/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>13328270
its pretty obvious at this point that we'll never hit ATH again and 2017/early 2018 was the last chance to exit at insane prices. Biz will continue buying crypto throughout the 2020s only to watch their $ evaporate, but like the degenerate gamblers they are they will double down after each major dip.

>>13328294

Could not have put in any other way. Keep in mind, i only took the black pill this week. It finally sunk in.

Yes yes just like Mt Gox ruined BTC

>>13328317

>same situation sir!

>>13328330
ok have fun fomoing in

If BTC dumps, another coin will replace it because no matter whan you say faggot OP, there is a use for crypto and so there is value associated to it.

>>13328389
ohh yes, plenty of bags to be mined and sold. After all you will keep buying. Only ones making money in the coming years will be miners, exchanges and scammy devs

>>13328389

Nigga wake the fuck up. The entire market has lost all its normie money volume. They cashed out and never came back. Yes there is use for some crypto but if you think we are going to see coings going 500% overnight you are lying to yourself. Again, wake the fuck up.

>>13328416
POS dumps on miners and we're still early stages in block chain development and different coins are working on different things.

Cardano is trying to get third world countries to adopt crypto currencies due to people not having access to banks. If third worlders adopt a new currency that would see BTC level growth.

BTC was literally cryptocurrency 1.0, if a shitcoin like cardano became an official currency for third worlders than you'll have new money coming into crypto by the millions. All it takes a push in the right direction and I get the feeling the people coming in on shitcoins will eventually move to BTC if it's still the major crypto.

>>13328270
Norman bucks didnt pump it to 20k, however a bunch of normans did fomo in around 20k

>all these faggots who think the same normies won't FOMO in again when BTC or any other instrument hits new ATH

>>13328484
>ada bagholder
now it makes sense, keep coping

>>13328270
>>13328294

Is there any reason why you think this? I don't really care either way I am just hodling 1-2 BTC permanently as my lottery ticket in case it actually does go to 100K. But consider this:

BTC will NEVER hit over 21M market cap. Let's assume for a moment BTC is going to be the top used crypto as value storage or for transactions. Currently we have a circulating supply of 17.5M or so with a market cap of $90B. Now for reference there is at LEAST in USD alone around $10.5 trillion dollars in physical currency (which is about 115X the market cap of BTC). This does not include value stored in the form of debts, value held in banks, etc. Now I'm a brainlet so if there's something I'm missing feel free to tell me how stupid I am, but let's ask another question.

WHY would any cryptocurrency ever hold the value they do? Supply and demand, the crypto in question MUST be used on a daily basis for some reason other than the speculation of future price increases. The supply half is covered by scarcity and the reasons mentioned above as to judge the true value of bitcoin in the scenario that it's actually used on a global scale. If bitcoin is actually used by your every day person as the primary currency used for crypto transactions I don't really see why it WOULDN'T be worth 100K if fully adopted. But that's the question isn't it? WILL bitcoin ever be adopted for use by normal people?

>>13328637
cant scale for mass use, for something to be valuable you need scarcity + utility. The price is being driven primarily by the scarcity + speculation factor, not so much utility.
In addition to being shit for transactions, there is no way to price goods without comparing to the USD and if you're gonna price crypto in USD then might as well just use something like tether cause its stable. So if we see adoption it will be in the form of a stable currency backed by govt/federal reserve, not tether though cause its on the omni platform which is btc based and slow as fuck

>>13328489
DELETE THIS

>>13328696
globalism is coming wether you like it or not and with that will come a global currency. The only feasable way to do this is via crypto. When the next global war kicks off, nobody will be signing up to the draft considering we now have the internet and too much diversity.
Get on the crypto train before it's too late.

p.s my bags are in HOT

>>13328745
i didnt say there wont be global currency or that it wont be crypto. If there is global currency (and its crypto) it wont be something which pumps and dumps like btc but something fast (like XRP) and stable (like tether). So it wont be something you can get rich off by buying early. You cant expect a global currency to have ponzi like characteristics

>>13328270
>>13328294
>>13328303

You people weren't around in 2013, were you? Your posts reek of 2017 newfag.

>>13328784
>it wont be the genesis project with the longest chain
>it will be like a scamcoin or a shitcoin backed by fiat!
stop making predictions lel

Imagine being as fucking dumb as op. Never gonna make it

>>13328696
Unfortunately I haven't done enough research into the actual tech behind it, takes a long time to read all of this shit. I don't really disagree that we won't see the actual currency used might be something developed by the government themselves or something like Tether. But this doesn't really mean that BTC won't be the most valuable coin because it's transaction speed is slower, this just means that BTC will be a primary store of value while in a developed crypto industry people may be holding in bitcoin if the price becomes stable in the future for the simple fact that it's the most well known.

