Sentiment doesn't care about fundamentals. Bitcoin will go up and down always, even as it trends higher and higher over the years. And this bull will eventually end, and yes, Saylor and miners who leveraged like crazy during the bull will again be left holding the bag in the bear. That said, I think this rally could see $120k-$130k.FobTies said:
I have a feeling Michael Saylor is going to go down in flames in the not too distant future. Any meaningful correction could cause him to have to sell BTC to pay his bond holders. Depending on other conditions, that could cause a BTC death spiral. Is it next year? Or five years from now? Not sure.
The strategy to sell convertible bonds to buy more bitcoin works great if BTC doesn't crash. Why would BTC crash with a finite supply and growing demand via this rinse and repeat process? That seems to be the maximalist thinking as he goes on his pump tour. Others like MARA are following suit. It's like when wall street overleveraged thinking the value of the collateral (houses) wouldn't crash. The major difference is the gov won't bail out the bitcoiners.
There needs to be a villan IF BTC ever fails. Right now I would bet it's ultimately Saylor, who points the finger at MSTR short sellers.
Bitcoin on the path to irrelevance?
111,809 Views |
1822 Replies |
Last: 3 days ago by Yukon Cornelius
Agreed, plenty of room to run there, and even higher after a pullback. It's a great asset for TA traders.
The major difference between BTC and other assets is that it is a pending threat to gov central banking world wide. The US economy and foreign policy are totally dependent on MMT and a USD global reserve currency. It's unlikely BTC ultimately becomes gov sponsored to indefinitely survive, per the BTC narrative. Unless major govs start to do what El Salvador does, the music will end some day.
So it's the maximalist rhetoric by Saylor and others that will cause real pain to the hodlers going all in. Traders will be fine. Bagholders wont.
*Perhaps we see a catalyst with a battle for Trump to buy BTC into a strategic reserve. That would force the Fed and others to switch from "BTC is a speculative asset" to "BTC is a threat to executing our dual mandate". Something like that could be the beginning of the end.
The major difference between BTC and other assets is that it is a pending threat to gov central banking world wide. The US economy and foreign policy are totally dependent on MMT and a USD global reserve currency. It's unlikely BTC ultimately becomes gov sponsored to indefinitely survive, per the BTC narrative. Unless major govs start to do what El Salvador does, the music will end some day.
So it's the maximalist rhetoric by Saylor and others that will cause real pain to the hodlers going all in. Traders will be fine. Bagholders wont.
*Perhaps we see a catalyst with a battle for Trump to buy BTC into a strategic reserve. That would force the Fed and others to switch from "BTC is a speculative asset" to "BTC is a threat to executing our dual mandate". Something like that could be the beginning of the end.
please expound on saylor's maximalist rhetoric related to central banking and USD. i've been paying attention to him pretty closely for 4 years now and i'm not sure what you're referring to there.
Oh look.. I was right way back then. Guess what? BidenKalama are buying it now. Blackrock/Grayscale ETFs available for retirement savings....Signel said:Same as cash?wbt5845 said:
Bitcoin's highest best use is still for large, illegal transactions.
Guess what they will get rid of next?
I am always amused by all the conservatives in here that don't see the value in having another asset class that that you can make money on that isn't controled by the government. You know, the one that we all complain about creating inflation at an inflating rate?
The real underlying value is the fact that it isn't managed by Biden and the Fed, or eventually whomever you dislike. So what if crack heads use it to buy their drugs.
It passed 100k today. It's not going away.
I'm not a financial advisor, but I laughed at my advisor 2 years ago when they told me they wouldn't buy bitcoin for me. Their loss.
ac04 said:
please expound on saylor's maximalist rhetoric related to central banking and USD. i've been paying attention to him pretty closely for 4 years now and i'm not sure what you're referring to there.
I never claimed his rhetoric was related to those points I made on our dependence on central banking and USD.
I've listened to Saylor a long time. He has recently gone more mainstream and moved from technical arguments, to much more layman and sensational rhetoric. Things like:
"BTC is like electricity or fire or the internet"
"The BTC use case is to be rich and stay rich forever, it's what everyone wants, it's what 3 yr olds want."
