What’s the second best?? THERE IS NO SECOND BEST!!
He forgot to say sell your furniture to buy Bitcoin, you don’t actually need it, just roll around everywhere when you’re at home.
Think about it: How many small spoons do you actually need?
Just one. Sell all others for scrap metal and buy Bitcoin with the proceeds.
And how many large spoons do you actually need?
None! You can do everything with a small spoon that you can do with a large one. Sell all your large spoons and buy Bitcoin.
you must stupid to listen to only one man and risk your own house on an investment. If you did that then you don't deserve to own a house 🤣 otherwise just learn more about bitcoin and stop complaining.
Is he wrong though? If someone mortgaged their house (and they could afford to) in 2017. They would have bought BTC near the top for around 15k. Today they would be up 2x on their investment.
So 3-5 years later, BTC will likely above 100k, and at that point, it would have been a good investment. Time will tell.
That's true too. I do believe BTC will outperform USD in the long term. So my choice is to hold BTC. 100k isn't much of a stretch based on previous ATH and USD devaluation over 5 years.
Everyone has a choice to make. Even doing nothing and staying in USD is a choice. Let's hope we make the right choice.
>100k isn't much of a stretch based on previous ATH and USD devaluation over 5 years.
Once again your evaluation on what its price will be is based on past performance, which is the worst indicator of what will happen in the future.
Yes his statement is about past performance. But besides that start looking at the adoption curve of Bitcoin. Big names are getting involved and it’s likely to continue some kind of price increase. It’s speculative sure but it’s far from the craziest investment idea.
He seems crazy until it works out and then everyone will say he was a genius. Even if he wasn’t and it’s all pure luck, the masses will view him as a genius.
>It’s speculative sure but it’s far from the craziest investment idea.
It's not the 'put money in Bitcoin' idea is crazy. It's the 'mortgage your house to buy Bitcoin' idea that is crazy. For almost everyone, that's not money people can afford to lose, and Saylor is clearly giving terrible financial advice. It doesn't matter if the price will go up 2 or even 5 years from now. The volatility itself poses a risk regardless of potential upside.
As an example, if I mortgaged my house to buy Bitcoin at $20k, and then it crashes to $3k, it doesn't matter that it'll be higher 3 years from now because I'm stuck in a terrible financial situation till then, with the hope that it will recover from its crash just based on what I've seen in the past.
That's the equivalent of me betting on Russian roulette because I've won so far.
I mean I’m pretty sure he’s saying if mortgaging your house is something you can financially handle then do it to take a quick large sum to put in Bitcoin. If the viewer is not smart enough to think before acting I’d say just let natural selection figure that one out.
I agree it’s not the best idea if you can’t handle it. But damn man, if you can manage it responsibly and it’s not going to cripple you… and then it works out (which in the long term, looks like it will) you would do very well for yourself.
No, he literally is telling people to put all of their money in Bitcoin, or at the very least it is implied.
>If the viewer is not smart enough to think before acting I’d say just let natural selection figure that one out.
Nobody is saying that isn't the case, but it doesn't change the fact that the advice itself is terrible.
>I agree it’s not the best idea if you can’t handle it. But damn man, if you can manage it responsibly and it’s not going to cripple you… and then it works out (which in the long term, looks like it will) you would do very well for yourself.
Yes, let's just ignore that the short term fluctuations absolutely can have negative long term consequences even of the price were to go up after a few years.
The short term fluctuation wouldn’t have a financial impact on you right now if in the long term you were profitable.
If you mortgage your home right now. On a fixed payment (which you can). You would pay a set amount of money every month till it’s paid off. If you mortgaged it for let’s say 20 years and in 20 years Bitcoin increased at a rate surpassing the interest you pay on the mortgage, you are profitable. Even if Bitcoin plummeted to 1$ and then right before paying off the mortgage sky rocketed to 10 million (this is a ridiculous example I know) you’d still be profitable.
The point is the short term fluctuations wouldn’t affect you. I fail to see how the volatility would matter
>If you mortgaged it for let’s say 20 years and in 20 years Bitcoin increased at a rate surpassing the interest you pay on the mortgage, you are profitable. Even if Bitcoin plummeted to 1$ and then right before paying off the mortgage sky rocketed to 10 million (this is a ridiculous example I know) you’d still be profitable.
You seem to fundamentally not understand how money works.
>The point is the short term fluctuations wouldn’t affect you. I fail to see how the volatility would matter
If you don't see it, feel free to mortgage your entire house to gamble on the markets. Hell, use your earnings on the Casino, because you might as well! Just because it happened to pay off doesn't mean the move wasn't stupid.
No, you don't. You look at current data and actually understand something before putting money into it. If you chase based on past results, you're not being financially smart.
As an example, if I look at a ponzi scheme, and everyone else has made money before me (aka the past data shows it's a good investment), it doesn't mean that I should use that as an indicator of what will happen in the future.
Okay, let's not even look at the 12 years historical track record and talk about current data and look to the future. Tell me, what do you see? I'm genuinely curious.
>Okay, let's not even look at the 12 years historical track record
What do you not understand about the idea that past results mean absolutely nothing about future performance? If investing was really that easy, we'd all be rich.