Is it true that higher volumes exchanged result in a more stable price? Because the idea is that in the future BTC will have a massive increase in value which in of itself creates the stability. What makes the USD, the pound, yen, etc stable? When we even mention stability we're talking about the ability to exchange a currency at one point in time for the same value forward or backwards in time. When you look at it this way there is no such thing as a stable currency, in fact the only way you don't lose money is to transfer the value associated with whatever you currently own into something that will be more desirable in the future. If you hold USD it is losing value as we speak due to inflation. In 20 years from now when you're spending $3 for a Coke and a normal person is being paid $15 min wage in Montana I think $5K/BTC is going to be a joke assuming it doesn't lose popularity.

>>13328803

kek if you were around in 2013 and you are still browsing /biz/ you fucked up beyond comprehension. The anons who made it and became millionaires have already left this shilling shithole.

>>13328841
I didn't buy in because I just turned 18 and didn't trust gox. Also /biz/ wasn't even a thing until 2015. You're so new you don't even know about the cycles.

>>13328851

kek they have been talking about btc on /g/ while it was 50 cent.

By the way, how much of a brainlet am I for using Robinhood for storing my crypto? I get the entire idea is antithetical to crypto and they probably sneak in an increase in the price to buy it, but isn't it theoretically more secure? At the end of the day it's simply an account tied to me personally, I am never going to use BTC at this point in time and I only bought it for investment purposes. Assuming BTC goes up the USD equivalent of my ownership will rise with it. Should I go through the effort of transferring my money from RH all the way to Binance? Maybe I'll just keep my 2 BTC in RH and in the future use an actual wallet.

>>13328696
That's really interesting considering there's people who have baseball cards that serve next to no utility but sheer scarcity can increase their value to unimaginable proportions. You just have a really small mind that's all. It's ok buddy.

>>13329047

So you are basically proving his point that btc has no intrinsic value.

>>13329072
He is saying both scarcity and popularity on their own will carry BTC to a new ATH on it's own even if it WAS completely useless. You can say the same about any currency, the point behind the currency is the value perceived first and foremost, not always on the actual use behind it. This is because currency is a social tool, cryptocurrency simply has both social AND actual intrinsic value, but you do not need both to make currency valuable. Likewise, something could be the "best thing since sliced bread" but if everyone looks at it in a negative light it's value is less than what it "should" be

>>13329047
its not their scarcity which makes them valuable brainlet but the demand for them, and there's demand cause it provides some utility, even if meaningless. Way to show how much of an idiot you are

>>13328637
>>13329098
btc or any other crypto literally cannot be used for payments of goods&services without it being pegged to the dollar or other fiat. If all fiat vanished and only crypto remained, how do you know what to charge for your goods? 100 sats? 500? 1000?

>>13329218
Well of course not, that's pretty obvious. However that's for now. Value is always determined by what people are willing to pay for something, realistically BTC would always be tied to fiat even in a world where nobody ever uses fiat anymore (like how nobody uses gold or silver to buy things anymore). You would see a slow increase in BTC or crypto ____'s value with simultaneous adoption into everyday life reflected in that until it reaches a point where only millenials in their 80s are found writing chec-, oops I mean using cash.

>>13329218
>>13329248
I forgot, as for how you would determine the value of an individual product it would be the same as anything else. Company A simply devices arbitrarily that they need to increase revenue for shareholders so they test the waters and slowly increase prices for their products until it reaches the prime earning potential. I'm no marketing or finance guy though so I don't know how they do this

>>13329218
>If all fiat vanished and only crypto remained, how do you know what to charge for your goods?
same way ppl figure it out in video game auction houses id assume

>>13329248
>>13329258
cost of production + profit margin. You need to pay wagies to make your product. In an expanding world economy it'd make no sense to pay them in btc or any other currency with hard cap. With automation and mass production things become cheaper therefore worth less sats, something you paid 1k sats for could cost 100 sats 5 years later, therefore everyone would hold their btc and just use fiat, making btc nothing but a ponzi

>>13329344
difference is video game currency (you're probably thinking WoW) is infinite, there is no limit to the gold/silver/copper dropped by mobs. Not the same with BTC

look at this fucking bitcoin complex shitshow. dividing into new "ABCDE" bitcoins.

this stupid shitshow was the sign that btc is going to die. bitcoin is 10 year old obsolete technology. it ain't helping that it has pyramid-scheme ponzi reputation among normies.

GL explaining complex adresses, wallet set ups and qr-codes to rich boomer grandpa.


when people realise that bitcoin is shit, its gonna be epic flash dump, probably some other coin in top 10. that 90 billion gonna flow to ripple and eth.

>>13328270
you think normies have money? nobody has money. all it will take are some more rich fuckers with actual money.

