Another crypto crash? I'm surprised anyone would have serious money still in crypto after the last megacrash, which came after the previous crypto crash.
The money builds a new factory. Or in the case of Google, a data center, or other such item that allows the company to make more money.
Later, when the company is worth more, the shareholder sells the stock back and/or gets a dividend (aka, a slice of the profits).
Everyone wins.
--------
In contrast, the BTC you bought was likely made using stolen electricity. So we're already negative sum to the start.
An actual difference is that current inflation levels make another round of stimulus checks highly unlikely. And the current nominal rates for risk free treasuries are high enough to keep large scale cash parked outside as well.
During the previous run ups, we didn't have institutional investors buying billions of Bitcoin, we didn't have public companies (TSLA) buying a billion dollars of BTC for fun, we didn't have sports stadiums with the name "crypto.com", or ads on TV.
BTC achieved mass adoption during 2020/2021/2022. It's available in 401k funds, derivatives on the stock market, etc.
The only catalyst I can think of that could truly catapult BTC back to the heights of 2020/2021 is if we get to a point at some point in the future where BTC is actually useful for something other than asset speculation and people trying to get rich quick. This could take years.
a purchase traceable down to the KYC’d buyer dumb enough to put their purchase on a public, immutable ledger
It is this bad for crypto right now, and there's going to be no cheap cash coming to rescue it for quite some time.
I think it is still possible that there might be a floor down at $4k or so where all the True Believer billionaires may still step in to buy it up and rescue it. If the billionaires themselves are net sellers though needing to raise cash because everything else is in flames (e.g. Elon+Twitter) then it may just fail.
everyone had a choice to just never touch TerraLuna.
everyone had a choice to not keep their funds on exchanges.
I'll give some sympathy to custodial smart contracts being drained and advertised as non-custodial, a legal distinction that has little practical distinction for the user except unlimited amounts and no permission needed to use. But you didn't have to use those either.
and overcollateralized stablecoins type fiat are still fine (for now)
and overcollateralized stablecoins type crypto are still fine with redemptions functioning smoothly through pretty amazing stress tests
other kinds of stablecoins are the ones that actually have implosions and make the news, with the notable exception and danger of Tether which still have passed every stress test despite such a large attack surface being consistently attacked by state actors very publicly
regardless, it has been entirely possible to have stable value in crypto the whole time, and in fact that's where a majority of the capital is, far beyond any hacks, exploits and exchange implosions. overcollateralized stablecoins are still $120bn and has been a steady amount for the past year. redemptions go well when desired, people just don't desire.
and then for the people that actually have the risk profile for volatile assets and self-custody those assets? they're fine too. let the VC and bankruptcy trustees fire-sale, let everything trade for another 90% discount, that's not controversial, commodities trade like that, digital commodities are trading similarly.
and that's not controversial, I'm perfectly fine with that and everyone in the space should be just as objective about their risk profile. We both agree that any other sales pitch for crypto was grifter bingo.
I don't consider this platform for investors to be perfect yet, for example I don't consider any stablecoin overcollateralized by fiat to be 'good' and I don't consider any of the stablecoins overcollateralized by crypto to be great yet, there is a lot to build and a lot of value to extract building.
Where? Which crypto investments would have resulted in that during the "whole time"? Or even just the last few years?
in direct contrast to storing on exchanges, or non-stablecoin crypto assets
you can convert them on DEX’s to other cryptos
you can sell them on OTC desks
you can redeem them for their underlying collateral if using onchain collateral, or with the issuer
stop using exchanges. in crypto they are occasionally part of the journey but people act like they are the destination.
If you ever want normal people to use crypto, exchanges or banks or something similar have to be part of it. Securely storing crypto is just too hard for normal people.
Its also accurate that I don’t care about that and I’m never one of the people pushing for “mainstream adoption”. The alpha exists while it is hard. The Venture Capital exists to bring capital to a place where it is hard. Most of the platforms are financial services. Traditional finance has many obscure financial services that mainstream never directly interacts with and its the same here. In both, there are nuances in having access. You need special hardware and special accounts to be a merchant or payment processor, you need special permission and infrastructure to trade credit default swaps, you have to jump through many hoops to self-custody any paper-claim to an asset. These arent games for mainstream. If you want to jump through those hoops you can.
And you think the value is going to rise without increased adoption? Or that actually using your Crypto to purchase goods and services is going to become easier without increased adoption?
Why hold stables? I’m confused why you’re interested in coin pegged to inflationary fiat. The yield accounts are all scams, so that’s definitely not a good idea.
for users its just a convenience for staying onchain and having stable value while awaiting other opportunities, if you have the risk profile to hold something else then do that. Its just a trade and a few months of single digit inflationary pressures really is a non-issue