Bitcoin over $30k USD again, proving naysayers wrong once again

techlead on 12/04/2023 - 11:47
Last edited 16/04/2023 - 16:51

Bitcoin has penetrated the $30k USD and appears to be holding, looking at the charts, it looks like the beginning of another bull market which can take its price to $100k, $200k and beyond. Goes without saying, but still this is my own opinion only, not financial advice. I'm just opining on the potential future price of BTC, it may or may not eventuate, I don't have control over the price of BTC. Do not rely on my posts and comments, its for educational/entertainment/lively debating purposes only.

I look at other investment classes, shares, bonds, property, its all doom and gloom. This is why I've decided against buying an investment property, I just do get where the attraction is from. I'm investment vehicle agnostic, I just want the best vehicle to make the most returns. Of course risk is very hard set, and some investment vehicles are much much more susceptible to regulation and other shocks. Take the property market for example, there is a range of regulation changes, which governments can implement which will cause it to break, look at China as a very good example, a rule change reining in how much debt developers can take on, rippled through the market and broke it.

Cryptocurrencies are not immune, however they are much much more resilient to these regulation changes. Of course, it will be affected by it if governments attempt to ban it or otherwise restrict it.

I find it very funny reading through https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/, which shows a collection of what naysayers have said throughout the years and Bitcoin has proven them all wrong. Take a look at this from Dan Pena, he said this when Bitcoin dropped from $6k to $3k and he was doing a little victory rant, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX21rnDV-oo. Now Bitcoin has proven him wrong, and he has egg all over his face. Its so funny, everything he said about Bitcoin turned out to be wrong.

Personally, I thought Bitcoin was a scam from 2009 to 2013. I knew about its existence shortly after it was created and I read and understood the whitepaper, but didn't believe it would work. This changed in 2013, happy to be proven wrong and Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have allowed me to accumulate a nice small fortune. I've done calculations on the alternatives, if I didn't buy Bitcoin and other cryptos from 2013, eg purchased an investment property, purchased apple shares etc, and none could have allowed me to amass my net wealth today. So with 20/20 hindsight, I'm glad I made the right decision back in 2013.

Has your perception about cryptocurrency changed over the years?

Update - adding in some common points people put in the comments.

Crypto is a zero sum game. For you to make money, someone needs to lose money.

This is not true, shares and property are not zero sum games, hence crypto which is another asset just like shares and property is not a zero sum game.
Here's a recent trade I did. I purchased 20.82 BTC late 2022 at $16688 USD per BTC, I sold it over the last few days at an average price of around $30100 USD per BTC because I want to purchase a property to live in soon.

In this scenario, who lost money?
1. The people who sold it to me late 2022
2. me or
3. the people who bought it off me a few days ago. BTC is $30184 USD at the time of writing.

Bitcoin is based on "thin air", its not backed by anything.

Bitcoin was created in the aftermath of the GFC, which is either forgotten or just not experienced by people. Bitcoin's value is based on its decentralised, censorship resistant and permissionless network, which is a god send for people in oppressive regimes with unstable fiat currencies. It is also based on trust, through its open sourced code.

Much of our economy is based on trust without the transparency. We trust that our RBA gives us accurate data on how much money it conjures up from "thin air". Unlike Bitcoin, we can't easily verify it, how do we know they haven't printed a trillion AUD?

Financial Cryptocurrency

Comments

      • mitchalbrown on 14/04/2023 - 10:55

        what does it say when NAB are testing running transactions over the Ethereum network?

        • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 10:59
          +2

          Looking good, that's what adoption looks like.

          https://news.nab.com.au/news/nab-completes-world-first-with-…

          First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

          I've experienced all these phases, we are in the beginning of the winning phase now.

          • JumperC on 14/04/2023 - 11:44
            -1

            @techlead: Then they blow $170m to realize it sucks.

            https://cointelegraph.com/news/aussie-stock-exchange-abandon…

            We’ve gone through the winning phase, some have learned an expensive lesson, the emperor has no clothes. If you can’t convince people you’re right it’s winning like the Roman Empire.

            Banks want their cut of the scheme, if they can skim transactions they don’t care if you win or lose investing in it, they make money both ways.

            • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 12:03

              @JumperC: There are always teething issues with new technology.

              Do you think Netflix can exist in its current form in the 1990s and 2000s? The technology hasn't matured enough yet, but it will change. I'm not old enough to experience the internet in the 1990s, but from the accounts I've read, it sucked really bad.

              • JumperC on 14/04/2023 - 12:18

                @techlead: Are you arguing it’s new or that it’s been around so long it’s obviously stable? Lol seems like both.

                Yes, your lack of experience in the world is showing. Bitcoin’s problems aren’t due to bad design, they’re intentional features. Remove them and you’ve just got what we had before.

                If Bitcoin changes then problems it becomes something other than Bitcoin. It’s like saying cassette tapes are new, they just have to mature. Yes, they were replaced, as happens when technology matures, it becomes easier to replace than remediate.

                Netflix over DVD didn’t mature, it was replaced with streaming. There were streaming services in the 1990s, but, but like bitcoin will eventually have happen, they got replaced. Now people are born who don’t even remember them. And like every generation, look back and say ‘the past sucks’ when at the time, it was the best anyone knew. Bitcoin’s already on the downward curve, like cassettes there will be people holding on for decades…..

                • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 12:28

                  @JumperC: Are you familiar with the lifecycle of new technology?

                  When something new comes along, it must go on the rails of the old technology. Take cars for example, early cars were notoriously unreliable, constantly got stuck on muddy roads designed for horse and carriage and no infrastructure in place for petrol, hence these early cars were laughed at and constantly got stuck which required horses to pull them out of sticky situations. The same can be said of the internet, the infrastructure when the internet was introduced was analogue and was designed for voice, not data. Hence dialup was so hard, slow and unreliable to use.

