oh dear
Cryptocurrency mega-thread
- Thread starter DapperJong
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Nice way to avoid my question. Well, if you're enjoying your 7% p.a. returns from the share market then who am I to judge where you (or anyone else) put your money
I cannot help that you ask the wrong questions
- Jun 14, 2013
- 13,076
- 15,681
- AFL Club
- Essendon
How many bubbles did tulips have? How many bubbles has bitcoin had?
How do you explain the difference?
I think its' a bit premature to make this call, given it's only been around 5 years. Plus it existed at a time of historically low interest rates.
To call it a "Best performing" asset class in history (compared to, say property, gold or stocks), I would want to see how it performs under tightening credit conditions and a number of other conditions and at least 20 years. It wasn't too long ago that people thought crypto might be a "safe" asset like Gold with falling stock/finance markets. That doesn't appear to be true.
When you say something so definitive with such a lack of information, you do sound like you're a member of a cult.
The same blockchain people were also spruiking NFTs. Haven't seen a lot of that about lately.
The tulip stuff is over-played. It wasn't widespread and didn't send people broke. It was a bunch of rich Dutch people faced with a plague playing drunken games with a specific market item. None of them went broke, they were all filthy rich. The nobility weren't involved and obviously neither were the ordinary people of the time.
The main comparison/similarity was that it was done by people with money they could afford to lose. Now that things are tightening, so is the market.
People still grew and sold tulips after the "crash" in value a few months after the plague and drunken winter had passed.
Long (but a very good) thread on the whole FTX/Alameda story:
5 years?
Can you name a better performing asset class then? Especially one that all of us have had the opportunity to invest in.
And it's been around much longer than 5 years...
I asked the other hero that came in here the same question but of course didn't get a response, so I'll ask you.
Do you even know what a blockchain is?
Making statements like this makes you seem like an expert on the subject.
If I was a gambler, I would wager I know more about blockchain than you do
to draw that conclusion from the extent of our discussion merely underlines your poor judgment
Property is probably the best performing asset class. Very difficult to add to the overall stock. Govts have protected land rights for centuries and it keeps improving. Transaction costs are high as a result.
It has multiple uses from accommodation to production. It's been proven for thousands of years that property is a highly sought after asset. Wars have been fought over property going back beyond recorded history.
Recently, it's been doubling in value every what, 8-10 years, for the last 100 years?
Agree, in 2021 an estimate had the industry valued above $200T, I don't think anything else comes close. I believe the overall crypto market cap reaches somewhere in the realm of $10T by 2030 (and can go higher), which is still dwarfed by real estate.
No arguments there. If you're looking over a long-term time horizon, property is the best performing asset class. Of course property ownership rights have been around hundreds of years longer than digital asset ownership rights, so it's hard to make an apples for apples comparison. The only reason why crypto returns have been greater than property returns over the past 5-10 years is because it is a new asset class, so all the people who bought are early adopters catching the exponential growth curve. Of course these returns won't continue forever. FWIW my opinion is that there will only be one (or at an absolute maximum two) more bull-bear cycle(s) until the market cap of crypto settles to a more stable level.
Another red flag that has come out about SBF is that when a potential investor raised that FTX should develop a board of directors, SBF's response was quite succinct '* off!'
So then Crypto isn't the best performing asset class in history?
If people dropped the hyperbole they wouldn't sound like a cult. It sounds far more desperate than intelligent.
Since it was created, 12 odd years ago, it has the best performing asset class, bar none.
If you want to zoom out over a longer timeframe of >100 years, then there are valid arguments pointing to other asset classes. But that's not an apples for apples comparison. An apples for apples comparison would be to compare how property performed in the first 12 years after property rights were granted.
Yeah, and since last year, it's the worst performing class, bar none. 1 year and 12 years are not great time-frames for comparing to history. Crypto hasn't been through much, in a historical financial sense.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,554
- 40,753
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
News of a major "hack" with hundreds of millions missing to follow ?
Hmmmmm, taken at lock at traditional stocks in the past year? Tech companies have been hit just as hard by the sapping of liquidity from markets
I don't think you realise that you're probably proving my point rather than your own.
Those tech stocks have been around only about double the time of crypto and are still extremely volatile.
"Traditional" stocks like Banking, construction and companies which do things in the real world are doing a lot better. the Dow Jones is only down 7% YTD and that's mostly because the tech stocks have weighed down the decent stocks.
Ah, that ol' argument, companies that 'do things in the real world'. Are tech companies not 'doing things in the real world'? How do you think banks and construction companies conduct their operations these days, via carrier pigeons? How is Netflix not 'doing things in the real world', are you still watching free to air TV?
