God candle and sideways! You may be able to borrow against your BTC for your property requirements? Rather than selling.
There is a chance that (conspiracy theory) Bitcoin will demonetize Real Estate soon and that's why Blackrock applied for the Bitcoin ETF as they will move away from RE securitization and move to Bitcoin securitization, much cheaper costs, completely fungible, let's fucking go! There's a bill, dunno if it passed already, that US firms have to sell their RE portfolio within 10 years(?) Anyway, whatever happens, tick tock, next block RE will crash big time, everyone knows, ironic Blackstone defaulted on their building, lol, the firm that trapped its investors from cashing out of REIT's Here's the thing, Bitcoin is a trojan horse, it may appear Wall Street is eating Bitcoin, but but it could be the other way around, as Bitcoin becomes an unwieldy asset, once it becomes part of the asset side of balance sheets, the next bear market when bitcoin goes down from $1M to $200k will bankrupt a lot of institutions that like to leverage, they'll ask for a bailout and print more money
I don't think it's likely BTC will go under $10,000 any time soon. I think it's a useful commodity, probably still short of it's peak adoption. And I agree as well that it's not good to try to store value in cash, aside from some times where the short term interest rate is above forward inflation. But for sure, the bet goes both ways. If BTC hits $250K inside 3 years let's say, that will mean my framework on how I currently view it is wrong. And I have already underestimated BTC's capacity for adoption in the past, because I sold 50 BTC at $30 each, and re-allocated to this space years later at $16,000 and higher. It's good to quantify our convictions so we can re-evaluate them in hindsight for accuracy. The narrative that is forming along with BTC is interesting and I agree with several points. I don't think the secular powers that be are primarily motivated by the well-being of the masses. I do think that, inadvertently or not, lies and illusions are embedded into our worldview growing up and some serve to keep us complacent. Centralized control of currency conveys benefits to the controller, and decentralization of currencies conveys certain benefits to holders of it that aren't present in fiat. However, I am nowhere near as optimistic as BTC Maximalists, as you term them, that those problems will be going away anytime soon. And BTC as a primary currency would come with new problems of it's own, whereas it's currently being over-idealized in my opinion. Glad we can discuss our differences in thought though. We both ought to continue to self-reflect, for example if BTC is not above $100K EoY and you're 90% conviction turned out to be wrong, hopefully there will be some adjustment of your beliefs and re-evaluation of future probabilities. And if it is above $100K EoY, in my case I will begin weighting these counter-narratives higher and I will have to adopt a new dominant view of BTC if it breaks $250K soon. And I love free markets. Luck or not, you had the right view of BTC when it was in it's infancy, and you were rewarded with a good amount of capital for taking the asymmetrical view and holding it into realization. Great trading.
Your ability to articulate your ideas so eloquently is admirable, apologies that I would not be able to match it or get to anywhere close, not because English is my second language, but more so because I consider myself of only average IQ (I think slightly above, better for me to overestimate) You're asking for an investment asset to do a 600% move within 3 years... I strongly believe it will do so within 2 years from now Be that as it may, this hits to the core of our differences in beliefs wrt Bitcoin, even though you got in very early to bitcoin, you always viewed bitcoin as a trade(able asset, which it is) rather than a revolutionary idea of being sound money, not as a primary currency, though, that would introduce too many problems with world governments If btc does not break $100K EoY, I will re-evaluate but it won't be easy, there's a ton of material that I am able to grasp in support of my confirmation bias towards bitcoin as the hardest money, but there's not a whole lot of argument on the other side that has not been countered effectively by the high IQ Bitcoiners I think I'm incapable of unseeing the debt-based ponzi slavery fiat monetary system And I take cues from others who I know are way smarter than I am, for example, there are very public figures who became Bitcoiners but none that have become anti-Bitcoin, i.e. Michael Saylor said bitcoin was doomed to fail and he became a believer and did not become a non-believer in the face of the recent bear market when his company was in the red over $1B m2m I was watching Scaramucci on YouTube talking about how Larry Fink transformation from anti-Bitcoin a couple of years ago, to a major supporter of Bitcoin... sure sure, Blackrock will earn fees, but the numbers are very small in relation to Blackrock's size, maybe it's more of a legacy and not just about the profits... Great trading to you as well
At the moment BTC is "only" the size of Berkshire Hathaway but if it does keep going up... Price......Market Cap....Comparable $40k........$O.8Tn.............Berkshire Hathaway $100k......$2Tn.................Google or Saudi Aramco $150k......$3Tn.................Apple $250k......$5Tn.................Apple + Google $500k......$10Tn..............Approaching Gold at $13Tn $1m.........$20Tn...............Entire Nasdaq $2.5m......$50Tn..............Entire US stock market $5m.........$100Tn............US real estate
Taleb would be one that went from pro to anti-bitcoin, not that I buy his arguments. https://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/BTC-QF.pdf
PS. if BTC does reach this level, and becomes worth more than the largest company in the world (currently a close run between AAPL and MSFT), that might start alarm bells ringing with the powers at be. Passing the psychological $100k mark would also generate a lot of attention.
Yes, you are correct! Don't know what happened with Taleb re: Bitcoin Saifedean Ammous, author of The Bitcoin Standard who's also Lebanese was extremely pissed off at Taleb for being featured on the Foreword per Taleb's request, newer revision of the book has Jeff Booth instead Here's the thing, however Taleb feels about Bitcoin, the financial devastation he has brought to his own people cannot be explained by simple ego or mistake. My guess is that he was "in cahoots" with the Lebanese Govt or central banks While famous Bitcoiners, including Saifedean who's also a Lebanese, to publicly advise everyone to get out of the Lebanese fiat/banking system, Taleb was on record arguing that everything was fine and many of his family and friends were ruined as well as all the people who valued his intellect and advise Twitter has them on record by others who screenshot the convos. Lebanese who went into Bitcoin before the collapse got saved, others got ruined and still others had to resort to violence bank armed robberies to get their own money He couldn't see the financial collapse in Lebanon because it was not a Black Swan but rather expected and it was not antifragile
In the past, I generally found him interesting because of his unique insights. As far as his take on bitcoin, he conveniently doesn't mention that bitcoin has an enormous level of antifragility (you'd think he'd appreciate that), and it increasingly looks better and better based on the Lindy Effect, which he often references in other contexts.