                  Then as the technology develops, new rails are developed just for it, paved roads, digital data networks which greatly enhances speed and reliability etc, until this new technology fully takes over, like cars and the internet.

                  Similarly, crypto is currently clunky and hard to use and there's not much infrastructure to support it, it must go on traditional rails, eg the traditional banks. As this space evolves, there will be new rails built, new infrastructure just for crypto, like Decentalised Exchanges which don't need interaction with banks. I don't think anyone back in the 1990s could have envisaged what the internet would be like today in 2023, likewise, in 5, 10, 20 years time, the crypto space will also be very different.

                  • JumperC on 14/04/2023 - 12:50
                    +2

                    @techlead: Am I familiar with the lifecycle of new technology. Lol. I’ve been implementing new technology since before you were born.

                    Bitcoin is Maths, not technology. It doesn’t get better because technology improves any more than gravity stops existing due to aircraft.

                    The same can be said of the internet, the infrastructure when the internet was introduced was analogue and was designed for voice, not data.

                    No it wasn’t. It was packet switched since the 1950’s, the whole point was reliability. Individual users did eventually use phone lines but that was much later. Bitcoin isn’t the internet in this scenario, it’s dialup.

                    They say he who doesn’t understand history is doomed to repeat it….

                    Decentalised Exchanges which don't need interaction with banks

                    The thing is, needing interaction with banks isn’t a bug, it’s a feature, removing that actually diminishes currency. On the other hand not needing interaction with banks (just an increasingly small network of operators).

                    I think it’s a mistake to think the future brings improvements without drawbacks. Even two decades ago people didn’t used to go to instagram/Facebook etc. there was a much richer community of individual web pages which while inferior in many many ways, were actually a better place than much of the internet has become.

                    I don't think anyone back in the 1990s could have envisaged what the internet would be like today in 2023, likewise, in 5, 10, 20 years time, the crypto space will also be very different.

                    Like you today, they were unfamiliar with the disappointment they’d be enduring, they expected the lifecycle of technology would bring only improvements. They’d be rushing in to invest in a thousand ideas all stronger than bitcoin and few of which still exist. The lifecycle of technology is more about the inevitable death of individual technologies than their growth.

                    and no infrastructure in place for petrol

                    The earliest cars were electric. The combustion engine came later. The internet itself is mature, that’s the roads. The bitcoin algorithm is as old as the universe itself. Improving technology will kill it, not save it.

                    There is scope for blockchain, but there’s a pretty a narrow scope that it has universal advantage in, and it hasn’t even got started there, instead wasted on over hyped currencies.

      • aznbob on 14/04/2023 - 11:13
        +2

        Crypto is currently subject to CGT rules like property and shares. Yes, they take a cut when one profits but it also means one can claim deductions for losses - i.e. ATO collects less tax. Correct me if i'm wrong but if the ATO thought crypto is going to depreciate long term - then they would lose money (collect less taxes) by treating it as an investment asset subject to CGT.

        • lostgoat on 14/04/2023 - 11:22
          +2

          Yeap that is correct . The government is riding crypto will gain in value . The opposite is gambling losses cannot be tax deductible unless they deem you a profession gambling organization . They know about 95% of people lose at gambling and it would not help their bottom line .

          • JumperC on 14/04/2023 - 12:02
            +1

            @lostgoat: You can’t tax deduct crypto losses against personal earned income, just capital gains, so as long as someone makes money on it, it’s irrelevant if it goes up or down. Same as any other individual share. Tax deductions ‘leak’. Gambling wins aren’t taxable at the individual (non professional) level either.

            They’re not betting any individual company will go up or down by making shares taxable, they’re simply collecting taxes now vs potential losses later which due to inflation are lower in value.

            It’s highly unlikely 95% who lose massively on crypto will ever make a enough capital gains before they die to soak up that deduction. But the one winner will provide a much bigger (and earlier) infusion of tax, because someone started off a $0 base (international trading obviously affects both - of the losers are international there’s obviously no local deduction but that’s zero sum more or less).

        • JumperC on 14/04/2023 - 11:55
          +2

          You have to cash out to realize either a loss or a gain. It doesn’t really matter if it loses money overall it’s still a net gain for taxes, if you lose millions on crypto the ATO doesn’t give you a deduction against your personal earned income, you have to make a future (or concurrent) capital gain to offset it, and thanks to inflation that’s going to be worth less. Tax deductions basically ’leak’.

          You could just as easily argue that the ATO is saying ‘x’ individual share the ATO thinks will go up. They don’t care, it’s not part of the decision making. So consider yourself corrected.

          The prime reason it’s treated like shares or property is because that’s the only way to get any taxes (and guaranteed to be positive). If it were a currency it wouldn’t be taxable.

          Fundamentally it is a share, but unlike a share in a company that makes and owns things, it’s a share in the ‘faith’ it will go up, a company with no product other than an army of invested spruikers, invested in denying reality as loudly as possible.

          There’s no reason another company couldn’t use a blockchain to issue their shares, the ASX wasted $170m to work out this completely possible thing is also extremely inefficient.

          • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 18:25

            @JumperC: Frame this >"You have to cash out to realize either a loss or a gain".

            It's the crypto-nite of tech-leads delusion.

