Cryptocurrencies

[mattee2264]

Trump is a populist. And it is far easier to pump up the bitcoin price than the stock market. And easy for the US government to find some pretext to purchase a few million bitcoin. 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

2 hours ago, Malmqky said:

 

One thing I've always wondered is will the US/some other government create a virtual currency? Why use Bitcoin - something they can't control?

 

The US is the country in the world that has the LEAST incentive to give up the current system. 

 

That being said - the writing is on the wall for the current system. The only question is what would be the alternative. IF the alternative is Bitcoin, the US would do well by being an early adopter. 

 

That being said, I do NOT expect the US to adopt BTC in any meaningful way for the $ or the debt. I expect it to be other countries with significantly less to lose who make the move first - as demonstrated by El Salvador and Central African Republic being the first two. 

[Malmqky]

14 hours ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

 

The US is the country in the world that has the LEAST incentive to give up the current system. 

 

That being said - the writing is on the wall for the current system. The only question is what would be the alternative. IF the alternative is Bitcoin, the US would do well by being an early adopter. 

 

That being said, I do NOT expect the US to adopt BTC in any meaningful way for the $ or the debt. I expect it to be other countries with significantly less to lose who make the move first - as demonstrated by El Salvador and Central African Republic being the first two. 

 

Thanks for clarifying. I could see a reality where a bunch of smaller countries adopt it ala El Salvador and it snowballs from there. Especially with the US weaponizing the USD.

 

It would be interesting to see the US/Chinese response to that. Both countries would be very against it happening, and both countries like to meddle in foreign affairs...

[wachtwoord]

On 12/17/2024 at 4:31 PM, Malmqky said:

 

Thanks for clarifying. I could see a reality where a bunch of smaller countries adopt it ala El Salvador and it snowballs from there. Especially with the US weaponizing the USD.

 

It would be interesting to see the US/Chinese response to that. Both countries would be very against it happening, and both countries like to meddle in foreign affairs...

 

Well Bukele seems to have yielded to IMF demands at least in part:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/el-salvador-scales-back-bitcoin-035746971.html

[rkbabang]

3 hours ago, wachtwoord said:

 

Well Bukele seems to have yielded to IMF demands at least in part:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/el-salvador-scales-back-bitcoin-035746971.html

 

Would be hilarious if he used the loan to buy Bitcoin.  

[TwoCitiesCapital]

Just now, rkbabang said:

 

Would be hilarious if he used the loan to buy Bitcoin.  

 

Would lol

 

I don't think Bukele is full-Saylor yet, but I believe he is still buying 1 BTC every day for the Treasury. 

 

3 hours ago, wachtwoord said:

 

Well Bukele seems to have yielded to IMF demands at least in part:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/el-salvador-scales-back-bitcoin-035746971.html

 

Most businesses weren't accepting/processing transactions in BTC anyways, and the ones that want to still can. 

 

In ~3.5 years when this loan needs to be rolled though, I expect El Salvador's BTC stack to be in excess of the notional. So the question comes do they pay the IMF back and begin life as an actual sovereign nation OR do they keep stacking sats and voluntarily comply with western world direction in expectations of longer term profits on BTC. 

[wachtwoord]

Would indeed be hilarious if he turned around and threw it as a 1.4B limit buy order at 100k

 

I indeed see nothing yet about not being allowed to buy Bitcoin anymore for the treasury. I didnt look in depth and only looked at news articles but the only public policy measures affected I saw are:

 

Quote

"Public sector involvement in Bitcoin-related activities will also be restricted. The government will no longer accept Bitcoin for tax payments, and its involvement with the state-run Chivo wallet will be phased out."

Edited December 19 by wachtwoord

[rkbabang]

8 hours ago, wachtwoord said:

Would indeed be hilarious if he turned around and threw it as a 1.4B limit buy order at 100k

 

I indeed see nothing yet about not being allowed to buy Bitcoin anymore for the treasury. I didnt look in depth and only looked at news articles but the only public policy measures affected I saw are:

 

 

 

He bought 11 today instead of 1.  Not quite a 1.4B limit order, but more than usual.

 

 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

2 hours ago, rkbabang said:

 

 

He bought 11 today instead of 1.  Not quite a 1.4B limit order, but more than usual.

 

 

 

Lol -

 

Honestly - good middle ground. Don't go whole hog. Just 11x your DCA

[Parsad]

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/hawk-tuah-girl-hailey-welch-164207108.html

 

Cheers!

[Dave86ch]

8 hours ago, rkbabang said:

 

 

He bought 11 today instead of 1.  Not quite a 1.4B limit order, but more than usual.

 

 

Bukele is going full Saylor.

[james22]

On 12/16/2024 at 6:27 PM, TwoCitiesCapital said:

The US is the country in the world that has the LEAST incentive to give up the current system. 

 

Sure, but not because the current system works so well.

 

The market should not be so moved by the Fed.

[nwoodman]

5 hours ago, Parsad said:

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/hawk-tuah-girl-hailey-welch-164207108.html

 

Cheers!

Looks like she “put in the work” as well.

Edited December 20 by nwoodman

[james22]

 

[Dave86ch]

An interesting interview with Matt Corallo (Bitcoin Core) about Bitcoin and quantum computing.

 

https://fountain.fm/episode/7jDS1DYZuyYfgaFZlLCs

 

Edited Sunday at 11:39 AM by Dave86ch

[SharperDingaan]

It's worth keeping in mind that at USD 100K, BTC has to rise to USD 150K just to make 50%; and the higher BTC goes, the harder it becomes to get these returns. Then keep in mind that most of retail holds BTC via a BTC-ETF; when the price of the BTC-ETF approximates the price of blue-chip bank stock, and that blue-chip bank stock also pays a dividend .... a lot of wind spills out of the sail. 

