/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>11853478
were not bursted until sub 500 actually...

>>11853478
The Golden Bullrun did not happen yet.

Cause we are near the beginning. Not every down trend means its game over, markets fluctuate and a global 24/7 market will fluctuate a lot more. Especially a 24/7 market with such low liquidity.

>>11853498
>Sub 500
How? Imo sub 1200 would be the sign for an epic correction

The hype got ahead of the tech. We will see a bubble massively larger than the dot com one once the tech gets to a usable standard. Do t believe the it’s over memes. It’s still too early

>>11853478
Of course it's not as revolutionary as the internet. It wouldn't even exist without the internet.

The .com bubble was a little different because things were more tangible. You could go to a website and see/use their service, it was all relatable stuff (pets.com, napster, etc). It was easy for rich boomers to buy into because the product wasn't just magical internet tokens (what ever old person sees Bitcoin as). The point is there was lots of old money in it, we aren't quite there with Bitcoin yet.

The only problem was no one knew that none of these things were actually profitable and were all just benefiting from cult of personality hypestorms

Some of the dotcom companies had a future. None of crypto does. Some of the companies during dotcom had value. None of crypto did. Comparing a stock market bubble vs an illegitimate pump and dump ponzi scam, lol.

>>11853859
Wrong

>>11853958
Rofl, Buffet called crypto “rat poison squared.” He was right. You were wrong.

When smartcontracts actually become widely used is when the true valuation of most of these erc20 shitcoins will be revealed. crypto may not be as revolutionary as the internet, but is is pretty close. When you think about crypto think about how the blockchain could be used to bring value to society.

>>11853478

I think crypto is closer to beanie babies than to the dot com bubble for a handful of reasons, including...

1. The market is a small group. There were only so many beanie baby collectors, and there are only so many crypto investors. The dotcom companies were much more widespread, with thousands of employees, real estate, and (at least for a while) working businesses.

2. In both beanie babies and crypto, the price is driven by speculators selling/buying to/from other speculators, and not by transactions or speculation by the general public. The dot com bubble was caused more by a lack of real-world customers and an over-estimate of potential real profits. In the case of BB and crypto, the price is set by the belief that other speculators will pay more.

3. Investors in both BB's and crypto feel that holding long term will result in price inflation, and that their product has real outside-world value.

4. Both rely on artificial scarcity to help prop up the value. In the case of BB's, it was the idea of limiting production and "retiring" individual babies; in the case of crypto, it's the forced slowing of transaction and mining.

>>11853478

dotcom bubble happend once.

crypto bubble the 4th time since 2011

>>11853478
AB said crypto could bubble to $20T

>>11854186
Beanie babies aren't very useful as a token. It cannot be transferred over the internet and since it's physical its easier to forge it or to get damaged from wear and tear.

Furthermore Beanie babies were not superior to paper money in the sense of functionality, while cryptocurrencies are.

Beanie Babies were produced by a single company, while crypto can be mined by anyone.

>>11854186
>3. Investors in both BB's and crypto feel that holding long term will result in price inflation, and that their product has real outside-world value.

Exactly zero people thought that Beanie Babies would usher an era of libertarian ideology.

>>11853478
Because those were still the actual companies with products and services... Nothing like crypto.

>>11853958
Didn't Warren Buffett also take a huge shit on crypto?

>>11854240

> BB's not superior to paper money in the sense of functionality.

Crypto isn't superior to dollars. In fact, that is the main problem with cypto, it's a poor attempt to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

The only people who would have a real use for crypto are those doing black market transactions who need to remain anonymous. But the number of people who do this is so small that there will never be a serious market for crypto.

Meanwhile, the existing system of cash and credit already does nearly everyone you would want; and the system of national & international credit and debit already serves the world.

Consider the humble credit card machine, which sits on the counter of nearly every business in the world. You can use a credit card to pay for a product with debt, you can use a debit card to pay for purchases with your existing money. It has security and a built in system for resolving disputes. Transactions are almost instantaneous, it you can use it anywhere in the world.

So the real question becomes.... with the exception of black market transactions, what does crypto have to offer that someone else isn't already doing better?

>>11854335
smart contracts

>>11854257

No one with a brain thinks that crypto will usher in an era of libertarian ideology either.

