I thought about this for a moment and I think there is a lot of value to that statement. I think we are both on the same page when we say that most people speculate on profit in terms of more USD in their pockets once they have bought and sold BTC. But you have been criticizing the word profit here, and I say rightfully so!

BTC gives you benefits and options. There is a whole branch of science on the value of options. That's why your statement is so valuable because it captures what many of the people who do understand BTC a little better have in their minds. Owning BTC gives you options like no other asset can give you. BTC carries value and BTC is convertible in literally any life circumstance at any place and at any time. If I own an Amazon share, it is not the same. Gold is not the same because I can't carry it with me anywhere at any amount and it comes with more problems than that.

The moment someone sells BTC for USD profit, the same moment the person sells options and opportunities. The real life profit in the moment of the sale is the USD surplus minus all the options that BTC potentially offers to the holder. It could be the obvious further potential price gains, having to leave the country without nobody noticing you are taking value with you, it could be Wall Street burning down and share prices going down the toilet while BTC remains stable due to its security architecture, it could be protection against expropriation in some places, it could be many things and the list is long.

Nice phrase I have to say and while I act that way and think that way I have never put it into a single sentence like you did: "I doubt that the end game is necessarily profits." = "The end game of holding BTC is not necessarily USD (or any other currency) profits." Awesome! The end game is options, having options!

 

No I think that Xabi Alonso is a highly realistic person and the primary goal for Leverkusen is not to be even better than last season, but to confirm last season's performance as a first goal and to me makes most sense.

If they think about improvement, then maybe it is in the European competitions because he knows that their weakest game took place in the Europa League final. That is something which went wrong.

But in the Bundesliga it would not be realistic to aim for a season better than the last one. They aim for winning all the games, but that's the same for any team or otherwise they wouldn't be playing at all. It wouldn't be smart to raise the bar as a coach and say that the goal this season is to gather more points than last season without a defeat.

How likely is it that Leverkusen would play 2! Bundesliga seasons in a row without defeat when this was the first time that a Bundesliga team played a season without defeat ever?

I have no idea where you are from, but if a gambler should understand that small money cannot make him big money because mathematics and so on, then why the heck are there lotteries where you can buy a ticket for a few bucks? Well, the whole idea behind lotteries is that it is exactly this disproportion of your stake in comparison to the potential payout that makes it so interesting as almost everyone can afford it.

Barely anyone is getting their calculator out to see what their chances are to win the Powerball lottery in the United States.

And why does a fair game give you a 50% winning chance? The definition of a fair game is that the proposed RTP rate is objectively true. It is that you are not getting scammed. If you know that your chance of winning is 10% and it is 10%, wouldn't you call that a fair game? I think I would call that a fair game. Lotteries are fair games if there is no manipulation going on. Everybody knows that they have essentially zero chance of winning, but it is still fair if someone makes the decision to play a lottery that comes with these conditions.

---

Gambling is bad to society if you look at it as a social phenomenon from a collective perspective. On an individual basis, if someone has control over themselves and they know what they are doing, it could potentially have positive pleasuring effects for an individual. But it is probably hard to argue for a positive case on a national community level or something like that. It would be quite far-fetched I guess no matter how the smart the points are that somebody could bring up.

I think one bad tendency that was introduced due to the Internet is the anti-social aspect. You could say that partying is bad with alcohol, but if people socialize and enjoy the night then in total it may as well affect communities positively. But online gambling has probably created more lone souls than many other things in the online world.

Poker is a great example: these days people are sitting down playing it online. A long while ago it meant meeting for barbecue with friends and playing poker there. But this doesn't only apply to gambling of course. The whole Internet trend has brought about anti-social tendencies.

There is far too much black or white in your post. There are many important aspects to consider when someone decides to be a trader instead of an investor. It's as well a question of frequency and available time. Investing means you want to build a basket of assets or one asset at a time that you believe will increase in value in the long run. In trading you try to exploit swings in the market and you don't really care whether an asset goes up or down unless you are simultaneously holding the same asset you are trading because you believe in it.

I suppose there are quite successful traders out there, but if it is not for luck, then it usually means they are putting in far more time than the average market participant. When someone calls themselves a trader, I have a well defined picture in my head how the activity should be looking like and executed. Clicking buy and sell a few times a day doesn't make anyone a trader. In my opinion it is someone who has more or less nonstop ab idea where the market stands, what information is to be expected in the near term and what has been said about an asset in the nearest past, whether there are rulings or laws about to be passed that could affect the price, has a deep understanding of economics, puts in effort to understand how the price of an asset can be affected by developments in other asset or debt classes. Some of the traders believe in technical analysis, which I think is mostly esoteric.

