Show HN: The Coinbase FOMO Calculator(vidacode.github.io)
vidacode.github.io
Show HN: The Coinbase FOMO Calculator
https://vidacode.github.io/CoinbaseFomoCalculator/
85 comments
A good counter to "I could have made $X bazillion if I'd gotten into Y thing at Z time" is to remember that you could have doubled your money at the horse track yesterday by betting on the right horse at the right time.
So the only question is: what's different between Y thing and horse betting? Did you have enough information at Z time to know you should have invested? Or are you just wishing you could have predicted the future?
Anyway, that's the framing I use to counter the regret of not getting into any given asset that's appreciated a lot in a short period: BTC, tesla stock, etc.
So the only question is: what's different between Y thing and horse betting? Did you have enough information at Z time to know you should have invested? Or are you just wishing you could have predicted the future?
Anyway, that's the framing I use to counter the regret of not getting into any given asset that's appreciated a lot in a short period: BTC, tesla stock, etc.
The issue is that many of us WeRE present and actively monitoring crypto. Heck I even tried to mine bitcoin back when you had a chance to mine one in your own gpu. I even thought maybe I’ll buy a coin or two; it’s only 20 bucks each!
But “better judgement” said that it’s a currency it shouldn’t appreciate so why bother unless you want to actually use it?
So if there’s regret it’s because many of us feel almost penalized for applying better judgement. It’s like you’re rewarded for stupidity. Not a single person I know and actually respect invested in crypto, and half brained idiots I know have become millionaires. So yeah this is not like horse betting.
But “better judgement” said that it’s a currency it shouldn’t appreciate so why bother unless you want to actually use it?
So if there’s regret it’s because many of us feel almost penalized for applying better judgement. It’s like you’re rewarded for stupidity. Not a single person I know and actually respect invested in crypto, and half brained idiots I know have become millionaires. So yeah this is not like horse betting.
Even if you bought a few bitcoins $20, who’s to say you wouldn’t have sold at $40? Easy to think “what if I bought”, but really, would you have hold it until 50K? Quite unlikely!
I don’t know any millionaires from crypto. I know people who are loud when market is up and very silent when it’s down. May be they were millionaires on paper at some point. Highly doubt they sold everything at the right time and became actual millionnaire. But sure, it did happen for many.
I don’t know any millionaires from crypto. I know people who are loud when market is up and very silent when it’s down. May be they were millionaires on paper at some point. Highly doubt they sold everything at the right time and became actual millionnaire. But sure, it did happen for many.
Yea this is how I try to think about.
I mined a "bunch" back in 2011 or so, lost the hard drive with the keys on it in the years since, didn't really think about backing it up, because of course it's not worth anything, etc, etc.
If I had that drive today, I'd be a millionaire. But also, if I had that drive in 2013, there's absolutely no chance I would have held it. I would have sold it for a few hundred bucks and been elated.
I mined a "bunch" back in 2011 or so, lost the hard drive with the keys on it in the years since, didn't really think about backing it up, because of course it's not worth anything, etc, etc.
If I had that drive today, I'd be a millionaire. But also, if I had that drive in 2013, there's absolutely no chance I would have held it. I would have sold it for a few hundred bucks and been elated.
There is so much adaptation overlooked in any thing (item, experience, relationship, etc). becoming a thing of value, and so missing frames of references of this type occur frequently.
A friend got a great job, if I hadn't failed job interview X I would have a great job. Later you find your friend hated that job; your experience of the job you "missed" is unknown, etc. It's also part of survivor bias.
What would it have taken in advance for you to not cash in that early bitcoin that you didn't get (or lost) and didn't expect would become anything? Is that something you can prepare yourself for now? Is it worth preparing?
Deciding you have a financial portfolio, and framing that one part of it is risky, and another part is experimental, and then placing early bitcoin ownership as part of the experimental portion of your financial portfolio, and then later (as it becomes a larger percentage of the total) as part of the risky portion, and then looking for more situations that seem like it could fit this approach could possibly be one takeaway ... but it seems like a stretch.
You also have to avoid patterns that cause long-term failure but are misleading in the short term, such as buying and selling to realize gains, but then repeating ("it worked once") buying and selling until you have an overall loss. Like gamblers do. Sometimes they win, somethings they lose, but they lose overall by not ever stopping.