"BTC represents the digital transformation of 100s of trillions of global capital, it's worth all the money in the world."
"BTC is the protocol for prosperity, it works for a company, a country, a family etc."
"The key to getting rich is buying BTC with cash or borrowed money."
"USD is a 40 ton sculpture in our backyard, imagine if I attach a flywheel to it, then it becomes a turbine plugged into a power plant making it a nuclear reactor." (Describing MSTR bond strategy)
I've also heard Saylor talk about reverse mortgages to buy bitcoin, and taking out loans against your BTC. He is obsessive about urging people to hold and never sell. This is the type of rhetoric I was referring to.
Nothing personal. I have traded and continue to trade miners from time to time. It's only the maximalists to take things personal bc they have fallen in love with an asset that prob makes up a huge part of their hopes and dreams.
i didn't take anything personal or give any indication that i had? very odd comment there.
you followed up a paragraph of government FUD with the statement "So it's the maximalist rhetoric by Saylor and others..." so i inferred that the two were related and i was genuinely interested in what you were referring to. my apologies.
you followed up a paragraph of government FUD with the statement "So it's the maximalist rhetoric by Saylor and others..." so i inferred that the two were related and i was genuinely interested in what you were referring to. my apologies.
saylor has been buying BTC with cash and borrowed money since august 2020 and MSTR is up ~2500% since then. weathered the FTX meltdown and ensuing bear market fine, was never close to liquidation at any point because of the way the bonds work. i think he'll be ok.Quote:
"The key to getting rich is buying BTC with cash or borrowed money."
Just saw this and yes, took some off the table this morning. I'm still invested into the crypto market (and BTC) but it was nice to recoup a nice chunk of my initial investment. It is difficult to stay disciplined when the candles are long and green.
Will we get an apology for it sliding back under $100k?
That's fine for Saylor to buy BTC with borrowed funds or MSTR bonds. I just think it's careless to direct those comments to the public, which he does all the time.
When I heard him recently pitch the reverse mortgage concept to buy BTC, I couldn't believe it. Would it have worked to date as you point out? Yes, but could it potentially leave someone homeless, also Yes.
The reason BTC has value is bc of the possibility it becomes a major gov sponsored asset/currency. If there is ever a widespread realization that won't happen, it just becomes a finite NFT that can be traded/bartered. Until that realization happens, it likely goes up. IF major govs do sponsor BTC, it goes way up. IF we find the only possession the gov ever intends to take of BTC is thru confiscation from criminals, it's toast.
No disputing it has unmatched historical performance. But like buying AMZN or GOOG today, you aren't likely to get anywhere near that return buying it now. So for Saylor to go around today proclaiming "the BTC use case is getting rich and staying rich forever", that seems a bit desperate.
When I heard him recently pitch the reverse mortgage concept to buy BTC, I couldn't believe it. Would it have worked to date as you point out? Yes, but could it potentially leave someone homeless, also Yes.
The reason BTC has value is bc of the possibility it becomes a major gov sponsored asset/currency. If there is ever a widespread realization that won't happen, it just becomes a finite NFT that can be traded/bartered. Until that realization happens, it likely goes up. IF major govs do sponsor BTC, it goes way up. IF we find the only possession the gov ever intends to take of BTC is thru confiscation from criminals, it's toast.
No disputing it has unmatched historical performance. But like buying AMZN or GOOG today, you aren't likely to get anywhere near that return buying it now. So for Saylor to go around today proclaiming "the BTC use case is getting rich and staying rich forever", that seems a bit desperate.
desperate for what exactly? he has the top performing stock in the S&P, the most active options market, and the most profitable convertible bond ever offered. he's up billions and is closing in on 2% of the total supply of the best performing asset of all time.
this is not at all why BTC has value, not even close. you've completely misunderstood BTC's value proposition. i appreciate your advice up to this point but we're not speaking the same language at all.
edited to add i just realized you are BlueTaze. consider taking a break from sucking the government's dick for 10 minutes and thinking for yourself instead.