It's not like sooner or later traders will lose. The issue is that many of the guys considering themselves traders aren't traders. I don't know what they are, but a trader earns that name through putting in the effort that trading is associated with. If someone decides to try and outcompete the market, then that is a lot of work to do and of course never comes with guarantees no matter how much effort you put into it. Though it is more likely that more effort leads to more success.

Everyone here who has tried to outcompete the market in the past or is trying it these days should be honest with themselves. I remember when BTC had its first bull runs that literally everyone thought they are genius traders because no matter what they did, it couldn't go wrong - until the first serious corrections happened. Many then felt like catching a falling knife when it went from $20k to $3k and the reality is that those with a strict DCA plan outplayed 99.9% of so called traders.

Maybe when there are these extended periods of sideward price movement, then trading might make sense for some here. But again, nobody ever knows whether the current sideward movement should be expected to be an extended period of sideward movement. You only know for sure in hindsight. Trading out of BTC believing it will drop 5% to then buy back into it can be and has been a costly mistake for many.

This choice was definitely made because of a lack of options. Otherwise Bayern Munich would have signed a big name in the business, but Kompany is a risky choice. After the season they now played, this doesn't feel like a proper response. But then again I have no idea whether there was any of the bigger names available at all. Mourinho comes to my mind, but I assume we won't fund out whether there have been talks or negotiations, but Mourinho isn't the same Mourinho anymore. That's why I think he wouldn't have been the best choice either.

The problem with Kompany is that everything will be going crazy if he doesn't win most of the games from day one. That is where I think a more experienced coach would be superior in handling these kinds of situations. Kompany will get under pressure immediately if he has some weak results and the whole club will be in distress within no time.

Leverkusen on the other hand can be fully relaxed. They still have their amazing coach and don't have to screen the transfer market or start any experiments. I call Kompany for Bayern Munich an experiment. It is not the bullet-proof choice that Bayern would have liked to have.

Contract duration for Kompany is three years, which means that Bayern is serious about him. I thought they would be more inclined to give him two years instead, but no. It would be quite a bad joke though if this whole endeavor fails and they have to sack him after four months.

Forum Rank: Hero Member
 Bech32 address: bc1q2prmvxprqvf784elttzygj9kcuytxwnejt4pq9

CoinPoker Username: ticerdime
Forum Username: tiCeR
Total Merits earned (Excluding Airdropped Merits): 252
BTC Segwit address: bc1q2prmvxprqvf784elttzygj9kcuytxwnejt4pq9

I assume his date registered doesn't quite represent the time he spent on the forum, but if it does, then looking for cheap alt-coins as he calls them is almost pathological.

@GideonGono I have a great overview for you to find lots of very cheap alt-coins that make you a lot of money and you can increase your portfolio by a few thousand coins at close to zero cost.

Just have a look here. Very cheap coins! Best indicator for a good coin? --> low price! Bitcoin sucks because high price! ^{warning: sarcasm}

Now I am asking myself whether you know that there will be a bearish season in the context of where we are now? It's like an empty statement, it is like buy low sell high. Of course by low sell high, problem is nobody knows when it will be low and when it will be high. And when it feels high, whether it is high compared to what potential is still in the air.

Same thing for your second part of the post. I am sure that for most people going up or down is a coin flip. Or maybe some of them are these hyper naive people thinking that bitcoin can only go up. Risk is still there and the fact that bitcoin is so extremely multifaceted means that on the one hand it makes bitcoin resilient, but on the other hand it might be susceptible to government attacks in the form of unfavorable legislation, for instance.

I have recently heard Trump say that he hates Biden's stance on bitcoin and Musk is one candidate he wants to get on board to counsel him on the topic. Whatever you think about Trump or Musk, it shows that there are things nobody has yet an influence on or knows what's going to happen once he would become the next president. Who knows, maybe he decides to be extremely pro bitcoin and passes laws nobody would have expected. That could boost bitcoin out of nowhere.

The one part that is true is that there is plenty of time to acquire more BTC. There are various ways of doing so, depending on what someone does for a living, for instance. Buying BTC is one way.

In my opinion it is a pretty controversial choice, but Bayern wasn't actually left with many other options. If I was Kompany, I wouldn't have hesitated and immediately taken the opportunity. It is not about him, but for Bayern I think it is a step back. He should be given a chance of course, but I remember when they decided to sign Kovac as a coach and he failed big time. You can quickly notice when Bayern doesn't have a coach who is a big name. Tuchel is a good coach, but has been lucky a couple of times in his career. They had Heynckes, Ancelotti, Guardiola, van Gaal and some other great names.

It won't be easy for Kompany because he will be asked whether he knows that he was like option number 6 or so. I am still surprised that so many coaches declined the offer. When the name Roger Schmidt from Benfica came up, I thought he could be someone who goes for it, but no. Glasner, quite a nobody and also declined. Nagelsmann declined.

