I guess warren beatty was right about crypto

[eli77]

 

[eli77]

I mean warren buffet

 

[FlirtLife]

I mean warren buffet

Buffet's investment partner, Charlie Munger, actually has much stronger views about crypto than Buffet.

 

[SW15]

Warren Buffett is more into money. Warren Beatty is more into women 3-4 decades ago.

 

[eli77]

Buffet's investment partner, Charlie Munger, actually has much stronger views about crypto than Buffet.

They both hated it

 

[VirtuousD]

No he wasn't...

 

[BillyPilgrim]

Phuck Warren Buffet. He's best friends with Mr. Genocide himself, Bill Gates. Definitely part of the "Club".

Not into crypto, but anything he says should be regarded with suspicion.

 

[jaygreenb]

Crypto, for the most part yes. There are some legit ones but the vast majority are at best highly speculative tech but for the most part are cash grabs or scams. Bitcoin is completely different that the rest of crypto, also why it is the only one classified as a commodity.

 

[jaygreenb]

Coming from the world of traditional invesment, I tried very hard to understand what crypto does over a longish period of time and I am still none the wiser.

I think it’s the the dot com bubble. in the long run, the internet did revolutionise everything. in the short run there was massive froth and a massive crash and it took 10 years and multiple insolvencies to get there.


same wkth crypto. the tech is good, but it might be 10-20 years for it to manifest.

The bull run IMO was a result of lockdown and low interest rates.

Crypto or Bitcoin? To make it very simple, new tech dematerializes the industry they disrupt and makes it faster and more efficient. Example, amazon to brick and mortar, netflix to video stores, google to libraries or any where that stored information, uber to taxis etc Now this is happening to finance. If I had to make a comparison to the previous wave, Bitcoin is like the protocol of the internet and everything else are software/tech companies that constantly evolves and changes.

There are several reasons why we may have not had our dot com bust moment yet. Of course we may have as well but remains to be seen. Market size and participants. Numbers may be off, but the dot com bubble was I believe around 9 trillion and was primarily in just the United states. At that time too, there was a much larger barrier to entry. Primarily the only people who participated in stocks were upper middle class and up, much different than today. Crypto is a global market and anyone with an internet connection can participate fairly easy. Crypto also topped out at around 3trillion, which in 2001 values is much less. There also was not a meaningful amount of intuitional involvement because of the lack of regulation clarity. It has a significantly higher potential market cap just by the higher numbers of potential participants and value of fiat.

Pretty much every market was greatly impacted by the actions that were taken the past few years. Bitcoin was created for this reason and the world central banks all just announced are going to provide liquidity. In my opinion, any short term price action is just noise.

 

[Solomon]

But Warren Buffet is exposed as a hypocrite, do as I say not as I do

 

[FlirtLife]

But Warren Buffet is exposed as a hypocrite, do as I say not as I do

You're claiming a new marketing ploy [1] makes an existing investor a hypocrite, retroactively?

[1]

Nubank said it would invite 2,000 customers to take part in a forum group for guiding the development of Nucoin.
...
In a press release, the company touts Nucoin as “a new way to recognize customer loyalty and encourage engagement with Nubank products.”

 

[Solomon]

You're claiming a new marketing ploy [1] makes an existing investor a hypocrite, retroactively?

[1]

It is hypocritical to not believe in crypto and invest in a company that primarily deals with crypto is it not?

 

[FlirtLife]

It is hypocritical to not believe in crypto and invest in a company that primarily deals with crypto is it not?

I didn't realize it is more than a marketing ploy - this is a fintech bank, so I stand corrected. Buffet has investors who work for him and decide investments without being micro-managed. I suspect they got Berkshire started investing in Apple, and may be the source of fintech investing as well. Is it still hypocrisy if Buffet allows employees to invest Berkshire money in companies related to crypto?

 

[jaygreenb]

Dot com had a huge affect on the FTSE so not just in the US.

I was working in the industry at the time and in 2001 it was not just the upper middle class invested in stocks, if anything, even more of the average punters had stocks by way mainly of endowment policies in the U.K. PEPs and TESSAs (you won’t know what these are most likely but they were tax free share accounts For the average person).

post dot com the rot set in and most punters started going for property because they got burned and punters like property because they can see it, and understand it.

As for crypto offering participation to a wider audience, participation in what exactly? Bitcoin aside, crypto is an alternative to what? Visa? Mastercard? The banking system? It most certainly is not an alternative to investing. A share in new technology?

I don’t doubt stocks and bonds will eventually digitalise and go on a blockchain, but it will still be stock. U.K. shares used to be settled in paper and in the 80s they went on to SETS and Sov debt went on to CREST.

As buffet said; the only value of a coin is what I can sell it to you for. Value invested in a token is like value invested in fine art. You have to hope it’s fashionable. Money invested in real assets actually goes to work .
The nearest I’ve seen in crypto is lending, in which case it rivals the banking system. And this being the case, would I deposit my savings to be lent in a decentralised system or with a bank, who do due diligence on debtors ability to pay?

as far as I can see, it’s a digitalisation of paper assets which has great potential. Does this mean any token you buy now has any value? No, in my opinion. 1. You really don’t want a decentralised financial system, unless you want the economy to fail and 2. We don’t know which of the new tech will be adopted. as it stands, virtually nothing day to day is done in crypto. by all means hold some but know what it is: a tech share with zero ranking in liquidation, zero voting rights and zero dividends.

I really just rattled of numbers from memory, they are probably a little off. The point being, with all things considered the dot com bubble was a lot larger with a much smaller group of potential market participants. Really just trying to say, this may not have been the big bubble and bust. It very well may have been but just a data point to keep in mind.

First, lets separate bitcoin and the rest of crypto, two completely different topics. Bitcoin is the actual innovation and paradigm shift. It is an engineered decentralized, rules based, set supply monetary system that anyone can participate in. is peer to peer and no person or group has influence or control over. It is the most secure payment network every created. Anyone who lives in a country with central banks that have devalued their currency or corrupt govt that weaponizes the financial system should have interest. So everyone, including western countries.

Financial services for those that do not have access. Outside of first world countries there are vast percentages of people who do not have access to any services in the banking system. Now they essentially have a bank on their phone and will in the future have more access to other financial services and can actually save for the future. There is a big world outside of where you live. It also cuts out the parasitic fees financial services have attached themselves to on everything. You can very clearly see this now with remittance payments in El salvador, you can send USD over the bitcoin payment rails for essentially free where prior you are paying 10-20%. On top of that banks are starting to fail, you know have the option to self custody large amounts of value.

99% of other crypto is legit garbage and at best is a highly speculative tech bet. There will be winners I am sure but I have never claimed I knew how that would turn out or what it would look like. It is my belief that the bitcoin market cap alone could one day be multiples higher that the dot com boom. It can pull store of value premiums in multiple markets like RE, bonds, stocks etc. Everything else is just a guess. It is my belief that Bitcoin is the base that will remain constant with everything changing and evolving on top of it.

We didn't know what tech and the internet would look like today 20+yrs ago either. Not really sure what your argument is, kind of all over the place and arguing points I never made.

 

[jaygreenb]

it was never meant to be an argument pal. A discussion.

Bitcoin only replaces a tiny amount of banking activity. As you say, remittance and custody. Lending is the main function of a bank.
how does that work with Bitcoin?

Ok you were discussing and responding to points I never made, pal. Well I don't own a bank and do not plan on starting one so probably not the right person to ask. Currently you put it up as collateral and borrow against it, like any other asset. This is being done already, both in the real world and trading. Keep it a fairly low percentage to account for the volatility. As the industry grows would imagine additional financial services are added. Again, I do not work in the banking sector so do not know the nuts and bolts and not going to pretend I do. Like any new technology, it takes time to grow which it is doing at an exponential pace. In a little over a decade, with no ceo or marketing department, an idea and a piece of code have already become of the largest currencies in the world. Would have to look up current rank

Looked it up, currently 22nd

Fiat Market Capitalizations | FiatMarketCap

fiatmarketcap.com