Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bitcoin millionaire

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by xraygoggles View Post
    “Bitcoin … is a highly speculative asset, but it is a store of value that people wish to invest in as some would invest in gold,”.

    - Gary Gensler, SEC chair.

    Crypto landscape is changing at a fairly rapid pace. A 2.5 trillion dollar market cap (and growing) asset class won't just disappear overnight - it may correct 30-50% like we saw this year, sure, but it's here to stay, period.

    For those that continually espouse the Chicken Little 'sky is falling' mantra, I suggest they actually read up on the advancements taking place in the entire sphere. 'Follow the money' is a trite aphorism, but it really holds true in the blockchain sphere: Big Money (TM), Smart Money(TM), Venture Capital, et. al. are not dummies.

    BITO is just the beginning of institutional adoption of Bitcoin, and crypto in general. This may sound incredulous right now, but within 2-5 years at the very most (likely much sooner), there will be not only Bitcoin spot ETFs, but Ether ETFs, blue-chip large cap Defi index ETFs, Dogecoin ETFs, etc. which will be provided by BlackRock and other large firms with low expense ratios. If that sounds far-fetched to you, which I have a feeling it will to many on here, prepare to be amazed going forward.

    I like this article as a primer on how institutions would approach BTC/crypto:
    https://coinshares.com/research/inst...-factors-watch
    I know crypto space is hyped about this, but its bad overall for the things they love about it. It would put it under a security framework and all the regulations that come with it, many exchanges would essentially have to become banks/chartered, you wouldnt have leverage like you do, farming, etc..etc...accredited investor rules. Many people could be prosecuted for pump/dump, insider trading, etc...

    Futures and securities are regulated by entirely different regulators in the US. A futures fund getting approved confuses people thinking it makes btc spot more likely, which it doesnt necessarily given the vast difference in these things. People misunderstand because it says "bitcoin futures" it is somehow related to bitcoin or legitimizes it. Futures are its own thing, a new security, they dont have to trade in, replicate nor use the thing they are trading upon to exist. The most obvious and good analogy for btc is VIX futures. You cant trade the vix, you cant replicate it or use other instruments to synthetically approximate it easily, they are their own thing and traded as such. Also why btc/vix futures do not do a good job of tracking spot and have inherent carrying costs associated with how futures contracts works and settlement.

    While I would guess unless some death blow comes (time may be past) coins will eventually be traded as securities (which means far fewer coins and less rando and sh!tcoins ofc which is a good thing) but also centralization, etc...and all these things that would make them nothing like their current day versions and wouldnt trade like that either, ie, no more unlimited trading, t+3 settlements, etc...many people have zero understanding what theyre asking for here.

    Nothing wrong with that, but it isnt crypto anymore like you know it today, it will be an etf. It will be hard for them to exist simultaneously. Maybe thats how they kill it, by making it institutional.

    The above article misstates SEC approving futures etf as btc, they are approving futures only. And uses a bunch of anecdata for their case and narratives which are totally off base. The regulatory apparatus is the only story here, and nothing else matters. Btc doesnt have to be useful, people dont have to take it up, it simply has to conform to the rules and have its stuff together like any other proper instrument. Lots of terrible products out there with no use, doesnt matter, structured properly.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Brains428 View Post
      jacoavlu I think jfox addressed it in her previous comment. Too speculative at this point.

      There should be a distinction between btc and eth and the rest of the crypto space. There should also be a distinction between BTC and ETH. But that's all discussed in another thread. I don't think Jfox is coming out of left field when it comes to financial advice and putting crypto in the "play" space.

      In discussing crypto with a physician friend who is also in the space, he wants to utilize it on run ups to utilize margin to purchase real estate with. You can be in the dogmatic crypto camp and HODL and think that eventually we will be paying with things in satoshis/libra/dogecoin/whatever or you can have exit points to scale out when it's reached a certain fiat value. OR you can bridge the 2 and realize both spaces will likely coexist.

      For many who are really speculating in in cryptocurrency, there isn't an exit plan. But in order to have a decent debate about cryptocurrency in a portfolio, one needs to define WHICH cryptocurrency. At least on this board, it should be assumed that that is predominantly BTC or ETH based, much like when we presume a well diversified stock portfolio has a low cost Vanguard/Fidelity/Schwab TMF rather than a fee loaded fund from elsewhere.
      “too speculative” again leads to “why”

      im curious to hear jfoxcpacfp from herself

      of course it’s not coming out of left field for a financial advisor to be dismissive of bitcoin or “crypto”. but to me that’s a cop out

      for a physician it’s fine. not their job to advise people on financial matters

      re your buddy i’ve no interest in trading or exit plan or whatever. i would espouse a dca buy and hold btc strategy same as index funds and bond funds at a reasonable asset allocation

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by xraygoggles View Post
        “Bitcoin … is a highly speculative asset, but it is a store of value that people wish to invest in as some would invest in gold,”.

