Coinbase hits number 30 in the top free apps on Apple's mobile store
theblockcrypto.com
theblockcrypto.com
Of course, I can't predict the future, so maybe it's the first time a peak will never end? :)
I just find it interesting how regular people (including me, I'm not a big crypto enthusiast and I don't follow the prices and innovations in the field) are inclined to buy when they hear about the peak in the news and then expect that the price will continue to go up, then get frustrated when in about a month, the value of their acquired coins go down.
I guess, hodl?
Embrace it, buy a small amount of bitcoin, buy a small amount of tesla, be part of something big, if it pops it will not hurt you, if it continues to grow and evolve you will be part of it.
What I don’t like is all the scams they have been used for.
Nothing new under the sun.
Same scammers, same scams.
All the above applies to Bitcoin as well, which has largely failed at all the practical uses that were proposed to justify its early rise.
And if you were, like me, starting your career back then with Enron in the backdrop, it's easy to get pretty cynical. It's left many people, for nearly a decade now, expecting the next crash. But it takes optimism to make money I think.
I think tesla is frothy. I've sold some and bought other things with the gains. But I'm going to hold because I'm going to make a bet that the better tech and team wins.
Unless it is a small group using it (less than a million) there is no way it is ever going to do transactions fast enough.
As for crypto, I definitely see a future for it and plan to invest soon, but I will wait to see if it dips back down a little bit before buying at such a large high.
edit: added status page
There's still the good old https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=%21gtrends+buying+ethereum
The fact you're even making this assessment tells me this isn't going to end well for anyone.
Heed my warning: The bubble pops when the last bear dies.
My point was only that it’s a currently a small fraction of the overall US equity market, and if it becomes increasingly widely accepted as a reserve currency comparable to the dollar or an inflation protected asset like gold then there’s no reason why it shouldn’t be worth trillions.
That people are willing to pay for it doesn't mean it should be worth anything. Worth is not price. And a high price certainly doesn't mean something is good for the world. If I offered $1,000,000 for each silverback gorilla pelt you procure, (a) is that a proxy for its worth and (b) is that good for the world?
The market tends to conform to my personal biases, my personal investing account just crossed 14X what it was on 3/20. I tend to short irrationality but in this case I have no interest in shooting dice in a rigged casino.
Being so sure that BTC is a bubble is just as naive as being completely sure it's going up to a million dollars per coin. It's just speculation either way, and there is no fundamental law of nature (or even principle of economics) preventing either outcome.
Which is why I'm not playing. And why I don't have any gold.
There are much better ways to make this argument than extrapolating based on current earnings forever.
e.x. “Tesla would have to capture X% of worldwide automobile sales AND capture Y% of worldwide taxi/ridesharing market share AND etc”
For instance, Apple has a market cap of 2.2T a P/E of 40. Tesla has a market cap of 0.8T and a P/E of 1602.
Apple could get into all those markets, so should we value it at, uh, let me run the numbers here... 88 trillion dollars?
CPI, price inflation, is tracking at 2% as expected. Housing is actually down.
Stocks are up because some people have a bunch of extra cash and nothing to do during the day. These two are not connected.
Savings (for retirement or otherwise) is probably the other big expense, which you could classify as "stocks", but if you predict more volatility in the future, therefore needing to save more now, then that is also increasing in price.
Real estate, while down, is a supply and demand function. In big cities, supply is artificially constrained to the benefit of existing landowners. On average across the US housing, on an inflation-adjusted dollars per square foot basis, is actually exactly the same as its been since the 1970s. [1]
Education and healthcare are social and fiscal policy issues and not connected to monetary policy at all.
[1] https://fee.org/articles/new-homes-today-have-twice-the-squa...
I specifically wrote the "goods and services I want" so real estate that I'm not interested in doesn't concern me. I have to plan my life around buying real estate that I want, and so if the price of that real estate is increasing, then it's once again affecting my bottom line.
