james22

It's glorious.

Probably creates an opportunity for the more aggressive banks (reading the tea leaves) to act before others?

This.

Intrinsic value refers to the inherent worth or real value of an asset, often determined through financial models and analysis of its fundamentals, rather than its current market price. In essence, it's what an asset is worth based on its underlying characteristics and potential, rather than market sentiment or speculation. Bitcoin has unique characteristics that make it useful (more so than gold) as a store of value. Because it is both useful and scarce, it has value. It has potential because its usefulness increases with adoption (while remaining scarce).

What's the difference between a brand name and a generic? Not everything that counts can be counted.

Bitcoin is a better mousetrap.

I'll buy you two beers now.

Nothing is so simple it can be explained to the simple.

Exactly.

Wanna bet? Loser leaves the board.

Competitor? MSTR holds 538,200 bitcoins.

Is the Economist smoking crack? https://archive.ph/EquoC

About ten years ago I went on a junket to Switzerland and attended a talk with the CEO of Nestlé. Listening to him, it became very clear to me that he had little to no interest in free markets or capitalism properly understood. He saw his corporation as a “partner” with governments, NGOs, the U.N., and other massive multinationals. The profit motive was good for efficiency and rewarding talent, but beyond that, he wanted order and predictability and as much planning as he could get. https://www.nationalreview.com/2009/06/liberal-fascism-20-interview/

What's the intrinsic value of a dollar bill?

Well, he'll do fine if he doesn't own bitcoin, sure. As will all the naysayers here. But success can blind one to opportunity: he'll do much, much better than that if he does. That's what we mean when we argue bitcoin should be part of everyone's portfolio. The opportunity cost is HIGH. I'll buy him a beer in 5 years either way.

Curious, I checked the Portfolio thread. Thought it'd be funny if Reds held a Nasdaq 100/QQQ (containing MSTR) fund. Nope. Helps to understand where he's coming from.

Gotcha.

Only four?

Yeah, but that's why the Early Majority, Late Majority, and Laggards are who they are. And I'm betting Reds will be in that first category.