though variations of the future can be hypothesized and speculated), but surely growth of bitcoin is not necessarily going to be ossified, even if there are likely going to be some aspects of bitcoin that are conceptually changeable (such as its fixed supply) that seem theoretically changeable would be nearly impossible to change in actual practice.. ..

There are other aspects of bitcoin like that too in terms of some aspects of bitcoin might be more ossified than other aspects.

Having gold/silver in your sign seems off topic at best and a dig at bitcoin if interpreted more deeply.

In other words, both gold and silver have a lot of debasement issues .. so even if less manipulated than dollars, they both still suffer from quite a bit of manipulation.. and I doubt we are in a good place to be getting into those battles in this here thread, like we have over the years, at least in respect to both gold and how much superior bitcoin is to gold, which is becoming more and more apparent.. even looking at relative price actions of bitcoin versus gold markets.. over the years and likely into the future..

Bitcoin is the soundest money that we have to the extent that soundness and honesty might be equivalent in terms of the underlying systems.. but another thing about bitcoin is that there is not really any need to attempt to moralize matters in terms of who is using bitcoin because anyone can use it, and it is also built upon a lot lesser needs to trust.. trust minimized people say...

In other words.. fuck gold and silver.. except maybe as a back up once you have established your bitcoin position.. and sure if you are already into gold/silver but not into bitcoin, then there is just a matter of figuring out how much (if not all of it) of your gold and silver positions to shave off and to allocate those amounts into bitcoin.  

For example, with gold, bitcoin is currently priced at a wee bit less than 1/10 of the market cap of gold, but any kind of fair and introspective assessment of where we are at in current times, we should fairly easily appreciate that bitcoin has at least 100x to 1,000x the value of gold, so it could take a few more cycles for bitcoin's market cap to get there, but of course, those kinds of fair assessments should highlight that gold/silver are not likely to do very well (relatively speaking) compared to bitcoin, even if each or both might be able to hold value relative to fiat.. perhaps? perhaps?

It is not bad to consider whether bitcoin might happen to be a low price when investing into it, but the first thing is to get the fuck off zero.  So it may well not matter what the BTC price is, if you have no coins, you better get some.

It is better to consider bitcoin as a longer term investment, such as 4 years or longer.. of course, the longer the better.  Of course, if your investment timeline is less than 4 years, then you likely have to be more careful with the amount of your allocation into bitcoin.

We don't really give too many shits about shitcoiners might or might not think in this here thread.


Ask Phillip how that "bitcoin $70k next week" prediction series went.


Hadn't noticed until you mentioned it.


Fair point.

+1 WO merit - courtesy of toxicmoxic


Shame on you for even thinking it.   

-1 WO merit for that poorly thought out (muddied thinking) idea-er.  - you gotta thank toxicmoxic for this one, too


That's about the only thing such shirt would be good for, except if they happened to have one of those Texas cold spell / energy outages, then it might make good fireplace fuel as a second option.

Surely not a bad piece.. even though I did not see any hamster contained within.. or even in the peripheries.

Is that your own gif, NIZZAONE?