Also, how do you know someone who seems to have succeeded isn't simply in the "looks like success" portion of long-term failure? How would you avoid it?
A friend got a great job, if I hadn't failed job interview X I would have a great job. Later you find your friend hated that job; your experience of the job you "missed" is unknown, etc. It's also part of survivor bias.
What would it have taken in advance for you to not cash in that early bitcoin that you didn't get (or lost) and didn't expect would become anything? Is that something you can prepare yourself for now? Is it worth preparing?
Deciding you have a financial portfolio, and framing that one part of it is risky, and another part is experimental, and then placing early bitcoin ownership as part of the experimental portion of your financial portfolio, and then later (as it becomes a larger percentage of the total) as part of the risky portion, and then looking for more situations that seem like it could fit this approach could possibly be one takeaway ... but it seems like a stretch.
You also have to avoid patterns that cause long-term failure but are misleading in the short term, such as buying and selling to realize gains, but then repeating ("it worked once") buying and selling until you have an overall loss. Like gamblers do. Sometimes they win, somethings they lose, but they lose overall by not ever stopping.
Also, how do you know someone who seems to have succeeded isn't simply in the "looks like success" portion of long-term failure? How would you avoid it?
Same for me. I actually tried to find my wallet in around when it went over a few hundred dollars.
Exactly, the fact that an assent went from $20 to $20,000 once doesn't tell us much. This is why in financial economics the variable of interest is returns, not price. Statistical analysis of returns will tell us what return to expect if we hold the asset over a random time period of a certain length, which is what happens in practice.
You have to be ruthless towards your own intuitions when investment. Human nature is absolutely geared towards buying high and selling low, and it isn't the first impression that gets you but the slow pressure in situations where social proof says you were wrong (although social proof proves nothing about money).
Just because someone was actively monitoring crypto & then missed out as the price went from $1 to $10,000 still doesn't mean they have misjudged. Even if crypto is the future - and I've become convinced that it is for privacy reasons - there was still scant evidence of that during Bitcoin's rise. There have been no great arguments circulating to explain why someone should buy in and a lot of the people who made money look like they just got lucky.
Just because someone was actively monitoring crypto & then missed out as the price went from $1 to $10,000 still doesn't mean they have misjudged. Even if crypto is the future - and I've become convinced that it is for privacy reasons - there was still scant evidence of that during Bitcoin's rise. There have been no great arguments circulating to explain why someone should buy in and a lot of the people who made money look like they just got lucky.
The difference between gambling and crypto is in the timelines. Gambling has a high frequency where crypto is quite a bit lower. This allows some lucky people to 'exit the casino' by the virtue of being lucky enough to have won the bet, and being pressured somehow to cash out and not continue gambling. For some, it is a birth of a child, perhaps a purchase decision etc. Low frequency allows for these events to take place, betting on horses does not.
Isn't that exactly like horse betting
It's like if you see a friend betting a bunch of money on a long-odds horse and then winning. You exercised good judgement, but he won anyway. Do you feel penalized for applying your better judgement in that situation?
The only thing that really matters is: was it the right decision given the information you had at the time?
It's like if you see a friend betting a bunch of money on a long-odds horse and then winning. You exercised good judgement, but he won anyway. Do you feel penalized for applying your better judgement in that situation?
The only thing that really matters is: was it the right decision given the information you had at the time?
I've been in it since 2012. The financial crisis of 2009 prompted me to study economics, the federal reserve system and the history of banking in the U.S. I went looking for solutions since the problem was affecting me and many people I knew. Bitcoin was the best solution I found. At first it seemed too quirky and strange, but I've continued to study over the years and have come to appreciate the elegance of the "quirks". Here is me presenting my take on bitcoin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fUiFtJ8BaY
With BTC especially, my argument (to myself) is that if I weren't lazy and got BTC at $20 I would have definitely sold at $100.
I did that, and then rebought at 130 and sold again at 175, and so on until I only had a couple and then MtGox happened and I lost 80% of that and lost interest for a couple years. It's definitely possible to get in early and not become rich at all.
