Same goes for all markets. Tech, spy and bonds all entered bear markets. Crypto has tumbled, but I wouldn’t single it out. If stocks and bonds were at all time highs and crypto was down this badly, I think the point would stand.

From Jan 2020 right before the pandemic, total crypto market cap is +320%. Nasdaq is up 42% and spy is up 25%. This is despite the big underperformance since the start of the bear market for crypto. Bitcoin alone is up 180% during that time. There was a lot of euphoria during the crypto peak, but over any multi year time period over the last decade and crypto had greatly outperformed.

The investment base for equities is enormous whereas crypto is not. That and the fact crypto is up +320% as you say means it needs more investors to keep advancing. Crypto never really moved beyond the enthusiast phase and I don't think that's going to ever happen. It's far too confusing and volatile for the average person.

99% of bitcoiners don't even know what it means to be liberterian.


Most people just want to buy something that goes up in value.


Bitcoin so happens to be one of those "things" some people think goes up in value based off certain criteria.

Every investment class needs more investors to keep advancing. Crypto has been growing in price and adoption for ten years and continues to, I can understand a certain level of pessimism, but to say it hasn’t moved beyond the enthusiast phase after this level of growth I can’t understand.

How is this not obvious? When you have all your bags invested in a certain asset, you are emotionally invested. So all bad information is rationalized away.

Mccormack's history is being a cocaine and alcoholic addict that put 23 000 pounds into bitcoin which turned into 7 figures in 2016. He isn't anything more than a WallStreetBets type all in investor.

How is anything McCormack saying worth listening to?




Michael Saylor is also Bitcoin's biggest maxi and just go booted from the CEO position for being an awful investment manager of a public company.

Why does a bitcoiner need to know what it means to be a libertarian? Bitcoin is not a religion or political party. Different people with different values can buy bitcoin for a number of different reasons.

I agree with you that people just want to buy something that goes up in value. It’s the only reason people buy stocks, gold, collectibles, real estate etc. Investments are only made because they believe it will go up in value.

Bitcoin has a two fold problem which I don't believe will ever be solved.


1) It isn't a better currency for 99% of the transactions out there and bitcoin holders don't spend their bitcoins so mass adoption isn't possible.

2) It has not shown to be a better store of value against inflation vs other kinds of store of value assets.


So what is bitcoin or crypto.


It mimics being one gigantic casino where the games are not quite "solved" yet. So there are still inefficiencies the minority of crypto investors can exploit.

Source?

He stepped down from CEO position in early August at the same time he showed abysmal quarterly returns.

Microstrategy's 4 year bitcoin investment thesis has not paid off for the investors and the company is trading at around its aggregate bitcoin value.

He did not get “booted” out. He had majority voting share, it was not possible to remove him without him wanting to step down. He simply wanted to focus less on every day operations and more on bitcoin.

https://www.tradingview.com/x/GmUHjOxG/

Microstrategy has doubled since it started buying bitcoin, better performance than any index, why exactly would shareholders be upset?

Dividends allow stocks to keep advancing without more investors.

And the stocks without a dividend?

The average bitcoin price of purchase is $30 000. The price today is $20 000.

Nearly all of them produce some sort of cashflow, bitcoin doesn't.


If you argue that BTC doesn't need cashflow because its a currency, then its another argument, and Bitcoin hasn't won the currency argument either.

More than 80% of the companies in the S&P 500 pay dividends.

Half the Nasdaq 100 doesn’t pay a dividend. Are these companies worth less because they rely on more money and investors coming in similar to bitcoin and crypto? Same question for gold or rolexes and fine art. Something can be attractive and drive in more investors and rely on these new investors to drive price up and not be worthless or a scam. And if these fundamental reasons attracting new investors are sound, price likely continues going up long term.

Ethereum and other cryptos provide a yield. But simply having yield/dividend itself doesn’t drive more authenticity to me.

