I see the crypto market has halved since the start of the year. Down from 2.5 tr USD
Was it not always a form of pyramid selling, given the currency has no intrinsic value? Thinking in terms of mobile phones, they reached a saturation point eventually. And manufacturers like Nokia suddenly began to struggle. There's limited numbers of buyers for crypto?
When sellers outnumber buyers, what stops the wipeout?
I'm not totally dissing the concept, I see benefits in a currency that could be used globally, just questioning the valuation.
Also worth noting that always the latecomers are stung - and of course they don't generally return to buy more. The old rule - if the milkman is recommending a share it's time to sell etc.
So that removes millions of buyers.
I'll have to compare the crypto graph to the dot-com one
Also worth noting that always the latecomers are stung - and of course they don't generally return to buy more. The old rule - if the milkman is recommending a share it's time to sell etc.
So that removes millions of buyers.
I'll have to compare the crypto graph to the dot-com one
It's been up and down like hookers knickers, it will continue in a similar fashion I reckon.
Money is made on the change, not investing in it's long term value.
Yes. It's a distributed biggest-loser system. Not literally a single Ponzi scheme because Ponzi schemes are usually more closely held and run explicitly, but there have been explicit Ponzi schemes within it, and in sum it has the effect of a Ponzi scheme because everyone in the system knows they depend on two things:
1) everyone with currency holding onto their currency -- hence the unironic advice to "never sell", or "HODL" (hold on for dear life)
2) everyone else "buying the dip"
The crashes this week are the consequence of structural decisions that are reminiscent of the 2008 crash; the idea of an "algorithmic stablecoin" is a nonsense, and has only ever worked because this biggest loser market has convinced itself that no instability can be so bad as to break the stablecoins; they've convinced themselves in particular that Tether, the psychological backstop of the entire industry, is a robust scheme, when it is not.
It doesn't really compare to the dot-com crash because that was really a crisis of overvaluation through a lack of investor knowledge (like the videogames crash of the 1980s). There are dot-com crashes coming (in media, for example) and there may be a dot-com crash coming more generally in the tech sector, even if just at Elon Musk's house.
It's much, much more like the 2008 crash because every participant is knowingly holding their investments at arms' length; they all know that what they are buying and selling is a fiction that only has worth to those who are using it to avoid scrutiny of their financial misdeeds.
indemnity the change could be relentless falls now though
Yeah, not the first time hit $27k yesterday some today 100% drop....how money is made is similar to the trading platforms CFDs which as we know the people attracted to it usually lose in fact roughly 80% lose over all trades. The platform is the winner a bit like bookies.
Unfocussed Mike was just reading about tether. That seems to be a big blow for holders
Yeah. But the important thing to grasp, I think, is that Tether isn't just the technical underpinning of a lot of the wider system, it's also kind of the psychosocial underpinning of it. A lot of investors get into cryptocurrency because they hear about stablecoins and they believe Tether's (clearly unrealistic) assertions of 1:1 fiat currency backing. The existence of stablecoins -- and in particular the existence of Tether, which is the big one -- underpins a lot of that "getting in on the ground floor" or "buying the dip" that people in the milkman-investor class are urged to do.
Tether -- which ordinary consumers definitely cannot use to directly cash out to USD, unless they have more than $100K of value -- is also held up as an early example of the kind of technology "coming soon" that will make it easier to access the wealth they accrue in their investments (i.e. actually spend it on anything other than other cryptocurrencies and cartoon drawings of anthropomorphised apes).
Other means to spend cryptocurrency directly on real-world things have not really emerged, largely because of the high transactional cost. (You can't even use them on Steam anymore.)
In short: Tether is a big part of the picture sold to underinformed investors, and the entire system depends on the arrival of new buyers, because it is a biggest loser system. If there are no new buyers, nothing in the system has any value at all. All of those new buyers have to have the promise that they will be able to spend their winnings.
Unfocussed Mike anyone that bought a nft thoroughly deserves to be struggling to pay the leccy bill now. Chris Morris should have thought of it for Nathan barley.
As an actual currency which you can buy things with, BC is actually quite worthless, to buy something for $5 might have $5 processing fees added on and takes 2 - 4 hours to validate the purchase. You could not think of a worse medium for buying and selling.
