Future of Bitcoin

Investing / Cryptocurrencies
2233

I agree.

The only difference between Gold and BTC is that Gold glitters and have been around for long time to keep people interested. Plus if everyone forget about Gold someday, if someone still has some gold at disposal, they can atleast make jewellery and wear it.

In past Gold was the currency, then it was used to back a currency and even when it was removed as a peg, somehow people maintained their trust.

I don’t expect any store of value to deliver above inflation returns because ideally that’s what store of value means I guess. However this is expected return. Realised return depends a lot on people’s frame of mind and as history has shown us in some periods Gold has outperformed even stocks.

BTC represents about 1% of world equity market cap. So yeah 1% allocation for world equity investors would make sense. Having said that , I am not sure how much difference would it make to overall portfolio for future. In order to make a meaningful impact, it needs to outperform VT significantly over next 10-20 years.

P.S -: I really believe that underlying technology of bitcoin is brilliant. It would have been great if more research was done and it could be leveraged to make banking system more secure. I heard some banks are trying to do so. Let’s see.

2234

Ita funny. I had the same mindset some time ago. If i had to bet i would say you work in the financial industry :wink:

Today after lots of research i believe the technology is basically shit (for most applications except btc) because its nothing more than an inefficient and slow database.

The magic comes in for btc when you consider network effects, green transition by using(“subsidising”) suprplus renewable energy,…

Financially i see it as an inflation hedge, and even more a stagflation hedge, in times when equities dont really perform despite inflation. I dont really see a tight monetary regime with these debt levels.

Anyway. I do not know what’s going to happen. Small allocation to improve risk return

2235

Well, when I said tech , I meant the whole thing. It is a network of computers sharing blockchain almost impossible to hack for now. Similar tech could be built for banks as well and I know there are some pilots.

Actually I neither work in Tech, nor in finance. I just try to understand things I invest in. For BTC, I still don’t get it. So I just try to listen to people and the narrative today is a bit strange . On one hand it is store of value and on the other hand it is going to be outperforming all the value creating assets. :slight_smile:

Going forward, I think instead of digital gold, it should be compared to Hermes Birkin. A luxury which everyone wants but only few can have and is limited in production.

P.S -: I don’t own Gold or Birkin .

2236

The production of a hermes birkin bag is the discretion of Hermes. They can make as few or as many they please.

Nobody can decide to make more btc, there is no single entity to control it.

2237

Well, even if Hermes wants to increase the production, they need to train so many craftsmen to do the job. But I agree, it’s technically possible. Although they are increasing by 7% their capacity every year.

Similarly as BTC was built from nothing in first place, anyone can technically try to use the same logic and build a network. Let’s call it BTC2.

The issue is not that BTC2 is not possible. The issue is that BTC1 is already there and it’s tough to compete with it without spending all the money that people spent over the years.

So, even though I understand that BTC is limited. It doesn’t actually mean you cannot have BTC2.

The only reason BTC2 is not there is because there is no real use of BTC1 in first place. So the only reason to build a competition network with exact same characteristics would be the hope that even the BTC2 will have same fan following. There is very low incentive to do so and a very high chance of failure.

This is why I believe most other crypto coins are positioning themselves as problem solvers like identity theft, smart contracts , etc etc.

Anyways, I am the least expert on this topic. I just tried to explain my understanding of what’s going on. I might be completely wrong. It could very well be that times have changed and people love more the things that are not used, have a charisma, are virtual and cannot be experienced versus the stuff that actually exists in real world.

Imagine we all just woke up after sleeping for 20 years. And someone told us that nowadays people are paying more money to buy a string of characters than food, vacations, entertainment and everything else they can buy. And the main reason is that there could only be 21 million of these codes ever.

For fun only
People on Mars might want to tokenise human beings on earth. Based on what we know today. We would get to 10 billion and then will never go up again in number. So they should invest their wealth in human token where each token is pegged to one human on earth. A new token can only be created when the net human population increases. The rate of increase of humans is limited and there is no one person or central authority to change this. The authorities might try but it’s not really easy. Martians might benefit from this deflationary asset class :slight_smile:

1 Like
2238

Just buy Bitcoin, HODL and learn about it.

Read:

  1. Bitcoin Information & Educational Resources
  2. https://planb.network/
  3. The Bitcoin Standard by Saifedean Ammous (available for free as PDF approved by author)
5 Likes
2239

Thanks for sharing

Quick question. I am assuming you are invested in Bitcoin.

Could you share your estimate of expected annualised return from BTC for the future 10-20 year period in CHF terms?

