$7.6B in crypto long positions liquidated in 1 hour as Bitcoin plunges to $52k
theblockcrypto.com
theblockcrypto.com
I still have problems with the idea that people are able to pick the correct winners. When the blockchain finally gets its killer mainstream app, why not do a new ICO on a restarted blockchain instead of a billion dollar wealth transfer to early adopters?
In addition, your killer mainstream app may only be useful inside of an existing ecosystem. Ex: Uniswap is pretty useless if you don't have any assets that people want to trade.
If you've put up your crypto as collateral on a loan, which you used to buy more crypto (defi), and the price of the asset backing your loan drops below threshold it gets auto liquidated by the holder and your loan is cancelled out. It is automated in all cases with triggers and varying thresholds.
Majority of these are 75-85% ratio which means if btc dips 15-25%, all of those providers liquidate the asset to cover.
Btc has also been holding at 60k for a while while alts are enjoying a rally as they tend to do when everyone leverages their btc gains via the aforementioned to buy into alts.
I'm surprised it didn't crash further but I guess the defi bubble wasn't as big.
How do you know that?
If governments decide it’s a threat I imagine it’ll go to near zero. Much to my personal shock that doesn’t seem to be happening.
I use those figures to decide on the future price of bitcoin, in case governments actually addopt bitcoin, so a future, very unlikely ~50X increase in bitcoin price is not enough for me to put money into it.
I've missed my chance and a very unlikely future 50X increase in price is not worth the risk, imho.
But we're way over the phase where governments would ban it, on the contrary, I think bitcoin is a last resort fix for the immense global debt.
My wild theory is after elites load up on bitcoin(and also a lot of ordinary folks) governments would change bitcoin to bitcoin 2.0 and completely crash other forms of fiat currency, wiping the huge fiat currency debts in the process and also shutting up all the people who want anonimity in bitcoin(because they would lose a lot of money otherwise).
While I agree popularity reduces risk, some Governments have banned alcohol for years, or how about even banning certain types of securities (2008 crash)?
To say it is not the same is moot, for, the point is things get banned, popular or not.
Other than that...
There are people out there who will pay for discounted income streams, and they put a pretty good floor on prices. There are people out there who will pay for book value when prices drop too far, and they provide a (different, weaker) floor on prices. There are people who will pay for brands and memes and so on, and they provide different floors again. And then throw in different discount rates, different projections of the future, different tastes, you get the picture.
None of these lower-bounds provides the price. If I have a company that just holds $1 in a bank account at 0% interest, an income-based valuation says it's worth $0, and a book-value based one says it's worth $1, so it's worth at least $1. But if I have a goose that lays $100 bills every day, it's worth a lot more as an income stream than it is in book value (as a goose.)
There are some things that provide upper-bounds. When prices are too high, companies should issue stock and (incidentally, not as a goal) drive the price down -- this is "raising money cheaply". But in practice this is usually a pretty weak force. The bitcoin equivalent (mining) might be stronger because there are more market participants on the supply side.
Anyway, with interest rates at zero, high savings and lots of spare time and boredom, the income- and meme-based lower-bounds are causing prices to do interesting things.
In other words, the price of a company is the present value of its future earnings. There is some speculation on what future earnings will be, but generally the valuation is about 20x last year's earnings, right now it's about double that.
If a company earns profits it can pay it out as dividend, or it can accumulate it as cash and gain equity.
Bitcoin doesn't have such a thing. There's no profit that bitcoin makes that gets paid out to its owners in dividend. And the price increases aren't related to its profits, either, it's really pure speculation, no different from tulip mania.
Bitcoins potential technical uses are real, but have no real world use case so far after 13 years. There's no killer app. And if there was, it still does not require bitcoin to have a trillion dollar market cap to function. The blockchain can function just fine at a fraction of it. You can write data to the blockchain with a millionth fraction of one coin, a tiny fraction of a cent.
As a store of value sure it has proved itself across what is a very short span of time in human history, but only because its speculative. It's not an argument that its a good store of value. In the end, its only based on a mutual fashionable agreement. Technically you can fork bitcoin and create infinite tokens. The scarcity is akin to every human on earth being an alchemist and and being able to make infinite variations of a gold metal, slightly different, and us artificially choosing on one (the first one) being valuable, and the rest not. For now... and then claiming it to be a good store of value. Time will tell. In any case, there's nothing but FOMO/speculation driving bitcoin valuations atm.
With crypto, I don't have that same sense. I buy, it goes up, I'm a visionary genius. I buy, it goes down, I'm a fool. I can't really point to any reason why either scenario happens, no testable hypothesis. Other than a very few events, like the coinbase IPO, that is.
In general, I think trying to reason about assets over short periods of times typically comes down to emotions rather than fundamentals. Over longer periods of time, fundamentals can start to have some affect.
For crypto, I do think there is a narrative that can be pointed to for the run up over the past year - a mix of defi projects that are actually getting traction, scaling solutions for Ethereum allowing it to catch up to demand, and a general inflation scare that drives interest in fixed supply assets not controlled by a central party.
Bitcoin is a bunch of hope, hot air, and hubris. I suppose you could say it's an industry of its own, but I think it's harder to project than, say, the tech industry.
Let's say that a stock has value because of some combination of: 1. The underlying's earnings/cash flow, and 2. Speculation (I want to buy stocks that I think other people will want to buy)
But if you think about it, #1 is also just speculation. Because at the end of the day, you are risking $X to make $Y. You are placing a bet that tomorrow, some other people will come to value this stock (perhaps based on earnings) higher than you do today.
So basically, speculation has always been a thing and there are enduring assets whose price is more or less agreed to be entirely based on speculation and speculation alone (e.g. gold).
