Why Do You Invest?

[jonsi]

OgNasty, those investments had only went down in value regarding of the BTC usd price. The poit you fail to understand is that if you invested 10 BTC when BTC was $1000 and even if BTC went down to $1, of course you are not happy because now you have 20BTC if this is how much your investment brought to you, but are you happy having 1 BTC or less (wich is the reality of BTC investments in general, not only on Havelock)? The question remains legit: why do you invest?

[1714881622]

1714881622

[1714881622]

1714881622

[1714881622]

1714881622

[1714881622]

1714881622

[IPO Magic]

@OgNasty:
I have given you a chart spanning a year's time.  BTC price has went up x10 and halved again.  If there was a price correlation, it should be observable.
And "security you are investing in is run properly"?!  You came to the wrong hood, bro.  I've just gave you a list of securities, and, apparently, none of them are "run properly"

Finally, you wanna hedge against Bitcoin?  Buy dollars.  Simple.

[OgNasty]

OgNasty, those investments had only went down in value regarding of the BTC usd price. The poit you fail to understand is that if you invested 10 BTC when BTC was $1000 and even if BTC went down to $1, offcourse you are not happy

OK, so you aren't happy regardless of what happens unless you see gains in both USD and BTC.  OK, I got it now. 

@OgNasty:
I have given you a chart spanning a year's time.  BTC price has went up x10 and halved again.  If there was a price correlation, it should be observable.
And "security you are investing in is run properly"?!  You came to the wrong hood, bro.  I've just gave you a list of securities, and, apparently, none of them are "run properly"

Finally, you wanna hedge against Bitcoin?  Buy dollars.  Simple.

You are giving me the chart of the market's trades, not the asset's value.  Some people are stupid enough to trade without understanding what they are doing with regard to the exchange rate (see this thread), so try looking at the end result instead of the market perception and maybe you'll grasp the concept?  When you break everything down per trade in USD value, you can actually see the real performance of these assets, most of which are still horrible.

What if you want to hedge against dollars and Bitcoin?

[IPO Magic]

Market price reflects investor sentiment.  If every participating "investor" is, to use your words, "stupid enough to trade without understanding what they are doing with regard to the exchange rate," then such is the market.  Complaining about it is pointless.  I can only hope that when you dole out your IRL investment advice, said advice reflects things as they are, not the way you feel that they should be.

... Market price is market price.  It's what the market is willing to pay you for what you have...

[lobbes]

...

You are giving me the chart of the market's trades, not the asset's value.  Some people are stupid enough to trade without understanding what they are doing with regard to the exchange rate (see this thread), so try looking at the end result instead of the market perception and maybe you'll grasp the concept?  When you break everything down per trade in USD value, you can actually see the real performance of these assets, most of which are still horrible.

Maybe I'm one of the stupid ones, but isn't an asset's value determined by what people would pay for it on the open market (among other things)?

What if you want to hedge against dollars and Bitcoin?

Buy gold and silver? How would buying a BTC-denominated security hedge against BTC?

[jonsi]

OgNasty, those investments had only went down in value regarding of the BTC usd price. The poit you fail to understand is that if you invested 10 BTC when BTC was $1000 and even if BTC went down to $1, offcourse you are not happy

OK, so you aren't happy regardless of what happens unless you see gains in both USD and BTC.  OK, I got it now.  
...

You know very well this is not what I'm saying. It's about the investment part, not the BTC usd price. If you are so addicted to the usd part of the investment look at it this way: if you don't invest you have one chance to gain usd from a rising BTC and one chance to loose from a falling BTC but if you had invested you have to chances of loosing usd one from the falling value of the investment and one from the falling price of usd (if BTC rise in value you would be better not to invest anyway). I really hope you understand now what I say and don't twist my words so you can be right about this.


-edit-
 Please don't take phrases out of the context, that is what reporters do to get "sensational news" for the public.
-edit-

[OgNasty]

if you don't invest you have one chance to gain usd from a rising BTC and one chance to loose from a falling BTC but if you had invested you have to chances of loosing usd one from the falling value of investment and one from the falling price of usd (if BTC rise in value you would be better not to invest anyway). I really hope you understand now what I say and don't twist my words so you can be right about this.