You should stay away from casinos. Gamblers tend to follow this pattern, they are ahead in between but they always lose it all in the end, they just don't know when to walk away.
Ah yeah, that typical behaviour of gamblers that when they lose it all they stop gambling for years :P
The difference is that Crypto is The Future.
Horse betting has been established to be just that: Betting (I have no clue if that's really true, no offense to the hn horse racing crowd). There is no big institution money that says otherwise. There are no startup wizards working in the field. Nobody claims they are going to change the world.
Crypto on the other hand is sold as the future, and the people who miss out on the future are losers. The tech is really complicated, you don't understand what's going on, but, clearly, some very smart people do and they are convinced.
The point being, it's a lot easier to disregard horses than it is to disregard the future.
Horse betting has been established to be just that: Betting (I have no clue if that's really true, no offense to the hn horse racing crowd). There is no big institution money that says otherwise. There are no startup wizards working in the field. Nobody claims they are going to change the world.
Crypto on the other hand is sold as the future, and the people who miss out on the future are losers. The tech is really complicated, you don't understand what's going on, but, clearly, some very smart people do and they are convinced.
The point being, it's a lot easier to disregard horses than it is to disregard the future.
>The difference is that Crypto is The Future.
[Citation needed]
[Citation needed]
Imagine you actually read, and understood, my entire post.
> you don't understand what's going on, but, clearly, some very smart people do and they are convinced.
Even applying a steel man, it is not convincing. Don’t defer to “smart people”. Do your own research from first principles.
Even applying a steel man, it is not convincing. Don’t defer to “smart people”. Do your own research from first principles.
My understanding was that his post was to be read in an ironic tone.
Oh I see. poe’s law strikes again.
I think you should have kept the capitalisation consistent.. The Future
Apparently I'm not the only one who did not get the sarcasm.
It is a great point.
Off Track Betting near me is also always packed with people betting on horses. No one there though is foolish enough to create an ideology around horse betting and I am sure most know deep down the house always wins.
Off Track Betting near me is also always packed with people betting on horses. No one there though is foolish enough to create an ideology around horse betting and I am sure most know deep down the house always wins.
The difference is that I founded and raised millions of VC $$ in the crypto space, and watched some of my friends make tens or hundreds of millions, and yet I made very little from crypto. I didn't build a protocol or anything with a token. The whole time I felt like I could have just built some pie-in-the-sky "crypto for ML" thing and done a huge token sale.
I tend to counter in a different way:
YES, I knew about Bitcoin a couple of years before I invested in it.
YES, I could have made a significant return during that time.
YES, I should have investigated it further at that time, instead of focussing on other things.
YES, I made a risk/return analysis at that time, and felt that the risk of investing was too high, even if I didn't do my due diligence.
Everyone, at every time makes a decision to either invest or not invest in something at any point in time, even if that decision is subconscious. I can feel bad about making that decision, but I did make it. My risk/reward appetite just wasn't high enough.
YES, I knew about Bitcoin a couple of years before I invested in it.
YES, I could have made a significant return during that time.
YES, I should have investigated it further at that time, instead of focussing on other things.
YES, I made a risk/return analysis at that time, and felt that the risk of investing was too high, even if I didn't do my due diligence.
Everyone, at every time makes a decision to either invest or not invest in something at any point in time, even if that decision is subconscious. I can feel bad about making that decision, but I did make it. My risk/reward appetite just wasn't high enough.
The lucky ones are the ones who were a little foolish (spot my bias...) and not greedy. Those who got on the bandwagon (again, spot my bias), and decided to cash out when they thought "That's great enough ROI!".
Of course the problem with humans is, if they cashed out at say 25K, they'd have regrets when BTC hit 30K-35K, and since they have money they'd be tempted to join in again...
Of course the problem with humans is, if they cashed out at say 25K, they'd have regrets when BTC hit 30K-35K, and since they have money they'd be tempted to join in again...
In an alternative world where Bitcoin crashed and burned after it was launched but before you decided to invest you would feel that much smarter!
It's all very easy in hindsight, the trouble is to predict it accurately. A better way to look at this is to say that some people got lucky and some didn't.
It's all very easy in hindsight, the trouble is to predict it accurately. A better way to look at this is to say that some people got lucky and some didn't.