>>13329345
When the daily trade volume hits such a point to where an entire planet full of normies is using something there won't be any significant fluctuation. Also, how does an increase of supply of a product correlate to the decrease in value of a currency? Not saying you're wrong but I don't study this shit in depth, I don't see why the decrease in price of item X makes currency Y less valuable. If anything that means liquidity is more valuable in your scenario, but this is purely dependent on what you're exchanging it for.

>>13329401
If bitcoin was going to flash dump the perfect time for it would have been at the start of 2018. You know, when it DID dump and normies panic sold thinking crypto was useless.

>>13329401
Faketoshi is not Satoshi so I'm not sure what your chart is trying to accomplish except highlighting the obvious scams so I'll go with that. Most normies I know don't have any opinion one way or the other about BTC or crypto in general. In fact a few of them are pretty open to the idea, only one person I work with thinks it's a scam and he bases it off what some idiot at the NY Times said about it.

>>13329513
When the daily trade volume hits such a point to where an entire planet full of normies is using something there won't be any significant fluctuation.
yes this is what crypto bulls believe, that at some price range btc will 'stabilize'. What they dont say is that whatever the price, there will still be people sitting on thousands of btc. People like to bitch about banks fiat printing but imagine the power these whales would have in a btc economy.
>how does an increase of supply of a product correlate to the decrease in value of a currency?
it doesnt make the currency worth less, just the item costs less. Everything should be getting cheaper, reason it doesnt is because they are creating new money faster than production increase.
So if X tons of milk are produced and suddenly some new tech or whatever increases production of milk by 100%, and you used to pay 1000 sats for 1 litre now you pay around 500 sats, making you feel stupid for ever paying 1k sat for it. You dont have this issue with fiat because 'meh, inflation would've made it cost that anyway'. With btc there is a hard cap on amount of sats making it pointless to spend them if you expect an ever increasing adoption (of crypto) and an increase in production of goods & services due to automation/tech advances

>>13329650
sorry i meant to say you dont have this issue with fiat cause its supply is unlimited, you dont feel those dollars you were paying for the milk are worth as much as is you were paying with btc

>>13329650
>What they dont say is that whatever the price, there will still be people sitting on thousands of btc. People like to bitch about banks fiat printing but imagine the power these whales would have in a btc economy.
What's your point? This is the exact same for any currency. No matter what system you have the 80/20 rule applies. What's to keep Warren Buffet from tanking USD?

>So if X tons of milk are produced and suddenly some new tech or whatever increases production of milk by 100%, and you used to pay 1000 sats for 1 litre now you pay around 500 sats, making you feel stupid for ever paying 1k sat for it
So you honestly believe that people instead of saying "awwww yea, milk is half price now!" they'll instead be worrying that they'll be spending even less in the future? How the fuck does that work exactly? You're talking about the reversal of inflation, which is the entire fucking point. Who is going to be worried that their money is worth more? You're making a very good case for why BTC will only increase in value if it's popularity stays the same while inflation wreaks havoc on people's wallets. You're essentially saying that because people will hold the average person will have the foresight to see that and then as a result not want BTC in the first place because it increases in value?

How would it make it pointless to spend BTC? You still need things to survive, they'll just be hesitant to use BTC but how exactly does this mean they won't want to own any?

>>13329679
The supply being unlimited is the entire reason why BTC will keep rising in value when compared to other currencies, that's the point. You seem to acknowledge that but I don't see how you come to the conclusion that an increase in value creates a decrease in value on it's own. This would be like saying gold is going to increase in value I better hold onto it instead of spending it right now. Yea no shit.

>>13328830
Nigga please you talk bullshit

>>13329724
>What's to keep Warren Buffet from tanking USD?
you gotta be kidding me. Even if rothschild themselves decided to crash the usd whats there to gain? it would be for a very good reason. With btc there is always more btc to gain either pumping or dumping.
Also most of the rich people do something with those usd, they invest in companies that produce. Why would anyone invest their btc if they can make more profit speculating on the currency itself?
>So you honestly believe that people instead of saying "awwww yea, milk is half price now!" they'll instead be worrying that they'll be spending even less in the future? How the fuck does that work exactly? You're talking about the reversal of inflation, which is the entire fucking point. Who is going to be worried that their money is worth more?
im saying no one would (who isnt a nigger) would spend a single satoshi if the currency everyone uses to price goods & services is hard capped because increasing production means goods get cheaper every year (in satothis), therefore making it pointless to buy stuff with btc
>You still need things to survive, they'll just be hesitant to use BTC but how exactly does this mean they won't want to own any?
exactly they'll use fiat instead, making the point of btc existence stupid but for speculating. Once every one catches up that this is its only real use (taking money from people fomoing at tops, taking btc from people panicking at bottoms), then the demand will decrease and so will the price. Only demand drives the price up and why would there be a demand if everyone thinks its a ponzi? it collapses at some point, after whatever amount of 'cycles'

>>13329754
im just saying if it is pointless to use as currency (just like gold was, too many negatives) then just being scarce is not reason enough to drive up demand unless the entire world gets caught up in a speculation frenzy. These frenzies dont last forever so at some point it collapses. Once its obvious its just a tool for pump and dump then the demand ceases because more and more people get burned on each pnd cycle. Therefore something scarce, which by your logic should increase in price, actually decreases because demand is the only thing that matters

>>13328317
You're retarded if you can't see how the last bubble cycle completely saturated the normie market.