Given this logic, you also have 2 ways to gain.  You cannot say you have two ways to lose, and then ignore that you have 2 ways to gain.  I'm OK with using whatever logic you want, but the end result is the same.  Purchasing power is what matters when dealing with multiple currencies.  I'm simply stating that you cannot currently measure purchasing power over time in BTC.  Can we agree on that, or are you aware of some website that prices goods competitively only in BTC and does not adjust them per the exchange rate?  Spoiler alert, one doesn't exist.

It is not me who doesn't understand.  I have decades of trading experience with multiple currencies.  I would have been fired had I made an investment in Zimbabwe and then tried to justify it by saying that I was seeing huge annual gains in Zimbabwe dollars.  That is in essence what you are all doing with the line of thinking in this thread.  I really hope you understand now. 

There is a reason why all major companies that you all get excited about when they start accepting Bitcoin use USD to establish their pricing and not BTC.  The securities (I use this term very loosely) exchanges don't price in USD for legal reasons, and that tricks the weak minded into not seeing what is going on.  Hence how so many people without global trading experience come here and complain about all BTC securities.  They simply don't understand what they're doing and try to blame the market instead of themselves.

[jonsi]

if you don't invest you have one chance to gain usd from a rising BTC and one chance to loose from a falling BTC but if you had invested you have to chances of loosing usd one from the falling value of investment and one from the falling price of usd (if BTC rise in value you would be better not to invest anyway). I really hope you understand now what I say and don't twist my words so you can be right about this.

Given this logic, you also have 2 ways to gain.  You cannot say you have two ways to lose, and then ignore that you have 2 ways to gain.  I'm OK with using whatever logic you want, but the end result is the same.  Purchasing power is what matters when dealing with multiple currencies.  I'm simply stating that you cannot currently measure purchasing power over time in BTC.  Can we agree on that, or are you aware of some website that prices goods competitively only in BTC and does not adjust them per the exchange rate?  Spoiler alert, one doesn't exist.

It is not me who doesn't understand.  I have decades of trading experience with multiple currencies.  I would have been fired had I made an investment in Zimbabwe and then tried to justify it by saying that I was seeing huge annual gains in Zimbabwe dollars.  That is in essence what you are all doing with the line of thinking in this thread.  I really hope you understand now.  

There is a reason why all major companies that you all get excited about when they start accepting Bitcoin use USD to establish their pricing and not BTC.  The securities (I use this term very loosely) exchanges don't price in USD for legal reasons, and that tricks the weak minded into not seeing what is going on.  Hence how so many people without global trading experience come here and complain about all BTC securities.  They simply don't understand what they're doing and try to blame the market instead of themselves.

     You didn't had two ways of gaining. We talk here about facts that happend, not in theory. In theory of course you also have two ways of gaining if you invest in the right securiti. The point is this: until now that didn't exist (except for Asicminer). Let's both face it: investing in btc securities was a bad ideea, and we talk here about buying at the IPO and holding, because I admit there are people that made good money trading those securities.
     Please understand this is not a fight and not about who is right and who is wrong. It's just the fact that until now bitcoin securities had only brought big loses to investors.

[OgNasty]

Maybe I'm one of the stupid ones, but isn't an asset's value determined by what people would pay for it on the open market (among other things)?

No, that is called the cost.  Value is something different.  I'd suggest you read some of Warren Buffet's writings to help you understand the difference.

Buy gold and silver? How would buying a BTC-denominated security hedge against BTC?

Gold and silver have proven to be a pretty terrible hedge between USD & BTC historically.  On a line chart of the 4 over enough time you cannot even distinguish the difference between metals/USD due to the massive increase in BTC.  

If you cannot identify how a BTC-denominated security can hedge against BTC, I cannot help you or argue with you.