Tuchel made fun of them because I think he never intended to really continue his work there. He gave them hope for a moment to then drop them.

Wirtz is the Bundesliga player of the season. This will add some value to his name and it will certainly increase the action when clubs decide to make him an offer. Bayern Munich has publicly said that they consider signing him, but now it came to light that others like Real Madrid entered the bidding competition. No prices have been publicly announced yet, but as the Bundesliga player of the year and the fact that he is so young, I am sure that Bayer Leverkusen is aiming at quite a bit more than €100 million.

He can decide whatever he wants for as long as any club is willing to pay a high enough transfer fee for him. Otherwise Leverkusen would still have some time and can patiently wait to not let him go as his contract is ending 2027.

Alonso's hope is probably that he has a word to say, too. Perhaps he could convince Wirtz to stay and be the leader again for next season when all eyes are on them after this impressive season. It's not always a wise decision to leave a club early when you are the top performer. I think he could still grow and increase his value further. With 11 goals and 11 assists I think he could top that next season.

It's an exciting player and hopefully he stays in the Bundesliga, but he might as well be in Spain already in August. 

I agree. It's naive to believe in any of the extremes, like Buffett who says bitcoin will go down to zero while others say there is only one way up towards a million USD. It might even be that the set of risks bitcoin is exposed to is more complex than the set of risks of any other asset. What makes bitcoin resilient may also go hand in hand with additional risk exposure. So I agree with you that pinning risks down in concrete terms is clearly impossible. I was just throwing out some of my thoughts, but there is no way to verify whether my thoughts carry value unless they materialize one day, which I don't hope of course.

Shitcoin exposure in hopes of being "kind of" invested into bitcoin is of course a fallacy. But not enough people understand the security model bitcoin is based on. That doesn't mean they won't be successful if they get the chance and sell in the right moment, but the most promising long term horse to bet on is still bitcoin. We have seen that with government attacks on coins that have development teams and then they got cracked down on because they were labeled a security and so on and so forth.

Sure, if someone is sufficiently well invested in bitcoin in regards to their own requirements or possibilities, then divesting is not necessarily a wrong idea. This leads me to those early days whales who held like 50k or 100k BTC, perhaps bought for cents on the dollar. If we think in percentage terms, even if you believe that the BTC price will go to 20k, would it still be rational in your opinion to not sell any all the way up to a price of 20k USD? I think someone who bought loads and loads for cents or maybe 10 dollars or 50 dollars, the percentage return got to a point that it would be very naive to not sell some.

I made the mistake that I sold a lot far too early because percentage wise it felt to be the right thing, I would even say mandatory because what in the freaking world gives you 1000% in no time? Now we are at a point where these insane rewards in no time are not realistic anymore, or they have never been realistic, but happened.

But at the same time I think bitcoin is still an amazing asset to acquire because other assets, shares and real estate can quickly get into trouble, too. Those who bought Tesla at an all time high now lost over 50% of their money. The tech titles are doing well these days, but if people got the timing wrong, they could have lose almost 70% if they bought Facebook by the end of 2021.

I think having a plan and being willing to execute it can be extremely helpful. This doesn't mean new information shouldn't be taken into account, perhaps altering the plan. But having one at all can't hurt.

But I think pretty much the only threat that could drive bitcoin to zero is when there is some technological mess or advancement that makes bitcoin redundant or useless because there is something better than it. Otherwise I understand there can be unforeseen developments, but what else could there be in the near future with a similar or stronger security architecture and predictability? A fixed mathematical schedule for emission and the security through redundancy in the nodes globally distributed and holding the data, it seems to me that there can't be much that is better overall.

The solution to the SPOF problematic is so unique that I don't see how this could be done with a higher level of security.

The biggest problem still are the fees at times for people who do it right and want to manage their own wallets instead of buying it and leaving it on an exchange or as some derivative from some corporation dealing with bitcoin (ETFs for instance). For small investors it is still a hassle, but I doubt that the fee problem will be solved to a degree in the near future where people with small budgets can reliably follow a DCA plan. Then again I doubt that there will never be a solution.

There is also lots of dilution from many of the shit coins. Bitcoin represents about half of the total crypto market cap, but their hope is to hit the so called bitcoin killer. But I get that smaller investors would like to get into the market, but then realize that their $100 DCA investment every two weeks is sometimes stuck because it costs $20 to get the money off the exchange. A simple layer is required that may not offer the same level of security, but still allows small investors to move their bitcoin. The lightning network still sounds too complicated for the vast majority to be used, it scares them away and I get the point. By now you have all these gamified apps that allow you to trade everything and since it is simple, they tend to prefer those apps and trade there.