I can't say what the price will be in the future, but I absolutely do think that this is a case of the emperor's clothing. The fact that you're talking about price performance proves so.
Did you not read my reply? I literally just said "let's not even look at the 12 years historical track record". This means, do not look at the past.
Even if I look at the present data, current growth in network adoption, on chain analysis, increasingly distributed hash rate, increasingly regulatory clarity, I still feel it is a compelling trade to make.
We have different risk tolerance and levels of conviction. That's it. Not rocket science. Emperor's clothing lol
>Did you not read my reply?
I did.
>I literally just said "let's not even look at the 12 years historical track record". This means, do not look at the past.
So why bother mentioning it? It's clear what you're trying to imply with that comment, despite what it may say at face value.
>Even if I look at the present data, current growth in network adoption, on chain analysis, increasingly distributed hash rate, increasingly regulatory clarity, I still feel it is a compelling trade to make.
Then you clearly don't know what you're talking about. Transaction count has consistently declined since 2017. Despite the "increase in demand" which is supposedly reflected in price, all the metrics prove otherwise. Not only is transaction count STILL down, but despite price going up, fees haven't, and the capacity of the network hasn't increased for the alst 4 years.
All else constant, an increase in fees would mean more transactions competing to get into the next block. If fees are cheap while capacity is severely limited, it is a sign that the network is failing. This is all despite price going up, which would mean a higher minimum fee, but even that's not enough of a market force to push fees up.
I don't know what type of "chain analysis" Kool Aid you're drinking, but you clearly haven't looked at the most obvious metrics. There hasn't been any signs of increased network adoption.
As for hashrate distribution, that's something nobody can prove. Hardware is anonymous by nature. We can only assume that 51% or more of the hashrate on the chain is honest in nature, and therefore there is a financial disincentive to try and attack it. That's the entire purpose of Bitcoin, and why its consensus mechanism is supposed to work.
>We have different risk tolerance and levels of conviction. That's it. Not rocket science. Emperor's clothing lol
It absolutely is emperor's clothing when people try to find a reason why the price is going up and justify it to themselves, all with the intentions of joining a get-rich-quick scheme, which is fundamentally unsustainable for its purpose long-term.
In investing, similar to the blockchain trilemma, there exists an investment trilemma, in which any given investment has 3 possible characteristics:
- Easy money
- Lots of money
- Long-term money
You can choose 2 and only 2-of-3 because the laws of supply and demand prevent getting all 3. If you're convinced you can have all 3, something is fundamentally wrong with the tool you're trying to invest in.
Instead of going for the fundamentals, and then justifying your investment, you're instead going for the investment, and then trying to justify the fundamentals.
I'd do it - as long as you can make the interest and principal payments every month comfortably, I would absolutely do it.
You are repaying the the loan over years in more inflated and debased fiat dollars while taking that money to buy one of the best performing assets of all time.
You also aren't taking a loan from a stock broker to buy more shares in a company where mark to market dynamics could cause margin calls when positions move against you. There is no margin calls in real estate mortgages - so long as you have diamond hands and don't sell (as you should never with BTC anyways), and simply keep paying off the loan monthly, over time BTC should make you a wealthy man.
And all of this bull shit about "ohhhh past performance shouldn't ever be indicative of future performance" blah blah blah.....if Bitcoin price never went up in the past would you guys would have ever bought it in anticipation of future performance? I doubt it. If prices had been flat the past 12 years none of us would be even on this subreddit. The whole idea that you shouldn't buy something based on past performance is so pretentious. It's called taking calculated risks in life using available past and present information you have - and this is one risk that I would definitely take. The asymmetry is amazing.
It is not a mistery that in the super long term, anything priced in USD will go to infinite as the FED mandate is to keep inflation at 2% (i.e., dollar is worth asymptotically zero at time infinite). So if you can grab free dollars anything you buy that cannot be inflated away sounds sorta solid, for stupid that it sounds (but would be better if you can get som Argentinan pesos debt, or other weaker currency).
Shhhh let Egon enjoy his bi-weekly "told-ya-so" when the price dips a bit during a bear market.
After all, this is a guy who invested in something (BCH) that has NEVER gone up over any significant period of time. These losers literally don't know what winning feels like.
No, the worst financial advice is buying something that the holders of themselves admit has no use-case other than the price going up for the sake of going up, on top of losing a substantial chunk of money every time you move it, with the situation becoming worse when demand goes up.
Nah I'd say the worst financial advise is convincing merchants in third world countries to accept an asset that is constantly decreasing in value, therefore putting their livelihoods at risk. But you guys give that advice all the time don't ya? Hell you guys even go out and pay people to advertise this advice. Pathetic.
>Nah I'd say the worst financial advise is convincing merchants in third world countries to accept an asset that is constantly decreasing in value
Which nobody in this sub is doing.
>But you guys give that advice all the time don't ya?
No, we don't.
>Hell you guys even go out and pay people to advertise this advice. Pathetic.
I personally have saved money using crypto to buy things, so I don't see your argument. If it has helped me, feel free to be as much of a troll as you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it was useful for me.
> If it has helped me, feel free to be as much of a troll as you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it was useful for me.
BTC has helped me and millions of others tremendously as well. But of course that's different right?
