Topic: [2021-02-12] Cramer Thinks Every Corporate Treasurer Should Be Thinking Bitcoin (Read 181 times)

Ditto!
When I first read about bitcoin I wished we would be coming at this stage at some point which we did. Now the battle is far from being over as this is going to be a marathon where there will be only one winner on the long run.
Completely agreeing with you here, no need to repeat your reasoning.

@cr1776. It might be correct for a company to put a very small portion in bitcoin for their treasury, however, 20-40% as protection against inflation might put themselves on a wrong position. Bitcoin behaves like a penny stock. They should only hold bitcoin because it is presently a good investment during this bull market. CEOs who become maximalists might lose their job during the bubble burst hehehe.

First, Aker has set up a new company dedicated to investing in bitcoin projects and companies, so this isn't Aker itself.  How is it reckless to set up a new company that deals solely (according to the article) with bitcoin and bitcoin projects and to place 100% of their capital in these projects? 

Second, neither Aker nor this new company have citizens.  They have shareholders and the shareholders hire a board of directors to hire people to manage the operations of the corporations.  The shareholders of this new company are (probably) Aker itself. 

Third, what a private company does with its capital (about $58 million in the Aker-new-company case) isn't anyone's business but the owners of that company so it isn't the business of anyone else in Norway or anywhere else.  They are not forced to "render services" to anyone.  If they succeed wildly, the owners benefit, and if they fail, the owners pay the price.  That is the nature of a free society, people make decisions like this of their own free choice. 

As far as Cramer goes, he is probably right for most companies that aren't involved in crypto.  They should put some portion - 2%, 5%, 10%, maybe 20-40% - in crypto in order to protect themselves if all the fiat printing flooding the world with money that is worth less than it was a month ago.  The smaller end of the spectrum helps to future proof them, the larger end helps to protect them.  The smaller end is more a diversification of assets alone.

If the goal of those companies is to protect themselves from inflation, they should put a higher percent if they think it will eventually occur.  The key is that if flooding the world with fiat continues, eventually inflation will occur and those companies that protected themselves will do well.  Is that reckless or smart?  Was it reckless to short the housing market in 2006, 2007 or 2008?  Many people thought so. 

Is it reckless now to (effectively) short the fiat system by buying bitcoin?  Many people think so.   Time will tell who was correct.  It may not be 3 months, or 3 years, but time will tell.  The last 11-12 years of bitcoin has told us that bitcoin has done very well in fiat terms, but it hasn't been all in one direction.

"Every treasurer should be going to boards of directors and saying, 'Should we put a small portion of our cash in bitcoin?' It seems to be an interesting way to hedge against the rest of the environment" he said.

I think the underlined words should be crucial in their decision making process to experiment with this. Do not be reckless and do something like this .... https://www.coindesk.com/norway-listed-aker-to-put-100-bitcoin-in-treasury-reserves-of-new-investment-unit

What will happen if the price crashed from the ATH with 70% ..like it did after the ATH in 2017. It will basically wipe out 70% of their budget to render services for their citizens.  

The cryptospace will also be having its own addiction hehehe. It will be in stablecoins and the storyline for this is beginning. Cryptonews media will begin to praise undercollaterized stablecoins and criticize overcollaterized stablecoins. They might have forgotten the undercollateralization lessons from the 2008 credit crisis hehehehe.



“We are basically trying to say, ‘What’s good about Tether and what’s good about MakerDAO?’ and take the good things,” he said. The mistakes the team wants to avoid repeating include “Tether being opaque and MakerDAO being governance-heavy and over-collateralized.”

Variant Fund’s Jesse Walden said its modest governance scope and less-weighty collateralization make FEI “more socially and financially scalable.”

Source https://www.coindesk.com/coinbase-naval-framework-ventures-19m-raise-fei-stablecoin

Just 'thinkin'?


Just go down the cyber risk and compliance risk rabbit hole - find out about what really is Bitcoin - and what breakes it

It is starting to sounds like "MMT".  Modern Monetary Theory is, of course, anything but modern, and will completely destroy an economy, country, individuals, and money supply if enacted.  Printing money will lead to smart people buying solid assets like gold, silver, property, Bitcoin etc.  The fools will be left with worthless paper.