  • Shaquille Oatmeal on 14/04/2023 - 12:06
    +3

    Yeah Nah

  • thesilverstarman on 14/04/2023 - 12:25
    +5

    Here you go again. Always trying to talk up bitcoin and crypto.
    Nobody is surprised that it has risen. You keep acting as if people are stupid. They aren't.
    Bitcoin is not an investment. It is not an asset. It is a gamble. And no, shares, precious metals and property are investments and assets. You don't know the difference.
    Fiat currency is backed by government and comes with guarantees. Bitcoin doesn't. There is literally nobody and nothing behind it or backing it.
    Shares get you ownership of a business. The market is regulated to ensure that people can't just manipulate it, unlike crypto.
    The block chain is not bitcoin or crypto. The technology is used in other areas and is not patented or owned, so it does not affect the value of bitcoin.
    Bitcoin and crypto has no inherent value. Assets and things backed by government do. Crypto is nothing more than an idea and it isn't even patented. It has no inherent value and is backed by nothing. The price movements are due to pure speculation, and the price can be manipulated and has been done so by international criminal gangs. It is used to launder money from crime, and the price is manipulated in order to get the best return.
    Warren buffet has said many times that it is not an investment and that he would not ever put money into it. The largest investment companies in the world do not trade in it, because it has no inherent value. Banks do not see it as an asset and will not lend money against it. They do not trade in it. Because it has no inherent value.
    You keep trying to get others to put money into it, and your rants are against the law in Australia. You are trying to convince people to put money into something which is a scam. Why is it a scam? Because it has no inherent value, it is not an investment or asset and if the criminals were removed from the market, it would collapse to be nearly worthless.The only reason it has a value is because the market is unregulated and buyers get convinced that they will make money and that it is real and is an investment.It requires a sucker to purchase it, so it does mean that someone is losing money. The buyer can literally see the money they spent rendered worthless overnight if governments step in or if the market collapses. And no, this doesn't happen with shares etc because the underlying asset still has value, produces income and can recover because of this.
    Go away and stop peddling your scams and bullshit.

    • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 12:49

      You keep trying to get others to put money into it, and your rants are against the law in Australia.

      I've done no such thing. What law am I breaking?

      if the criminals were removed from the market, it would collapse to be nearly worthless

      This is demonstrably false, illicit activities involving Bitcoin accounts for less than 1% of its volume. According to blockchain analysis company Chainalysis, 0.15% of known cryptocurrency transactions conducted in 2021 were involved in illicit activities like cybercrime, money laundering and terrorism financing, representing a total of $14 billion.

      The buyer can literally see the money they spent rendered worthless overnight if governments step in or if the market collapses.

      That happens in other asset classes. Look at investors of SVB, Credit Suisse, all gone overnight, rendered worthless. These are regulated entities I might add. What good did regulation did for these investors?

      • JumperC on 14/04/2023 - 12:53
        +2

        looking at the charts, it looks like the beginning of another bull market which can take its price to $100k, $200k and beyond.

        This could be construed as financial advice and it pis against the law to offer it without a license in Australia.

        This is demonstrably false

        No it’s really not. People who have vested interests telling you it’s false is far from demonstrating, it’s performance.

        • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 13:03
          +1

          Lmao, do you know what financial advice is?

          That is so far from it. Its called an opinion. If you tried to make this argument in court, you'd be laughed out. None of what I said can be construed as financial advice, its all opinion, therefore its not against the law and no action will be taken against me. You can certainly try though. :) Make my day!

          I'm also confused as to what "advice" I'm supposedly giving. I've been debating mostly whether Bitcoin is a scam, a ponzi scheme etc, what advice am I giving?

          • JumperC on 14/04/2023 - 13:24
            +3

            @techlead: I’ve spent a decade working in the fintech sector so yes.

            I wouldn’t be trying anything in court, ASIC would here’s some information you might find saves you a fine.

            https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/financial-services/…

            Basically you have to be completely factual, if you give your opinion on the likely future value of asset, ASIC considers that advice.

            “Provides an opinion about these products.

            It is likely to be financial product advice.”

            So one of us didn’t know what financial advice was (as decided by ASIC) now hopefully you do.

            Basically by admitting you’re giving your opinion about a financial product you’ve admitted that under ASIC’s rules you have given advice. Assuming this is your first offense they’d probably just educate you. If you had a pattern of doing this the penalty is up to 5 years imprisonment.

            • techlead on 15/04/2023 - 18:23

              @JumperC: Well, since I'm fully aware of what financial advice is, it must be you who doesn't know.

              The example you shared from the ASIC website is this:

              "I’m going to share with you five long-term stocks that will do well and which you should buy and hold."

              Where in my original post or any subsequent comments did I say "you should buy and hold"?

              All of my posts and comments has been comparing Bitcoin to traditional asset classes like shares and property and commenting on the recent price movements of Bitcoin. At no point did I recommend anyone to buy nor sell Bitcoin or any other asset. Hence its a little far fetched to say anything I have said is financial advice.

      • SBOB on 14/04/2023 - 12:59

        accounts for less than 1% of its volume.

        How much volume does other usages account for, for example wash trading?
        If you know criminal usage statistics so accurately, I assume you also have a breakdown on other categories of utilisation? Across the major trading platforms.

        Actual trade volume charts (as opposed to price charts) definitely don't indicate any massive recovery from ath times.

        • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 13:06

          Wash trading is not illegal in crypto, hence, there's nothing wrong with it.

          I'm sure there are some shenanigans happening, but this is no different to the share market which is supposed to be regulated. The fact is, the volume and the decentralised nature of Bitcoin makes price manipulation a lot harder than before. If we go back to 2013 where Mt Gox accounted for 85% of the Bitcoin trading volume, then I'd agree with you, manipulation would be rampant and alot easier to pull off. This is not the case today, it is alot harder and more expensive to pull off today.

          Making an educated guess here, I think it would be easier to manipulate a penny stock than Bitcoin at this point.

          Actual trade volume charts (as opposed to price charts) definitely don't indicate any massive recovery from ath times.

          That's true, but we are at the beginning of this cycle, so there's still some ways to go. The havening is next year, so this is just foreplay. My humble opinion, not financial advice, not sure what the advice here anyways lmao.

          • JumperC on 14/04/2023 - 13:39

            @techlead:

            Wash trading is not illegal in crypto, hence, there's nothing wrong with it.

            There’s a reason it’s illegal in other markets. And hint, it’s because it can be used to deceptively mislead investors and manipulate prices.

            Saying there’s nothing wrong with it because it’s no illegally is a tacit admission that improper things in crypto aren’t even attempted to be regulated and thus the statistics are meaningless. It’s like dropping the crime rate by making violent crimes legal. Not the win you think it is.

