The American doomsday by Tom Lee

[bbc.reporter]

I cannot stop laughing.

I reckon a major crash on the S&P might be good for bitcoin however. It might make institutions look for alternative investments that might also rush bitcoin ETF applications to quick approval.



Wall Street Strategist Tom Lee Predicts S&P Rally in 2019

Read the article https://www.ccn.com/wall-street-strategist-tom-lee-predicts-sp-rally-in-2019/

[exstasie]

I cannot stop laughing.

I reckon a major crash on the S&P might be good for bitcoin however. It might make institutions look for alternative investments that might also rush bitcoin ETF applications to quick approval.

Wall Street Strategist Tom Lee Predicts S&P Rally in 2019

Read the article https://www.ccn.com/wall-street-strategist-tom-lee-predicts-sp-rally-in-2019/

Don't forget, this is Tom Lee's bread and butter. He made a name for himself as a Wall Street equity analyst. That's the only reason he's a talking head on CNBC today. So I give a little more pause when he makes predictions about the S&P 500. I don't think he's automatically a contrarian indicator here.

Actually, I agree with him.

[WinslowIII]

Tom Lee should go be an Uber driver, he killed his reputation with idiotic predictions. If bitcoin doesn't cross 6 figures in a couple years, Mcafee and Draper will join him as crypto analyst clowns.

[exstasie]

Tom Lee should go be an Uber driver, he killed his reputation with idiotic predictions. If bitcoin doesn't cross 6 figures in a couple years, Mcafee and Draper will join him as crypto analyst clowns.

McAfee sure, but Draper gets slack no matter what. He only ever made one prediction: $10K by 2017. He made that prediction in 2014 in the middle of the dump from $1,200 to $150. That was pretty damn impressive. Worst comes to worst, he'll be 1 for 2. Not bad in the world of random price predictions, really.

[beerlover]

Tom Lee loves these big headline news type of talks. He is known for making wrong predictions after wrong predictions and if you look at what he imagined bitcoin would be by the end of 2018 you can see how he has NO CLUE about market at all. The most recent I remember was bitcoin going to 15 thousand dollars each whereas we ended up with 3-4 thousand dollars each instead. That is about 300% off from the truth.

Yeah, american stock market did dropped a lot and not looking like its recovering as quickly as people imagined but really Tom Lee is not the guy you should be getting your information at all. I understand people share his news because its hilarious and we all love to point fingers and laugh at a clown but really all it does is to create a fame for someone who doesn't deserve a single second of it.

[deisik]

I cannot stop laughing.

I reckon a major crash on the S&P might be good for bitcoin however. It might make institutions look for alternative investments that might also rush bitcoin ETF applications to quick approval

Can you give even a single plausible reason why it might?

Truth be told, I hope you turn out to be right (if it comes to that), but if your train of thought is anywhere close to what I think it is, then there's a lot of ifs and buts in respect to your reasoning. Basically, you may think that if the American stock market continues to spiral down in ever widening circles, with the economy stagnating in recession, people will be looking for safe havens (the point with which I agree) and one such safe haven will be Bitcoin (the point which I doubt). So what are your convincing reasons as to why that might be true indeed?

[1Referee]

Tom Lee should go be an Uber driver, he killed his reputation with idiotic predictions. If bitcoin doesn't cross 6 figures in a couple years, Mcafee and Draper will join him as crypto analyst clowns.

Tim Draper puts his money where his mouth is, plus he is actively contributing to make Bitcoin become more widely known and accepted. His latest investment in OpenNode is a great example of that, where it will utilize Bitcoin's Lightning Network and compete with shitty services as BitPay. That's why I find it funny that Tone Vays wants him out before the market can finally bottom, lol. Idiot.

Tom Lee and McAfee are nothing more than fools, that I can agree with. Both have done nothing for this space other than providing nonsense analysis in case of Tom Lee, and in case of McAfee it's promoting scam ICO's that people lost a lot of money with.

The funny thing with Tom Lee is that his legacy market analysis was fairly decent up to a certain point, but it became shit the moment the stock market started correcting. 