The normies who would have gotten in to crypto now have gotten in to it.
THERE WILL NOT BE ANOTHER SPECULATIVE BUBBLE.

Only true adoption can get this shit going and I'm not sure at all that it will happen.
Who the fuck really needs Bitcoin anyway?
Venezuela and drug dealers (maybe).
If it gets popular for money laundry you can expect a crack down.

Meh, I'm 85 % bearish the next 10 - 15 years, 15 % bullish.
I still think we're overvalued, got to fall another 70 %

The amount of stupidity in this thread is remarkable. A new low for /biz/ for sure

>>13328270
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regeneration_in_humans
have you not heard the old tale that within 7 years your body has completely shed and regenerated. Its not just skin its your brain too. its why bitcoin is fullproof

>>13329828
>>13329864
>whats there to gain?
I don't know why anyone would crash a currency, that's why I asked the question. You proposed that a whale would want to crash BTC I'm simply asking the same question you just did.
>Why would anyone invest their btc if they can make more profit speculating on the currency itself?
Probably because most people aren't speculators, they're normal people that use money to buy normal things. People using BTC to buy things comes AFTER stabilization. we are obviously not in a stabilized situation right now and the question is what the price of each individual BTC is going to look like when it is stable. It will either be a massive unfathomable amount because of mass adoption, or it will be half a penny because BTC will be dead. You tell me which one is more likely, I'm simply saying I don't know but I think there is a chance that it will be the former, so I don't mind tossing in a few grand that most people would waste on car payments to find out.

>im saying no one would (who isnt a nigger) would spend a single satoshi if the currency everyone uses to price goods & services is hard capped because increasing production means goods get cheaper every year (in satothis), therefore making it pointless to buy stuff with btc
I get that and I see your reasoning behind it, but you're thinking like an intelligent person. Most people don't see beyond their $5 coffee, the idea that they might pay less in the future for the latest Switch game isn't going to cross their mind when (((they))) wave shiny objects in front of them. If they DID think like that the world would be a vastly different place, so I don't really consider that to be a likely factor. Maybe you're right but I don't see it happening.

>Exactly they'll use fiat instead
I don't think they'll use fiat if that happens because crypto will already be adopted. It would be similar to us saying "fuck it let's use gold again".

>>13329928
>too long, cont.
I don't know what they'll use but I doubt it will be fiat and this would be over 40 years into the future, I'm not going to pretend to know what they will use because I don't even know if crypto will succeed.

>>13329900
>>13329816
If you are so knowledgeable then why aren't you explaining why it's a retarded idea? Enjoy sitting on the sidelines getting cucked. Even if I go to 0 I've already accounted for the possibility. But when you FOMO if BTC ever goes above $6K I want you to remember this moment.

>>13329945
actually I gotta go now so im bitching out BTC $0EOY confirmed

>>13329928
>I don't know why anyone would crash a currency, that's why I asked the question. You proposed that a whale would want to crash BTC I'm simply asking the same question you just did.
he would want to crash btc to buy more btc cheaper and pump it again. This cant be really done with fiat, not this easily
>People using BTC to buy things comes AFTER stabilization
thats the thing, it never stabilizes as long as fiat exists, because fiat keeps being printed. It would require literally taking over fiat as the standard method of payment, which i dont see happening: wages would get lower (in sats or whatever) each year due to increasing population(competition), this would make people
> Most people don't see beyond their $5 coffee, the idea that they might pay less in the future
start caring big time about this shit and hoard and save every sat they can making them spend less and the economy to sunk. The only benefit i see in this is people returning to whats essential and stopping spending on crap like $5 starbucks.

Btc could've been revolutionary, if only satoshi didnt put a hard cap on it and halved the block reward every 4 years.
Reward should've remained consistent throughout time with no hard cap but known supply rate. With the current model, its gonna take massive mining operations eating megawatts of energy just to obtain what a single pajeet mined in his cpu on 2011. This ponzi like model is what made btc fail as currency.
If supply rate was constant, then as a global currency countries would compete for better and more efficient energy and hardware production. As it is now, whats left to mine is shit compared to whats already circulating that people bought for sub 1k. Get it? I can expand further on all my points as long as this thread doesnt die