        - Gary Gensler, SEC chair.

        Crypto landscape is changing at a fairly rapid pace. A 2.5 trillion dollar market cap (and growing) asset class won't just disappear overnight - it may correct 30-50% like we saw this year, sure, but it's here to stay, period.

        For those that continually espouse the Chicken Little 'sky is falling' mantra, I suggest they actually read up on the advancements taking place in the entire sphere. 'Follow the money' is a trite aphorism, but it really holds true in the blockchain sphere: Big Money (TM), Smart Money(TM), Venture Capital, et. al. are not dummies.

        BITO is just the beginning of institutional adoption of Bitcoin, and crypto in general. This may sound incredulous right now, but within 2-5 years at the very most (likely much sooner), there will be not only Bitcoin spot ETFs, but Ether ETFs, blue-chip large cap Defi index ETFs, Dogecoin ETFs, etc. which will be provided by BlackRock and other large firms with low expense ratios. If that sounds far-fetched to you, which I have a feeling it will to many on here, prepare to be amazed going forward.

        I like this article as a primer on how institutions would approach BTC/crypto:
        https://coinshares.com/research/inst...-factors-watch
        you went from gensler quote re bitcoin specifically, straight into “crypto”

        if you listen to the rest of what gensler says you should be very careful outside of bitcoin

        i will bet you 1 btc that there will not be a dogecoin etf in 5 years.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Zaphod View Post

          I know crypto space is hyped about this, but its bad overall for the things they love about it. It would put it under a security framework and all the regulations that come with it, many exchanges would essentially have to become banks/chartered, you wouldnt have leverage like you do, farming, etc..etc...accredited investor rules. Many people could be prosecuted for pump/dump, insider trading, etc...

          Futures and securities are regulated by entirely different regulators in the US. A futures fund getting approved confuses people thinking it makes btc spot more likely, which it doesnt necessarily given the vast difference in these things. People misunderstand because it says "bitcoin futures" it is somehow related to bitcoin or legitimizes it. Futures are its own thing, a new security, they dont have to trade in, replicate nor use the thing they are trading upon to exist. The most obvious and good analogy for btc is VIX futures. You cant trade the vix, you cant replicate it or use other instruments to synthetically approximate it easily, they are their own thing and traded as such. Also why btc/vix futures do not do a good job of tracking spot and have inherent carrying costs associated with how futures contracts works and settlement.

          While I would guess unless some death blow comes (time may be past) coins will eventually be traded as securities (which means far fewer coins and less rando and sh!tcoins ofc which is a good thing) but also centralization, etc...and all these things that would make them nothing like their current day versions and wouldnt trade like that either, ie, no more unlimited trading, t+3 settlements, etc...many people have zero understanding what theyre asking for here.

          Nothing wrong with that, but it isnt crypto anymore like you know it today, it will be an etf. It will be hard for them to exist simultaneously. Maybe thats how they kill it, by making it institutional.

          The above article misstates SEC approving futures etf as btc, they are approving futures only. And uses a bunch of anecdata for their case and narratives which are totally off base. The regulatory apparatus is the only story here, and nothing else matters. Btc doesnt have to be useful, people dont have to take it up, it simply has to conform to the rules and have its stuff together like any other proper instrument. Lots of terrible products out there with no use, doesnt matter, structured properly.
          agree w pretty much all. bitcoin futures etf is basically just another shitcoin

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Zaphod View Post
            It makes perfect sense not to include bitcoin in standard portfolios. Bitcoins main characteristic is volatility. Its impossible to have amazing returns without this volatility, which is fed by leverage as well.

            For most normies, they are scared of barely leverage, due to lots of things but mainly the increased volatility it could bring. Most advisors would never suggest a 3x S&P fund even though its probably half or so of BTC.

            Like being a doctor even if you have a view that something is okay, if it is against the "standard of care" or current paradigm, theres just no way you recommend it. Recommending something is very very different than allowing someone to do it anyway because they want to.

            You have to take reality and industry standards into account. Suggesting bitcoin and having something happens is not really a defensible position.

            Does the person have bonds? Why not increase equities? Vol, then btc makes no sense. Why not leverage? Scary, well btc makes no sense for you. Etc..etc...