 

SD

 

[Kizion]

7 hours ago, SharperDingaan said:

It's worth keeping in mind that at USD 100K, BTC has to rise to USD 150K just to make 50%; and the higher BTC goes, the harder it becomes to get these returns. Then keep in mind that most of retail holds BTC via a BTC-ETF; when the price of the BTC-ETF approximates the price of blue-chip bank stock, and that blue-chip bank stock also pays a dividend .... a lot of wind spills out of the sail. 

 

SD

 

 

You give a lot of credit to the retail investor - in my opinion, too much. 

Not only do they have to be aware of the market cap of the blue-chip bank stock, they have to be smart enough to listen to the advice of the "common" people (non-BTC believers) and be contrarian to the cult that has made them 50% gain. What's a dividend compared to "the sky is the limited" gains? 

[Milu]

8 hours ago, SharperDingaan said:

It's worth keeping in mind that at USD 100K, BTC has to rise to USD 150K just to make 50%; and the higher BTC goes, the harder it becomes to get these returns. Then keep in mind that most of retail holds BTC via a BTC-ETF; when the price of the BTC-ETF approximates the price of blue-chip bank stock, and that blue-chip bank stock also pays a dividend .... a lot of wind spills out of the sail. 

 

SD

 

When BTC market cap is still roughly 10-15% of the market cap of Gold my sense is there is still a long runway of large gains ahead. Perhaps when things get to 500k per coin what you have said might make more sense but we are still early in my opinion.

[SharperDingaan]

BTC is sold to retail based on its volatility .. the more volatility, the lower the entry price, and the more units the better. For average Joe Six-Pack the affordable vehicle of choice is the ETF; for the more sophisticated Joe it is options on MSTR.

 

But when the BTC-ETF gets too expensive, Joe goes for volume and tends to switch quickly to cheaper crypto ETF's &/or shite coin, as we have seen with BTC around USD 100K. The volume effect works, so long as BTC continues to bring in the tide, and the cheaper crypto can float on that rising tide. Today's world.

 

The obvious solution once the price of a BTC-ETF starts to materially affect it, is to spin off a less volatile dividend paying BTC-ETF (competing against blue-chip stock), that also materially reduces the price of the volatile BTC-ETF. Adoption improves, and we are temporarily back to the 70%+ prices rises. Second wave, etc.

 

Thing is; that if the BTC-ETF is trading at around 5000: 1 (5000 units at $20 per 100K BTC), when BTC is at 200K, the BTC-ETF is $40, and at that price the dividend paying blue-chip is competitive. Retail money inflow into crypto both slows down and diverts into cheaper alternates, significantly reducing demand for BTC, and dragging on its price.     

 

Our point is that the game is changing; buy and hold 'forever' is unlikely to continue performing as it has.

 

SD   

 

 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 03:36 AM by SharperDingaan

[Vish_ram]

BTC ETFs will split when prices goes too high. 
there are many tricks up the sleeve of BTC proponents

1. slowly increase allocation % of portfolios 

2. keep pushing swf and others to own it

3. provide more covered call BTC securities with varying degrees of upside/downside protection.

 

we are at the end of the beginning of crypto adoption

[Vish_ram]

Another angle. Imagine if all wealth is stored in a form that is universal, portable and unhackable!

 

stocks of aapl, cost doesn’t fit the bill. The wealth creation of these goods/services producing cos will be stored in BTC. 

[james22]

3 hours ago, SharperDingaan said:

BTC is sold to retail based on its volatility .. the more volatility, the lower the entry price, and the more units the better. 

 

Retail has largely been buying based on number go up, not volatility.

 

It will be sold by Blackrock and others as a portfolio diversifier.

 

3 hours ago, SharperDingaan said:

Our point is that the game is changing; buy and hold 'forever' is unlikely to continue performing as it has.

 

Assets in advised portfolios may be rebalanced, but are otherwise held forever.

[SharperDingaan]

15 hours ago, james22 said:

 

Retail has largely been buying based on number go up, not volatility.

It will be sold by Blackrock and others as a portfolio diversifier.

Assets in advised portfolios may be rebalanced, but are otherwise held forever.

 

Quite agree with most of this; but Joe is also very much a momentum trader, and when BTC is at 94K it's cheap! and going past 106K next!! That volatility is systematically creating lower entry points, and multiple rounds of bragging as short term holds are profitably sold off at higher prices. I made 6K last week, what a hero! It's a great side hustle, all legal, and even pays better than dealing drugs !! Friends pile into the ETF 'cause if even this idiot can do it, I should be a lot better! The rising price is incidental.

 

Jill six-pack is a lot more cautious; make enough to fund the down payment on a house, then focus on protecting the gain and actually buying the house. Money temporarily moving to the dividend paying ETF and blue-chip, then later into the housing market. If Joe wants to settle down at some point, Jill six-pack ultimately prevails.  

 

Like most others we're pretty sure BTC has some ways to run, but it'll be a bumpy ride, and the more bumps the more likely Jill's view prevails. It's just not the message in today's circulating cool-aid.

 

SD

 

Edited Tuesday at 03:08 PM by SharperDingaan

[Xerxes]

I am guessing this has been debunked but a curious coincidence. 
 

 

 

[Malmqky]

2 hours ago, Xerxes said:

I am guessing this has been debunked but a curious coincidence. 
 

 

 

 

What is the coincidence? Steve Jobs died a year after Satoshi was last active? Am I missing something? Not sure why this would imply Jobs is Satoshi.

But never say never..

Edited Tuesday at 09:01 PM by Malmqky