Are we the "Berkshire Hathaway" stock holders of the future?

[BittBurger]

If you purchased Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1980 you would have paid $200 for a share.
This stock is now worth $192,000 per share.  Yet it took 34 years to get there.

See this:  http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BRK-A+Interactive#symbol=BRK-A;range=1d
Click "Max" for the range.

From March 1981 to Aug 1982 it didn't move a penny.  Sat at about $500 for the entire year.
From October 1984 to October 1985 it didn't move a penny.   Sat at $1300 for the entire year.

Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately - need to get some perspective.  

$200,000 is a possibility.  But 1 year with no price increase is perfectly in line with "how things play out" sometimes ...

-B-

[1714848109]

1714848109

[1714848109]

1714848109

[1714848109]

1714848109

[1714848109]

1714848109

[1714848109]

1714848109

[bitcasino]

Bitcoin will never pay dividends 

[Raxe.io]

Interesting analysis. As far as I see it Bitcoin is a solid idea, as exposure has increased so has the price this is due to belief in the actual technology. So yeah you could be right.

[BittBurger]

Im going to be so friggen old in 34 years

-B-

[counter]

I would be a good way to invest into your retirement.  Either way it is a good investment.

[Sindelar1938]

Not sure bitcoin will have that kind of long term durability

[BittBurger]

Not sure bitcoin will have that kind of long term durability

Maybe you're viewing it like a company then.   

When I think of the future of Bitcoin, I think of a million new innovations coming which may be better than it.   But I still see it being incorporated into a foundational layer of the new digital economy.  Part of the very fabric of what is coming in the future, which will have many layers.  I still believe it will be the grand daddy of them all.  I don't see any reason why it would just "poop out" completely.  Companies do that.  The internet doesn't poop out after awhile.  Why would Bitcoin.

-B-

[counter]

Yeah I tend to agree with the previous poster.  There isn't much way to tell how this will change our society.  For me and many others I suspect this is uncharted territory and people should expect the unexpected.

[Dannie]

If you purchased Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1980 you would have paid $200 for a share.
This stock is now worth $192,000 per share.  Yet it took 34 years to get there.

See this:  http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BRK-A+Interactive#symbol=BRK-A;range=1d
Click "Max" for the range.

From March 1981 to Aug 1982 it didn't move a penny.  Sat at about $500 for the entire year.
From October 1984 to October 1985 it didn't move a penny.   Sat at $1300 for the entire year.

Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately - need to get some perspective.  

$200,000 is a possibility.  But 1 year with no price increase is perfectly in line with "how things play out" sometimes ...

-B-

Very interesting.
Btw, the stock has never ever made any stock split even at that high price, so maybe we shouldn't move to a smaller unit in bitcoin as well.

[SomethingElse]

Im going to be so friggen old in 34 years

-B-

Me too.  How much do you think one of those fancy nanny/chef/sports trainer/therapists/assistant/butler robots will cost?  Hopefully less than a bitcoin.  I only have 2 right now.  

[LiteCoinGuy]

amazing chart yes. but that took 30 years, people here get afraid when bitcoin lost 20 USD in one week 

i think its an good investement but a risky one. either we lose 99% or the price will rise alot.

[jubalix]

If you purchased Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1980 you would have paid $200 for a share.
This stock is now worth $192,000 per share.  Yet it took 34 years to get there.

See this:  http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BRK-A+Interactive#symbol=BRK-A;range=1d
Click "Max" for the range.

From March 1981 to Aug 1982 it didn't move a penny.  Sat at about $500 for the entire year.
From October 1984 to October 1985 it didn't move a penny.   Sat at $1300 for the entire year.

Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately - need to get some perspective.  

$200,000 is a possibility.  But 1 year with no price increase is perfectly in line with "how things play out" sometimes ...

-B-

Berkshire Hathaway, stock in a stock market. Not currency/money istlef. BTC is and CC's are going to make BH look like a basket case.

"Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately"

can't use log graphs and don't know what a s-adoption curve is.

BH was never subject to almost universal commentary by every central bank plus, an alphabet soup of other agencies, nor had leading powers issue various dictums about it, if that gives you any idea of the magnitude of BTC.

Nothing even close to BTC has existed in history. BTC is almost a new thinking entity, its kinda close to a wetware agents/silicon data/backend, all working to/because they decrease S [entropy = inefficient systems] and so agents can accrue more E to themsleves. That's why its more or less a fait accompli

One wonders about ethierium, or nxt going the next step or something on BTC.

