Pages:
Author

Topic: Are we the "Berkshire Hathaway" stock holders of the future? - page 2. (Read 4194 times)

legendary
Activity: 1918
Merit: 1018
Bitcoin will never be as stable as BRK either.



If only btc looked like this, I would have no problem just hodling.

Bitcoin is new and growing but there are a lot of uncertainties so the volatility is high

The volatility will go down but the volatility hasn't been a huge problem for holders that made a lot of money
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
Stability is exactly the issue.

Profit on the ups and downs.

My $.02.

Wink
legendary
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1035
Bitcoin will never be as stable as BRK either.

Of course it will...
dont be silly
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
Bitcoin will never be as stable as BRK either.



If only btc looked like this, I would have no problem just hodling.
legendary
Activity: 2590
Merit: 3015
Welt Am Draht
I'll be a sprightly 72.

Other than potential matches in value at various points there's zero comparison between the two.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
Im going to be so friggen old in 34 years Sad

-B-

Me too; far too old to enjoy it  Sad But I have no doubt if it succeeds, it'll not take 34 years to do it.

You could put 2k a year in a IRA account and in 40 years you should be have tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands Grin
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
Im going to be so friggen old in 34 years Sad

-B-

Me too; far too old to enjoy it  Sad But I have no doubt if it succeeds, it'll not take 34 years to do it.
legendary
Activity: 1918
Merit: 1018
amazing chart yes. but that took 30 years, people here get afraid when bitcoin lost 20 USD in one week  Tongue

i think its an good investement but a risky one. either we lose 99% or the price will rise alot.

I can see other scenarios than Bitcoin becoming massive or disapearing

Owning berkshire means owning a slice of a huge conglomerate of profitable, growing businesses.  Owning bitcoin means owning an electronic numerical value that's guaranteed by the network.

Berkshire is a productive asset, bitcoin is effectively an e-commodity.  There is virtually no intrinsic value in bitcoin (it doesn't generate massive amounts of value for society).  Owning berkshire for long periods of time is investing (long-term profit and value growth), while owning bitcoin for long periods of time is speculating (believing the next sucker will buy a non-productive asset at a higher price than you).

Bitcoin has massive intrinsic value. Eg replaces 1/2 of the world banking infrastructure for one.

Bitcoin obv has intrinsic value

I think OP made a very interesting parallel because people get anxious after a 2months decline or a 3months stability when long term means a longer time than Bitcoin's age and Bitcoin's future looks very bright

1991-1998 1000%, B.A doesn't pay any dividends, he choses his companies very well and paid a small price while leaving the good managers in place with a lot of freedom but removing the bad ones; look at his portfolio http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/12/02/why-warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-wont-pay-a.aspx
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
I think you guys missed his point.

Think about it again.

My $.02.

Wink
legendary
Activity: 2884
Merit: 1115
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
Bitcoin will never pay dividends  Cry

Same as Berkshire actually kind of neat when I think of it that way
(Cough there was 1)
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
If you purchased Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1980 you would have paid $200 for a share.
This stock is now worth $192,000 per share.  Yet it took 34 years to get there.

See this:  http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BRK-A+Interactive#symbol=BRK-A;range=1d
Click "Max" for the range.

From March 1981 to Aug 1982 it didn't move a penny.  Sat at about $500 for the entire year.
From October 1984 to October 1985 it didn't move a penny.   Sat at $1300 for the entire year.

Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately - need to get some perspective.  

$200,000 is a possibility.  But 1 year with no price increase is perfectly in line with "how things play out" sometimes ...

-B-

How could you compare stocks with bitcoin?
Stocks is all about futur cash flows, whereas bitcoin is all about adoption.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
If you purchased Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1980 you would have paid $200 for a share.
This stock is now worth $192,000 per share.  Yet it took 34 years to get there.

See this:  http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BRK-A+Interactive#symbol=BRK-A;range=1d
Click "Max" for the range.

From March 1981 to Aug 1982 it didn't move a penny.  Sat at about $500 for the entire year.
From October 1984 to October 1985 it didn't move a penny.   Sat at $1300 for the entire year.

Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately - need to get some perspective.  

$200,000 is a possibility.  But 1 year with no price increase is perfectly in line with "how things play out" sometimes ...

-B-

You make a good point and you could well be correct.

My $.02.

Wink
legendary
Activity: 2632
Merit: 1023
Owning berkshire means owning a slice of a huge conglomerate of profitable, growing businesses.  Owning bitcoin means owning an electronic numerical value that's guaranteed by the network.

Berkshire is a productive asset, bitcoin is effectively an e-commodity.  There is virtually no intrinsic value in bitcoin (it doesn't generate massive amounts of value for society).  Owning berkshire for long periods of time is investing (long-term profit and value growth), while owning bitcoin for long periods of time is speculating (believing the next sucker will buy a non-productive asset at a higher price than you).

Bitcoin has massive intrinsic value. Eg replaces 1/2 of the world banking infrastructure for one.
full member
Activity: 125
Merit: 100
Owning berkshire means owning a slice of a huge conglomerate of profitable, growing businesses.  Owning bitcoin means owning an electronic numerical value that's guaranteed by the network.

Berkshire is a productive asset, bitcoin is effectively an e-commodity.  There is virtually no intrinsic value in bitcoin (it doesn't generate massive amounts of value for society).  Owning berkshire for long periods of time is investing (long-term profit and value growth), while owning bitcoin for long periods of time is speculating (believing the next sucker will buy a non-productive asset at a higher price than you).
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
very possible. but you shouldn't expose our true agenda that openly. to the public bitcoin still has to be about liberty, democracy and this other nonsense we usually say.

legendary
Activity: 2632
Merit: 1023
If you purchased Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1980 you would have paid $200 for a share.
This stock is now worth $192,000 per share.  Yet it took 34 years to get there.

See this:  http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BRK-A+Interactive#symbol=BRK-A;range=1d
Click "Max" for the range.

From March 1981 to Aug 1982 it didn't move a penny.  Sat at about $500 for the entire year.
From October 1984 to October 1985 it didn't move a penny.   Sat at $1300 for the entire year.

Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately - need to get some perspective.  

$200,000 is a possibility.  But 1 year with no price increase is perfectly in line with "how things play out" sometimes ...

-B-

Berkshire Hathaway, stock in a stock market. Not currency/money istlef. BTC is and CC's are going to make BH look like a basket case.
Quote
"Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately"
can't use log graphs and don't know what a s-adoption curve is.

BH was never subject to almost universal commentary by every central bank plus, an alphabet soup of other agencies, nor had leading powers issue various dictums about it, if that gives you any idea of the magnitude of BTC.

Nothing even close to BTC has existed in history. BTC is almost a new thinking entity, its kinda close to a wetware agents/silicon data/backend, all working to/because they decrease S [entropy = inefficient systems] and so agents can accrue more E to themsleves. That's why its more or less a fait accompli

One wonders about ethierium, or nxt going the next step or something on BTC.
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1014
In Satoshi I Trust
amazing chart yes. but that took 30 years, people here get afraid when bitcoin lost 20 USD in one week  Tongue

i think its an good investement but a risky one. either we lose 99% or the price will rise alot.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
Looking for the next big thing
Im going to be so friggen old in 34 years Sad

-B-

Me too.  How much do you think one of those fancy nanny/chef/sports trainer/therapists/assistant/butler robots will cost?  Hopefully less than a bitcoin.  I only have 2 right now.  
legendary
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
If you purchased Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1980 you would have paid $200 for a share.
This stock is now worth $192,000 per share.  Yet it took 34 years to get there.

See this:  http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BRK-A+Interactive#symbol=BRK-A;range=1d
Click "Max" for the range.

From March 1981 to Aug 1982 it didn't move a penny.  Sat at about $500 for the entire year.
From October 1984 to October 1985 it didn't move a penny.   Sat at $1300 for the entire year.

Those of us annoyed by the lack of price increases lately - need to get some perspective.  

$200,000 is a possibility.  But 1 year with no price increase is perfectly in line with "how things play out" sometimes ...

-B-

Very interesting.
Btw, the stock has never ever made any stock split even at that high price, so maybe we shouldn't move to a smaller unit in bitcoin as well. Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 500
Time is on our side, yes it is!
Yeah I tend to agree with the previous poster.  There isn't much way to tell how this will change our society.  For me and many others I suspect this is uncharted territory and people should expect the unexpected.
Pages:
Jump to: