Cool Breeze wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 2:24 pm To say that BTC doesn't have underlying value is to fundamentally not understand bitcoin. If you don't understand it (I've listed these reasons for months now, it's a waste of time repeating them all again though I did some above) then you are STILL are left to explain why billionaire investors are buying it. Wanna get laughed at? Go tell someone that Saylor, Musk, Tudor Jones, O'Leary, Druckenmiller - you name him - bought BTC for the hell of it. Yeah, they did it just for fun. WTF are you guys serious?
I've already covered this.
Higgenbotham wrote: Wed Feb 17, 2021 11:44 amHiggenbotham wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 10:37 pmAs far as Musk and Saylor go, it's impossible to know why they are gambling on bitcoin. But let me offer a possible reason.Cool Breeze wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:27 pm I've answered the value question many times, but surely you can't think that myself, Elon Musk, Michael Saylor are idiots.
“You only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out.” — Warren Buffetthttps://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/ ... 9b993a226/Shortly after March 20, 2000, the worst day of Michael Saylor's life, one of his blue-chip Washington lawyers, Brendan Sullivan, promised him that everything was about to get worse.
This was just after MicroStrategy Inc., the company Saylor led, had been forced to issue a "restatement" of its recent financial records, effectively turning two years of profits into two years of losses; it was after the company's stock price fell from $226.75 to $86.75 a share in a single day of trading.
So Saylor hit a speed bump about the time the Internet bubble burst. Now he's borrowed to buy bitcoin.Higgenbotham wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2020 5:08 am Say, like Trump, you've been in the real estate business, and you recognize it's a bubble and has been for a long time. It's logical to say, well, it's been a bubble for a long time and the way to address it has been to buy the dip and then wait for some excesses, trim holdings, wait for the next dip, etc. The practical way to be successful in navigating the bubble has been to take on debt and assume the general trajectory is onward and upward to bigger and bigger bubbles with speed bumps along the road. People who have the constitution to operate in that manner are the only ones who have amassed fortunes since the 1987 crash (Hendricks Holdings, for example) and among that class of people a certain groupthink has developed and a level of genius is inappropriately attributed to that kind of thinking (another more widely known example, the cult of Warren Buffet which would never have existed absent the bubble environment since 1987).
A friend of mine dug this up. I hadn't seen it. The question is when does just another speed bump turn into a brick wall for these gamblers.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB967502678567820619Troubled MicroStrategy Dumps Cruises, Other Lavish Worker Perks to Cut Costs
By Julia AngwinStaff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal
Aug. 29, 2000 4:18 am ET
The party is over at MicroStrategy Inc., literally.
As part of a cost-cutting move, the struggling Vienna, Va., software firm will no longer take all 2,300 employees on annual Caribbean cruises or fly workers' friends and family to Virginia for annual company visits.
Also, the company announced it will lay off 10% of its work force in a move the company says will save $25 million annually.
Higgenbotham wrote: Tue Jan 26, 2021 4:15 pm So when you see the billionaires and family offices like Tudor Jones and Druckenmiller getting involved in this, these are the guys who operated solely in the post 1971 bubble environment. They understand bubbles and they know what they are doing with regard to bubbles, but in my opinion that is all they know and they became billionaires solely because they are able to latch onto that kind of thinking (up or down). My view is that we have been in this bubble environment for a long time and it seems normal but is in fact quite abnormal and when it reverses, it will do so with an absolute vengeance. This is a multi-century extreme in my opinion. Few will survive the financial fallout and even fewer will survive at all. It's for that reason that I don't want to spend a lot of time debating this (I think full moon and tim are right, and it doesn't matter much whether they are right on the details or not - a bomb shelter in a remote location is good for many things besides surviving a nuclear war). I believe we are in the last days of the current paradigm, as many other posters do.