Please understand this is not a fight and not about who is right and who is wrong. It's just the fact that until now bitcoin securities had only brought big loses to investors.

That isn't a true statement.  You need to measure losses and gains in purchasing power when dealing in multiple currencies over time.  Any other way is wrong.  Looking at the IPO price in BTC and the last price in BTC is either trolling, or shows a blatant misunderstanding of how assets are valued.

[jonsi]

Maybe I'm one of the stupid ones, but isn't an asset's value determined by what people would pay for it on the open market (among other things)?

No, that is called the cost.  Value is something different.  I'd suggest you read some of Warren Buffet's writings to help you understand the difference.

... (the ... part have nothing to to with this, I'm not taking anything from the context)

What was the value of gold 10 years ago? was the price that people would pay for it. It wasn't the cost, it was the actual value. Same as BTC 2 years ago, same as oil 1000 years ago, it had no value because nobody was willing to pay anything for it. Maybe in the future we discover that we can make gold from iron and it's value plumets. It's it actual value that plumets, not the cost.

-edit-
  Something can have value for me but not for you. For example I may be willing to pay $1000 for something without any value for you, like my dog, if I loose him. What is the cost of the dog? The value is the real indicator of value, not the cost.
-edit-

[pummle]

This is a very informative post about Havelock listed (and delisted) securities. Could you make a similar post about the shares and funds listed on MPEx?

[IPO Magic]

...
Gold and silver have proven to be a pretty terrible hedge between USD & BTC historically
...

To steal a line from Voltaire, "Compared to what?"  If gold, USD, and BTC are all lousy bets, what's  good?  NEOBEE?

[Benny1985]

I like how dividends for certain stocks are cut off to show a narrative that no company has issued any dividends.

For example:

PETA-MINE CryptX (PETA):
Issue price:     ฿0.05000 first tranche
Issue price:     ฿0.09500 second tranche
Issue price:     ฿0.09750 third tranche
Current Price:  ฿0.0479
Highest bid:     ฿0.0443
Dividends paid: ฿0.0
Profit:             Lol.

Should instead read:

PETA-MINE CryptX (PETA):
Issue price:     ฿0.0500 first tranche
Issue price:     ฿0.0950 second tranche
Issue price:     ฿0.0975 third tranche
Current Price:  ฿0.0479
Highest bid:     ฿0.0443
Dividends paid: ฿0.0143/Share
Dividends paid since 2nd/3rd issuance: ฿0.0054

Return on 1st Issuance: ฿0.0143, or 28.7% in 6 months and 2 weeks (projected out to 51.2% annually)
Return on 2nd and 3rd issuance: ฿0.0055 , or 5.8% in 1 month (projected out to approximately 69.8% annually)

But hey, if you want to use dishonest data, I guess that's your choice. I am surprised no one has called him out on it yet. Sure, there are a lot of questionable stocks, but I would note that a lot of stocks during phases like the tech boom in '99/00, you won't find a ton of great stocks, but when you do, they can be pretty lucrative.

[OgNasty]

What was the value of gold 10 years ago? was the price that people would pay for it. It wasn't the cost, it was the actual value. Same as BTC 2 years ago, same as oil 1000 years ago, it had no value because nobody was willing to pay anything for it. Maybe in the future we discover that we can make gold from iron and it's value plumets. It's it actual value that plumets, not the cost.

-edit-
  Something can have value for me but not for you. For example I may be willing to pay $1000 for something without any value for you, like my dog, if I loose him. What is the cost of the dog? The value is the real indicator of value, not the cost.
-edit-

This statement shows that you do not work in the finance industry, and do not have any formal education on the subject.

Your dog comment is actually in contrast to the rest of your statements and shows that maybe you do understand the difference between cost and value.  For example, the cost of your dog may be $500.  You may value the dog significantly higher than that, so buying that same dog would be considered the best investment of your life, even though when you sell that dog, all you're seeing is losses from expenses and you did not see any return on your investment.  While this isn't a perfect example due to your assigning value on the dog, using some imagination and swapping the dog value with USD value, and the cost with the BTC cost of investment, you prove my argument quite well.