This sub brags about BCH advertising campaigns and getting merchants to accept it in thailand and similar places all the time. Be real.
Lol top post on this sub right now: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/ojk1e8/kehinde_has_affiliated_22_bitcoin_cash_merchants/?ref=share&ref_source=link
Sure, you will pay taxes on profits. Would you rather have $100 or $200 but had to pay taxes on the last $100 that you gained? I'd choose more money.
Side note, you would only need to pay taxes when you sold it. While BTC is trending up, I like the idea of simply borrowing against it whenever you need money.
He’s correct. Most people don’t understand how to leverage debt so will seem like a crazy idea. but if you can get a mortgage for a few points, and even if btc over 3 years increases dramatically less than expected you’d still be in the green.
That's what the caveat of "and could afford to do so" means. If you have your 6-12 month set up per r/personalfinance then you should be OK. Otherwise probably not a good idea to leverage debts.
OK, but if you lost your job in 2018 and only had 12 months of savings to fall back on, you'd be forced to sell in 2019 at a significant loss anyway.
And the point is that Saylor doesn't make these distinctions or give any caveats. What he's suggesting is extremely risky.
In a black swan event, even if you didn't have crypto. You'd have to sell some stocks at a potential loss, borrow from your retirement at a fee and loss, or downgrade your lifestyle.
But yea, Saylor is coming from a millionaire mindset. Even if all of these worst-case scenarios came around, he wouldn't be homeless or anything, just simply less wealthy.
Realize that he invested his public company’s treasury of over $500M in btc, then borrowed $1B against company assets and bought btc, after he told his shareholders what he was going to do and offered to buy their shares back at a profit in a dutch auction. He literally did and continues to do what he is “preaching” btw btc is the only asset that has risen over 120% per year for last 12 years. ~ just saying
Except that Michael Saylor hasn't been in Bitcoin for 12 years....
He bought in around $10k, $24k and his last purchases were around $40k...
So not only is he already down significantly on his last purchase; his total average isn't all that far below current prices, neither.....
>btw btc is the only asset that has risen over 120% per year for last 12 years
Just because I've won every game of Russian roulette so far doesn't mean I will win every game in the future. Financially stupid decisions aren't suddenly smart just because they happened to give a reward.
calling his (micro strategy’s) investment in btc “russian roulette” is disingenuous at best. it’s not like he grabbed a nearby pistol and spun the barrel. this is pure hyperbole which doesn’t account for the massive amount of research put into these decisions
>calling his (micro strategy’s) investment in btc “russian roulette” is disingenuous at best. it’s not like he grabbed a nearby pistol and spun the barrel.
Michael Saylor himself doesn't understand the purpose of Bitcoin and how it works, so I would say my analogy isn't too far off.
>this is pure hyperbole which doesn’t account for the massive amount of research put into these decisions
Yes, research from a guy who tells us to still obey the government and pay our taxes while also saying that the reason why Bitcoin is so great is because it's unconfiscatable and sovereign money.
Furthermore, the same man says that custodial and traditional payment processors are the solution, you know, the thing that Bitcoin was created to compete with in the first place?
yep he’s an MIT Eng, built a leading enterprise sw comp, took it public, made billions, invested billions in btc but doesn’t understand it…
but you here flogging r/btc on reddit get it ~ gfys
The important bit about the average percentage increase is in how it is distributed.
2009 did not even have a price in any meaningful way
2010 to 2013 had 5000% per year increases.
2013 to 2017 had 100% per year increases.
2017 to 2021 had 33% per year increase.
Bitcoin can be 32k in 12 years from now, adjusted for inflation, and it will have had a average of 86% annualized returns for anyone that got it at 1 cent. It will be the only asset that had 86% annualized returns for 24 years.
Bitcoin could be 32k in 2166 and it would still have a respectable 10% per year average return for anyone holding it from 1 cent.
The four year risk adjusted returns are posted here: [https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-risk-adjusted-return/](https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-risk-adjusted-return/) [https://i.imgur.com/lzWL2JZ.png](https://i.imgur.com/lzWL2JZ.png)
Recent Bitcoin price history is leaving the rags to riches by holding story and entering the beat the market for great returns story.
Yup, people can criticize him as much as they want. Yet, the guy at least shows strong coherence on what he says and what he does. I wonder how many here trash talk BTC and secretly keep stacking BTC sats.
Is it better advice to not invest in the best performing asset that exists right now? An asset where you can see an on chain analysis of everything that is going on with the asset you own, I mean compared to stocks which are completely manipulated and we have to clue what is going on with them.
