Okay? And 1.5 trillion was wiped off of the US equity market.
The idea behind FAANG was to create a catchy acronym for "high-growth, big-cap tech stock". At the time, maybe it made sense to stick Netflix in the acronym - but their business model was also radically different than it is now. It also wasn't really sustainable: Facebook, Apple, Amazon, and Google all own their "moats[0]", Netflix is just a middle-man that licenses content.
The FAANG business model is all about creating your own sovereign territory on the Internet through capex and licensing. You spend a lot of money building out the best tech platform possible, and then license that out to as many people as possible so you can take 30%[1] off of the top of every transaction ever. This also implies being "cynically inclusive": trying to onboard anyone and everyone, regardless of their absolute economic value as a customer or the company's ability to support them. 30% of pennies adds up across billions of individual publishers.
Netflix does not do this, never have, and never will. They only license premium video content, which means they're exclusively working with people who actually have negotiating leverage. Furthermore, the people selling that content are better-capitalized than Netflix and can afford to just DIY/self-host their own streaming service. Thus, their business model is less like YouTube, and more like Comcast. The amount of profit Netflix can make off of premium content is far lower than FAANG companies make off of the "30% of pennies" model. That's also why they moved into content production - owning the shows is more valuable than owning the screens they are showed on.
Counting Netflix as a FAANG makes absolutely no sense and we should just pretend the N stands for, oh... I dunno. Does Alphabet own an "N" company yet? Is there any other platform owner out there that has an "n" somewhere in their name?
[0] A tech company euphemism for a monopoly. Amazon likes to call it a "flywheel". Other companies use the phrase "stickiness".
[1] A lot has been made of "the 30%", especially in the context of Epic v. Apple. In my opinion, the problem is not the fact that the cut is 30%, or even that it exists at all; it's just a convenient shorthand for market power gained from owning the platform.
I always mentally treat the 'N' as standing for Microsoft. The letter isn't right, but FAAMG isn't as easy to pronounce as FAANG...
What do you thought the "N" stood for or you thought it was a placeholder so that acronym is not offensive.
Big Tech stocks have changed since FANG/FAANG was coined, the term doesn't necessarily relate to what was big and heading for explosive growth back then. "FAANG" is a noun that doesn't necessarily mean "Facebook Amazon Apple Netflix Google" any more
But did not say they were wrong and Netflix was actually the same as Bitcoin.
They edited it to another group to prove their point.
Which to be honest confirms the original implication, they are picking and choosing for politics.
OP point is clear to me, everyone can trash talk Bitcoin from twitter rote, but no one is actually thinking. How does it relate to the US equity market? The top comments are currently very uninspiring.
What did you get last month?
It's true that's not captured in the headline, but this is a newsworthy crypto crash. It's not the first or the worst, but it's worth covering.
Retail is already all the way in. Institutions have mandates that restrict them to trading venues, types of instruments, jurisdictions (some can only invest domestically, and so cannot use foreign ETFs), and so on and so on.
There is a reason why MSTR was able to raise mountains of debt to buy Bitcoin.
It's all institutional money.
US money printer.
Inflation hedge.
Do you think we forget what the crypto-bros said just a few months ago?
Don't conflate people talking about something with the thing itself.
Bitcoin doesn't have a HN account. Listening to people talk about it is the only way to get information about it.
You especially can't be an inflation hedge if you drop while inflation goes up.
Neither is as volatile as crypto, but my point is no asset has a guarantee that its value won't "drop randomly", simply not possible. Inflation was positive during the real estate crash of '08 and during multiple gold bear markets. If your time horizon is long enough, a volatile asset can still be a good inflation hedge.
Oil, housing, car prices all dropped at that time. Prices dropped so low that companies like General Motors went bankrupt.
-------
We face an opposite problem today. Prices are going up. Old established companies love this, they can sell their stuff at higher prices. Aka, inflation. Turns out crypto was terrible at hedging this scenario.
Most assets have tanked in the last couple months, so it's sort of misleading to single out crypto.
I suspect it will drop another 20% though, back to mid 2020 levels. Fed will start to intervene if it goes beyond that, too many votes. Its like house prices in the UK, the government won't allow them to drop.
It's the same point above: this is what markets do. Investment strategies are risk management strategies. You can't just dump money into whatever is going up right now and then complain when it goes down.
Not exactly, so I'm not down 9% in my 529. I set target dates and my financial institution has shifted them to more stable assets based on that. I just checked and it's only 19% stocks.
As an aside, using a 529 for a tax shelter wouldn't work very well because of the penalties incurred if it is not used for education. 100% of the funds I have saved here are for tuition purposes -- I started doing this years before we had children.
But with a long enough pole and a firm-enough place to stand, you could move the world! <ducks>