...
Gold and silver have proven to be a pretty terrible hedge between USD & BTC historically
...

To steal a line from Voltaire, "Compared to what?"  If gold, USD, and BTC are all lousy bets, what's  good?  NEOBEE?

That diversification thing you don't seem to comprehend.  

[NotLambchop]

I like how dividends for certain stocks are cut off to show a narrative that no company has issued any dividends.

For example:

PETA-MINE CryptX (PETA):
Issue price:     ฿0.05000 first tranche
Issue price:     ฿0.09500 second tranche
Issue price:     ฿0.09750 third tranche
Current Price:  ฿0.0479
Highest bid:     ฿0.0443
Dividends paid: ฿0.0
Profit:             Lol.

Should instead read:

PETA-MINE CryptX (PETA):
Issue price:     ฿0.0500 first tranche
Issue price:     ฿0.0950 second tranche
Issue price:     ฿0.0975 third tranche
Current Price:  ฿0.0479
Highest bid:     ฿0.0443
Dividends paid: ฿0.0143/Share
Dividends paid since 2nd/3rd issuance: ฿0.0054

Return on 1st Issuance: ฿0.0143, or 28.7% in 6 months and 2 weeks (projected out to 51.2% annually)
Return on 2nd and 3rd issuance: ฿0.0055 , or 5.8% in 1 month (projected out to approximately 69.8% annually)

But hey, if you want to use dishonest data, I guess that's your choice. I am surprised no one has called him out on it yet. Sure, there are a lot of questionable stocks, but I would note that a lot of stocks during phases like the tech boom in '99/00, you won't find a ton of great stocks, but when you do, they can be pretty lucrative.

Just corrected.  Not sure why you're getting so bothered about it.  Not like you turned a profit or anything

As far as "a lot of questionable stocks":  Technically, you're right. ALL OF THEM HAVE LOST MONEY, and "all" could be seen as "a lot," I suppose.

*If you spot any more errors, please point them out and I'll correct them. 

[jonsi]

What was the value of gold 10 years ago? was the price that people would pay for it. It wasn't the cost, it was the actual value. Same as BTC 2 years ago, same as oil 1000 years ago, it had no value because nobody was willing to pay anything for it. Maybe in the future we discover that we can make gold from iron and it's value plumets. It's it actual value that plumets, not the cost.

-edit-
  Something can have value for me but not for you. For example I may be willing to pay $1000 for something without any value for you, like my dog, if I loose him. What is the cost of the dog? The value is the real indicator of value, not the cost.
-edit-

This statement shows that you do not work in the finance industry, and do not have any formal education on the subject.

Your dog comment is actually in contrast to the rest of your statements and shows that maybe you do understand the difference between cost and value.  For example, the cost of your dog may be $500.  You may value the dog significantly higher than that, so buying that same dog would be considered the best investment of your life, even though when you sell that dog, all you're seeing is losses from expenses and you did not see any return on your investment.  While this isn't a perfect example due to your assigning value on the dog, using some imagination and swapping the dog value with USD value, and the cost with the BTC cost of investment, you prove my argument quite well.

...

Well, not everything in this life it's an investent. I don't consider an invetment by giving someone a reward for bringing me my lost dog. Not everything that has a value is an investment. A piece of gold that was extracted 300 years ago can change it's value but not it's cost. The real price of something it is given by it's value not by it's cost. A btc has the same value regardless of it beying mined 4 years ago with a laptop that cost $500 and consumed 80 W/h as the one that was mined 5 months ago with a Teraminer that cost (at that time) 15k usd and consumed 2.2 kW/h. The same Teraminer cost is constant but it's value changed. So the price is given by the value not by the cost, same as securities.

[RiverBoatBTC]

What was the value of gold 10 years ago? was the price that people would pay for it. It wasn't the cost, it was the actual value. Same as BTC 2 years ago, same as oil 1000 years ago, it had no value because nobody was willing to pay anything for it. Maybe in the future we discover that we can make gold from iron and it's value plumets. It's it actual value that plumets, not the cost.