Crypto is a blip on the financial timeline. It's like the "free stores" that were popular in California in the late 60's.

>>11854354

But smart contracts don't require tokens.

Tokens are simply a creation to motivate those running the decentralized servers/oracles to do the work.

But once you realize that having outside people doing the work is a mistake, you can set up the equivalent of smart contracts yourself, and the coins become redundant.

Which is the other problem with crypto. If the programming was copyrighted; or if the people who created crypto had something that couldn't be replicated by someone else, then they might have something of value, but they don't.

There's nothing to prevent the people who already have the money and the infrastructure from simply using their own form of blockchain & smart contracts without ever needing to touch any of the existing coins, or even to have coins at all.

>>11853478
market cycles, remember that chart, 'maximum financial opportunity' ? well that is now, when everyone is shitting their pants

>>11854428
Alts or BTC or both? what is a better buy

>>11854414
Why would you invest resources into developing your own solution when you can use an existing one?
Decentralised oracle network as a service.

>>11854471

Because it's cheaper in the long run. Your question is like asking... why would a person buy a house when they can rent the same house?

And frankly, the amount of resources to develop their own solution isn't that much, because they already have most of it set up with their existing systems.

Companies already have an ability to communicate with each other. They already have the ability to verify transactions at thousands of retail establishments.

But again, there is a bit problem with decentralized transaction verification. If you were moving millions of dollars from point A to point B, would YOU trust some random person you don't know? I sure as hell wouldn't.

So let's talk blockchain for a moment. Let's say that a group of companies transact business among themselves on a regular basis (like a clearing house).

So they set up a private blockchain ledger. And since they don't require tokens, they remove the artificial limits that slow down transaction verification.

So what do they do? All of them verify transactions, and since everything is verified by all, they now have a system of verified transactions where every counterparty has signed off on it.

All of this being done without a decentralized server, without the need for any token/coin, done quicker than the existing crypto system, with far more security.

Again, the bottom line is.... the technology behind blockchain and smart contracts might be useful, but the coins, the tokens, and the existing crypto infrastructure is redundant, and it's cheaper for the big players to just eliminate it.

>>11854440
99% of alts will not survive.
>alts or BTC?
Take a guess

>>11853521
This.
I don't think that was the bubble, I think we'll see the bubble over the next couple years. It's probably not Bitcoin dependent either. it's going to be ethereum, accounting, automation, ai etc

>>11854186
You fucked up senpai
2018....$ 50.000, some are listed at 600k

>>11853859
>DLT is going to go away
It's not going to be the currencies, it's going to be utility tokens that provide real services to permissioned blockchains.
End to end automation and security. The salaries of thousands of white collar workers flowing to /biz/ pockets

>>11853859
>>11854007
Someone bought high and sold low. Don't worry I'll happily sell my bags to you when we're at the peak of the next bubble, remember always buy high and sell low my friend.

>>11853478
We are at "first sell off" one the meme chart

>>11854787

Yes but that was the super-special bear. There were only a limited number. And you know... you would have been stupid not to have paid that kind of money for something as rare and as special as that, right?

Translation: It was filled with magic beans.

>>11853543
Yep this is 1998 te multi trillioinare bullrun will happen in the next 3 years which will be crucial for crypto

>>11854554
>>11854414
>>11854361
>>11854335
My god, this feels like reading Krugman's opinion on the internet in 1996. You have literally no clue where the world is heading. We no longer live in unipolar world where the western banking system can control every economic transaction the happens in the world. We live in a multipolar globalized world where investment and value will flow to the most efficient places, and when american and euro politicians start trying to block these flows, like Trump stupid tariffs, smart people will just abandon the dollar and the american banking system..

>this time it bursted for good i swear

>>11853478
All I will say is patience my friend

>>11853478
crypto bubble will 'pop' from several hundred trillion, eventually setting arroind 80T, equivalent to the global stock market cap

these are just local bubbles that are part of the game. the real bubble is far far ahead.

>>11854554
Renting infrastructure is a proven business model. The vast majority of orgs do not have the capability or resources to create their own solution.

With respect to transaction verification, I might trust a person or persons that have a reputation to uphold. I could be selective, depending on the criticality of the transaction.