Who goes for horse betting when you could buy powerball tickets?
Because horse betting is a game of skill where powerball is pure randomness.
It's funny, trading games lead to philosophy. You can't maximize, everything is fuzzy, a blend of patience and reaction is key.
Whenever someone says "I could have made X money if I put it into Y" I say "yeah, crystal balls are in short supply".
Even with god-tier timing, I would have had to invest an extremely reckless amount of savings (at the time) to make anything serious, so this calculator actually puts some of my FOMO to rest.
And that's before you even touch whether there's enough liquidity in the different coins listed to put your $100k (or whatever) in at that cheap early price and get your millions out at the high price.
Can we have a logarithmic scale on the y-axis as an option, please?
One could argue that a log scale should be the default for any graph showing a price over time, though it would confuse people who don't know what a log is. In this case it might make it easier to compare what happened around 2018 with what happened around 2020-2021.
One could argue that a log scale should be the default for any graph showing a price over time, though it would confuse people who don't know what a log is. In this case it might make it easier to compare what happened around 2018 with what happened around 2020-2021.
There's a confusing bug for longer time ranges. It's impossible to select a real start date before 2015. The start date is effectively limited by the period you chose, whatever start date you tried to pick.
There's no warning of this, but if you look at the start date of the chart you'll notice it may be much later than the date you thought you had picked
edit: With that bug, choosing a period of 1 week is the way to get the longest possible time range for the chart, about 7 years
One observation: The volatility is terrifying, but the multimillion dollar gains are interesting
There's no warning of this, but if you look at the start date of the chart you'll notice it may be much later than the date you thought you had picked
edit: With that bug, choosing a period of 1 week is the way to get the longest possible time range for the chart, about 7 years
One observation: The volatility is terrifying, but the multimillion dollar gains are interesting
That's cool, but what I'd really like to see would be some form of tool to define different strategies and visualize how they would've worked.
I mean, probably professional traders have tons of these to do back-testing, but it would be nice to have something simple that people could use to check basic strategies.
Just as an example, when I was still into BTC my "strategy" was to buy $100 very month, and in the end of the year I would sell just enough to get my money back and only if the average price went up in the year. It worked well for the bull years, and losses (if I was forced to realize them) were capped at $1200/year.
I think a tool like that should be good not just for crypto, but also to help those understand that sensible investing is not about timing the market and picking the right lottery tickets.
I mean, probably professional traders have tons of these to do back-testing, but it would be nice to have something simple that people could use to check basic strategies.
Just as an example, when I was still into BTC my "strategy" was to buy $100 very month, and in the end of the year I would sell just enough to get my money back and only if the average price went up in the year. It worked well for the bull years, and losses (if I was forced to realize them) were capped at $1200/year.
I think a tool like that should be good not just for crypto, but also to help those understand that sensible investing is not about timing the market and picking the right lottery tickets.
Hi, thanks for checking it out and leaving some great ideas. A graph comparing with two strategies and seeing which was more effective given a certain starting date would help people see your point.
Took forever to load. Is that just on my end?
Can someone brighter than me explain what to calculator is supposed to show?
what is the "period" parameter for?
what is the "period" parameter for?
Feature Request: Is it possible to bind the values selected in the diagram with the form, and then bind them all with the query params? I'd love to share this with some friends, but on specific periods (not as gloats, just to discuss).
You could have made trillions of dollars with ANY asset in ANY time period if you time it right, so this is not special or unique
No, you definitely could not. That would require a highly liquid asset.
Yeah not trillions and not any asset. But many millions and 99% of traded funds, yeah.
Indeed. The only entity capable of this is the Federal Reserve.
> trillions of dollars with ANY asset
There SOME assets which are not worth trillions, so no.
> in ANY time period
There are SOME time periods which any given assets decline in value. Over an infinite time scale, the survival rate of everything is zero. But of course you're speaking about selecting the optimal interval in that time scale.
The problem is we are not immortals, infinite time scales is irrelevant. Many are born too late to be Warren Buffet.
There SOME assets which are not worth trillions, so no.
> in ANY time period
There are SOME time periods which any given assets decline in value. Over an infinite time scale, the survival rate of everything is zero. But of course you're speaking about selecting the optimal interval in that time scale.