            Bitcoin is more centralized than it has ever been in terms of network structure.

          • CrowReally on 14/04/2023 - 15:38
            +1

            @techlead:

            Wash trading is not illegal in crypto, hence, there's nothing wrong with it.

            Wash trading is illegal in all CGT transactions, which includes crypto (obviously).

            Here's an ATO press release about wash trading that explicitly mentions crypto: https://www.ato.gov.au/Media-centre/Media-releases/Wash-sale…

      • thesilverstarman on 14/04/2023 - 15:20
        -1

        You are providing financial advice, talking up bitcoin in an aim to profit from it. You have also offered to help people "invest" in it, which is also against the law. As JumperC stated, you are not providing factual information, and what are are giving is classed as financial advice. And this is not the first time. This would be the 4th or 5th post on here alone. Id listen to ASIC, not you.
        How in the world would you expect to know who is undertaking illegal activities and money laundering? You are talking about KNOWN transactions. International policing services estimate that at least 80% of transactions may be connected with criminal activity. Id listen to them, not you.
        It is NOT AN ASSET. SVB and Credit Suisse are banking institutions. They administer assets. The people who invested in the shares of these entities may have lost money (the administrators will work that out) but those who used them to manage their investments did not. If you don't understand what an asset is, what an institution like a bank is, then you are either stupid or trying to misrepresent the facts to people.
        STOP YOUR LIES.
        STOP TRYING TO PROMOTE A SCHEME THAT PEOPLE CAN LOSE EVERYTHING IN
        STOP PROVIDING FINANCIAL ADVICE IN CONTRAVENTION OF AUSTRALIAN LAW

        • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 18:21

          Hear hear. He has become a cross between click baiter and actual advertising. He is blatantly promoting a scam.

        • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 21:21

          None of what I've said is financial advice. Please educate yourself on what financial advice means.

          https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/financial-services/…

          I'm providing my opinion and at most I'm providing "factual information is objectively ascertainable information, the truth or accuracy of which cannot reasonably be questioned." which do NOT require an AFS licence.

          I'm quoting directly from the ASIC website.

          but those who used them to manage their investments did not

          Yes, the depositors of SVB and Signature Bank did not lose out, but the money needs to come from somewhere. They got bailed out by tax payer funds or magic funny money that the US fed willed into existence. Money was indeed lost, in order to make the depositors whole, money would have came from another source or out of thin air.

      • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 18:36

        " What law am I breaking" The law of the jungle? The law of physics?
        You keep saying illicit content is a minor %.
        I think $14B is more than reason enough (pro rata) to call that BS.

        If I could be arsed reading the Chainalysis 'report' I am certain I'd find annual reports from crime syndicates and terrorists tax returns.
        Unless of course I missed the poll they ran on Ozb.

        https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/02/afp-s…

        Just wondering if Chainalysis business model is defunct if (when?) crypto collapses?

        Other reading>
        https://www.austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-04/AUSTR…

        https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/news-items/scam-a…

        • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 21:15

          Did you even read the article you linked?

          AFP smash crime ring, seizing $150m haul including Sydney mansions and luxury cars

          So out of this $150 m of illicit gains, $29 mil was in cryptocurrency, the majority are in properties. You just undermined your own position lmao. So by your logic, we need to ban property because its involved in crime?

          • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 22:08

            @techlead: No you undermined YOUR own repetitious claims. Look at the ratio of crypto (VS other dodgy dealings), in this compared to the minuscule ratio you claimed is nefarious.
            Your 0.15% versus 20%?
            The articles title was WHAT, again?
            Did YOU read it? Digest it? Comprehend it? Or slip back into serial denial?

            See the word 'crime' in there?
            All the other stuff bought via crypto is not included , so that value adds onto the bottom line.
            When it comes to crime & trends to filter/launder/inflate etc, Crypto is the latest duck. It's a no brainer (literally)
            The incident of criminality would be WAY WAY higher if there wasn't such a 'neat' way to hide the tracks.

            • techlead on 16/04/2023 - 13:30

              @Protractor:

              All the other stuff bought via crypto is not included , so that value adds onto the bottom line.

              Would it made a different that the properties were all purchased with crypto? Think about what you are saying. Those would be pretty dumb criminals if they used bought crypto with proceeds of crime, then proceeded to use those crypto to purchase property, an easily trackable asset which can be easily taken from you.

              Criminals are gonna crime and scammers are gonna scam with whatever tools available. Cash is still the most used medium of exchange for drug deals, not crypto, so ban cash?

              • Protractor on 16/04/2023 - 14:33

                @techlead: No need to ban cash, old bean. All the crooks will soon gravitate to the place that hides their footprints the best. Pro rata that's clearly crypto..
                If the cryptomaniacs are so hellbent on dusting that off, maybe they should employ registration of all traders.
                Protect your 'good' name.
                BTW unless and until you convert your BTC to tangible commodities or cash, you are no better off than the struggling non crypto 'friends' & family you gloat at.

                • techlead on 16/04/2023 - 14:35

                  @Protractor:

                  All the crooks will soon gravitate to the place that hides their footprints the best.

                  Why haven't they done it yet? Vast majority of the drug trade is still cash based. Why? That already disproves your point.

                  BTW unless and until you convert your BTC to tangible commodities or cash, you are no better off than the struggling non crypto 'friends' & family you gloat at.

                  This is demonstrably false as I can easily convert 1 BTC into $30300 USD right now and have it in my bank account within hours.

                  • Protractor on 16/04/2023 - 14:56

                    @techlead: BS
                    Look at the % of criminality per $$ and per crypto . I said pro rata. You wilfully ignored it and spun another fable.(drugs are only one element of the crime cycle)

                    You keep saying "gunna" mate.Show me the >>>MONEY" Gerry. They is why no-one believes a word of your advertising threads.