Those companies aren't worth less if they need more investors to advance their stock price but they can gain more investors by improving their profit or profit potential, including buying back shares with profits. The only way for crypto to gain investors is by further speculation.

The yield provided to crypto is based solely on further speculation in the instrument itself, so that's a self-referential circular argument.

MSTR is up 101% since their first BTC purchase. The S&P 500 is up 24% in that timeframe. They've outperformed the market significantly. You can say that they would've been better off selling all their assets and holding USD but the same would be true for pretty much every company the last 12 months.

I wonder if this is indeed the time when BTC does not bounce back. All the money seems already put in, the vast vast majority of course, are looking at BTC as a get rich scheme. Only a tiny minority hold BTC due to the initial belief from some that BTC would replace fiat currency.

We had celebrities being paid to talk up BTC recently (all the signs of a bubble) while those at the top must have been cashing out. So given that so much money is already in, who new is going to keep on buying into this 'greater fool theory'?

I never considered that celebrities were paid to do ads. Definitely the end.

I don't think bitcoin or ethereum will ever go to zero OR like $5 a coin.

I certainly can see them going down 90% or 95% from where we are at now ($20K bitcoin). If so, does it really matter that they didn't go to zero?

When you get right down to it, bitcoin and crypto currency is just an excellent way to speculate and gamble.

It is NOT a store of value, I've not known anybody to use it to buy things, pay bills, move money.

A couple of months ago, I talked with an ethereum miner that I know. He is shutting it down, liquidating his equipment, and calling it a day. He lost money, a pretty good percentage (50%+) of what he initially started with. He won't be back.

I also know a bitcoin miner, and he invested/worked with several other guys locally and they had much capital at stake than the ethereum miner I know. They lost money, a goodly amount. They have liquidated their rigs & infrastructure. They won't be back.

So what I am getting at is this....with this latest downturn, a lot of "players" have left the market. These guys that lost money have a bad taste in their mouth, and I don't think they will be back. These absolutely massive swings in price will drive people OUT of the market. I think that is only going to accelerate moving forward.

Also, think about this....If you have capital ($10K, $100K, $500K) just sitting around, and money markets and bank accounts are paying 5% or so, that is going to get a much larger percentage of people's capital moving forward. At 0% or 1% interest rates, why not speculate? At 5%+, it is a totally different environment.

I just don't see many good thing for bitcoin, crypto or NFT's moving forward.

Good post.

Where is all the new money going to come in from?

Hey all:

One thing I forgot to mention in my prior post is the percentage losses that crypto speculators have taken, and how that will play out in the future.

I don't know the exact amount the two miners that I know, but it is at a MINIMUM of 50%, likely more. This is especially the case when these guys factor in the electricity cost and set up/tear down costs.

If you are a speculator in a certain asset class, you know that you have the potential of a loss, maybe even a big one. However, when people have 50%+ losses, I think that might trigger something psychological. Especially with crypto and how everyone was supposed to ride it to the moon and get rich. Instead, these guys have 50% to 75% losses. That has to be a heavy burden. If you are in something speculative, and you lose say 10% or 20%, that hurts, but not so much that you will write it off. A 20% loss, while being bad, can be overcome. A 50%+ loss, and you've got to double (or more) your next investment simply to break even.

Another thing that I forgot to mention is that there are some Quick-E-Marts near me that have bitcoin ATMs in them. I have never observed anybody using them myself. I've started asking the clerks if they ever see anybody using them. Most of the clerks chuckle/laugh and they report that they have never seen anybody use them. Other clerks have reported seeing some people using them, but very rarely. Of course, that could simply be a function of being near Detroit...but I don't think so.

What do you mean by loss? Do you mean actual negative return on their original investment in their mining gear and operation costs (electricity)? Or do you mean the percentage drop in the price of their mined crypto holdings. The latter would mean they still had a positive return on their original investment. I doubt it's the former since they'd have to be very late to the mining game to show an overall negative ROI.