Education and healthcare being social and fiscal policy issues is irrelevant to me for budgeting purposes. All I am concerned with is the price to achieve the life I want for myself and my kids.
I am predicting that the items I am interested in buying are worth $x in year 2021, but will be worth $y in year 2030, and the difference in $x and $y will be more than what is predicted by official CPI numbers. This has proven true for the last 15 to 20 years for me.
I assume it's all wrapped up in the widening income/wealth divides, rewards of automation and outsourcing going to capital owners, and reduced opportunities or perceived opportunities for many resulting in lower quality of life than they expected. That's not going to be captured by any numbers, especially not in a single number nationwide for a place as big as the US.
CPI measures something, and perhaps it's useful for economists or policymakers, but it has been useless as a predictor for how much income I will need to keep up with expenses in day to day life.
[1] https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2014/september/wha...
[2] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/velocity.asp#:~:text=Ve....
Let's say the Fed prints 1 quintillion dollars, and then gives it to me. I then put it under my very big mattress. I will never spend a single one of those dollars. Has this quintillion dollar print changed the value of the dollars that are actually changing hands? It has not.
Obviously that's a contrived example but it does demonstrate the principal. If economic environmental factors are causing people to spend less money, such as unemployment or a global pandemic, then the velocity of money goes down. This in turn causes merchants to lower prices to incentivize spend. This is how deflation materializes. If they cannot lower prices fast enough to actually incentivize a consistent level of spending you enter a deflationary spiral.
Printing new money offsets the reduction in velocity, and staves off a deflationary spiral. It doesn't however guarantee a commensurate level of inflation.
You can see this on a macro scale. Since the 1970s the M2 money supply has increased 15X however inflation has only increased 7X.
Because the Fed, like most central banks, exercises a positive control mechanism, once velocity is restored, printing will slow or even go negative to ensure a consistent, predictable level of inflation.
[1] https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042015/how-does-mon...
Probably, very slightly, because even if you plan to never spend them, the fact that you have a quintillion of them in your mattress probably changes the value you attach to other dollars (because, in extremis, you could break into that stash), which has an effect on the overall value of dollars (but only imperceptibly, because you are a very small part of the market.)
But of course no one is stupid enough to put their dollars on a mattress. They will, like everybody else, try to find a way to run from inflation, be it investing on stocks or any other assets. So your point is of course true but irrelevant.
Not at all. Its fine if that money makes its way into assets because assets are not a necessity for life. CPI is a proxy for necessity for life. If it makes its way into stocks, that's just an ROI.
Further, if that money starts making its way back out, towards CPI, the fed will stop printing or even take the money back out of the system. That's why we have a Fed.
Except I have yet to see any convincing indicators that crypto currency is actually being used for day to day transactions.
Everything I see suggests people are hoping it's the next gold rush and they'll strike it rich based on timing alone.
(Which is not to say I don't sometimes think about how back in 2011 I toyed with the idea of buying 1000 bitcoins just for kicks when they were ~$1 each.)
Some miners dabbled with FPGAs in 2012-2013, but the difficulty adjustment wasn't hit hard until ASICs started being used in 2013. Since then it's only been profitable to use the latest few generations of ASICs.
I think it's interesting how true it is that some people just can't stand the feeling of money burning a hole in their pockets.
Based on the furniture set sitting out on the curb at my neighbor's house, they decided a free $1800 was as good a reason as any to get some new furniture.
I guess that's the theory behind stimulus checks, so I suppose it makes sense.
What is going on in there?
There is a difference between overbought assets and scams, and it usually goes along the line of, the easier it is for a small group of people to walk away with all the winnings the more likely we are to call it a scam.
Cryptoassets are a suitable vehicle for scams just as bits of paper with holograms on it or devices with touch screens can be - all it takes is a suspension of disbelief and caution which we also see with overbought assets. And there's a fair share of altcoins and ICOs that look quite scammy to educated people, while BTC/ETH/LTC and some others have survived a decade of people trying to poke holes into them.