Topic: CNBC: "Bitcoin is the new safe-haven asset" (Read 2346 times)
This might be true. It is proved that in a long-term period investors may enjoy huge amounts of profits as ROI is over 100% these years. Even now that it is 8k and not 20k as it was in December 2017, it is still a good profit for anyone that bought some BTC.
I've been hearing this more and more from mainstream media sources... maybe they're trying to turn people away from gold/franc/yen? Gold especially has always been a thorn in the back of central banks because it doesn't allow them as much freedom to manipulate their currency and devalue it. People from Eastern countries know very well that gold is the most secure way to protect themselves from a rainy day, and it is a large part of their tradition to buy up gold and resell it several years later to buy something big like a car or a house.
This is why bitcoin is being ascribed similar features. People are turning to it to protect themselves from global risks, like trade wars. If China and the US go into a full out trade war, you'll see a lot of damage on the stock markets and the currencies. Investors will want to protect themselves, naturally.
This is why bitcoin is being ascribed similar features. People are turning to it to protect themselves from global risks, like trade wars. If China and the US go into a full out trade war, you'll see a lot of damage on the stock markets and the currencies. Investors will want to protect themselves, naturally.
Media has got the potential to turn anything positive as well the same on the negative manner. Such a news rolling out of an international media makes it a truth to the people who were in dilemma to make an investment into bitcoin. Users who have been into it as well benefited through it already know this fact.
I would agree to it as a new safe-have asset because bitcoin is more compared into gold where the prices per ounce right now is USD $1,229.30(price at the time of writing) at the same time bitcoin right now is USD $8,321.36 at coinmarketcap right now. Compared to gold bitcoin is much more accessible as you would only need internet to get is as opposed to gold where you can only get in into banks.
Ah, I see. Troll someone else
This is the essence of your whole "prove that $1,200 price spike was artificial" thing. No one is going to prove anything to you, since this is not what you actually want. All you want is to show your fake superiority...
But it seems that in this case you failed miserably
The market is stronger today.
it is bitcoin is safe heaven asset but at the same time we should understand Satoshi started bitcoin to give back power to people
If the price of bitcoin is stable, it could become a safe-haven asset like gold.
Like gold, cryptocurrencies are not controlled by any central bank or state.
If there is an economic crisis, BTC can effectively reduce people's losses!
Like gold, cryptocurrencies are not controlled by any central bank or state.
If there is an economic crisis, BTC can effectively reduce people's losses!
Let's relaunch this debate, now that Bitcoin has risen to new unexpected highs then fallen; i'm interested in what people will say now.
Yes, I think Bitcoin is a good safe-haven, but not for short term: meaning if you think you will need your money soon, then Bitcoin is not the ideal investment.
Yes, I think Bitcoin is a good safe-haven, but not for short term: meaning if you think you will need your money soon, then Bitcoin is not the ideal investment.
"safe haven" but look at the bitfinex fiasco right now. yes I believe in bitcoin but in its current state some people might find this hard to believe
I would like to agree to this CNBC news that bitcoin is the new safe-haven asset. Maybe because it is safe to send it and receive it plus hassle free transactions. You just need to know the btc address and then you can pay him or you can buy through btc. You do not need to handover the money physically or to go to atm. Or you need not to log in to your savings account online that most of the times can be hacked. So maybe that is the reason why they said it is the new safe haven asset. No one can snatch or grab or steal your money.
Ah, I see. Troll someone else
This is the essence of your whole "prove that $1,200 price spike was artificial" thing. No one is going to prove anything to you, since this is not what you actually want. All you want is to show your fake superiority...
But it seems that in this case you failed miserably
Trying to talk up the value of Bitcoin is one thing, actually investing money is another.
The amount of profit that you make is restricted by the amount of money you are actually willing to invest in Bitcoin.
Ah, I see. Troll someone else
This is the essence of your whole "prove that $1,200 price spike was artificial" thing. No one is going to prove anything to you, since this is not what you actually want. All you want is to show your fake superiority...
But it seems that in this case you failed miserably
That good to get positive publicity. The price may be a little volatile right now but it's staying strongly above $500 during this stretch so I see that as a positive also.
Good post OP.
But, what is the possibility of Bitcoins to see a high price rise due to this?
There have been many come-and-go, many popped up and said such things, but nothing changed.
But I agree, that the statement is correct.
But, what is the possibility of Bitcoins to see a high price rise due to this?
There have been many come-and-go, many popped up and said such things, but nothing changed.
But I agree, that the statement is correct.
You don't want to prove a statement of fact? That you said? I see. Move along, nothing to see here
Ah, I see. Troll someone else
This is the essence of your whole "prove that $1,200 price spike was artificial" thing. No one is going to prove anything to you, since this is not what you actually want. All you want is to show your fake superiority...
But it seems that in this case you failed miserably
Ah, I see. Troll someone else
I demonstrated that in the first place by using the expression "nominal difference", it was you that didn't understand what was going on, lol
If you really knew that, you wouldn't call two values with a 40% difference "very similar". Further, nominal difference usually means very small, negligible difference, that is, existing in name only. Surely not what you pretend it to mean now. But don't say that English is not your mother tongue, lol...
And you didn't mean what the phrase actually means
I demonstrated that in the first place by using the expression "nominal difference", it was you that didn't understand what was going on, lol
Jump to: