Sweet

you think this is an echo chamber? Why should we take you seriously when that’s your judgement of this thread and board which has been adversarial? What you posted is not, in my opinion, a demonstration of intrinsic value. I think nearly the entirety of this argument stems from differing views of what ‘intrinsic value’ is. Crypto, not necessarily Bitcoin, have some useful characteristics and some will find value in that. I’ve posted that many times now and you continually ignore it. I’ve further said that the price of Bitcoin is a function of what other people are willing to pay for it, and the valuation you posted doesn’t argue otherwise, and in fact I’d say it confirms that view.

You are making my points for me now, and you have just repeated some of what I have already posted. As mentioned, multiple times now btw, I believe the value you and other place on bitcoin is subjective. The price of bitcoin is determined by one factor - what others are willing to transact at. That's not investing in my book, it's speculation. There is nothing wrong with that but let's be honest about what it is. Ultimately investors have to make an assessment of the fair price of bitcoin. In nearly 10 years nobody has shown me measurable intrinsic value that can be objectively valued and given a price. I can only assume you haven't bothered to read my post. Since I've said several times that other people see value in bitcoin but I don't. There is not one thing self-centered about that view, but your insistence that I should accept your views are. Let's take it to the next step. . Question: What is it's fair price of bitcoin @TwoCitiesCapital and how did you arrive at that price?

Strange that you didn't address any of the points I made. I know what I consider intrinsic value, and I have my own ideas of what a store of value is. If you think it is bitcoin, fine, good luck to you. Just let me disagree without the attempted conversion.

Who buys stocks as stores of value? Seriously? I don't. I buy stocks because I want to make money. Here is what you guys don't seem to be getting. You say: "there is REAL value to have a decentralized monetary system, there is REAL value to be having a stable money supply. There is REAL value to a global payments network that is native to the Internet." I place effectively zero value on those. Read that again. I do no value those things, anymore than I value collecting stamps. The difference between intrinsic value of say a company, bond or real estate, and the subjective value you have for bitcoin, is that the former produces something. This is an investment board, why do so many seemingly not understand the concept of intrinsic value?

I don’t think you know what intrinsic value is, otherwise you wouldn’t be posting that article. The value in the article is subjective in nature, and as I JUST STATED, the useful characteristics of Bitcoin mentioned in that article is not unique to Bitcoin at all, but to blockchain. Intrinsic value in the investing world has long meant the sum of the cash flows, and Bitcoin doesn’t produce any.

I never said what I am. That’s true believer stuff you just posted. I’m sorry, but Bitcoin has no objective intrinsic value. It just doesn’t. It has subjective intrinsic value for you, and plenty of others, but not me. The benefits of Bitcoin are not even unique to Bitcoin, but to the blockchain technology. At this stage you’d have to be living under a rock to not know the basics of Bitcoin. At no point in nearly 10 years has anyone ever demonstrated it’s ‘extremely obvious’ intrinsic value because none exist. For my part I had a chance to buy Bitcoin around $100 - one I regret passing up. My regret is that it turned into this huge speculative asset class that blew up, one that I was exposed to at an early stage, and had the money and opportunity to advantage of but didn’t. However I’ve never fooled myself into believing it was anything more than a speculative bet - because it isn’t.

It can be converted to dollars, and its value has increased a lot in the past decade+, so in some ways you are right, it is a store of value. However that value has dropped 75% from its high though, and that’s a mark against it being a store value since it can lose so much. I also recently read that even most long terms holders (6 months or more) are now losing money. No idea if true. I’m happy for anyone to be believe it is a store of value and invest accordingly - I don’t care it’s your money. I personally don’t trust that it will act as store of value long term, and would never buy for that reason. I also don’t value crypto, I value assets like land, real estate or businesses. I’d speculate on it however. I’ll never understand why advocates of crypto need to evangelise the world though. I am also confused why otherwise intelligent individuals cannot understand that when an asset produces nothing, it’s value is basically subjective.

Merry Christmas . Thanks for the insights over the year.

A very good thing.