-edit-
  Something can have value for me but not for you. For example I may be willing to pay $1000 for something without any value for you, like my dog, if I loose him. What is the cost of the dog? The value is the real indicator of value, not the cost.
-edit-

This statement shows that you do not work in the finance industry, and do not have any formal education on the subject.

Your dog comment is actually in contrast to the rest of your statements and shows that maybe you do understand the difference between cost and value.  For example, the cost of your dog may be $500.  You may value the dog significantly higher than that, so buying that same dog would be considered the best investment of your life, even though when you sell that dog, all you're seeing is losses from expenses and you did not see any return on your investment.  While this isn't a perfect example due to your assigning value on the dog, using some imagination and swapping the dog value with USD value, and the cost with the BTC cost of investment, you prove my argument quite well.

...

Well, not everything in this life it's an investent. I don't consider an invetment by giving someone a reward for bringing me my lost dog. Not everything that has a value is an investment. A piece of gold that was extracted 300 years ago can change it's value but not it's cost. The real price of something it is given by it's value not by it's cost. A btc has the same value regardless of it beying mined 4 years ago with a laptop that cost $500 and consumed 80 W/h as the one that was mined 5 months ago with a Teraminer that cost (at that time) 15k usd and consumed 2.2 kW/h. The same Teraminer cost is constant but it's value changed. So the price is given by the value not by the cost, same as securities.

Best response thus far, well put sir.

[lynn_402]

I invested in these unregulated securities solely as a more interesting way to gamble, which implies testing my skills to know which issuer is legit and competent, and it also serves to practice trading stocks with a very low barrier of entry.

I did not make profits in the few months I've done this, and luckily I broke even, but I've gained from this some valuable trading experience.

Really, cryptocurrencies-related securities are a great way to learn about trading, the value of stocks, and about how to spot scammers. The last one is a particularly important skill in life.

[OgNasty]

A piece of gold that was extracted 300 years ago can change it's value but not it's cost. The real price of something it is given by it's value not by it's cost.

This statement is wrong.  It's actually the opposite of the truth.

Cost is a result of perceived value at the time.  Therefore the cost of something will change in time along with it's perceived value.  This is accentuated by inflation over time, which is similar to a moving BTC rate.  So I guess you probably think anything purchased 300 years ago is an amazing investment because you got back so much more USD than was invested.  You can turn a blind eye to the fact that it's possible your purchasing power didn't change at all so in fact you gained nothing.

I see your issue though.  You are trying to evaluate something incorrectly based on your personal experience.  You say, I paid this amount, so that is my investment cost.  The problem you are having is that you are paying an investment cost determined by the USD/BTC exchange rate in USD and trying to pretend your investment cost is solely in BTC (so while you argue that your investment cost cannot change, you are in fact going back in time and changing your investment cost with each tick of the USD/BTC exchange rate).  For people used to staring at their brokerage account in only 1 currency and seeing the cost/return, this might make sense.  For someone with experience dealing in multiple currencies, it appears that you obviously don't understand what you're doing.

I hope that makes sense, I admittedly didn't explain it well but tried my best to do so in a way that might finally click for you.  If not, I'm sorry for your future investment losses.

EDIT:  Why not list these securities in a 3rd party value that is neither BTC or USD to give another non-bias opinion?  It seems that might be a better way to do it since people don't seem to grasp this whole multiple currencies evaluation thing.  I know why of course, it wouldn't be a good troll and the OP's intent was not to provide any useful data, but to simply bash the market he failed miserably trying to control and will ultimately imprison him.

[jonsi]

Don't be. I don't make "investments" in BTC securities. The reason for that you'll have it if you look at the way that this securities performed over time. Anyway, I don't want to argue with you no more, you are right and I'm wrong. Just please tell me, with all your experience in finance and trading: What securitie do you recomand buying right now at it's current price? Please give me a straight answer, just name it. Thx.