[figmentofmyass]

Tim Draper puts his money where his mouth is, plus he is actively contributing to make Bitcoin become more widely known and accepted. His latest investment in OpenNode is a great example of that, where it will utilize Bitcoin's Lightning Network and compete with shitty services as BitPay. That's why I find it funny that Tone Vays wants him out before the market can finally bottom, lol. Idiot.

seriously? good luck with that one, tone. draper went balls deep into bitcoin right in the face of the 2014 bear market. his mindset is completely long term; he's not interested in getting rich quick (he's already rich). guys like that won't get shaken out easily, if ever.

tone is just being irrationally bearish. that's always been his way.

[WinslowIII]

Tom Lee should go be an Uber driver, he killed his reputation with idiotic predictions. If bitcoin doesn't cross 6 figures in a couple years, Mcafee and Draper will join him as crypto analyst clowns.

Tim Draper puts his money where his mouth is, plus he is actively contributing to make Bitcoin become more widely known and accepted. His latest investment in OpenNode is a great example of that, where it will utilize Bitcoin's Lightning Network and compete with shitty services as BitPay. That's why I find it funny that Tone Vays wants him out before the market can finally bottom, lol. Idiot.

Tom Lee and McAfee are nothing more than fools, that I can agree with. Both have done nothing for this space other than providing nonsense analysis in case of Tom Lee, and in case of McAfee it's promoting scam ICO's that people lost a lot of money with.

The funny thing with Tom Lee is that his legacy market analysis was fairly decent up to a certain point, but it became shit the moment the stock market started correcting.  

Draper endorsed two of the biggest ico flops of 2017, Bancor and Tezos. Anyone buying either because they trusted Draper's opinion and involvement most likely ended in terrible losses, so for that he lost a shit ton of credibility afaic. Now he says $250k by 2021, so if it doesn't happen he's in the same boat as Tom Lee and Mcafee as people not to listen to in my eyes.

[bbc.reporter]

I cannot stop laughing.

I reckon a major crash on the S&P might be good for bitcoin however. It might make institutions look for alternative investments that might also rush bitcoin ETF applications to quick approval

Can you give even a single plausible reason why it might?

Truth be told, I hope you turn out to be right (if it comes to that), but if your train of thought is anywhere close to what I think it is, then there's a lot of ifs and buts in respect to your reasoning. Basically, you may think that if the American stock market continues to spiral down in ever widening circles, with the economy stagnating in recession, people will be looking for safe havens (the point with which I agree) and one such safe haven will be Bitcoin (the point which I doubt). So what are your convincing reasons as to why that might be true indeed?

I cannot give any plausible reason except that I am using Tom Lee's prediction on the S&P as a counter indicator basing it on his failed predictions on bitcoin last year. I also started the thread as another joke on Tom Lee hehehe.

Also, giving it more thought, stock market crashes have always caused investors to hold safer investments like gold and bonds. I am not certain if this will change and make all of them invest in bitcoin, however there are big investors who understand the technology enough to be confident on its potential. Those big investors might also be the reason why the ETF is a possibility.

[Herbert2020]

but SEC has not been rejecting ETFs for nearly 2 years (maybe more) because of lack of interest to want to approve of them in case interest from "big investors" peaked! they were and still are rejecting ETFs based on same reasons such as the un-regulated state of bitcoin market, the high unrealistic volatility of it, the manipulation that exists in this market, and a lot more and none of those reasons are going to go away if S&P tanks!

[BitHodler]

they were and still are rejecting ETFs based on same reasons such as the un-regulated state of bitcoin market, the high unrealistic volatility of it, the manipulation that exists in this market, and a lot more and none of those reasons are going to go away if S&P tanks!

It's clear by now that there is no way to please the SEC other than stop coming up with new ETF proposals. They don't want it. I can't blame them, it must be frightening for them to stimulate this industry.

It wouldn't surprise me if they completely ignore coin backed ETFs and solely allow empty cash settled ETFs doing nothing but functioning as price tracker. It's the safest option in many ways and it translates into less spot demand.

In terms of Tom Lee's prediction about the S&P, it is perfectly possible that it bounces back up. His crypto predictions are rubbish, but he's not a joke when it comes to traditional markets, so don't write him off yet on that front.

[exstasie]

I cannot give any plausible reason except that I am using Tom Lee's prediction on the S&P as a counter indicator basing it on his failed predictions on bitcoin last year. I also started the thread as another joke on Tom Lee hehehe.

Also, giving it more thought, stock market crashes have always caused investors to hold safer investments like gold and bonds. I am not certain if this will change and make all of them invest in bitcoin, however there are big investors who understand the technology enough to be confident on its potential. Those big investors might also be the reason why the ETF is a possibility.