I agree, it’s not a sector you hold long term unless you get an unbelievable entry price. Even then, there is a question mark over how long the industry is required.

There has been a bullish story in oi all year but it’s been a year of up first half and down second half. Perma bulls saying throughout the year, wait until the SPR is done, when China comes back, when Russian price cap comes into force etc… oil didn’t care. The key here for investors is still US shale discipline. They can’t be growing production more than global consumption growth. If they stay disciplined oil prices will sit at a level where energy equity investors should make some money. Shale is not the marginal barrel.

A little over a week ago he said he had less than $100k. Today he just posted bail for $250 million

USSR won both their wars with Finland - it’s not a draw when the USSR gets more than it demanded before the war began.

Is 13 years is long term history? Most people in crypto have been in it for a few years only. This thread is from 2017 - 5 years. Who buys crypto as a store of value? What I see is people buying it in the hope of making it rich. I would buy it for that reason. As a store of value, it’s supposedly an argument for crypto, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen a person actually buying for that reason. Is that really why you bought it?

Has anyone seen this? At this stage she is behaving like a crook because I can’t see this as being anything other than grossly misleading. Best case scenario is she is totally delusional.

I don’t mean built in to max the use of the engine, I mean something smallish which can be attached and run while the car is idling. Not viable? There has to be a reason why it’s not been done.

Yes it’s a good idea and attractive to many including myself. I often wonder why no ICE cars are designed to double as an electric generator.

Bear in mind that this is peak prices, it’s not representative over the day. Journalists do like a bit of exaggeration… still it’s bloody expensive:

The end customer pays their energy company a flat rate which can be adjusted on a monthly basis. The price the energy companies pay is the wholesale price of energy, and they take the market rate when they need energy. Yes, some companies do offer incentives for using energy off peak demand, one particular company was offering a rebate on some bills if they avoided using electricity at the peak morning and evening times.

It’s maybe not as bad on the continent, but still bad there too. The figure above is peak demand, from 5-6pm only. Average daily price perhaps is £600ish. Still expensive. UK is somewhat fortunate that we get half our Natural Gas from the North Sea fields. Yes limited storage of natural gas as you say, however a large storage terminal was reopened this winter because it is now economical at the higher gas prices. We have an over reliance on wind power which can produce roughly half of UK electricity. It has lead to complacency. The UK is ok if it is cold and windy… but cold and calm for long periods = trouble. I think we will struggle to keep the lights on all winter. I have been preparing for blackouts since the summer. I bought a petrol to electricity generator and got an electrician to hook it up to our house’s circuit. Hope I don’t need it.

Greetings from the UK where low temperature and zero wind have combined to drive peak electricity prices to an all time high of >£2,600 Mega Watt Hour. The high prices are here… again.

Ed Morse was the only guy who got the back end of the year correct: https://www.bloomberg.com/media-manifest/videos/android/WiFi/8e875ff8-7157-4193-8835-c707adb0a8c8.m3u8?idType=BMMP

I would go with Vanguard for the expense ratio. If you managed to buy during periods when the index is down a lot you’d have a good chance of producing a return that would beat almost all active managers. Indexing is definitely my preferred approach when buying into a sector where I can’t be sure what companies will last and which won’t. Obviously if you could buy a Google or an Apple at inception, and hold that would be better, but very difficult to do.

I agree Spec, I think Europe will rumble on through. I think the biggest risk isn’t heat though, it’s electricity generation. To add to you risk of extreme cold I also say a lack of wind power.

I’ve come to a similar conclusion about buying and holding companies. My biggest mistakes, by far, were selling good companies. An obvious problem with this approach is that you largely select out technology companies. Companies that tend to stick around for the long haul tend to be those that provide something fundamental that’s hard to replace. An alternative and boring approach to this problem is to index into technology. That way you don’t ever have to pick a winner and you largely remove survivorship bias. Despite the massive drawdowns the Nasdaq has comfortably outperformed the SP-500 since inception. I think we need to be long human ingenuity in some way. And I think an argument can be made that is value investing of a kind.