            Now someone who maybe loves 3x funds, trades options, etc...can they handle btc, ofc they can.
            it may be reasonable to exclude any particular asset from a portfolio with a reasonable explanation as to why. which necessitates some understanding of the asset.

            to simply dismiss bitcoin at this point, from the standpoint of a financial advisor particularly catering to clients with plenty of money, is irresponsible.

            a young client may reasonably be 90/10 or 80/20 with low debt and a stable job. a strong case could be made that a small allocation to bitcoin from the equities slice is very prudent at this point.

            it is a far less risky asset at $50k than it was at $5k or $500

            these decisions don’t exist in a vacuum. to not buy bitcoin is to buy something else. we are not talking about leverage. a small allocation to bitcoin has a nearly inconsequential downside. the upside is who knows.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

              it may be reasonable to exclude any particular asset from a portfolio with a reasonable explanation as to why. which necessitates some understanding of the asset.

              to simply dismiss bitcoin at this point, from the standpoint of a financial advisor particularly catering to clients with plenty of money, is irresponsible.

              a young client may reasonably be 90/10 or 80/20 with low debt and a stable job. a strong case could be made that a small allocation to bitcoin from the equities slice is very prudent at this point.

              it is a far less risky asset at $50k than it was at $5k or $500

              these decisions don’t exist in a vacuum. to not buy bitcoin is to buy something else. we are not talking about leverage. a small allocation to bitcoin has a nearly inconsequential downside. the upside is who knows.
              I don't know much about Bitcoin other then everyone around me seems to making a lot of money from it. I'm curious though, who is losing money then if everyone seems to be raking it in.

              In any case, if an advisor presents Bitcoin as an option, I'd probably move on to a different advisor. Not to say that they wouldn't make me a lot of money, but doesn't seem like prudent advising. If one sees allocating 10% as gambling money, that's just personal choice, not really good advising. This coming from someone who made some bad gamble in the couple years.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by youngDoc View Post

                I don't know much about Bitcoin other then everyone around me seems to making a lot of money from it. I'm curious though, who is losing money then if everyone seems to be raking it in.

                In any case, if an advisor presents Bitcoin as an option, I'd probably move on to a different advisor. Not to say that they wouldn't make me a lot of money, but doesn't seem like prudent advising. If one sees allocating 10% as gambling money, that's just personal choice, not really good advising. This coming from someone who made some bad gamble in the couple years.
                the only people “making money” are presumably trading. they will not “make money” for very long

                this is a different conversation. i’m talking about buy and hold. plan to sell: never

                if you don’t understand bitcoin that’s ok. you reference “gambling” which suggests you haven’t tried to understand.

                if you went to an advisor and they advised for or against, you should be able to ask why, and expect them to know more than you. that’s kinda their job.

                bitcoin is a trillion dollar asset. the chair of the SEC is talking about it. congressmen and senators are talking about it. some public companies are buying it.

                and oh by the way what is the current rate of inflation?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

                  the only people “making money” are presumably trading. they will not “make money” for very long

                  this is a different conversation. i’m talking about buy and hold. plan to sell: never

                  if you don’t understand bitcoin that’s ok. you reference “gambling” which suggests you haven’t tried to understand.

                  if you went to an advisor and they advised for or against, you should be able to ask why, and expect them to know more than you. that’s kinda their job.

                  bitcoin is a trillion dollar asset. the chair of the SEC is talking about it. congressmen and senators are talking about it. some public companies are buying it.

                  and oh by the way what is the current rate of inflation?
                  It still boggles my mind that some people don't invest in BTC. The mental gymnastics they have to go through to justify their reasoning is baffling. Out of all my investments, including VTSAX, VOO, REITs and crypto, BTC has the lowest risk, I truly believe that. When people say that BTC is riskier than VTSAX when looking at 10-20 year time frames, that blows my mind

                  There's a fixed supply, there will never be more than 21 million bitcoin and with more and more people accumulating, with corporations now buying and holding it on their balance sheets, with investment firms now buying and countries making it legal tender and therefore accumulating it and holding it in their reserves, the price will only go up long term. Short term there will be swings but long term it's a sure thing.

                  And to the people that think that EL Salvador will be the only country making it legal tender, let's just think about this. How many countries use the USD as their currency, without having their own native currency? How many countries have their own currency but it is pegged to the USD? Why would those countries continue to use the USD exclusively as their currency when lawmakers in the US continue to print money to give out stimulus checks to American citizens? People in those countries aren't getting stimulus checks. But they are getting the short end of the stick in the form of inflation and decreasing purchasing power. More countries will make it legal tender, demand will continue to increase, more and more corporations will keep it on their balance sheets and demand will continue to go up. Now what happens when demand continues to go up while supply is forever fixed?