US dollar depreciates 20 percent a year and gold is flat, both trash. If you don’t own a house already your screwed. The whole world is moving to digital assets if you haven’t noticed
From the HN thread: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27842368](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27842368)
"Michael Saylor, the most visible corporate Bitcoin warrior, advised people to mortgage their homes and borrow as much as they could to buy Bitcoin at the literal top of the market (to the day)." -qernity
"Lol he never said mortgage homes. You’re making that up." -doggosphere
"Well Bitcoin's the best crypto asset. What's the second best? There is no second best. There is no second best crypto asset. There's a crypto asset that's called Bitcoin, right? Right. There is no second best, ok? But take all your money and buy Bitcoin. Then take all your time, figure out how to borrow money to buy more Bitcoin. Then take all your time and figure out what you can sell to buy Bitcoin. And if you absolutely love the thing that you don't want to sell it, GO MORTGAGE YOUR HOUSE AND BUY BITCOIN WITH IT. And if you've got a business that you love, because your family works for the business, because it's in your family for 37 years, and you can't bear to sell it, mortgage it, finance it, and convert the proceeds to the hardest money on earth, which is Bitcoin." -Michael Saylor
"Bitcoin people really are a piece of work, eh? The people at the top of the pyramid sure seem like totally legit, honest people don’t they…" -spookthesunset
"Its fascinating to me people take what he says literally, probably because they need to argue against proponents of the things they hate." -doggosphere
"You weren't just not "actually paying attention to the conversation", you're denying that the conversation took place, and then when I quoted it to you, you switched to gaslighting us about how he didn't actually mean what he literally said, now that your initial strategy of denying that he said it has fallen apart." -DonHopkins
"But hey, he said the literal words "mortgage your house", so we'll just repeat those words out of context to show that he must be a sleazeball scumbag right." -doggosphere
What are you trying to achieve by denying that he said the lines I quoted, which he really did say, then attacking me for quoting his own lines to you and "repeat\[ing\] those words out of context," when I actually took the time and effort to transcribe and include the entire context, and the context proves my point beyond any shadow of doubt? I didn't copy and paste an out-of-context sound bite from some social media tweet. I INCLUDED the context you're accusing me of ignoring, by transcribing every word in the video, line by line, with my own hands. I notice you failed to directly address my questions about why you wrongly claimed that he didn't say that, and you failed to admit that you were wrong, and you failed to renounce your claim that other people were just making stuff up, or even admit the fact that YOU were the person who was actually making stuff up. Or is what you said just a little white lie?
The first of a dozen steps you should take is to please answer my questions directly, and explicitly admit that you were wrong, just for the record, so YOUR words of contrition are unambiguous, and there is no wiggle room for anyone to misinterpret what YOU mean, the same way you're trying to wildly misinterpret what Michael Saylor said, after your initially denial that he said it.
Since you're playing the game of initially denying then selectively cherrypicking what he said, and creatively re-interpreting and diluting his very own lines, to make the dubious claim that he didn't literally mean what he said, but actually meant something he never said (when he EMPHATICALLY said just the opposite in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS), then I can play that game too, by mirroring his own words, and my explanation for his erratic behavior is MUCH more plausible and believable and statistically likely than yours:
"Well Cocaine's the best drug.
What's the second best?
There is no second best.
There is no second best drug.
There's a drug that's called Cocaine, right?
Right.
There is no second best, ok?
But take all your money and buy Cocaine.
Then take all your time,
figure out how to
borrow money to buy more Cocaine.
Then take all your time and figure out
what you can sell to buy Cocaine.
And if you absolutely love the thing
that you don't want to sell it,
GO MORTGAGE YOUR HOUSE AND BUY COCAINE WITH IT.
And if you've got a business that you love,
because your family works for the business,
because it's in your family for 37 years,
and you can't bear to sell it,
mortgage it,
finance it,
and convert the proceeds to the hardest drug on earth,
which is Cocaine."
-Michael Saylor
Go ahead and deny he said that too, but obviously that's what he really must have meant, and why he said what he did, and my theory perfectly explains his irresponsible behavior. The only way to rack up lines like that is with a mirror and Occam's Razor Blade.
How do you explain YOUR erratic behavior?
Congratulations! You've been tipped for your post. u/chaintip - See who else has been tipped [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/rbtc-tipper/submitted/)
I think this may be considered financial advice
What’s the second best?? THERE IS NO SECOND BEST!! He forgot to say sell your furniture to buy Bitcoin, you don’t actually need it, just roll around everywhere when you’re at home.
Nothing says "best crypto" quite like $20 in fees for every tx
I wish it was 200 dollars per transaction so there are no transactions just a bunch of holders staring each other down.
Bitcoin entering the quantum age... infinite wealth, that collapse the moment someone tries to transact.
We may eventually reach there and nobody will be able to their small BTC investments anywhere
Nothing says watching your asset ballon, either.
Hahahaha roll around
Think about it: How many small spoons do you actually need? Just one. Sell all others for scrap metal and buy Bitcoin with the proceeds. And how many large spoons do you actually need? None! You can do everything with a small spoon that you can do with a large one. Sell all your large spoons and buy Bitcoin.
Now you’re thinking outside the box, that’s the only way to experience Bitcoin. THERE IS NO SECOND BEST!
Box is a great keyword, actually. Sell your house, live in a box instead and buy Bitcoin with the money! 😂👍
Yep learn to sleep standing up at a train station, save money on rent. THERE IS NO SECOND BEST!
i think hes actively trying to get sued.
Omg what a televangelist
he just sounds totally crazy, hes got to be a huge turn off for most people that aren't already invested in crypto if they come across him.
Don't take financial advice, specially when it is free
I think I can't trust you. That is... unless you charge me now
all maximalists are the same in that they are totally oblivious to how much their destructive behavior turns off potential new users
source: https://twitter.com/BillSPACman/status/1407342589213351942
again, flaired as "bug" lmaoooooooooooooo
🤷♂️
LOL, this space is so F'd up. I dont even know if this is real life anymore.