  • mitchalbrown on 14/04/2023 - 13:24

    I guess there's one thing we can all agree on…. IYKYK… and when what we know comes to fruition…. best not to gloat about it - either on the way or at the destination.

    This statement can be applied what ever side of the debate you fall on and to be honest…. no ones mind is being changed here in either camp so it's the one thing we can all walk away with…

    • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 13:27

      What's IYKYK?

      when what we know comes to fruition…. best not to gloat about it - either on the way or at the destination

      Why? Its always interesting to discuss. My property investing friends were laughing at me in 2013, now I'm laughing at them. Its all good fun.

      • SBOB on 14/04/2023 - 13:37

        What's IYKYK?

        If You Know You Know…
        I guess you didnt know :)

        • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 13:40

          Yea, I didn't know. There's alot that I don't, that's why I'm constantly learning.

      • thesilverstarman on 14/04/2023 - 15:23

        Your " property investing friends" actually invested, and have property. They have a physical real asset.
        You have not invested anything. You speculated on something that has no intrinsic value. You hold no asset.
        If both markets collapsed tomorrow, you have nothing. They still have an asset that can be used to generate income and wealth.
        That's why they laughed at you - they have security and something tangible.

        • lostgoat on 14/04/2023 - 15:30

          Have you noticed Buffet was wrong .
          He could have been the richest man on the planet . Instead there is probably 30K - 40K BTC millionaires with different degrees of wealth .
          The market has spoken . And nothing in this world is a fairer judge .

          • thesilverstarman on 14/04/2023 - 15:39
            +2

            @lostgoat: Except that he actually invests and controls assets. Bitcoin is not an investment or an asset.
            A BTC millionaire has nothing unless they can sell the BTC for cash or assets.
            What market has spoken? The Bitcoin market? Because the investment market has spoken and declared that this is nothing more than a massive risk, not an investment, is just pure speculation, and that BTC is not an asset.
            If people understand the risks and the facts and want to try to make money, that's fine. But this person is trying to pretend that BTC is an investment, will make money, has little risk, etc etc. This can result in some people thinking that it is comparable to shares, property etc and they could lose their money. That's the issue here. This guy just spins shit and tries to pump it up. In a previous post he even offered to help people buy BTC.He is providing investment advice in breach of Australian Law designed to protect people.

            • lostgoat on 14/04/2023 - 18:15

              @thesilverstarman: BTC is so liquid it can be cashed in minutes. Of course in cash you can buy whatever asset class or goodie you want .
              That why market value is important. .

        • techlead on 16/04/2023 - 14:43
          +1

          If both markets collapsed tomorrow, you have nothing. They still have an asset that can be used to generate income and wealth.

          I don't know how old you are and whether you lived through the GFC in 2007/2008 or read about it. If not, you should. Your example is unrealistic, this is a common myth, if property values goes to $0, you'd have a house to live in, without considering the catalyst for that to occur and its implications.

          Take the GFC for example, the property market plummeted, as a result there was a spike in foreclosures pushing property prices down in a death spiral. People who couldn't afford their mortgages got foreclosed, people who could still afford it found no reason to keep holding their property which have halved or dropped even more in value, so those people started abandoning their properties leaving the banks to hold the properties in a phenomena knowns as "jingle mail", google and read up on it.

          So reality proves you wrong. And if we look at other causes of property going to $0, such as war, you wouldn't even have a house left, let along generate any income or wealth from it.

          Property being "something tangible" did not protect people in the GFC.

  • helpme on 14/04/2023 - 14:02
    +1

    I'd say I'm a naysayer but what I 'naysay' about is never about its value. I can't predict what people will pay for it.

    Take Prime for example, kids are paying $20 a bottle for it from other kids. It's disgusting, and not that much different from other energy drinks, yet kids pay $20 a bottle for it.

    It's the same with Bitcoin, I couldn't care less about the price, I want to know what it actually functions as. It's been shown a few times that as a crypto currency, it's pretty poor. So what else is it for?

    I don't see it becoming a worldwide currency either. You're right about the banks, they were dodgy and did things they shouldn't have. But I'd rather have a government controlled currency than one like Bitcoin so they can implement fiscal policy. PROVIDED we have actually decent government. A central currency (euro) failed for Greece and I can't imagine what it would've turned out like if we couldn't print money in 2009. Give me a reason to see why Bitcoin is worth 30k rather than just telling me it's worth 30k.

  • thesilverstarman on 14/04/2023 - 15:32
    +1

    Reported to ASIC.
    Reference Number: 10049476

    • techlead on 15/04/2023 - 20:04

      Thanks mate, they will have a good laugh.

    • techlead on 15/04/2023 - 20:35

      Here's an example of someone who's actually breaking the law.

      https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/find-a-media-rele…

      None of my posts and comments here are like that at all.

      ASIC had alleged Mr Scholz was carrying on a financial services business by providing financial product advice, regarding share trading on the ASX, without a licence by:
      delivering training courses and seminars about trading in ASX-listed securities during which he made recommendations about share purchases
      promoting those courses and seminars on Twitter and Instagram using the handle ‘@ASXWOLF_TS’
      making share purchase recommendations on private online forums (that he administered) and on Instagram.

      I wonder why ASIC needed to make it clear that it was private online forums which Mr Scholz administered? hmmm, let's put our thinking caps on.

  • frostman on 14/04/2023 - 15:52
    +3

    You again?
    Seriously you must have bought at very high and wanting to pump and dump to negate your current losses.

    Otherwise, in which region of which world, would any random stranger want to let strangers in to some sky-rocketing investment?? hahah

    • techlead on 15/04/2023 - 20:05

      Seriously you must have bought at very high

      Sorry, I'm neither have the skill nor the luck to have that privilege. In the previous cycle, I didn't buy anywhere close to the peak of $19900, nor did I buy anywhere close to $69k.