If I am not mistaken, you're suggesting that the prospective users might band together and create a private solution to be used between themselves. I think this is by no means outside of the realm of possibility. But then your use cases are initially restricted to this group of orgs. I think it is unlikely that the demand for this technology (if it is adopted) would be so limited. It makes more sense then, to have decentralised infrastructure which can be used by anyone.

Moreover, Nazarov makes the point that the advantage of smart contracts is the very fact that they are decentralised and end-to-end tamper-proof. By definition, if they do not execute on decentralised infrastructure, you lose these benefits.

>>11853551
That's the same thing that I think as well.

>>11854933

The quotes near the bottom make perfect sense, especially since I'm the one who made them. Thank you for including me in your infographic.

>>11854984

Let me clarify:

There already exists the idea of a "clearing house", which already acts as a means to transfer, verify and mediate transactions among larger institutions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearing_house_(finance)

So in terms of large transfers between financial institutions, there already exists a mechanism. There may be improvements to the METHOD of handling the transaction or the ledger, but the improvements will be within the existing system and not by the creation of an outside system. This is especially true at <current year> because, so far, cypto does not have regulation, and regulation is the key to organized and stable contracts.

But let's look at the individual:

The average user of money doesn't really care HOW the transaction takes place, only that it DOES take place, that it is nearly instantaneous, and that there is a process in place to mediate disputes.

So whether you buy your cup of coffee in "bitcoin" or in "dollars" or in "Euros" or in any other type of currency (generally) doesn't matter to the user. All they care about is whether they can get their cup of coffee and finish heading to work.

The value in any currency is a combination of things which include: ease of use, universality, the ability to store wealth, the ability to enforce value, and the long-term confidence of the user.

So far, crypto fails in all of these. As a store of wealth it fails because the value is anything but stable. It doesn't have the full faith and credit of a government backing it up; it can't (currently) be used as a payment method in very many places; and all of these have eroded the confidence of all but the most die-hard believer.

(more in next comment)

>>11855141
Just to chime in before your next comment: to be clear, I think the idea of crypto as money is foolish. I think we are in agreement there.

>>11855141

(continued)

It seems as if the goal of crypto is to digitally replace gold as a universal store of wealth.

Theoretically this makes some sense because it's moronic that gold would be a universal store of wealth in the first place. Really the only reason why gold works at all (aside from the scarcity) is the fact that for 2700 years people have "agreed" that gold has value.

So from that standpoint, if millions of people got together and decided that bitcoin has "value", and if they agreed to be bound by this, there is no reason why it wouldn't work, because it is the universal agreement that GIVES it value.

But... this is a major uphill battle since doing so would require those who already possess wealth to arbitrarily transfer it to other people for no reason.

If I, for example, decide that the "anon" is the new form of money, and I print a bunch and pass out some of it, I'm essentially trying to create a system where I, by definition, start with all of the wealth.

I can only imagine that this will be met with universal scorn.

But right now, bitcoin (or other crypto) don't have an independent "value". Their only "value" comes from it's ability to be converted to other "real" currencies (like dollars, euros, gold)

So crypto (for now) is trying to be a middleman where no middleman is needed.

>>11854918
this

>>11855175
Crypto clearly has a use case for illegal activity. This will hold true unless there is a serious crackdown. For this reason its value is non-zero.

I agree that crypto replacing gold, or similar, is unrealistic.

The value of crypto lies, as you previously mentioned, in the underlying tech, which can be used to implement decentralised smart contracts, identity mgmt, health records etc. 99% of these use cases do not require a token.

Chainlink is a promising project for which the token actually serves a purpose.

For the most part, I agree with what you are saying.

>>11855165

Sorry. Wrote and posted the last comment before I refreshed and saw this comment.

So what, then, is the role of crypto? If it's not a "currency" what is it? A middleman in transactions between other currencies? Mind you, I'm not talking about the role of blockchain or even smart contracts, but of the token/coin itself.

Because, again, you can have blockchain and smart contracts without tokens, you simply need to eliminate the outsourced/distributed transaction verification.

And I would argue, again, that outsourced/distributed transaction verification is a weakness, not a strength.

I mean, I get that a lot of people are behind crypto because they want to "fight the man" and eliminate all governments from money and transactions, but that isn't going to work in the real world until there is nearly universal acceptance; and that isn't going to happen without price stability and nearly universal use.

Right now, there are only a handful of companies who accept bitcoin; and even those don't really "use" bitcoin, they simply allow a transaction at which point the bitcoin is immediately translated back to the home currency (dollars, euros, etc)

>>11855175
I'm not gonna enter a pointless argument, but you are grossly underestimating the geopolitcal threats to the USD and most major national currencies. Blockchain and cryptocurrencies can give poor countries an economic stability comparable to developed countries, and with the ever growing costs of bureaucrats and political systems in the west we will very likely see capital flight to those places, not to mention the potential for growth. Once capital flight hits critical levels and western governments start trying to tackle it we will see how reliable and useful is the western banking system and those fiat currencies. You seem to ignore the costs attached to the current banking system and how smart investors in the future will simply get the fuck out.

>>11855257
>Because, again, you can have blockchain and smart contracts without tokens, you simply need to eliminate the outsourced/distributed transaction verification.
How do you propose to reap the benefits of decentralised smart contracts if you are centralising the transaction verification? Is that not paradoxical? Maybe I misunderstand you.

The next bubble will be Mars its the perfect speculative tool, there just needs to be some sort of vision. Suppose its rich with natural resources, companies start mining there and construction companies start building cities to support the infrastructure. There will be a huge goldrush for Marsian Startups.

>>11855175
try again

>>11855289

Let's talk about that then. You are talking (I assume) about the impending or future collapse of the USD. Let's talk about that.

If the USD collapses, then the USA collapses too. What would be the side effect of that? It would probably be similar to when Rome collapsed, hundreds of years of dark ages; lawlessness; poverty; the destruction of world trade and the world economy.

So, when this happens; when the ATM's stop working and the grocery stores stop having food... how long do you expect to have your stable internet account?

Because the last time I checked, crypto requires a functioning internet to even operate. How are you going to process your transactions without electricity?

That is one of the main philosophical flaws of crypto. When the world is functioning, crypto can function. But if the shit really hits the fan, your cypto will be nothing more than electrons stored on a dead hard drive, unusable until society rebuilds itself.

>>11855329

The cheapest Lambo (the Urus) currently goes for for around $200k. If you believe your graphic, that bitcoin is going to be 200k each in 2020, you really are living in a dream world.

>>11855300
I question the value of decentralized smart contracts.

It might be a plus for person-person transactions, but how many of those does a person really make? Maybe I'm abnormal, but I've made exactly one person-to-person transaction since 2016, when I bought a police scanner.

Every other transaction has had either my bank or my credit card company acting as a mediator between myself and a retail establishment.

If I have read the documentation correctly, the whole idea of decentralized smart contracts is to replace one trusted source with another. So, instead of two banks moving money between each other with their own ledger acting as the verification and proof of the transaction, they would replacing it with a third party who would verify it?

Where is the value in that? I mean, I know it CAN be done, but where is the value in actually doing it?

>>11853478

primary use case scams > oversaturated and hype gone

fidgetspinners 2.0 time scales differ not much else does

>>11853551
>Usable standard
>>11855339
The world is the US of A huh if US has no internet no one does?

>>11855339
>Let's talk about that then. You are talking (I assume) about the impending or future collapse of the USD. Let's talk about that.
No, I'm talking about the rise of cryptocurrencies as an investment vehicle. The dollar doesn't have to vollapse for that, it will just inflate relative to cryptocurrencies. The rise of the yuan didn't lead to the us dollar collapse, but unlike the yuan bitcoin cannot be inflated to keep its value stable.

>>11855243

Yes, illegal transactions are the greatest value of crypto, though I don't think the market is large enough to support the entire crypto industry, and there is still the problem of how to eventually convert them back to USD or Euro, etc.

In a way, it is very similar to the system pioneered by the Rothschild bank, the idea of using a ledger transaction to safely transfer wealth.

During a war (I forget which) a country was having trouble moving their payroll to their soldiers. They would have a wagon full of gold coins, and it would be hijacked and lost.

So the Rothschild's invented (?) the idea of a ledger transaction between cities. The gold could be deposited in one city, a transaction was noted, and then it could be withdrawn immediately from another city, eliminating the transit risk.

