I just tried to do the math on how much he’s lost and I have to turn my phone sideways to see the number
thinking alot this morning about the 100s of billions of dollars of electricity, computing equipment and human capital that has been absolutely incinerated to produce these digital beanie babies.
I understand the link 100% it just does not interest me or have anything to do with why I got into crypto or NFTs. Sort of, yes. Bored Apes are the easiest NFT group to scam. It's one of the most recognized projects and a leader in sales volume. Their Discord has been hacked multiple times with announcements promising a free mint. People are clicking the link instead of taking the time to look at the URL or the transaction they are approving in their wallet. And almost instantly their top valued NFTs are drained from their wallet. It's possible to have some of these NFTs or wallets frozen, but it's about as user-friendly as the malicious links that are being sent out that are tricking people out of their NFTs/crypto. You can also revoke the permissions to the transaction that allows the transfer of your crypto, but that's not really ideal if your stuff has already been stolen. Signing or approving a message on MetaMask is like talking in a foreign language. It is incredibly difficult to understand what you are signing. And people are taking advantage of this.
Where Eagles Dare its actually worse. According to a Forbes article from a month ago Few companies have hitched their wagons to Bitcoin as Microstrategy has. The software company, which does not provide services in the cryptocurrency sector, has plowed over $4.5 billion into buying Bitcoin at the direction of Saylor, its CEO. MicroStrategy held 129,218 bitcoins on its balance sheet as of March 31. That mega bet is now underwater. MicroStrategy’s average purchase price for Bitcoin was $30,700 per token
but he had those billions to lose in the first place meaning he is much smarter than you as no one utterly stupid or undeserving has ever made that much money before.
Like many people in that situation they are amazing in one narrow area and mistake that as brilliance at all things. A more simple version of this is mistaking luck for ability.
I think it honestly should interest you. Libertarianism is a religion of selfishness and no compassion.
Don't like Saylor? Cool. His time horizon on the investment is 10+ years, so maybe check in on a longer timeframe. Not particularly surprising to anyone paying attention that an asset that previously dropped to under $2, then $20, then $200, then $2,000, has now dropped to under $20,000. It's had 80+% drawdowns multiple times in its history. But set aside Saylor, Ray Dalio owns btc. Stan Druckenmiller owns btc. Bill Miller has like 50% of his net worth in btc. George Soros, Steve Coen, Peter Thiel, Ricardo Salinas, Paul Tudor Jones, etc. Largely some of the best historical allocators of capital. Perhaps they've spent a bit more time understanding it than the average guy itt.
I misread "Bill Miller has like 50% of his net worth in btc" as Bill Maher and literally lol'd but it was too good to be true.
Was interesting seeing some btc maxis critiquing this themselves, in that past performance isn't predictive of the future so be careful and take profits
I don't claim that past performance is predictive of the future, but if an asset has had multiple 80+% drawdowns, it's not terribly surprising when it has another. It takes an awful lot of ignoring to simply write off that some of the largest and best investors in history own the asset. And I don't know what you're referring to on the maxis critiquing "this." Bottom line, if the investment thesis is that btc is a $10+ trillion asset over the next decade, then a price drop is simply an opportunity to buy more.
Most boring poster too. Just constantly points to YouTube videos or tweets from hucksters. No original thought. As bland as his username since his other one got owned.
What was the older username? Did someone hack TMB Blockchain and take it like one of those priceless Bored Apes?
And pointing to what rich people say as if those people haven't made their entire fortune off the backs of regular folks. Maybe think deeply about that as well.
Let's not leave out that once someone is considered a successful investor by the wider public (Warren Buffett is the prime example of this) he gets to play on an unlevel playing field where his copycats give him an enormous cushion to make some random moronic investment and still make money from it.
A bunch of rich folks who even if they held to 0 wouldn't have an impact on their daily life would not be that comforting to point to
When you say an “asset” is a hedge against inflation, a good store of value and a better currency it is hard to reconcile multiple 80+% drawdowns and those three points. Should we bring up big names that think it is a ponzi scheme? Like the biggest name in investing for example? As is the thought on any asset where an investor believes in the underlying vehicle.
This is silly. Pointing to successful investors for investment advice is kinda the whole point. That list is a who's who of the most well respected and successful macro investors in the world. And I get that you all like doing the "they didn't earn it and should be fed to lions" thing, but that's irrelevant to the game being played. Holding cash is not an option as monetary policy has forced every person into being an investment expert on the side in an attempt to keep up with inflation. So ya I guess you could listen to the opinions of people with poor historical investment records. I'll stick with a different approach.
Honestly the ponzi thing is boring as fuck to me and not remotely accurate. So sure go for it. It's a waste of my time. I don't rely on 90 year olds to understand emerging technologies. Dalio was wrong on btc for years and did the whole "blockchain not btc" thing. And I repeatedly called him wrong on that itt. Buffett and Munger's position is no different. Gates position with respect to nfts and "crypto" I largely agree with. To the extent he would say the same about btc, I think he's wrong.
You don't know a single thing about me, whether that's volunteer time, voting history, political stance, charitable donations, or anything similar. This board has tons of CURRENT posters who have made disgusting racial comments in the past. Odd how that's ignored.
You're just asking to get rug pulled or pumped & dumped if you're heeding publicly available free investment advice from the "experts". Those people seeing it are already late to the party friendo.
My former employer relies super heavily on microstrategy reporting tools. Their shit falls apart when it is unavailable for a few hours here and there.
Do we have enough data to know by percentage how successful these people are or is it just getting romanticized by wealth in general?
Yeah, I posted in the original statement. He's lost 1.4 billion. Bur we should listen to this sound investor buying a "store of wealth"
Most of that list made public comments starting in like 2020 after I'd been in the space for years. So nah. It's also not remotely "late" for btc, whether that's measured in market cap versus addressable market, ease of access (spot etfs, etc.), government regulation (just starting after the Biden executive order), user adoption, etc.
If these guys are such geniuses and knew past history. Why didn't they short it when they knew an 80% contraction was gonna 100% happen
Guys, it not a loss if you don't sell! Spoiler It is however a loss when you liquidated. Which is definitely going to happen and it will be hilarious.
Do we know if Google, Apple, and Amazon are successful companies or is it just getting romanticized by market cap in general? "No" I don't have access to their detailed internal yearly performance records. It's typically difficult to amass billions of dollars in wealth while being an unsuccessful investor. But you'll probably disagree with that. Regardless of wealth, I think it's safe to say that the list is collectively a bit more informed about macro investing and portfolio construction than some random internet posters. It's kinda been their job for decades, and they've seemingly done alright. This whole back and forth is bizarre. Would you rather listen to opinions from people with poor track records who manage small amounts of money? Or people with successful histories who manage billions of dollars? I've pointed to a ton in the latter group who are pro-btc. The people on the other side are....Buffett and Munger? Gates maybe? Cool point conceded that a few rich people who don't really fall into the same money manager bucket as those above are not pro-btc.
I just wouldn't draw big conclusions from them without knowing details and only going off public statements but that's me. I'm inherently skeptical of people trying to sell me something.
I notice you skipped the first point. Immediately went to the second point and tried to discredit the other investors by age as an example. So basically your “young” investors know more and since they agree with your point you view them as correct. This is the textbook definition of confirmation bias.