And sometimes I think the mystic around Nakamoto can be interesting to some investors on the one hand, but scary to others on the other hand as they fear there could be some ill intentions on behalf of the founder, like it comes to light that some rogue state brought bitcoin to life and does hold the majority of the coins. It's not that I am afraid of it, but it could be an explanation for some people to stay away since they rather have a figure they can see and assess. Take Elon Musk as an example or Steve Jobs: whether you like them or not, but those who do feel more comfortable when they actually can see what someone is doing and how they are behaving.

---

After all, bitcoin is a very different investment compared to owning shares in a company that has a cashflow and a financial report. The good thing is there is no blowing up of bitcoin because someone faked financial data, like there was with some big financial corporations or any of the accounting scandals. It is all mathematical and hence the happenings within the network are clearly predictable (I mean the hard data, not things like price manipulation). In a corporation you can't tell what someone might do next, It is an aspect I like a lot about bitcoin and that is why I am confident it won't go to zero as it will still have value for various groups of people. Value preservation, highest mobility of any asset in the world and autarchy if someone does it correctly.

Ancelotti is one of the best and most successful coaches in the business. Actually, it is sad to know that he will retire soon, too. I wonder if it is in 2026 I think when his contract ends, but if it is possible then I wish he would be a coach for many years to come. Klopp is now gone and Ancelotti would be another huge name in this field. All are of a different kind, yet Ancelotti is special. And he seems to still be super ambitious. He wants that title. Maybe he retires if he wins it!  Nobody can tell for sure, but I guess he is already planning his perfect moment to say goodbye. He seems to be that kind of person.

A potentially costly mistake for Bologna, but as good as this comeback sounds at first glance, this draw could cost Juventus the Champions League qualification. Take into account that Atalanta now has an unbelievable chance to leave Bologna and Juventus behind. What the heck is going on in Serie A. Looking back like 2 or 3 months, Juventus Turin was safe and nobody doubted they would get the qualification. Now it is all on the fence for them.

It would be the biggest nightmare for Juventus if Atalanta wins that game and by the way, Atalanta has two games at home now. It could now end in a catastrophe if Bologna wins the game against Genoa and Atalanta is not giving away any points in those two games. Unbelievable that Juventus would end up in the Europa League after a season without any games on European stages. Worst times for them ever.

I am asking myself whether you are serious or not... You think that Arsenal just needs to change a few things and then they can beat Manchester City? Why didn't they do it yet? If it is so easy as you describe, what is the point in waiting until next season? I assume you realize that this is bullshit. Manchester City is far superior and that is an issue Arteta can't solve. As if he only needed to adjust a few things and then they can win the Premier League title. Utter nonsense.

Manchester City will remain the superior team in the league. They have got all the resources and the players to stay the best team in the league for many years. Arsenal once again can only hope for Manchester City to make mistakes, but they don't make mistakes when it counts. The way they got kicked out of the Champions League was more of an accident than a lack in performance. Next season the question is not whether Manchester City will deliver again, the question is whether Arsenal can again gather close to 90 points and I doubt it.

There was an interesting interview with Xabi Alonso where he answered that finishing a season without a defeat is more valuable than breaking the 91 points record from Bayern Munich. I was thinking about that and I guess I agree. Of course it is just a numbers game then, but finishing a season without a single defeat is an achievement in and of itself. It's amazing that they pulled it off and never stepped back until the very end. The fact that they won the last game again was the perfect finish and in my eyes the perfect preparation for the Europa League final and the DFB Pokal. Knowing that nobody has beaten them will only make them stronger. Amazing performance.

This has not been decided yet if I may be frankly speaking. The interesting part about the story is that nobody knows how this will play out...

But for now the situation is that they want to keep ten Hag as a coach. I assume that most people don't understand why Manchester United is hesitating and what drives them to stick to ten Hag. They got the money to sign a new coach and this is what they should do. Start the whole thing from scratch, invest money into the team and get a big name on board to finally bring ManU back to where they belong.

It is still a brilliant outcome for them. Thea know that without wining this game, they would have gotten relegated. It is amazing how they resisted all these huge expectations and once they were in trouble they fought back.

Bochum gave the chance away and now they got to fight for it.

But the results are now there and Bochum is most likely shocked about their drop to the relegation zone.

i think it is still the same setup. Guariola may lose the Champions League and everyone knows it because the most little details decide whether you win or lose, luck included. But if you take the Championship as an example, I knew that Manchester City would step up and win and win and win. That is what they did. Arsenal knew there is nothing to stop them. Pep won the title with his boys and they deserved it. In my opinion the best team in the world. They should have destroyed Real Madrid.