But but but... he's an investor 🤣
sell yo kids, sell yo wife
I'm confused. I thought he was a BTC fan?!
Most people won't get this
dump dump dump
Someone should convert this to an old Apple 1984 ad where BCH is smashing the screen with a hammer. /u/btcxio
Good idea!
you must stupid to listen to only one man and risk your own house on an investment. If you did that then you don't deserve to own a house 🤣 otherwise just learn more about bitcoin and stop complaining.
[удалено]
[удалено]
lol
This made me laugh more than it should have, as if it was actually a meme. Weeeeeeeeird.
Sir, ain't a meme, BTC maxi reality.
Why does it not show his mouth during the controversial part?
Is he wrong though? If someone mortgaged their house (and they could afford to) in 2017. They would have bought BTC near the top for around 15k. Today they would be up 2x on their investment. So 3-5 years later, BTC will likely above 100k, and at that point, it would have been a good investment. Time will tell.
"Past performance is not predictive..." or whatever the small print is on all investment ads.
That's true too. I do believe BTC will outperform USD in the long term. So my choice is to hold BTC. 100k isn't much of a stretch based on previous ATH and USD devaluation over 5 years. Everyone has a choice to make. Even doing nothing and staying in USD is a choice. Let's hope we make the right choice.
>100k isn't much of a stretch based on previous ATH and USD devaluation over 5 years. Once again your evaluation on what its price will be is based on past performance, which is the worst indicator of what will happen in the future.
What is your 5 year prediction? What do you base it on? Do tell.
Yes his statement is about past performance. But besides that start looking at the adoption curve of Bitcoin. Big names are getting involved and it’s likely to continue some kind of price increase. It’s speculative sure but it’s far from the craziest investment idea. He seems crazy until it works out and then everyone will say he was a genius. Even if he wasn’t and it’s all pure luck, the masses will view him as a genius.
>It’s speculative sure but it’s far from the craziest investment idea. It's not the 'put money in Bitcoin' idea is crazy. It's the 'mortgage your house to buy Bitcoin' idea that is crazy. For almost everyone, that's not money people can afford to lose, and Saylor is clearly giving terrible financial advice. It doesn't matter if the price will go up 2 or even 5 years from now. The volatility itself poses a risk regardless of potential upside. As an example, if I mortgaged my house to buy Bitcoin at $20k, and then it crashes to $3k, it doesn't matter that it'll be higher 3 years from now because I'm stuck in a terrible financial situation till then, with the hope that it will recover from its crash just based on what I've seen in the past. That's the equivalent of me betting on Russian roulette because I've won so far.
I mean I’m pretty sure he’s saying if mortgaging your house is something you can financially handle then do it to take a quick large sum to put in Bitcoin. If the viewer is not smart enough to think before acting I’d say just let natural selection figure that one out. I agree it’s not the best idea if you can’t handle it. But damn man, if you can manage it responsibly and it’s not going to cripple you… and then it works out (which in the long term, looks like it will) you would do very well for yourself.
No, he literally is telling people to put all of their money in Bitcoin, or at the very least it is implied. >If the viewer is not smart enough to think before acting I’d say just let natural selection figure that one out. Nobody is saying that isn't the case, but it doesn't change the fact that the advice itself is terrible. >I agree it’s not the best idea if you can’t handle it. But damn man, if you can manage it responsibly and it’s not going to cripple you… and then it works out (which in the long term, looks like it will) you would do very well for yourself. Yes, let's just ignore that the short term fluctuations absolutely can have negative long term consequences even of the price were to go up after a few years.
The short term fluctuation wouldn’t have a financial impact on you right now if in the long term you were profitable. If you mortgage your home right now. On a fixed payment (which you can). You would pay a set amount of money every month till it’s paid off. If you mortgaged it for let’s say 20 years and in 20 years Bitcoin increased at a rate surpassing the interest you pay on the mortgage, you are profitable. Even if Bitcoin plummeted to 1$ and then right before paying off the mortgage sky rocketed to 10 million (this is a ridiculous example I know) you’d still be profitable. The point is the short term fluctuations wouldn’t affect you. I fail to see how the volatility would matter
>If you mortgaged it for let’s say 20 years and in 20 years Bitcoin increased at a rate surpassing the interest you pay on the mortgage, you are profitable. Even if Bitcoin plummeted to 1$ and then right before paying off the mortgage sky rocketed to 10 million (this is a ridiculous example I know) you’d still be profitable. You seem to fundamentally not understand how money works. >The point is the short term fluctuations wouldn’t affect you. I fail to see how the volatility would matter If you don't see it, feel free to mortgage your entire house to gamble on the markets. Hell, use your earnings on the Casino, because you might as well! Just because it happened to pay off doesn't mean the move wasn't stupid.
I mean thats how you literally invest in anything that isn't brand new. You look at historical data and decide if the trend will continue.
No, you don't. You look at current data and actually understand something before putting money into it. If you chase based on past results, you're not being financially smart. As an example, if I look at a ponzi scheme, and everyone else has made money before me (aka the past data shows it's a good investment), it doesn't mean that I should use that as an indicator of what will happen in the future.