Buying bitcoin is effectively shorting fiat in whatever country that person lives.  Venezuela, Russia, the Eurozone, US, Mexico, South America, Africa etc.  It is an escape hatch from the monetary system so that one can protect oneself from worthless, power-hungry, politicians. 

Thanks for clarifying on that one I did not know it.
I only found this article as a reference of what you are saying where Congressman Mike Garcia stated 'I’m committed to providing Americans the support they need to combat COVID-19 and open our communities, but a $1.9 trillion bill that only puts 9% towards COVID when the U.S. already has a $27 trillion debt is foolish.'
https://www.hometownstation.com/santa-clarita-news/politics/garcia-votes-against-1-9-trillion-covid-19-stimulus-package-368196

I keep repeating myself, I know, this whole US dollar addiction is not turning good.

And one scary thing about there $1400 checks is that is about $400 billion out of the $1.9 trillion.  The other $1.5 trillion didn't go to individuals, it went to payoffs.  You can tell it was full of pork because the other stimulus was bipartisan, this was strictly one sided.

Agreed. However, what I am afraid of is when mainstream media begins to be very bullish on bitcoin, it should be a time to begin to be cautious. Mainstream bullishness was an indicator that the bear might pounce on the market anytime hehehe.

Also this storyline. This will be the concern until December.



Tesla Inc (NASDAQ: TSLA) could create a “positive momentum” if its sold its Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) holdings and initiated a buyback of its stock, according to Gary Black, a private investor and former CEO of Aegon Asset Management.

Source https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-sell-bitcoin-buy-back-050117982.html

As you may all know by now, the US Senate approved Biden’s stimulus plan last Saturday, paving the way for some whopping $1,400 checks and jobless aid. Now the bill is getting sent back to the House where it will be voted on tomorrow.
This 1.9 trillion toilet paper rolls will have a huge impact on the markets (bitcoin included). I am not going to be surprised if more corporations will buy bitcoin after that.

It is great advice for corporations if they are concerned about inflation from all the helicopter money that has been printed over the last 12 months.  It protects shareholder wealth to have some Bitcoin vs fiat.

It is quite funny how personalities in the mainstream media can be so bullish when there is a bull run, but what will be their attitude once there can be a bearish period? I am a believer in Bitcoin but to say that all corporations or business should have Bitcoin is not a good advice especially coming from CNBC...that is hyping at best. Not all business can be good at handling cryptocurrency. And not all are prepared for the ups and downs of cryptocurrency. Anyway, this is always what we are getting from the media...they are coming to exploit something's popularity but is so ready to junk something when it is not yet or will not be anymore popular.

Of course, Bitcoin must be reckoned with, because it is one of the leaders.  Gold, oil and many other important resources fade into the background compared to bitcoins.

I support the argument on hedging against fiat currency, however, does anyone also remember that person on CNBC who shilled XRP and showed everyone how to buy on Poloniex? This is certainly a different situation but this news article also made me remember Brian Kelly hehehe. It might be the time to be cautious.



CNBC personality Jim Cramer has turned bullish on bitcoin balance sheets in the wake of Tesla’s $1.5 billion buy.

"I think it's almost irresponsible not to include" bitcoin on corporate balance sheets, Cramer said on CNBC Tuesday.

"Every treasurer should be going to boards of directors and saying, 'Should we put a small portion of our cash in bitcoin?' It seems to be an interesting way to hedge against the rest of the environment," he said.

"I think it's an alternative to having cash position where you make absolutely nothing," Cramer said. The verdict on bitcoin: "Nice hedge against fiat currency."

Cramer has previously endorsed MicroStrategy's bitcoin treasury reserve. He called CEO Michael Saylor a "gunner" he wouldn't bet against during a mid-January episode of "Mad Money."

Cramer, who said he owns bitcoin, has previously advocated for the cryptocurrency as a hedging instrument.

Source https://www.coindesk.com/cramer-bitcoin-balance-sheet