Topic: Are we the "Berkshire Hathaway" stock holders of the future? (Read 4194 times)

The logic behind what he says is true; he diversifies and seek profit but it is usually wise to pick companies that offer dividends with a few exceptions

Well I am fairly confident that Berkshire Hathaway will not pay dividends when Warren is still alive, that would affect the brand power of the company and go against the founders wishes over the last few decades.

Anyways your right it was discussed but the proposal was opposed
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/16/us-berkshire-dividend-idUSBREA2F0N220140316

"Our shareholders are far wealthier today than they would be if the funds we used for acquisitions had instead been devoted to share repurchases or dividends," he said in his March 2013 annual letter.

Bitcoin and shares in Berkshire Hathaway are entirely different animals. However, with that, I do think there is an incredible upside with Bitcoin, maybe even reaching levels of growth that Buffett had experienced with his company. Maybe in time, Bitcoin will also be worth in excess of $100,000 per coin.

Thank you for the clarification and correction

I believe that Bitcoin will go up in price at least $1000+ but who knows when? Until the market stabilizes and Gov'ts become more educated on BTC more traditional investors and merchants will continue to shy away

I run a full node and don't collect TX fees, only miners do.


But they might some day. I thought it was even discussed at the stockholders meeting this year.

Neither does Berkshire

LIES!

Bitcoin DOES pay dividends its called "Tx Fees"

setup a node and start collecting

Very good post, puts things in perspective.
I agree.

Well Bitcoin is not a really stable investment but most stocks/investments are not.
That said its always been a bit tricky for me to classify BTC as currency or stock and kind of label it in one category.

Such a shame bitcoin is not more stable

I think you completely missed BittBurger's point.  In the future, the number of bitcoin users will outnumber the number of BRK stock holders by many staggering orders of magnitude.  Right now we are at (maybe) ~1-2M bitcoin users, and that's worldwide.  To put this in perspective, I believe the total user base for World of Warcraft is something like ~8M worldwide (and that's for 1 obscure MMORPG out of hundreds of MMORPGs that only a small populous of the world actually cares about).  So we haven't even reached parity with the WoW crowd yet.

Hell, Facebook alone has achieved ~1.3B active monthly users in just 10 years, and that's without its users having any monetary incentive driving them to get involved and sign up.  And they aren't even in China, they're banned from it.



Notice too, that FB's biggest gains in users was the next few years just after the 1M users/month level.  I believe it took them 4 years prior just to hit the 1M user mark.

The bitcoin user base could eventually grow into the hundreds of millions, maybe even a few billion daily users, merchants, institutions, investors, etc. around the world.  It's the exponential growth and utility of the Bitcoin network that will give BTC it's total (purchasing) power and value, and it will grow at a much faster rate than BRK did.  Likely at the Facebook rate of adoption or so.

So yeah, $200K/BTC valuation is easily achievable one day.  I wouldn't be surprised if we saw that by 2018-2020.

Owning BTC means owning part of a system that can replace 50% Of what all banks do at least. Conservatively that is worth 500M~to 1T a year.

Think of the costs involved in securing the back end of the banks, banking branches, etc.

Then there is the cash side, the whole cash printing handling side of things is replaced by BTC that cost trillions a year to deal with.

This no intrinsic value is so often repeated but never actually thought about.

The number of IT consultant, systems, property, branches and all the costs and maintiance each year are huge.

34 years without any dividend can be hard but if you had x shares you can sell one once in a while and get some profit

I would have to have quite the patience to wait 34 years and hold my assets the whole time securely
Hope its a bit faster than that

Lol that's not how it works 

BRK could be a private company having as little as a single owner and it's valuation wouldn't change (if anything It'd be higher). Bitcoin with one user is not worth anything really.

Five years and over a million percent rise since inception, let me know when Berkshire Hathaway can do the same in fifty years.

Yes in 34 years I will be 73!

Bitcoin has therefore encouraged me to exercise more, get better sleep, and eat my veggies

But I agree.  I don't think the timescale for BTC hitting $200,000 will be 34 years.  If it happens, I see it happening in 1/3 that time.  Just because BRK is the 1885 locomotive of stocks and BTC is the 2014 technology of innovation.

If you think about it though guys - here's a stock.  BRK.  How many stock holders? 

Now think about Bitcoin.  How many possible users?   Its staggering what that could mean for all time high price of Bitcoin.

-B-

No, because Bitcoin is not a company and bitcoins are not shares. Bitcoin is a disruptive technology protocol.

Maybe you should have asked if we are the "TCP/IP" stock holders of the future.

It does look like BRK if you use the same time scale: the first few years of Warren Buffet's partnership. It rose exponentially, just like Bitcoin.