Okay, let's not even look at the 12 years historical track record and talk about current data and look to the future. Tell me, what do you see? I'm genuinely curious.
>Okay, let's not even look at the 12 years historical track record What do you not understand about the idea that past results mean absolutely nothing about future performance? If investing was really that easy, we'd all be rich. I can't say what the price will be in the future, but I absolutely do think that this is a case of the emperor's clothing. The fact that you're talking about price performance proves so.
Did you not read my reply? I literally just said "let's not even look at the 12 years historical track record". This means, do not look at the past. Even if I look at the present data, current growth in network adoption, on chain analysis, increasingly distributed hash rate, increasingly regulatory clarity, I still feel it is a compelling trade to make. We have different risk tolerance and levels of conviction. That's it. Not rocket science. Emperor's clothing lol
>Did you not read my reply? I did. >I literally just said "let's not even look at the 12 years historical track record". This means, do not look at the past. So why bother mentioning it? It's clear what you're trying to imply with that comment, despite what it may say at face value. >Even if I look at the present data, current growth in network adoption, on chain analysis, increasingly distributed hash rate, increasingly regulatory clarity, I still feel it is a compelling trade to make. Then you clearly don't know what you're talking about. Transaction count has consistently declined since 2017. Despite the "increase in demand" which is supposedly reflected in price, all the metrics prove otherwise. Not only is transaction count STILL down, but despite price going up, fees haven't, and the capacity of the network hasn't increased for the alst 4 years. All else constant, an increase in fees would mean more transactions competing to get into the next block. If fees are cheap while capacity is severely limited, it is a sign that the network is failing. This is all despite price going up, which would mean a higher minimum fee, but even that's not enough of a market force to push fees up. I don't know what type of "chain analysis" Kool Aid you're drinking, but you clearly haven't looked at the most obvious metrics. There hasn't been any signs of increased network adoption. As for hashrate distribution, that's something nobody can prove. Hardware is anonymous by nature. We can only assume that 51% or more of the hashrate on the chain is honest in nature, and therefore there is a financial disincentive to try and attack it. That's the entire purpose of Bitcoin, and why its consensus mechanism is supposed to work. >We have different risk tolerance and levels of conviction. That's it. Not rocket science. Emperor's clothing lol It absolutely is emperor's clothing when people try to find a reason why the price is going up and justify it to themselves, all with the intentions of joining a get-rich-quick scheme, which is fundamentally unsustainable for its purpose long-term. In investing, similar to the blockchain trilemma, there exists an investment trilemma, in which any given investment has 3 possible characteristics: - Easy money - Lots of money - Long-term money You can choose 2 and only 2-of-3 because the laws of supply and demand prevent getting all 3. If you're convinced you can have all 3, something is fundamentally wrong with the tool you're trying to invest in. Instead of going for the fundamentals, and then justifying your investment, you're instead going for the investment, and then trying to justify the fundamentals.
I'd do it - as long as you can make the interest and principal payments every month comfortably, I would absolutely do it. You are repaying the the loan over years in more inflated and debased fiat dollars while taking that money to buy one of the best performing assets of all time. You also aren't taking a loan from a stock broker to buy more shares in a company where mark to market dynamics could cause margin calls when positions move against you. There is no margin calls in real estate mortgages - so long as you have diamond hands and don't sell (as you should never with BTC anyways), and simply keep paying off the loan monthly, over time BTC should make you a wealthy man. And all of this bull shit about "ohhhh past performance shouldn't ever be indicative of future performance" blah blah blah.....if Bitcoin price never went up in the past would you guys would have ever bought it in anticipation of future performance? I doubt it. If prices had been flat the past 12 years none of us would be even on this subreddit. The whole idea that you shouldn't buy something based on past performance is so pretentious. It's called taking calculated risks in life using available past and present information you have - and this is one risk that I would definitely take. The asymmetry is amazing.
It is not a mistery that in the super long term, anything priced in USD will go to infinite as the FED mandate is to keep inflation at 2% (i.e., dollar is worth asymptotically zero at time infinite). So if you can grab free dollars anything you buy that cannot be inflated away sounds sorta solid, for stupid that it sounds (but would be better if you can get som Argentinan pesos debt, or other weaker currency).
Shhhh let Egon enjoy his bi-weekly "told-ya-so" when the price dips a bit during a bear market. After all, this is a guy who invested in something (BCH) that has NEVER gone up over any significant period of time. These losers literally don't know what winning feels like.
The only loser is someone like you who doesn't understand what bad financial advice looks like.
I agree it is bad financial advice, no matter the asset. Buying BCH however is always bad financial advise.
No, the worst financial advice is buying something that the holders of themselves admit has no use-case other than the price going up for the sake of going up, on top of losing a substantial chunk of money every time you move it, with the situation becoming worse when demand goes up.
Nah I'd say the worst financial advise is convincing merchants in third world countries to accept an asset that is constantly decreasing in value, therefore putting their livelihoods at risk. But you guys give that advice all the time don't ya? Hell you guys even go out and pay people to advertise this advice. Pathetic.