The problem is we are not immortals, infinite time scales is irrelevant. Many are born too late to be Warren Buffet.
[deleted]
Now please make one that calculates it for Coinbase employee wallets that buy dead shitcoins days before listing
how about the Coinbase job offer rescinded game
heh, thats fun to play with.
Ive heard conflicting viewpoints on the current crypto crash. Some say that this is different than the rest, and that crypto has already reached it’s all time max, whereas others say that this is just another pullback before an even larger bull run. With crypto, it is so hard to know what it’s actual value should be, since unlike a stock there are no earnings and thus you can’t look at the P/E ratio to determine its pricing. I’m curious to hear what you guys think—-and how you determine the value of crypto.
Honestly, no way to tell at this point. Low interest rate and QE enabled all sorts of funny money shenanigans. Like startups raising billions with no real revenue and wildly unprofitable unit economics. Crypto benefited greatlyfrom this low interest regime too. If you had to borrow money at 8% interest, you wouldn't be as callous with it.
Crypto has only existed in this funny money monetary environment. Good chance it all collapses if interest rates are too high by the time of the next BTC halvening (iirc around mid 2024) and there aren't enough bids to perpetuate the "next cycle will be bigger than the last" pattern.
But at the same time, its also true that the awful central bank management that prompted the creation of BTC is also at its peak awfulness right now.
So really, wait and watch.
Crypto has only existed in this funny money monetary environment. Good chance it all collapses if interest rates are too high by the time of the next BTC halvening (iirc around mid 2024) and there aren't enough bids to perpetuate the "next cycle will be bigger than the last" pattern.
But at the same time, its also true that the awful central bank management that prompted the creation of BTC is also at its peak awfulness right now.
So really, wait and watch.
When I had crypto assets, I came upon this article about “Greater fool theory”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory
It made me sell all my crypto (luckily at a profit), and I have not looked back.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory
It made me sell all my crypto (luckily at a profit), and I have not looked back.
What is the difference between something explained by the "Greater Fool Theory", and any of the numerous things that simply increase in value over time due to increased demand and/or rising scarcity?
It seems to me the only difference is whether the speaker is predisposed to not like the thing in question.
It seems to me the only difference is whether the speaker is predisposed to not like the thing in question.
[deleted]
To qualify for greater fool something must a) overvalued vs its utility and b) purchased on the sole assumption that it can later be resold at a higher value.
This leaves you with a surprisingly small amount of assets. Collectibles probably.
I think the epitome of greater fool is probably NFTs. Unlike a real piece of art you don't actually own anything unless additional value is conferred to you by owning it from the issuing entity, like say legal copyright over the referenced piece in question (if its art).
This leaves you with a surprisingly small amount of assets. Collectibles probably.
I think the epitome of greater fool is probably NFTs. Unlike a real piece of art you don't actually own anything unless additional value is conferred to you by owning it from the issuing entity, like say legal copyright over the referenced piece in question (if its art).
> Unlike a real piece of art you don’t actually own anything
What is it that you actually own when you buy a physical art piece? Is it the actual canvas and the paint on top? If so then that is definitely not worth hundreds of thousands of dollars on its own. Or, more likely, is it the fact that you own the original, and that the artists could never make an exact replica, unlike with NFTs? Even though you can make an exact replica with NFTs, everybody agrees on the original, and therefore the exact replica has no value. With art you could make a near perfect replica, but everybody would still agree upon the original, and therefore the original is the one with real value. IMO NFTs and physical art are still very similar.
What is it that you actually own when you buy a physical art piece? Is it the actual canvas and the paint on top? If so then that is definitely not worth hundreds of thousands of dollars on its own. Or, more likely, is it the fact that you own the original, and that the artists could never make an exact replica, unlike with NFTs? Even though you can make an exact replica with NFTs, everybody agrees on the original, and therefore the exact replica has no value. With art you could make a near perfect replica, but everybody would still agree upon the original, and therefore the original is the one with real value. IMO NFTs and physical art are still very similar.
That would be true if the actual NFTs stored the art in question, or even a cryptographic fingerprint of it. Generally speaking most NFTs are just a URL that usually points to some random webserver on some random domain, both of which could entirely cease to exist at any time or be taken over by another party.
i.e your dumb ape picture could now suddenly become furry porn.