Quote:
The reason BTC has value is bc of the possibility it becomes a major gov sponsored asset/currency.
this is not at all why BTC has value, not even close. you've completely misunderstood BTC's value proposition. i appreciate your advice up to this point but we're not speaking the same language at all.
edited to add i just realized you are BlueTaze. consider taking a break from sucking the government's dick for 10 minutes and thinking for yourself instead.
I don't know what else to say. If any CEO went on CNBC and talked about buying their stock like Saylor talks about buying BTC (bold quotes above), you would see how it could be perceived to be desperate. But bc it's your asset that you deeply believe in, you don't see it.
You have to resort to attacking me instead of engaging. That's the emotional connection I referenced prior. Your response clearly shows you take personal offense to my viewpoint on BTC and Saylor. You should take a moment to reflect on that.
You have to resort to attacking me instead of engaging. That's the emotional connection I referenced prior. Your response clearly shows you take personal offense to my viewpoint on BTC and Saylor. You should take a moment to reflect on that.
i have engaged plenty. i don't think i can learn anything from you. appreciate the back and forth.
I've learned plenty from your response that people who acknowledge the gov is unlikey to cede their monetary powers to bitcoiners are gov d suckers.
BTC has a risk reward profile like any other asset. For whatever reason, you seem to think there is no risk component. If I'm wrong, please let us know what risk exists for BTC viability?
BTC has a risk reward profile like any other asset. For whatever reason, you seem to think there is no risk component. If I'm wrong, please let us know what risk exists for BTC viability?
never once have i said there is no risk in bitcoin. this is the last time i will respond to you because this is a waste of my time at this point.
anyone who holds a material position in BTC or MSTR understands there will be volatility and there is a risk that it all goes to zero. once you come to terms with that (and get over your fear of the scary government) you can start working on ways to benefit from the upside. you're not there yet and that's ok.
anyone who holds a material position in BTC or MSTR understands there will be volatility and there is a risk that it all goes to zero. once you come to terms with that (and get over your fear of the scary government) you can start working on ways to benefit from the upside. you're not there yet and that's ok.
Anyone see the story about the Hawk Tua girl launching a coin, it going crazy high, then it crashing because of literal insider "trading"/ manipulation? She's allegedly in all sorts of trouble after banking $3 MILLION, but I don't understand Bitcoin at all so I can't elaborate.
She launched a meme coin, not related to bitcoin at all other than both are cryptocurrencies.
Ya, I think he's speaking to the long term and understands that there is risk year to year. Could be wrong.FobTies said:
I've learned plenty from your response that people who acknowledge the gov is unlikey to cede their monetary powers to bitcoiners are gov d suckers.
BTC has a risk reward profile like any other asset. For whatever reason, you seem to think there is no risk component. If I'm wrong, please let us know what risk exists for BTC viability?
"It could go to zero" just randomly? That's a cop out answer.
What is that variable, or possible variables, that could cause it to go to zero? Aka the risk to BTC longterm viability.
I can understand why you would want to run away to avoid contemplating this. Based on your responses doesn't look like you are trading the sentiment. You seem to be a long term believer.
What is that variable, or possible variables, that could cause it to go to zero? Aka the risk to BTC longterm viability.
I can understand why you would want to run away to avoid contemplating this. Based on your responses doesn't look like you are trading the sentiment. You seem to be a long term believer.
It's alt coin season. There's a coin for squirrels, a coin called FART coin, and tons of other nonsense. Fun to trade if you can catch some of these moves and GTFO. But this stuff will blow up money fast. And when the next crypto bear market hits, there will be bag holders for years like every other time. Some of these stupid things have even given second chance gentlemens exits recently and their dumbass followers are back to claiming moon and throwing caution to the wind after breaking even after YEARS. It's insanity.Ag in Tiger Country said:
Anyone see the story about the Hawk Tua girl launching a coin, it going crazy high, then it crashing because of literal insider "trading"/ manipulation? She's allegedly in all sorts of trouble after banking $3 MILLION, but I don't understand Bitcoin at all so I can't elaborate.