Are we talking about a stock market correction or a larger economic crash? I don't think it's possible to see a real crash in stocks (like 1929) without triggering a severe recession or depression. So it's an important question to keep in mind.

In an economic crash, all markets will generally suffer. Just look at 2008. Gold fell hard like everything else. It just didn't fall quite as hard as stocks.

[deisik]

I cannot give any plausible reason except that I am using Tom Lee's prediction on the S&P as a counter indicator basing it on his failed predictions on bitcoin last year. I also started the thread as another joke on Tom Lee hehehe.

Also, giving it more thought, stock market crashes have always caused investors to hold safer investments like gold and bonds. I am not certain if this will change and make all of them invest in bitcoin, however there are big investors who understand the technology enough to be confident on its potential. Those big investors might also be the reason why the ETF is a possibility.

Are we talking about a stock market correction or a larger economic crash? I don't think it's possible to see a real crash in stocks (like 1929) without triggering a severe recession or depression. So it's an important question to keep in mind.

In an economic crash, all markets will generally suffer. Just look at 2008. Gold fell hard like everything else. It just didn't fall quite as hard as stocks.

Gold fell hard? What did I miss exactly?

Actually, it started to grow in 2008 with an all time high in 2012. In 2009 alone it rose like 25% with another 30% in 2010. And it kept on rising as long as the Fed had been running quantitative easings. And while we are at it, this is the exact reason why things cannot repeat what happened in 1929 and soon thereafter. If we still were on the gold standard in 2008, we would likely have seen a new Great Depression or even worse, but this is not possible with fiat money not tied up by or to anything (e.g. gold)

[1Referee]

Draper endorsed two of the biggest ico flops of 2017, Bancor and Tezos. Anyone buying either because they trusted Draper's opinion and involvement most likely ended in terrible losses, so for that he lost a shit ton of credibility afaic. Now he says $250k by 2021, so if it doesn't happen he's in the same boat as Tom Lee and Mcafee as people not to listen to in my eyes.

Tim Draper is a venture capitalist, so it's safe to assume that he pumped money into way more ICO's. If people bought into these ICO's just because Tim Draper has invested in them, they have only themselves to blame for in case they lost money. I like Draper too, a lot actually, but that doesn't mean I have to follow everything he does or invests in.

It doesn't matter who you are, there is nothing in the world that you can do or say to tempt me to invest in ICO's, even when there admittedly is potential for insane profits. I prefer to stick to Bitcoin, sound money. Nothing can offer me that.

And in case Tim Draper isn't right with his $250k prediction, which I honestly don't see happen this soon, then it's still fine.

[exstasie]

Are we talking about a stock market correction or a larger economic crash? I don't think it's possible to see a real crash in stocks (like 1929) without triggering a severe recession or depression. So it's an important question to keep in mind.

In an economic crash, all markets will generally suffer. Just look at 2008. Gold fell hard like everything else. It just didn't fall quite as hard as stocks.

Gold fell hard? What did I miss exactly?

Actually, it started to grow in 2008 with an all time high in 2012.

No, its bull market began in 2001 and 2008 was a bearish/corrective year. Anyone can pull up a chart and see that, clear as day.

The discussion had nothing to do with the ATH several years after the financial crisis ended. It pertains to what happened during the financial crisis of 2008.

Between the high and low of 2008, gold fell 34% in value over a period when Bear Stearns and other huge banks collapsed and the government was engaging in bailouts.

Gold may have recovered sooner than stocks (the S&P 500 made one more lower low in early 2009) but you're ignoring the March-November downturn in the middle of the economic crisis.

[WinslowIII]

Draper endorsed two of the biggest ico flops of 2017, Bancor and Tezos. Anyone buying either because they trusted Draper's opinion and involvement most likely ended in terrible losses, so for that he lost a shit ton of credibility afaic. Now he says $250k by 2021, so if it doesn't happen he's in the same boat as Tom Lee and Mcafee as people not to listen to in my eyes.

Tim Draper is a venture capitalist, so it's safe to assume that he pumped money into way more ICO's. If people bought into these ICO's just because Tim Draper has invested in them, they have only themselves to blame for in case they lost money. I like Draper too, a lot actually, but that doesn't mean I have to follow everything he does or invests in.