Real art (assuming proper steps to preserve and protect it) will remain as it was while it's in your care. You -own- it, you can take it where you please, store it how you please, etc.
NFTs aren't like real-art at all, they are at best analogous to in-game collectibles - entirely subject to ToS but even those are less predatory and ponzi-like than NFTs.
i.e your dumb ape picture could now suddenly become furry porn.
Real art (assuming proper steps to preserve and protect it) will remain as it was while it's in your care. You -own- it, you can take it where you please, store it how you please, etc.
NFTs aren't like real-art at all, they are at best analogous to in-game collectibles - entirely subject to ToS but even those are less predatory and ponzi-like than NFTs.
If you're referring to gold, etc., then I'd agree. Even despite their real-world utility, I don't buy them.
If you're referring to stocks and bonds, those can have objective value in the form of dividends and coupons.
If you're referring to stocks and bonds, those can have objective value in the form of dividends and coupons.
Yup. You nailed it. It's a fad which which most buyers and sellers use as a means to engage in gambling.
So you basically don't invest in anything because that theory can be applied to any asset.
Most assets are, at least in theory, backed by something that can turn a true profit in an efficient market. Anything that's based on capital-intensive resource extraction can pay a dividend on the profit from that capital. Anything that's based on real estate will go up in price as population increases. Anything that's manufactured or based on IP can pay a dividend based on the value delta between inputs and outputs.
In general, anything that turns a raw material of some sort into a more refined product (be it iron ore into steel, steel into machines, or electrons into advertisements) is adding economic value into the system. By doing that work, the total net wealth of humanity increases. The economy is positive-sum, and so investing in anything that's correlated with the economy as a whole should be worthwhile.
Bitcoin doesn't work that way. Trading Bitcoin isn't adding to the total net worth of humanity. Mining Bitcoin arguably could be, because the ability to make transactions has some value, but the practical value of those transactions is less than the value of the electricity, computer hardware, and pollution that go into making them. Speculating on Bitcoin does nothing productive; it's zero sum. Net-zero systems are nearly indistinguishable from gambling unless you have insider information.
In general, anything that turns a raw material of some sort into a more refined product (be it iron ore into steel, steel into machines, or electrons into advertisements) is adding economic value into the system. By doing that work, the total net wealth of humanity increases. The economy is positive-sum, and so investing in anything that's correlated with the economy as a whole should be worthwhile.
Bitcoin doesn't work that way. Trading Bitcoin isn't adding to the total net worth of humanity. Mining Bitcoin arguably could be, because the ability to make transactions has some value, but the practical value of those transactions is less than the value of the electricity, computer hardware, and pollution that go into making them. Speculating on Bitcoin does nothing productive; it's zero sum. Net-zero systems are nearly indistinguishable from gambling unless you have insider information.
There are many different lenses in which one could look at Bitcoin and say that it’s making humanity more productive.
One that comes to mind especially for Bitcoin is that it “could” act as a global store of value, independent of any one geopolitical power. Many countries lack stable and non-corrupt currencies, and many people in those countries cannot trust putting large sums of money in their economy, for fear that they will be taken away from them. If BTC stabilizes in value sufficiently, people in those countries could use it as a store of value—like gold, but easier to obtain. Id argue that the idea of having a digital store of value does increase the productivity of the world, because people don’t have to rely on inefficiently hoarding gold, or paying fees for buying gold in the stock market.
One that comes to mind especially for Bitcoin is that it “could” act as a global store of value, independent of any one geopolitical power. Many countries lack stable and non-corrupt currencies, and many people in those countries cannot trust putting large sums of money in their economy, for fear that they will be taken away from them. If BTC stabilizes in value sufficiently, people in those countries could use it as a store of value—like gold, but easier to obtain. Id argue that the idea of having a digital store of value does increase the productivity of the world, because people don’t have to rely on inefficiently hoarding gold, or paying fees for buying gold in the stock market.
Like I said, mining Bitcoin can be argued to be adding value. Pure speculation can't - except via the second-order effect of encouraging more mining - so we shouldn't be surprised when speculators lose their gamble.