Some people buy stocks for dividends never expecting to sell them, and not especially worried if the price goes down after they buy. I guess the projection of dividends coukd be called "speculation", but I don't think that's what you meant when you used the term.
Other things that don't quite fit include bonds, especially short-term government bonds. If held to maturity, it's a stretch to say the value is a social construct in a meaningful way.
(Non-meaningful phrasings abound of course -- by some definitions my monthly rent is speculation, because law and order and property are social constructs and I'm betting on society not changing its mind on them, but again I don't think you were making that sort of facile point.)
Retail traders' emotional reaction to volatility really skews their perception. Professional traders are aware of this and take advantage.
The market is manipulated certainly, but that is not a justification for tech companies and developers to create crypto currencies to pump and dump.
Also the markets are regulated from registering trades by CEOs in advance to insider trading laws. Though far from perfect it’s no reason to waive a white flag and open the flood gates to unmitigated scams. And the only times it appears coin scams have resulted in any legal action and liability is under the guise of the existing securities laws.
I regret every time I invest in being smug.
For me, meditation and practicing self-compassion helped with stuff like this.
You should no more feel bad about not having won gambling on btc than you do about not having picked the winning lotto numbers last week.
This can not be understated. Everything about “crypto currencies” and NFTs are a complete and total rig job. It’s not even hidden by the large SV capital, simply justified on the basis that...so what it’s the same thing the markets or art collectors have always done.
Instead of backroom dealings, it all takes place in chat rooms and discord servers. I’ll admit as somewhat of an artist I thought I’d submit my work to a “invite only” NFT marketplace and sure enough I get a DM from one of the most prolific and successful artists shaking me down for Bitcoin in exchange for the invite promising me a minimum amount in monthly NFT sales. Of course thinking that was a potential scam, I inquired about the pay to play and was not only told how the whole thing works from the founders down to these “anonymous” NFT collectors on Twitter run by the marketplaces themselves, and to confirm it I posted a tweet immediately liked by one such profile (to put in perspective the profile had bought an NFT from Musk’s partner for I think around $750k).
I never sent the Bitcoin on the basis of being disgusted with the whole thing, which in hindsight makes me a complete moron. Everyday as I see “artists” thanking the anonymous Twitter account for changing their life with a purchase of their NFT or how they are in tears because they can pay their student loan off...I consider giving the discord art submission, dm, and tweet to the news media...but then I realize they don’t care they probably are in on it too, or at least would calculate the amount of money on ad revenue and clicks they would lose if they exposed this scam and they could no longer write daily stories about NFTs.
You can definitely make money, just always remember it is a repeat of the gold rush and just marketing to poor people about life changing opportunity and gold so plentiful you can just pickup nuggets as large as your head, all you need to do if move to their town and buy their shovels. If you have no morals about it the better bet is to tell them you aren’t much of a digger but one hell of a shovel salesmen with a wink.
I limit my exposure to 10%. Hate crypto or not, it’s earned its right to be treated as a legitimate investment class. The reason to diversify are due to the exact same reasons you’re expressing. If I were to liquidate my positions, I’d do so over a period of time rather than all at once - likely keeping some exposure.
IMO, if you’re investing in any equity trying to “time it,” or get rich quick, you’re taking as big of a risk as having exposure in crypto to begin with.
I agree with the overall point, but I'd add that the difference is the degree of permanence.
Not all governments are so permanent, and some are arguably less permanent at the moment than the big crypto schemes.
In addition, let's not forget for many of the original BTC enthusiasts, the purpose of BTC wasn't for it to be an asset class, but rather:
- A direct challenge to the dominance and reserve currency status of USD and the government and agencies that back it.
- A medium of exchange that the US government could not control.
These anarcho-capitalist goals have been greatly diminished as BTC becomes more of a regular asset class.
Anecdotally, I've heard many small scale investors (portfolios in the 5-10 million range) who are happy about these changes in BTC.
This has been going on for years, and it seemed that nobody was able to force them to prove anything.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-23/crypto-ex...
>New York officials, who originally began investigating Bitfinex in 2019, will receive quarterly reports on composition of Tether’s reserves for the next two years. The companies will end all trading activity with New Yorkers.
That starts in about a month
There's nothing in the article that suggests that tether will be closed if they are not backed up 100%, so I guess it won't make any real change even if they are not.
Paradoxically, it can lead to the prices in crypto shooting up, not down.
Months out, enough time for Bitfinex to get curbstomped by the DOJ, CFTC, or NYAG.
Also enough time for them to expire worthless.
it doesnt
It can be that people just thought others might think the China news would be bad and therefore decided to sell. In speculative market you are all the time trying to guess what others are thinking.
Maybe the hash rate isn't related...
I first found out about Bitcoin in 2017, but didn't have time to fully understand the technology, so I brushed it off as a curiosity and moved on. I heard about it again in November at the start of the price increase, but upon further analysis decided not to invest due to the fossil fuels required to secure the network (I extend my thanks to Stephen Diehl for his thorough and nuanced introspection of the technology).
I feel sorry for those who have lost money at this time, but I am thankful to have had the foresight to avoid this inevitable price crash.
It’s a great system where nothing can go wrong.
If you put $1 a day in since the Big Bang Theory Bitcoin episode aired on 7 December 2017, which is a fair date for when it reached the popular conciousness (13.84 million watched that episode in the US), and bought at the open every day, you'd have converted $1220 into $8600.
So fat in fact that it opens the ad no matter what I do, only to be told that eToro is not even available in my country.
So not only do I see a massive ad that makes the article hard to read, I can’t even close it, and it’s for a product I can’t buy.
I hate this, and everybody involved in implementing it should be ashamed of themselves.