It doesn't matter who you are, there is nothing in the world that you can do or say to tempt me to invest in ICO's, even when there admittedly is potential for insane profits. I prefer to stick to Bitcoin, sound money. Nothing can offer me that.

And in case Tim Draper isn't right with his $250k prediction, which I honestly don't see happen this soon, then it's still fine.

You don't understand, Draper didn't actually participate in either ico. What happened was he got involved way early before either ico was held, and then when the actual icos were being held his name was plastered all over them for his belief and involvement in them. My bet is he was given a shit ton of free coins before either ico was held in exchange for his endorsement. That's the worst case, the best case is he got coins for a small fraction of what actual ico buyers paid. In both cases, neither pumped, they both raised outrageous amounts and have just bled down - in Tezos case ico participants were lied to and didn't get any tokens for a whole fucking year after the ico was held, instead of the Fall 2017 expectation.
Do some fucking research on these, Draper comes out stinking like a fucking swindler in both situations. He took no risks, used his reputation for his great call in 2015 for a 2017 $10k price to get people to buy these shitcoins and he shouldn't be given a free pass - his reputation and credibility are damaged to anyone watching. I wouldn't listen to a GD thing he ever said again, and I'm sure I'm not alone.

[exstasie]

That's the worst case, the best case is he got coins for a small fraction of what actual ico buyers paid.

This is standard procedure. It's called a presale or a pre-ICO. Fundraisers want to maximize publicized investment numbers heading into the ICO, so they're willing to issue large blocks at a discount to private investors. I've also heard of companies scrapping ICO plans entirely because they received enough private investment from presales.

Taking tokens for endorsement is a bit murkier. You always have to wonder when you see "advisors" whether they're actually involved or are just being paid for marketing purposes. In some cases, I think advisors are intentionally misled about the nature of projects and the true intentions of the ICO creators.

Either way, what he did doesn't exactly seem out of line in this industry. I suppose nobody should be buying any ICO token just because Draper said he invested, anyway.

[1Referee]

You don't understand, Draper didn't actually participate in either ico. What happened was he got involved way early before either ico was held, and then when the actual icos were being held his name was plastered all over them for his belief and involvement in them. My bet is he was given a shit ton of free coins before either ico was held in exchange for his endorsement. That's the worst case, the best case is he got coins for a small fraction of what actual ico buyers paid. In both cases, neither pumped, they both raised outrageous amounts and have just bled down - in Tezos case ico participants were lied to and didn't get any tokens for a whole fucking year after the ico was held, instead of the Fall 2017 expectation.
Do some fucking research on these, Draper comes out stinking like a fucking swindler in both situations. He took no risks, used his reputation for his great call in 2015 for a 2017 $10k price to get people to buy these shitcoins and he shouldn't be given a free pass - his reputation and credibility are damaged to anyone watching. I wouldn't listen to a GD thing he ever said again, and I'm sure I'm not alone.

Did anyone force people to invest in these ICO's? Nope.

It's up to you to do basic level research, and to not invest in anything just because whatever well known entity owns a large chunk of it.

I value what Draper does for Bitcoin, and that's a whole lot more than what most of the so called Bitcoin maximalists have contributed to Bitcoin combined. He wants Bitcoin to do well, invests money into startups aiming to build on top of it, and that's something I value a lot. Whatever he ends up doing with shitcoins or ICO's is not my problem because that's not something I am interested in.

[WinslowIII]

That's the worst case, the best case is he got coins for a small fraction of what actual ico buyers paid.

This is standard procedure. It's called a presale or a pre-ICO. Fundraisers want to maximize publicized investment numbers heading into the ICO, so they're willing to issue large blocks at a discount to private investors. I've also heard of companies scrapping ICO plans entirely because they received enough private investment from presales.

Taking tokens for endorsement is a bit murkier. You always have to wonder when you see "advisors" whether they're actually involved or are just being paid for marketing purposes. In some cases, I think advisors are intentionally misled about the nature of projects and the true intentions of the ICO creators.

Either way, what he did doesn't exactly seem out of line in this industry. I suppose nobody should be buying any ICO token just because Draper said he invested, anyway.

There's no coincidence that these were 2 of the biggest icos in history, and both were endorsed by Draper. They were both also complete fucking failures for anyone participating in them. Rationalize it any way you want, but Draper's credibility went down the toilet afaic. He's just another shady name in the shadiest market the world has ever known.