>>11853478

Crypto hasn't ".com'd" yet. During the .com bubble, every Tom Dick and Harry was throwing money into internet stocks. This was easy because the stock market had already existed for 100+ years and if you want to buy something all you needed to do is pick up the phone and call your broker.

This ease of access does not yet exist in the crypto market. It's too difficult for the layman to enter without 3rd party help. The run-up in 2017 was caused by tech savvy millennials who know how to operate smartphones.

The REAL money will flow in when the market has been dumbed down enough for middle-agers and soon-to-retirees. Those are the people with the most discretionary income to burn.

>>11855418
>The world is the US of A huh if US has no internet no one does?

Over time, yes. Again, I am talking about what happens if the dollar collapses. If that were to happen it would sink ships all over the world, the world economy would collapse in a matter of weeks, and society would break down in a matter of months.

If the USD or the USA were to collapse, people would be back to horse carts in 5 years.

>>11855418

I would also add... 99% of internet traffic goes through undersea cables. Here's a map showing where these cables are.

The US is a necessary part of a functioning world internet.

>>11855478
Think of it as a wealth pie. 30 years ago dollar denominated wealth accounted for 50% of the total global wealth and yuan denominated wealth accounted for 5%. The growth thr yuan denominated wealth didn't cause the dollar to collapse but it changed the distribution, now the dollar accounts for 35% and the yuan for 25%, eg. What do you think would have happened the value of the yuan if the chinese government had stopped printing yuans when the chinese economy still accounted for only 5% of the world's wealth?

>>11854838
>Yes but

>>11854835
Honestly the first sell off was 2013. I know firefighters who bought Bitcoin in December. Inb4 Pajeet. If you accuse me of that you are probably one yourself.

>>11855860
And these firefighters (two I know of.) and I don't know more than 6. Are still holding. One was an early adopter I think he had around 100 k worth in December. The other just bought litecoin.

>>11854204

This. A real bubble pops once. Crypto has popped 4 times now and there will be a 5th pop but we will know better next time.

>>11855464

Check out $HODL ETF next week in Switzerland

>>11853551
Chainlink

>>11856739
So the previous "pops" in crypto were just huge corrections?

>>11853958
Yes. This.

>>11854414
>smart contracts don’t require tokens
Holy shit lol

>>11854818
>being this wrong

>>11855478
>1920's, Germany experienced hyperinflation. People resorted to burning cash to stay warm.

>Germany soon was reduced to cave people without electricity.

>>11853958
Would holding the holy trinity of BTC, ETH, LINK also work?

>>11855175
>There's no value in unconfiscable, seamless to move, hard money
kys

>>11855339
>If the USD collapses, then the USA collapses too. What would be the side effect of that? It would probably be similar to when Rome collapsed, hundreds of years of dark ages; lawlessness; poverty; the destruction of world trade and the world economy.

It already collapsed in 2008, we just need another 2008 and it's coming soon. Bitcoin and Asia will be dominating in 2030. There will be no "years of dark ages". Go study John Nash's Ideal Money and why you don't matter if you own no bitcoin in the information age.

>>11857153

Germany isn't/wasn't The United States.

>>11857272

It didn't collapse in 2008 We were on our way in that direction, but the govt stepped up in time to save the world

>>11853958
I would add Nano in there for fast coffee purchases and that would be the holy five coins to never sell.

>>11855321
>Marsian
Its just Martian not Marsian. But you are right desu. The first "interplanetary tech and stuff" will be a big bubble until an asteroid wrecks some companies prized robot ship.
>>11857288
You make good points. Crypto isnt about still owning money in a mad max world its more for a 1984 world. Ill give you the perfect example that happened recently. people escaping venezeula were searched for gold and valuables before leaving. They can search but not find nor even take bitcoin via capital controls. Thats where it will shine. The ability for individuals to control their capital in a semi private way.

>>11854186
I agree. The beanie Babies and crypto is like the tulip craze. Only it wasnt so high and not that quick.

>>11854335
>tries to buy in america with canadian bank
>declined

Where did those dollars come from? Who gets to control the 'monetary policy'?

This is actually the first good thread ive read on biz for weeks.

Bullish