3 Likes
2240

You might want to watch Michael Saylor’s keynote to the bitcoin conference. He gives a 21 to 37% ARR until 2045 (that’s the slide at 18m31s):

Very optimistic, but as the master says why not have some just in case it really takes off…

3 Likes
2241

I don’t have any estimations. The only thing I know for sure, it will be more valuable than now.
(I’m 95% BTC / 5% CHF, BVG not included).

3 Likes
2242

Of all your net worth, you have 95% in BTC? :sweat_smile:
Hell of a risk tolerance.

1 Like
2243

@stojano what about third pillar?

2244

I think it’s not NW, it’s net cash position

2245

No, @stojano is really all-in on BTC. I guess he’d also invest his 2nd pillar into BTC if it would be possible.

2 Likes
2246

I found the talk interesting but it felt like I was listening about a story of another planet. AI will like to keep their capital in digital assets. That digital asset will be bitcoin because bitcoin takes very low maintenance cost. As if AI is real person :slight_smile:

So the whole business case is set around the fact that people should put their assets in bitcoin (partially or fully) . This would create demand which would push up the price even further and happily ever after.

This can be positioned against gold because gold also doesn’t do much in real world. But I didn’t understand why he thinks BTC can replace bonds.

Bond is not just a piece of paper. It’s a debt which companies or countries use to create value added products or services which people (real humans) want and need. And only then they can return interest back or else face default. Countries can sometimes reduce their burden by inflation but still they actually borrow money to produce economic output. So in my view bond is not like gold.

Even if I don’t agree with most of the talk, mainly because I don’t understand virtual world much. I have to say he did a good job and if he succeeds in convincing people to hold 0.01 BTC which is not that much money per person and a lot of people do that. If 1 billion people end up doing that then it would establish a base on BTC price.

People love asymmetrical gains possibilities and it would feel like a lottery ticket.

2247

yep… viac with max 5% IBIT

1 Like
2248

Any estimate for btc will be far off the reality …

Based on the assumption that the role of btc stays the same aa today: " store of value".
I think btc will outperform all traditional asset classes. 10x on btc is possible, even 20x.
I cannot imagine a stock with a similar market cap to avhieve this. Sp500 might double or triple, but 10x is unrealistic.

The risk return profile of bitcoin is attractive, and should, in my opinion, be a part of an growth portfolio. Allocation for the “average” investor maybe 2-3%.

There is a second storyline, which the btc maxis will preach. They talk about btc becoming money. While i truely believe it would be good for society to have a world wide low inflation money which is not controlled by a country, i dont think its realistic in the near to mid future. (Gold failed this role btw mainly because of lack of verifiability of reserves, a problem btc fixed). In this use case, btc would obviously skyrocket.

Edit:
To comprehend the storyline “monetization” it helps to understand what may be broken with the monetary system today. Check out https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

1 Like
2249

Crystal ball but I’m not afraid to say : In 10 years, 400k minimum. In 20 years 1M.

1 Like
2250

Do you have a source? Its not my understanding

A search gave below quote from Wikepedia. BTC would seem to have the same problems but on steroids.

" The gold standard was abandoned due to its propensity for volatility, as well as the constraints it imposed on governments : by retaining a fixed exchange rate, governments were hamstrung in engaging in expansionary policies to, for example, reduce unemployment during economic recessions."

1 Like
2251

USA had usd peg to gold.
When france and other countries wanted to exchange USD for gold, the US stopped the possibility to exchange “temporarily” in the 1970s.

The fear was that there are more usd than are backed by gold.

2252

My understanding is that there were more USD circulating than could be covered by the gold reserves, so the problem wouldn’t have been fear but the willingness of the US government to print money without proper backing, hence fiat money.

I don’t think Bitcoin solves that problem: governments will want to keep having the ability to print money, hence they won’t sponsor BTC as a currency. If anything, they’ll go for Central Banks Digital Currencies, which allows for them to still have control over the suply while also giving them full access to all transactions done using their token. CBDCs are also anathema to an originalist Bitcoin supporter’s views.

I can get behind the “Blockchain as a payment processing network” narrative but Bitcoin as actual money on a meaningful scale seems unlikely to me.

Edit: my understanding is that gold failed as a currency because it was heavy and burdensome.

That gave rise to lenders providing notes worth a certain amount of gold that could be withdrawn at certain places under certain conditions. From there, the system expanded and in the end, only the notes remained as currency, without the gold backing (which central banks still keep plenty of in order to support their ability to stabilize their currency vs other currencies).