  • kaleidoscope on 14/04/2023 - 17:13

    which can take its price to $100k, $200k and beyond

    okay

  • wackedupwacko on 14/04/2023 - 17:22
    +2

    I have nothing for or against crypto. I have my views and you have your views. I feel however at this point this far in, arguing with people about perceived values and the future is a waste of time.

    You've made your opinions known and your pov. Those that have interest will hopefully do their own research and those that hold other viewpoints won't be swayed. The more you try to argue, the more people will find it distateful and feel as though you have an agenda (there are lots of pump and dump type posts in broad investment and social media). Not saying that's your agenda, but thats how you'll be perceived.

  • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 18:16

    You only have proxy moolah dude. Mirage. Token.Shadow.Mistral.

    Cash it in. You have been warned

    You can do a Musk and what his mates do and deliberately conflate by exaggerated posts online and in forums and it only makes your fall greater.

    Your magnifying reading glasses are about to let you you down.

    • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 20:54

      I bought Bitcoin way before Elon Musk, plus he's not the business genius everyone thinks he is. He paid so much for Twitter, which he admit has halved in value, he thinks Twitter is worth $22 billion, I don't think so, I reckon its worth less than $10 billion and dropping.

    • johnfuller on 15/04/2023 - 14:02

      Your magnifying reading glasses are about to let you you down.

      this, truth!

    • lostgoat on 14/04/2023 - 20:30

      He is doing the simple solution of moving overseas to continue no problems.
      The tell is the selling of his house .
      He has to continue to fleece his sheep hehe :)

      • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 20:33

        Good riddance. Hopefully back where his ancestral roots are. I can imagine where that is.

    • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 20:56

      What does this have to do with crypto? He's doing this for ASX shares lmao.

      I don't approve of what he's doing, its definitely wrong.

      • JumperC on 15/04/2023 - 00:55

        The law makes no distinction between what he’s doing and what you’re doing.

    • techlead on 15/04/2023 - 20:07

      Notice how what he is doing is very much different to my posts and comments? His activities definitely falls under financial advice.

  • MrThing on 14/04/2023 - 20:25
    +8

    Its funny how crypto bros disappear when it goes to shit, then when it turns they all reappear like they were just hibernating and nothing is wrong

    • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 20:31
      +1

      Yep, you nailed it. This guy is marketing,pure and simple.

      • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 20:57
        -1

        You see this in other industries too. Now that the property market has cooled, I don't see all these puff pieces about property investing anymore. Its strange isn't it, as if they've gone into hiberation.

        • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 21:05
          +1

          "the property market has cooled"
          Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha etc

          • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 21:11
            -2

            @Protractor: I've been actively looking for a property since late last year, I can definitely feel the market cooling down. If you don't see it, it shows how delusional you are, its not controversial at all. Its an easily demonstrably true fact.

            I've got real estate agents ringing me up about properties, I didn't get this during the boom times.

            Sydney median house
            March 2022 - $1403154
            March 2023 - $1230581
            −13.3% actual loss is 61.4947% due to leverage if the median property was purchased

            Sydney median apartment
            March 2022 - $833815
            March 2023 - $776780
            -8.7% actual decrease would be more due to leverage

            • JumperC on 15/04/2023 - 01:00
              +1

              @techlead: Lol. If the median property was purchased and you sold a year later like a moron. Unlike bitcoin people don’t buy property with plans to sell it immediately in a falling market.

              Yet you repeatedly push your debunking, misleading statistics. My property is worth much more than 12 months ago (I’ve got real estate agents banging down the door trying to get me to sell!) people stopped selling.

              Your delusions know no bounds. Making up fictional cherry picked and completely unrealistic scenarios. In 2 years bitcoin has almost halved, while property, even your magical median, is well ahead.

              • techlead on 15/04/2023 - 18:34

                @JumperC:

                Unlike bitcoin people don’t buy property with plans to sell it immediately in a falling market.

                Why do you assert people who buy crypto are going to sell within a year then? I've been buying in 2022, especially on the deep red days.

                Yet you repeatedly push your debunking, misleading statistics

                Where have you debunked this? My statistics came from CoreLogic Home Value Index, released in April 2023 which you can access yourself here: https://www.corelogic.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/137…

                Summarised in this article, https://www.ratecity.com.au/home-loans/mortgage-news/median-… and this article, https://www.openagent.com.au/suburb-profiles/sydney-property….

                My property is worth much more than 12 months ago (I’ve got real estate agents banging down the door trying to get me to sell!) people stopped selling.

                My analysis is on the market as a whole. I'm sure some property has fallen more than 13.3% on an annual basis as some are already in negative equity. Some may have fallen less, do you know how the median works? Your own personal circumstances may be different, just like if someone bought Bitcoin late 2022 at $17k would be at a huge profit now compared to someone who purchased at $69k. Your own example is not representative of the market.

                Your delusions know no bounds.

                Yes, your delusions. I have debunked all your points with receipts, sources and actual figures.

                In 2 years bitcoin has almost halved, while property, even your magical median, is well ahead.

                I just shown that if someone was to purchase the median house, they'd be at a 61% loss, last I checked that worse than half. Some people have lost 100% in negative equity, I think that's worse than half too, right?
                You are denying maths? How is a 61% and 100% loss "well ahead" of a 50% loss?

                Making up fictional cherry picked and completely unrealistic scenarios

                Nothing I've said is fictional. I used market averages, you are the one cherry picking the worse scenario looking at the peak price of Bitcoin at $69k vs now hence 50% loss. Even with your extreme example, I have shown that property is worse in terms of median value change. Very few people have the privilege of buying at $69k, I certainly didn't, and I didn't get to buy at the top of the 2017 cycle at $19900 either. Peaks occur over quickly, so you are the one using cherry picked and completely unrealistic scenarios, which I have indulged you and proved even with this cherry picked extremely unlikely scenario, Bitcoin performed better.

                I totally agree with you, "your delusion knows no bounds!"

  • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 20:41
    +2

    The OP (Gunna) should get back to us with a scan of his 'receipt' when he eventually buys the Playboy mansion. Or roll over and go back to sleep and keep dreaming.

    • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 20:52
      -2

      I don't even wear a Bitcoin or crypto related shirt. I ain't going to be buying a Playboy mansion nor have any crypto related car plates.

      Also, I only have $2.5 mil AUD cash, that ain't gonna get me a Playboy mansion in Sydney. I'm going to stick to my roots and just buy a modest house.

      • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 21:03
        +3

        At the risk of being pinged by the Mods, I'll say what everyone else knows>Now I know you are clearly FOS.
        People 'sticking to their roots do just that. They don't rub FIGJAM in peoples faces.
        I'm done. You can buy your own oxygen.

    • lostgoat on 14/04/2023 - 21:06

      U can see OP on Prime( Luxe Listings Season 2 Episode 1) at the Crypto Castle .
      I must admit the coolest house ever especially the spot in the house where you can go 7 different directions.

      • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 21:09

        I have socks to sort

      • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 21:22
        +1

        I enjoyed that episode, I don't like the house though, not my cup of tea.

        • lostgoat on 14/04/2023 - 21:26

          The Dude is trying real hard to hide his wealth hehe .

          • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 21:28

            @lostgoat: I'm not gonna be like that dude, don't want to be vulnerable to the $15 wrench hack.

            I actually thought about being a crypto influencer as something to do in retirement, but decided against it. Don't want to put a target on my back.

  • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 20:50
    +3

    OP said> "I'm glad I made the right decision back in 2013" and yet over multiple posts has emphatically failed to prove anything near that claim.

    • techlead on 14/04/2023 - 20:53
      -2

      What did I need to prove? I had an opportunity to buy an investment property or Bitcoin in 2013, I chose Bitcoin.

      • JumperC on 15/04/2023 - 01:02
        +1

        And I’m the king of England.

  • Budju on 14/04/2023 - 21:21

    Never underestimate the stupidity of humanity. Something the naysayers will never understand

    • JumperC on 15/04/2023 - 01:18

      ‘Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent’

      Bitcoin’s success is due to people underestimating how stupid people are. Will the world produce more stupid people with spare capital faster than they get burned, that’s the as yet unanswered question.

      • Protractor on 15/04/2023 - 09:49

        The fact that we are still relentlessly populating the overpopulated planet answers your question. The individuals don't need to be considered 'stupid' if the species is.

        We have anthropomorphised economics.

  • Captain M on 14/04/2023 - 21:40
    +3

    I first came across Bitcoin in a forum thread like this back in mid 2017 in ozbargain, before the mania phase. Even then everyone in the forum was tearing it to bits and bagging it saying it has no value, tulips, magic money, nothing backing it, virtual etc etc. I'm sure there will be more forum posts in ozbargain about this every topic in the years to come.

    I think we are very lucky to be living in Australia where our financial system is well regulated with a solid forward looking government compared to other developing countries. In finance we take a lot for granted where credit cards are easily accessible, tap and pay is everywhere and opening a bank account is just a click away.

    On the other end of the spectrum in developing countries, there is the absolute corruption of governments and financial mismanagement by central banks, where they print money or pass crazy laws overnight to block access to peoples hard earned money that they have saved in bank accounts. These kinds of draconian concepts are unimaginable to Australians and trying to explain the need of crypto currency is probably like trying to sell ice to an eskimo. There is simply no need of Bitcoin, since our financial system "works fine now".

    What I have learn over the years is that Bitcoin gets you financial freedom. This freedom is not just being able to work what job and hours you want, get what stuff you want, no, its about you having complete control of your hard earned money without worrying about massive devaluations or financial controls blocking access to that money or having to take the word of a bank, "trust us" your money is safe as long as there is no bank runs and everyone withdraws at once. Very few people really understand the need for this freedom as living in the developed world, a lot is taken for granted and things just "work".

    As everything in life, there is no fee lunch. Investing in anything is not for everyone, it take lots of research and hard work and not many people can handle the volatility. That is fine and of course there are no guarantees that it will succeed. For a majority of people living in Australia we have a stable financial system, government, rule of the law and above average living standards. We are truly lucky for now, but the question is will we continue to be lucky?

    • Protractor on 14/04/2023 - 22:27

      Gee I wonder what happens when mania reaches the end point?

    • JumperC on 15/04/2023 - 01:13

      On the other end of the spectrum in developing countries, there is the absolute corruption of governments and financial mismanagement by central banks, where they print money or pass crazy laws overnight to block access to peoples hard earned money that they have saved in bank accounts. These kinds of draconian concepts are unimaginable to Australians and trying to explain the need of crypto currency is probably like trying to sell ice to an eskimo. There is simply no need of Bitcoin, since our financial system "works fine now".

      The draconian governments are using bitcoin it siphon money from their countries offshore and tracking their citizens spending. The citizens are doing what they always do and informally using foreign currencies. It did provide some employment for them though, it’s a great way to siphon money out of any country through scams / ransoms etc.

      What I have learn over the years is that Bitcoin gets you financial freedom.

      Tell that to people who lost half their savings due to its volatility. By that measure you have to go back in time to find a fiat currency that draconian.

      without worrying about massive devaluations

      I want to live in your fantasy reality.

      Very few people really understand the need for this freedom as living in the developed world, a lot is taken for granted and things just "work".

      The countries with the worst financial systems, bar say North Korea where they don’t get the internet much less bitcoin, are actually probably more free than here. They’re just not so wealthy. Travel really opens your eyes.

      If you go to the draconian end, places like Russia practice disconnecting from the internet, a measure that makes your bitcoin worthless. India, Myanmar etc have all cut internet access for periods in regions. Imagine not being able to buy food. Bitcoin is demonstrably worse as a currency especially in the situations you think it’s most needed.