The reason I mentioned this story is some poor dumbass sunk a million & only had $30K left once the dust settled; ridiculous!!!
People are so incredibly stupid and don't have any sort of trading thesis or plan. Even if it went to the moon, they would just keep holding. It's the sentiment I absolutely prey on.Ag in Tiger Country said:
The reason I mentioned this story is some poor dumbass sunk a million & only had $30K left once the dust settled; ridiculous!!!
FobTies said:
"It could go to zero" just randomly? That's a cop out answer.
What is that variable, or possible variables, that could cause it to go to zero? Aka the risk to BTC longterm viability.
I can understand why you would want to run away to avoid contemplating this. Based on your responses doesn't look like you are trading the sentiment. You seem to be a long term believer.
If it could "all just go to zero," that undercuts any notion of intrinsic value or fundamentals. Also, he seems rather close minded on all this. "That's all I can learn from you!!!!! And this is a waste of my time!!!!!"
"It could all go to zero" = please leave me alone, I don't want to contemplate risk, only reward.
It's a shame. With this thread title, you would expect adults to be able to discuss possible factors that could potentially make BTC irrelevant some day. Even while acknowledging its a great wealth generating asset today.
It's a shame. With this thread title, you would expect adults to be able to discuss possible factors that could potentially make BTC irrelevant some day. Even while acknowledging its a great wealth generating asset today.
i have been patiently explaining my opinion on bitcoin for years. i have posted about it hundreds of times, probably thousands. re-read this thread if you don't believe me. everything i think about this topic is extremely well documented on this website if you're interested._mpaul said:FobTies said:
"It could go to zero" just randomly? That's a cop out answer.
What is that variable, or possible variables, that could cause it to go to zero? Aka the risk to BTC longterm viability.
I can understand why you would want to run away to avoid contemplating this. Based on your responses doesn't look like you are trading the sentiment. You seem to be a long term believer.
If it could "all just go to zero," that undercuts any notion of intrinsic value or fundamentals. Also, he seems rather close minded on all this. "That's all I can learn from you!!!!! And this is a waste of my time!!!!!"
i have finally accepted there are people on this board who will never get it because they don't want to. i wish you the best but i've had enough. there is nothing about this topic you can illuminate for me, that's just the reality of it. you're just way behind the curve unfortunately. if that upsets you then i hope you feel better soon.
Jamie Diamond: muh tulip bulbs
These morons arguing against bitcoin are just people whose wives would t let them invest in 2013
These morons arguing against bitcoin are just people whose wives would t let them invest in 2013
I wish I was a messenger, and all the news was good. Eddie V.
Live it up guys. Ride the wave. Make some $$$.
The markets have been a casino since the late 70's…****coin is the cherry on top. I hope you all get rich with it. Just don't be caught holding the bag when the casino shutters and the markets normalize. Have fun.
I'm too old (and too relatively poor) to take such risks.
The markets have been a casino since the late 70's…****coin is the cherry on top. I hope you all get rich with it. Just don't be caught holding the bag when the casino shutters and the markets normalize. Have fun.
I'm too old (and too relatively poor) to take such risks.
Its Texas Aggies, dammit
Joined:
Nov 27, 2006
Posts:
1,250
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"If you don't believe it or don't get it, I don't have the time to try to convince you, sorry." Satoshi Nakamoto
Legitimate risk short term in my opinion. Long term Bitcoin will survive past Saylor.
In regards to the scenario does he have to sell btc to payable holders? Can't he just force the conversion? And if the share dilution is too high and drops below its compression value in btc wouldn't that invite new buyers?
ETA: didn't mean to do the ball gag emoji
In regards to the scenario does he have to sell btc to payable holders? Can't he just force the conversion? And if the share dilution is too high and drops below its compression value in btc wouldn't that invite new buyers?
ETA: didn't mean to do the ball gag emoji
Bitcoin probably won't survive a major telecom disruption.
Btc isn't anti dollar. Soon enough people will figure it out. I suspect some have. Btc will cement the US dollar as tbe global reserve currency for a few hundred years.