[crunchynut]

very possible. but you shouldn't expose our true agenda that openly. to the public bitcoin still has to be about liberty, democracy and this other nonsense we usually say.

[HappyFunnyFoo]

Owning berkshire means owning a slice of a huge conglomerate of profitable, growing businesses.  Owning bitcoin means owning an electronic numerical value that's guaranteed by the network.

Berkshire is a productive asset, bitcoin is effectively an e-commodity.  There is virtually no intrinsic value in bitcoin (it doesn't generate massive amounts of value for society).  Owning berkshire for long periods of time is investing (long-term profit and value growth), while owning bitcoin for long periods of time is speculating (believing the next sucker will buy a non-productive asset at a higher price than you).

[jubalix]

Owning berkshire means owning a slice of a huge conglomerate of profitable, growing businesses.  Owning bitcoin means owning an electronic numerical value that's guaranteed by the network.

Berkshire is a productive asset, bitcoin is effectively an e-commodity.  There is virtually no intrinsic value in bitcoin (it doesn't generate massive amounts of value for society).  Owning berkshire for long periods of time is investing (long-term profit and value growth), while owning bitcoin for long periods of time is speculating (believing the next sucker will buy a non-productive asset at a higher price than you).

Bitcoin has massive intrinsic value. Eg replaces 1/2 of the world banking infrastructure for one.

[LostDutchman]

If you purchased Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1980 you would have paid $200 for a share.
This stock is now worth $192,000 per share.  Yet it took 34 years to get there.

See this:  http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BRK-A+Interactive#symbol=BRK-A;range=1d
Click "Max" for the range.

From March 1981 to Aug 1982 it didn't move a penny.  Sat at about $500 for the entire year.
From October 1984 to October 1985 it didn't move a penny.   Sat at $1300 for the entire year.

Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately - need to get some perspective.  

$200,000 is a possibility.  But 1 year with no price increase is perfectly in line with "how things play out" sometimes ...

-B-

You make a good point and you could well be correct.

My $.02.

[rudius]

If you purchased Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1980 you would have paid $200 for a share.
This stock is now worth $192,000 per share.  Yet it took 34 years to get there.

See this:  http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BRK-A+Interactive#symbol=BRK-A;range=1d
Click "Max" for the range.

From March 1981 to Aug 1982 it didn't move a penny.  Sat at about $500 for the entire year.
From October 1984 to October 1985 it didn't move a penny.   Sat at $1300 for the entire year.

Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately - need to get some perspective.  

$200,000 is a possibility.  But 1 year with no price increase is perfectly in line with "how things play out" sometimes ...

-B-

How could you compare stocks with bitcoin?
Stocks is all about futur cash flows, whereas bitcoin is all about adoption.

[Swordsoffreedom]

Bitcoin will never pay dividends 

Same as Berkshire actually kind of neat when I think of it that way
(Cough there was 1)

[LostDutchman]

I think you guys missed his point.

Think about it again.

My $.02.

[boumalo]

amazing chart yes. but that took 30 years, people here get afraid when bitcoin lost 20 USD in one week 

i think its an good investement but a risky one. either we lose 99% or the price will rise alot.

I can see other scenarios than Bitcoin becoming massive or disapearing

Owning berkshire means owning a slice of a huge conglomerate of profitable, growing businesses.  Owning bitcoin means owning an electronic numerical value that's guaranteed by the network.

Berkshire is a productive asset, bitcoin is effectively an e-commodity.  There is virtually no intrinsic value in bitcoin (it doesn't generate massive amounts of value for society).  Owning berkshire for long periods of time is investing (long-term profit and value growth), while owning bitcoin for long periods of time is speculating (believing the next sucker will buy a non-productive asset at a higher price than you).

Bitcoin has massive intrinsic value. Eg replaces 1/2 of the world banking infrastructure for one.

Bitcoin obv has intrinsic value

I think OP made a very interesting parallel because people get anxious after a 2months decline or a 3months stability when long term means a longer time than Bitcoin's age and Bitcoin's future looks very bright

1991-1998 1000%, B.A doesn't pay any dividends, he choses his companies very well and paid a small price while leaving the good managers in place with a lot of freedom but removing the bad ones; look at his portfolio http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/12/02/why-warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-wont-pay-a.aspx