Hacker News Reader

Comment by nwah1 | Hacker News Reader

It is worse than that because the "market cap" in the context of crypto scams is meaningless.

Spot price times the number of tokens means nothing if the tokens have no intrinsic value.

Apple may be overvalued, but they have enormous assets and revenue backing their price. Their P/E ratio is a rational number.

Crypto could fall to zero at any time and all the hodlers are left holding nothing but the bag.

And of course a lot of the tokens are just locked away, keys are lost, etc.

View on HN

> Apple may be overvalued, but they have enormous assets and revenue backing their price. Their P/E ratio is a rational number.

I appreciated this inadvertently exactly technically correct definition of a rational number. But I assume you mean a rationally derived number ….

It was an intentional double entendre

Sorry, I should have said "presumably inadvertently exactly technically correct" … and then I would have presumed wrong, but at least not made a baldly incorrect statement about technical correctness.

Can't you just say the same thing about the fiat currency that you say Apple's holding? It could also "go to zero". And certain "tokens".. specifically, let's say something like Bitcoin or Monero, actually do have what you would call "intrinsic" value since they require the expenditure of actual, physical energy to obtain, unless you know of a viable attack on those proof of work systems that you're not telling us about.

I don’t think you can. Apple owns real estate, intellectual property, and tons of tangible physical assets. The market is not going to decide Apple’s patents are worthless, California Real Estate is worthless, their factories and manufacturing equipment is worthless until there’s some world-ending cataclysm.

> The market is not going to decide Apple’s patents are worthless, California Real Estate is worthless, their factories and manufacturing equipment is worthless until there’s some world-ending cataclysm.

I'm not sure why you think there has to be a world-ending cataclysm for this to happen? If there were any major change in the way societies or economies were organized, Apple the entity could cease to exist entirely, or some/all of its assets could cease to belong to them. Like for patents, it certainly seems like the world is very far from deciding to abolish IP, but if society wills it, it is very simple to do.

Apocalyptic events like that are rare. Sudden rapid divestment from Apple is unlikely.

That's literally the definition of an catastrophic event

It could happen, in the same sense that a planet-killing asteroid could strike the Earth tomorrow.

By contrast the sudden demise of all crypto value could also happen, in the same sense that tomorrow might be cloudy.

My real point here is poking fun at how, as has been observed in the past, "it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism." People are talking about world-ending cataclysms when the much more mundane "downfall of an economic order and rise of a different one" is a possibility too.

I think it's reasonable to say that "any major change in the way societies or economies were organized" which resulted in all of Apple's assets going to zero, including the US Dollar, would qualify as the end of the World As We Know It, and would be effectively cataclysmic in magnitude as far as its effects on society.

...Whereas blockchain assets going to zero doesn't even register as a blip to the average citizen.

The requirements for a major sudden loss of value in Apple would likely involve a loss of value in a vast number of other presently high-intrinsic-value assets: real estate, the entire tech sector, the US and global economy, etc., etc.

Devaluation of cryptocurrency assets, on the other hand, could come about from someone sneezing. Or other events which would have similarly little impact on any asset valuations outside the crypto bubble itself.

The market's view of the likelihood of Apple disappearing via the things you suggested is priced in by people choosing to hold things like gold, NZ property to escape to or I guess guns and bunkers.

no we were talking about the 'cash' they hold. I dont get why you're bringing such tangential things into the discussion. what guarantees the value of USD is (a) its current adoption and (b) the fact the US stands behind it and will police and secure its usage. how is that different from a proof of work, asic resistant cryptocurrency?

Apple does have worth beyond it's stocks because it owns stuff. The chairs in Apple's offices are worth more than some very profitable small businesses, let alone their current working inventory of devices or the parts to make more or the IP that they've generated to make them, or or or ad infinitum.

Cryptocurrencies are a null term. There's no there there.

> chairs in Apple's offices

I’d have mentioned their real estate holdings (offices, etc). Office chairs don’t have a big resale value but real estate often does.

That's kind of my point. ;)

They have tens of thousands of chairs in Apple Park alone. Even if every chair went for $50, Apple could net hundreds of thousands of dollars. There's plenty of small businesses that would kill to net hundreds of thousands of dollars.

> Office chairs don’t have a big resale value

Check out ebay auctions for Herman Miller Aeron, they're still worth something !

we weren't talking about the value of apple's stock or its property aside from the cash it holds on hand. did you just not read what i wrote? the considerable number of downvoters must have made the same mistake as you i guess. the question is whether fiat cash is any more real than cryptocurrencies.

and as for them being a null term, you have no clue what you're talking about or you're intentionally trolling. please don't reply to me.

You are right, I misread. I apologize. Unfortunately, you don't get to decide who replies to you or not, and the "but fiat currency!" is even easier to disabuse: it has societally inherent worth because it can be used to pay taxes even if it is not accepted in any other venue (which of course it is), whereas cryptocurrency's primary use is to grift or be grifted.

That is inherent worth, unless you intend to go full big-brain about the Fall of Society, and at that point nobody is going to care about your digital ledger unless it comes with lead-backed securities.

> actually do have what you would call "intrinsic" value

I just spent all day digging a hole in my backyard for no reason. Does it have intrinsic value?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com