                  Again, how are some people still not invested in this? How do they think that VTSAX is a safer investment than BTC long term? Absolutely blows my mind

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by nycEMMD View Post

                    It still boggles my mind that some people don't invest in BTC. The mental gymnastics they have to go through to justify their reasoning is baffling. Out of all my investments, including VTSAX, VOO, REITs and crypto, BTC has the lowest risk, I truly believe that. When people say that BTC is riskier than VTSAX when looking at 10-20 year time frames, that blows my mind

                    There's a fixed supply, there will never be more than 21 million bitcoin and with more and more people accumulating, with corporations now buying and holding it on their balance sheets, with investment firms now buying and countries making it legal tender and therefore accumulating it and holding it in their reserves, the price will only go up long term. Short term there will be swings but long term it's a sure thing.

                    And to the people that think that EL Salvador will be the only country making it legal tender, let's just think about this. How many countries use the USD as their currency, without having their own native currency? How many countries have their own currency but it is pegged to the USD? Why would those countries continue to use the USD exclusively as their currency when lawmakers in the US continue to print money to give out stimulus checks to American citizens? People in those countries aren't getting stimulus checks. But they are getting the short end of the stick in the form of inflation and decreasing purchasing power. More countries will make it legal tender, demand will continue to increase, more and more corporations will keep it on their balance sheets and demand will continue to go up. Now what happens when demand continues to go up while supply is forever fixed?

                    Again, how are some people still not invested in this? How do they think that VTSAX is a safer investment than BTC long term? Absolutely blows my mind
                    disagree with most all

                    define “safe”

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

                      disagree with most all

                      define “safe”
                      Safe: least likely to fail, most likely to have a positive return (accounting for inflation of course)

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by nycEMMD View Post

                        It still boggles my mind that some people don't invest in BTC. The mental gymnastics they have to go through to justify their reasoning is baffling. Out of all my investments, including VTSAX, VOO, REITs and crypto, BTC has the lowest risk, I truly believe that. When people say that BTC is riskier than VTSAX when looking at 10-20 year time frames, that blows my mind

                        There's a fixed supply, there will never be more than 21 million bitcoin and with more and more people accumulating, with corporations now buying and holding it on their balance sheets, with investment firms now buying and countries making it legal tender and therefore accumulating it and holding it in their reserves, the price will only go up long term. Short term there will be swings but long term it's a sure thing.

                        And to the people that think that EL Salvador will be the only country making it legal tender, let's just think about this. How many countries use the USD as their currency, without having their own native currency? How many countries have their own currency but it is pegged to the USD? Why would those countries continue to use the USD exclusively as their currency when lawmakers in the US continue to print money to give out stimulus checks to American citizens? People in those countries aren't getting stimulus checks. But they are getting the short end of the stick in the form of inflation and decreasing purchasing power. More countries will make it legal tender, demand will continue to increase, more and more corporations will keep it on their balance sheets and demand will continue to go up. Now what happens when demand continues to go up while supply is forever fixed?

                        Again, how are some people still not invested in this? How do they think that VTSAX is a safer investment than BTC long term? Absolutely blows my mind
                        Truthfully, it's stuff like that has made me shy away from it. It is worth as much as the number of people believing in it..
                        and the higher the number of people believing is , the higher the price of Bitcoin will be.. and the more people pump it, the higher the number believer will be.. and this sounds like a pump. Who knows, maybe everyone will eventually believe in it, all money will get pulled out of stock and dump into Bitcoin, they will go belly up, and my share in these companies will be worthless.
                        ​​​​​​

                        ​​​​

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by nycEMMD View Post

                          Safe: least likely to fail, most likely to have a positive return (accounting for inflation of course)
                          that’s two different answers lol

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

                            that’s two different answers lol
                            Both true

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by nycEMMD View Post

                              Both true
                              i asked you to define safe

                              if you are going to say bitcoin is less likely to “fail” (as in go to zero) than vtsax then i think you’re being disingenuous

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

                                i asked you to define safe

                                if you are going to say bitcoin is less likely to “fail” (as in go to zero) than vtsax then i think you’re being disingenuous
                                I truly believe that. The risk of either going to 0 is astronomically small but if we're talking minuscule odds, I really believe the chance of VTSAX going to 0 is higher than BTC going to 0 and disappearing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X