As crypto market grows it'll all be dominated in dollar.
Think back to the 80s and getting crude to be traded in dollars.
We can do that again with btc. As stable coins are backed by Is securities and cash it'll propel the US dollar firmly into the digital age.
Btc isn't a threat to the US dollar dominance. It's an escape vehicle for it from its own undoing.
As crypto market grows it'll all be dominated in dollar.
Think back to the 80s and getting crude to be traded in dollars.
We can do that again with btc. As stable coins are backed by Is securities and cash it'll propel the US dollar firmly into the digital age.
Btc isn't a threat to the US dollar dominance. It's an escape vehicle for it from its own undoing.
I said BTC is anti-central banking and MMT, not anti-dollar. I don't think anyone denies it's ultimately a threat, or replacement for, central banking. Many of the BTC promoters I have seen DO claim BTC will ultimately become the global reserve currency (Pompliano etc). That would obviously have some potential geopolitical and fed policy impacts to consider. Sorry for bringing that up.
ac04 writes a big paragraph about "having enough", seemingly frustrated that anyone would ask what factors could make BTC "go to zero". This is a thread about BTC relevance, so it would be normal to discuss what variables would seal its relevance, or undermine it.
No one knows what's gonna happen in the future with regards to bitcoins fate. We should all be able to agree on that. The next 4 years with Trump admin and cabinet picks should give us a better understanding of how relevant the risks I mentioned are going to be.
ac04 writes a big paragraph about "having enough", seemingly frustrated that anyone would ask what factors could make BTC "go to zero". This is a thread about BTC relevance, so it would be normal to discuss what variables would seal its relevance, or undermine it.
No one knows what's gonna happen in the future with regards to bitcoins fate. We should all be able to agree on that. The next 4 years with Trump admin and cabinet picks should give us a better understanding of how relevant the risks I mentioned are going to be.
This week, Powell said:
"Our role would be to make sure BTC doesnt threaten the banking system, and we would want a consumer protection aspect to protect the public."
(24.25 mark)
"Its a speculative asset, like digital gold. People are not using it as a form of payment or as a store of value, it's highly volatile, it's not a competitor for the USD, it's a competitor for gold."
(28.35 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/live/-oLfaksWj4o
I disagree. MANY people are using BTC as a store of value and it's probably the biggest selling point. So why would Powell say this?
Is he that out of touch, is he dumb, or is he telegraphing a narrative that will soon circulate in DC?
Obviously he doesn't want it anywhere near his USD printing machine, but might have showed the Feds hand on how they may engage the treasury on a BTC strategic reserve.
Saylor has gotten out ahead of this, embracing the "volatility" as a positive attribute to BTC. Things are going to get real interesting over the next 6mo to year.
"Our role would be to make sure BTC doesnt threaten the banking system, and we would want a consumer protection aspect to protect the public."
(24.25 mark)
"Its a speculative asset, like digital gold. People are not using it as a form of payment or as a store of value, it's highly volatile, it's not a competitor for the USD, it's a competitor for gold."
(28.35 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/live/-oLfaksWj4o
I disagree. MANY people are using BTC as a store of value and it's probably the biggest selling point. So why would Powell say this?
Is he that out of touch, is he dumb, or is he telegraphing a narrative that will soon circulate in DC?
Obviously he doesn't want it anywhere near his USD printing machine, but might have showed the Feds hand on how they may engage the treasury on a BTC strategic reserve.
Saylor has gotten out ahead of this, embracing the "volatility" as a positive attribute to BTC. Things are going to get real interesting over the next 6mo to year.
I have made a little coin on mainstream meme coins like Doge, Pepe and wif. That's just straight up gambling really.
TexasRebel said:
Bitcoin probably won't survive a major telecom disruption.
It has survived all major telecom disruptions, vulnerabilities, attacks, etc to date.
Verizon, China Mobile, Cox Communications could all go poof and bitcoin would live on.
https://tips.fbi.gov/
1-800-225-5324
1-800-225-5324
We haven't had any major telecom events.
All of those are minor.
All of those are minor.