    • DingoBilly on 15/04/2023 - 10:09
      +2

      I laughed and disregarded everything you wrote when you said bitcoin gives you the freedom to stop worrying about massive devaluations. You must be living under a rock to not have seen the 50% devaluation over recent years?

      Or are you going to do the time tested BS method of just picking a different point in time and saying if you ignore recently and only look long term it's only up?

      • techlead on 15/04/2023 - 18:43
        -1

        No investment nor asset doesn't come with devalutions.

        Look at property, in the last year, the median price for a house in Sydney dropped 13.3%. If someone bought the median house, they wouldn't seen a 61% drop in their wealth due to leverage.

        let's say I bought a house at the median price, $1403154, I paid $280,630.80 (20% deposit) plus $61,684.40 stamp duty, disregarding all other costs, with the drop of $172,573, it means I only have $108,057.8 equity left in my property. That's a 61.4947% decrease in my net wealth, treating stamp duty as a sunk cost and disregarding all other property costs.

        Sydney median house
        March 2022 - $1403154
        March 2023 - $1230581
        −13.3% actual loss is 61.4947% due to leverage if the median property was purchased

        Sydney median apartment
        March 2022 - $833815
        March 2023 - $776780
        -8.7% actual decrease would be more due to leverage

  • JohnHowardsEyebrows on 14/04/2023 - 22:07
    +10

    Person at top of saturated pyramid scheme telling others to buy in at the bottom.

    That's the crux of this thread.

  • RatBargain on 14/04/2023 - 22:36

    What are competitive advantages of BTC besides. “Look how much it’s worth, I’m a rockstar”

    What is the moat?
    Can it be copied, duplicated, superseded
    There are mechanisms for sudden loss such as exchange failures, hacking, theft and govt tracking/acquisition, cold storage damage

    Can someone in the know chime in?

    • techlead on 15/04/2023 - 19:10

      What is the moat?

      Its community and developers which instill trust in all market participants, especially miners, who incur a cost in contributing hashing power to maintain and add to the blockchain.

      Can it be copied, duplicated, superseded

      Copied - Yes, easily, you can copy Bitcoin's code right now on Git hub and run your version of Bitcoin in probably 10 minutes or less
      Duplicated - No, not easily, you can't duplicate a community, you can't duplicate the developers working on the chain and you can't duplicate the miners who incur costs to maintain and add to the blockchain. If you copied Bitcoin's code and started your own Bitcoin blockchain, you will be the only one mining it. You will need to convince others to mine your chain, otherwise, its just you.
      Superseded - Possibly, maybe another chain will become more valuable. There was alot of excitement that ETH, an event called the "Flippening". It didn't happen back in 2017, but doesn't mean it will never happen. Who knows what the future holds?

      There are mechanisms for sudden loss such as exchange failures, hacking, theft and govt tracking/acquisition, cold storage damage

      What good did that do for Credit Suisse, Leighman Brothers and Bear Sterns? The Bitcoin network has never been down since 2009 and has never been hacked. Of course there are pitfalls and if you don't acquit yourself with them and avoid it, you'd lose out.

      For example, recently there was an article about scams and how banks refuse to reimburse people who transferred money to scams. There are no protections against that. if you authorised a transaction even under false pretenses, the bank is not going to reimburse you.

      • RatBargain on 15/04/2023 - 20:45

        The Bitcoin network has never been down since 2009 and has never been hacked.

        https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cryptocurrency-hackers-stole-3-…
        https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63547765

        This is not acceptable for stability and belief in the currency. The argument is decentralised, then how is it that you need centralised trading platforms? The argument is anonymity; protection from prying eyes. Yet there are instances of governments being able to trace ownership and transactions.

        duplicate the developers working on the chain and you can't duplicate the miners who incur costs to maintain and add to the blockchain

        Being a first mover, it's ripe for disruption: Netscape, AOL, Palm Pilot
        Vs other crypto, BTC is known for being power hungry, slow with high cost of transactions. It's universally banned from trade and mining in China. BTC is also subject to trade sanctions, govt regulation and global conflict. - What happens when ASIC miners supply is disrupted? or more govts outlaw it? Is it really infallible?

        Your argument for the moat is still subjective, just like the Snickers bar from Buffet's example, is this accurate?

  • pook1e341 on 14/04/2023 - 22:38

    On a side note, you wouldn't have bought Ethereum during its initial offering in 2014 by any chance? I've been listening to an audiobook about its development, quite interesting.

  • mickey7788 on 15/04/2023 - 06:09
    +1

    Bet you're fun to talk to at parties.

  • Dack Smith on 15/04/2023 - 07:49
    -2

    What did 30K USD do to get “penetrated” ??

    Cryptocurrency is the future and will be bigger than NFTs

  • shaybisc on 15/04/2023 - 10:54

    If we all keep the faith we will all be rich. Rich I tell you. I will sell to you at a big profit, then you sell to him at a big profit, then he will sell to her at a big profit, then she will sell to him at a big profit, then he will sell to they at a big profit and so on and so forth.

    Well you get the drift. It's a foolproof plan.

    • lostgoat on 15/04/2023 - 11:24

      It's all about the detective work finding the next penny dreadful that Musk or other big crypto influencers are secretly buying up . Once there is huge publicity you know they are dumping them .

      • Protractor on 15/04/2023 - 11:41

        Yep, Musk just made another faux legitimisation pitch today with his latest pitch, (cashtag).
        The feudal renaissance is gaining momentum.The Emperors new clothes is shiny, innit?

        The rise of the heady mix of apathy, cookers & slobbering citizens is a market too ripe NOT to pick.
        When the overnight crypto millionaires become paupers, I wonder, will they be leaning on taxpayer benefits to rescue them, or stand strong on principle?
        Humans do extremes, [very] well.
        Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

    • lostgoat on 15/04/2023 - 13:15

      It is a bit like our friend in the thread Silver. Lisa wrote the article Aug 2022 when BTC was at 24K . Now its over 30K .The market so far deems the author got it wrong .

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join