[deleted]
Coinbase recently offered a bond that paid 3.3750% interest. As long as they don't default on their payments, that will have objective returns outside of any market forces and greater fools. The price you can sell it for fluctuates but is immaterial if you hold it to maturity.
Of course, it's very unlikely that anybody in this thread bought them because in reality we are looking for gains correlated to hype/market performance/inflation/interest.
Of course, it's very unlikely that anybody in this thread bought them because in reality we are looking for gains correlated to hype/market performance/inflation/interest.
Like a house?
It’s fairly obvious that a compelling regulatory framework and standardization around security tokens will emerge in some jurisdiction. Custodians of tangible assets will offer listing services. Standardization, regulation, and features like fractionalization and composability will allow organized markets to form with more participants, better risk management, and increased liquidity for things like private equity and alternative investments. Price will follow underlying asset plus some risk premium minus some liquidity premium. Networks that secure these assets will have token prices that follow transaction fees and the value capturable by choosing transaction ordering.
As I learned from a quotation which is attributed to Mark Cuban, so-called “cyptocurrencies” are collectibles like baseball cards, rare postage stamps, and French impressionist paintings. Fundamentally they're all fads. None of them have any significant inherent value. Typically two types of people purchase them: either avid collectors or speculators.
Don't gamble. It's not a productive use of your time. It's also a vice. Spend your time doing something that is valuable and productive. Don't fritter it away or one day you will probably regret it.
Don't gamble. It's not a productive use of your time. It's also a vice. Spend your time doing something that is valuable and productive. Don't fritter it away or one day you will probably regret it.
And now some of them have entered to fractional ownership... Meaning some people are there for speculation not even some type of ownership of collection... Or at least I think very few would think owning part of card stored somewhere is collecting... Really asking question does this make sense at all.
I think you're confusing a Crypto with NFTs. One is virtual money, the other is virtual certificates.
I have a collection of broken pens on my desk... in theory I could also use them as units of currencies, I just have to find a sucker^W person willing to accept them as such...
[deleted]
> I’m curious to hear what you guys think—-and how you determine the value of crypto.
The value at any point in time is determined on the exchanges. I think a better question is what changes the value, creates the volatility, and so forth.
The value at any point in time is determined on the exchanges. I think a better question is what changes the value, creates the volatility, and so forth.
No, the clearing price is determined by the exchanges.
The value is the net benefit (including future benefit) that it provides.
McDonalds creates value by providing convenient and consistent hamburgers, and entry-level jobs.
Bitcoin, I've been told, creates value by allowing easy transfer of funds. Thus the value of Bitcoin should be based on how Bitcoin transaction costs and externalities (lack of regulation is both a plus and a minus) stack up against other money transfer systems.
The value is the net benefit (including future benefit) that it provides.
McDonalds creates value by providing convenient and consistent hamburgers, and entry-level jobs.
Bitcoin, I've been told, creates value by allowing easy transfer of funds. Thus the value of Bitcoin should be based on how Bitcoin transaction costs and externalities (lack of regulation is both a plus and a minus) stack up against other money transfer systems.
Buy and sell pressure.
[deleted]
> With crypto, it is so hard to know what it’s actual value should be, since unlike a stock there are no earnings
Your second part there gives a very good hint to your problem in the first part. Of course, in some sense there is some value in facilitating child porn and other illegal activities and some value in burning fossil fuels for mining (the value may be positive or negative). I am still pretty confident that if you just round "actual value" to zero - and use the possible error to keep you away from shorting the market - that is in the long run the valuation that gives you the best quality of life.
Your second part there gives a very good hint to your problem in the first part. Of course, in some sense there is some value in facilitating child porn and other illegal activities and some value in burning fossil fuels for mining (the value may be positive or negative). I am still pretty confident that if you just round "actual value" to zero - and use the possible error to keep you away from shorting the market - that is in the long run the valuation that gives you the best quality of life.
Now add random periods where Coinbase is offline and you can't move money for +/- 4 days.
That's the main reason why I moved away from Coinbase years ago... no problem with Kraken so far. Every time the market moves fast they don't allow you to trade for a long time and they don't give you a reason... unlike the stock market (they frequently halt trading on specific stocks but at least they tell you why).
Hope someone finds it fun!