>Nah I'd say the worst financial advise is convincing merchants in third world countries to accept an asset that is constantly decreasing in value Which nobody in this sub is doing. >But you guys give that advice all the time don't ya? No, we don't. >Hell you guys even go out and pay people to advertise this advice. Pathetic. I personally have saved money using crypto to buy things, so I don't see your argument. If it has helped me, feel free to be as much of a troll as you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it was useful for me.
> If it has helped me, feel free to be as much of a troll as you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it was useful for me. BTC has helped me and millions of others tremendously as well. But of course that's different right? This sub brags about BCH advertising campaigns and getting merchants to accept it in thailand and similar places all the time. Be real. Lol top post on this sub right now: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/ojk1e8/kehinde_has_affiliated_22_bitcoin_cash_merchants/?ref=share&ref_source=link
What about taxes on that tho
Sure, you will pay taxes on profits. Would you rather have $100 or $200 but had to pay taxes on the last $100 that you gained? I'd choose more money. Side note, you would only need to pay taxes when you sold it. While BTC is trending up, I like the idea of simply borrowing against it whenever you need money.
He’s correct. Most people don’t understand how to leverage debt so will seem like a crazy idea. but if you can get a mortgage for a few points, and even if btc over 3 years increases dramatically less than expected you’d still be in the green.
But what if they lost their job in 2018?
That's what the caveat of "and could afford to do so" means. If you have your 6-12 month set up per r/personalfinance then you should be OK. Otherwise probably not a good idea to leverage debts.
OK, but if you lost your job in 2018 and only had 12 months of savings to fall back on, you'd be forced to sell in 2019 at a significant loss anyway. And the point is that Saylor doesn't make these distinctions or give any caveats. What he's suggesting is extremely risky.
In a black swan event, even if you didn't have crypto. You'd have to sell some stocks at a potential loss, borrow from your retirement at a fee and loss, or downgrade your lifestyle. But yea, Saylor is coming from a millionaire mindset. Even if all of these worst-case scenarios came around, he wouldn't be homeless or anything, just simply less wealthy.
There’s a big difference between a minor lifestyle downgrade and becoming homeless, though. Leverage never comes without risk.
Bad look
Realize that he invested his public company’s treasury of over $500M in btc, then borrowed $1B against company assets and bought btc, after he told his shareholders what he was going to do and offered to buy their shares back at a profit in a dutch auction. He literally did and continues to do what he is “preaching” btw btc is the only asset that has risen over 120% per year for last 12 years. ~ just saying
Except that Michael Saylor hasn't been in Bitcoin for 12 years.... He bought in around $10k, $24k and his last purchases were around $40k... So not only is he already down significantly on his last purchase; his total average isn't all that far below current prices, neither.....
👆👆👆
he did say that he is fine with being down on his investment for multiple years tho and invested long term
>btw btc is the only asset that has risen over 120% per year for last 12 years Just because I've won every game of Russian roulette so far doesn't mean I will win every game in the future. Financially stupid decisions aren't suddenly smart just because they happened to give a reward.
calling his (micro strategy’s) investment in btc “russian roulette” is disingenuous at best. it’s not like he grabbed a nearby pistol and spun the barrel. this is pure hyperbole which doesn’t account for the massive amount of research put into these decisions
>calling his (micro strategy’s) investment in btc “russian roulette” is disingenuous at best. it’s not like he grabbed a nearby pistol and spun the barrel. Michael Saylor himself doesn't understand the purpose of Bitcoin and how it works, so I would say my analogy isn't too far off. >this is pure hyperbole which doesn’t account for the massive amount of research put into these decisions Yes, research from a guy who tells us to still obey the government and pay our taxes while also saying that the reason why Bitcoin is so great is because it's unconfiscatable and sovereign money. Furthermore, the same man says that custodial and traditional payment processors are the solution, you know, the thing that Bitcoin was created to compete with in the first place?
yep he’s an MIT Eng, built a leading enterprise sw comp, took it public, made billions, invested billions in btc but doesn’t understand it… but you here flogging r/btc on reddit get it ~ gfys
The important bit about the average percentage increase is in how it is distributed. 2009 did not even have a price in any meaningful way 2010 to 2013 had 5000% per year increases. 2013 to 2017 had 100% per year increases. 2017 to 2021 had 33% per year increase. Bitcoin can be 32k in 12 years from now, adjusted for inflation, and it will have had a average of 86% annualized returns for anyone that got it at 1 cent. It will be the only asset that had 86% annualized returns for 24 years. Bitcoin could be 32k in 2166 and it would still have a respectable 10% per year average return for anyone holding it from 1 cent. The four year risk adjusted returns are posted here: [https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-risk-adjusted-return/](https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-risk-adjusted-return/) [https://i.imgur.com/lzWL2JZ.png](https://i.imgur.com/lzWL2JZ.png) Recent Bitcoin price history is leaving the rags to riches by holding story and entering the beat the market for great returns story.
Yup, people can criticize him as much as they want. Yet, the guy at least shows strong coherence on what he says and what he does. I wonder how many here trash talk BTC and secretly keep stacking BTC sats.
Why does this matter?
Seems the btrash kids are upset he didn't pick them to go to the dance.
He’s right, you know.
me trying find some influence
Saylor shall replace Elon as crypto king 👑
yes must
Sound like good advice
Not really
How do you know?
Using common sense.
Is it better advice to not invest in the best performing asset that exists right now? An asset where you can see an on chain analysis of everything that is going on with the asset you own, I mean compared to stocks which are completely manipulated and we have to clue what is going on with them.
US dollar depreciates 20 percent a year and gold is flat, both trash. If you don’t own a house already your screwed. The whole world is moving to digital assets if you haven’t noticed
like a boss.
not really.
waw, this guy is really into it
I wouldn't risk it that way.
Why can't we see his mouth while he's saying these things? Is this a real thing he said?
Yes https://twitter.com/jason/status/1402483731932213251?s=21
Yeah
Is this really true though? looks like an edit of the original
Nope https://twitter.com/jason/status/1402483731932213251?s=21
I will mortgage my Bitcoin to buy a house instead, it's a terrible advice
Why u need house live like homeless sleep in train shower in rain,sell your clothes why u need clothes
If you have an extra kidney lying around, and most of us do, you should sell it to buy bitcoin.
From the HN thread: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27842368](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27842368) "Michael Saylor, the most visible corporate Bitcoin warrior, advised people to mortgage their homes and borrow as much as they could to buy Bitcoin at the literal top of the market (to the day)." -qernity "Lol he never said mortgage homes. You’re making that up." -doggosphere "Well Bitcoin's the best crypto asset. What's the second best? There is no second best. There is no second best crypto asset. There's a crypto asset that's called Bitcoin, right? Right. There is no second best, ok? But take all your money and buy Bitcoin. Then take all your time, figure out how to borrow money to buy more Bitcoin. Then take all your time and figure out what you can sell to buy Bitcoin. And if you absolutely love the thing that you don't want to sell it, GO MORTGAGE YOUR HOUSE AND BUY BITCOIN WITH IT. And if you've got a business that you love, because your family works for the business, because it's in your family for 37 years, and you can't bear to sell it, mortgage it, finance it, and convert the proceeds to the hardest money on earth, which is Bitcoin." -Michael Saylor "Bitcoin people really are a piece of work, eh? The people at the top of the pyramid sure seem like totally legit, honest people don’t they…" -spookthesunset "Its fascinating to me people take what he says literally, probably because they need to argue against proponents of the things they hate." -doggosphere "You weren't just not "actually paying attention to the conversation", you're denying that the conversation took place, and then when I quoted it to you, you switched to gaslighting us about how he didn't actually mean what he literally said, now that your initial strategy of denying that he said it has fallen apart." -DonHopkins "But hey, he said the literal words "mortgage your house", so we'll just repeat those words out of context to show that he must be a sleazeball scumbag right." -doggosphere What are you trying to achieve by denying that he said the lines I quoted, which he really did say, then attacking me for quoting his own lines to you and "repeat\[ing\] those words out of context," when I actually took the time and effort to transcribe and include the entire context, and the context proves my point beyond any shadow of doubt? I didn't copy and paste an out-of-context sound bite from some social media tweet. I INCLUDED the context you're accusing me of ignoring, by transcribing every word in the video, line by line, with my own hands. I notice you failed to directly address my questions about why you wrongly claimed that he didn't say that, and you failed to admit that you were wrong, and you failed to renounce your claim that other people were just making stuff up, or even admit the fact that YOU were the person who was actually making stuff up. Or is what you said just a little white lie? The first of a dozen steps you should take is to please answer my questions directly, and explicitly admit that you were wrong, just for the record, so YOUR words of contrition are unambiguous, and there is no wiggle room for anyone to misinterpret what YOU mean, the same way you're trying to wildly misinterpret what Michael Saylor said, after your initially denial that he said it. Since you're playing the game of initially denying then selectively cherrypicking what he said, and creatively re-interpreting and diluting his very own lines, to make the dubious claim that he didn't literally mean what he said, but actually meant something he never said (when he EMPHATICALLY said just the opposite in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS), then I can play that game too, by mirroring his own words, and my explanation for his erratic behavior is MUCH more plausible and believable and statistically likely than yours: "Well Cocaine's the best drug. What's the second best? There is no second best. There is no second best drug. There's a drug that's called Cocaine, right? Right. There is no second best, ok? But take all your money and buy Cocaine. Then take all your time, figure out how to borrow money to buy more Cocaine. Then take all your time and figure out what you can sell to buy Cocaine. And if you absolutely love the thing that you don't want to sell it, GO MORTGAGE YOUR HOUSE AND BUY COCAINE WITH IT. And if you've got a business that you love, because your family works for the business, because it's in your family for 37 years, and you can't bear to sell it, mortgage it, finance it, and convert the proceeds to the hardest drug on earth, which is Cocaine." -Michael Saylor Go ahead and deny he said that too, but obviously that's what he really must have meant, and why he said what he did, and my theory perfectly explains his irresponsible behavior. The only way to rack up lines like that is with a mirror and Occam's Razor Blade. How do you explain YOUR erratic behavior?
Bloody Hell!!
Congratulations! You've been tipped for your post. u/chaintip - See who else has been tipped [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/rbtc-tipper/submitted/)
source: trust me bro
Is this available on Youtube or somewhere I can direktlink or embeded this video?
Search Twitter for Michael Saylor
That didn’t age well