yes at least 60% drop.
My expectation is even a 90% drop, but I am happy to bet on a 60% drop to start with.
To those who dont believe in deflation that is already underway since late 1999 should look at the DJI measured in gold.
Topic: Comparison to Apple (AAPL) shares - page 2. (Read 9674 times)
Certainly your guess as to how AAPL will respond to lower consumer purchasing power is as good as any. But both Greenspan and Bernanke hold the stock market darling with no regard for base M0 monetary inflationary policy. The lesson Keynesians learned from '29-39 was that contraction of the money supply was both cause and effect of the stock market collapse. The Fed is now buying assets with printed money to prevent both. No, the stock market won't deflate, the Fed will just claim commodity supplies are decreasing, naturally increasing prices on tangible necessities.
I am happy to bet with you that the DJI will fall below 4000 by 2015, to underline that I am serious with my forecast.
The middle classes will have trouble affording food, energy, transportation, paying off debt (despite attractive loss in debt value), and very few will be able to afford fashionable consumer electronics. So AAPL will drop unless they start selling apples from trees or produce soft/hardware for the banks. But I posit that the Fed will continue monitary inflation combating stock market deflation while denying real price inflation. Unfortunately, I think they can keep that up for four more years, before everything traded in dollars collapses, but I'm certainly not betting on that timeline.
60% collapse by 2015, you say?
apple makes profit.
end of discussion.
end of discussion.
Revenue is the name of the game.
apple makes profit.
end of discussion.
end of discussion.
Some other genius can come out with a new crytocurrency. Most people on this forum at least are willing to try something new. Maybe in the next five years a new bitcoin competitor comes out. Also with bitcoin most likely not upgrading to SHA-3 then there is a pretty high possibility that it gets cracked.
No.
In the next 2-5 years BTC will likely be higher than AAPL in $terms.
Even if BTCUSD remains at 14$...!
Because the upcoming major stock market crash will bring back AAPL to the teens (and I love the Apple brand, have nothing against them, but consumers will not have the $'s left in their purse or credit to affort those high margin Apple products).
Even if BTCUSD remains at 14$...!
Because the upcoming major stock market crash will bring back AAPL to the teens (and I love the Apple brand, have nothing against them, but consumers will not have the $'s left in their purse or credit to affort those high margin Apple products).
Certainly your guess as to how AAPL will respond to lower consumer purchasing power is as good as any. But both Greenspan and Bernanke hold the stock market darling with no regard for base M0 monetary inflationary policy. The lesson Keynesians learned from '29-39 was that contraction of the money supply was both cause and effect of the stock market collapse. The Fed is now buying assets with printed money to prevent both. No, the stock market won't deflate, the Fed will just claim commodity supplies are decreasing, naturally increasing prices on tangible necessities.
I am happy to bet with you that the DJI will fall below 4000 by 2015, to underline that I am serious with my forecast.
Trawling can be contrasted with trolling, where baited fishing lines instead of trawl nets are drawn through the water.
As much as people harp on the trolls, posts like the OP's are equally worthless. No analysis, just another zomg I hope I get rich post. If people are going to be called trolls for being negative without providing any sort of logic/argument, then I say the same should go for these types of posts. What would be the equivalent of a troll? An orc?
Hey OP, stop Orcing the forum.
Hey OP, stop Orcing the forum.
In the next 2-5 years BTC will likely be higher than AAPL in $terms.
Even if BTCUSD remains at 14$...!
Because the upcoming major stock market crash will bring back AAPL to the teens (and I love the Apple brand, have nothing against them, but consumers will not have the $'s left in their purse or credit to affort those high margin Apple products).
Even if BTCUSD remains at 14$...!
Because the upcoming major stock market crash will bring back AAPL to the teens (and I love the Apple brand, have nothing against them, but consumers will not have the $'s left in their purse or credit to affort those high margin Apple products).
Certainly your guess as to how AAPL will respond to lower consumer purchasing power is as good as any. But both Greenspan and Bernanke hold the stock market darling with no regard for base M0 monetary inflationary policy. The lesson Keynesians learned from '29-39 was that contraction of the money supply was both cause and effect of the stock market collapse. The Fed is now buying assets with printed money to prevent both. No, the stock market won't deflate, the Fed will just claim commodity supplies are decreasing, naturally increasing prices on tangible necessities.
It's a high risk investment with an extremely low risk/reward ratio. You have approximately a 30% chance of making 10X your original investment. Any poker player would jump at the chance.
Haha I love it when bitcoiners quantify things like this. Please explain how someone has a 30% chance of making 10x their investment.
+1
I pulled the numbers out of my ass, but the principle still stands. Bitcoin has less than a 50/50 chance of reaching critical mass, but if it does, the return on investment will substantially more than double.
50% chance you say? That's like saying winning or losing a game is always equally probable, just because there are two possible outcomes.
Calling to reference expected value and poker play here is even dumber. Who's the say that the odds aren't <1% that we'll gain a 10% gain on our investment?
I invested some money in Bitcoin myself, but I'm just saying assigning expected values to such things isn't appropriate.
LESS THAN 50%. that's anywhere from 0.00000001% to 49.99999999%. A wide margin. It's not my fault you suck at reading comprehension.
Easy now, big guy.
I obviously made a reading-error, but that doesn't nullify the other points I made. You can't hide behind those with your caps lock and ad hominem.
I'm not assigning expected values. I already said that the numbers were just there to illustrate the principle of a bet with an expectation of loss that is still worth making.
Thank you for explaining what expected value is. We all needed that.
Anyways, there is no possible way you can say with confidence that investing in Bitcoin at this stage has positive EV.
I'm confident that investing in Bitcoin at this stage has a positive EV. You are refuted.
It's a high risk investment with an extremely low risk/reward ratio. You have approximately a 30% chance of making 10X your original investment. Any poker player would jump at the chance.
Haha I love it when bitcoiners quantify things like this. Please explain how someone has a 30% chance of making 10x their investment.
+1
I pulled the numbers out of my ass, but the principle still stands. Bitcoin has less than a 50/50 chance of reaching critical mass, but if it does, the return on investment will substantially more than double.
50% chance you say? That's like saying winning or losing a game is always equally probable, just because there are two possible outcomes.
Calling to reference expected value and poker play here is even dumber. Who's the say that the odds aren't <1% that we'll gain a 10% gain on our investment?
I invested some money in Bitcoin myself, but I'm just saying assigning expected values to such things isn't appropriate.
LESS THAN 50%. that's anywhere from 0.00000001% to 49.99999999%. A wide margin. It's not my fault you suck at reading comprehension.
Easy now, big guy.
I obviously made a reading-error, but that doesn't nullify the other points I made. You can't hide behind those with your caps lock and ad hominem.
I'm not assigning expected values. I already said that the numbers were just there to illustrate the principle of a bet with an expectation of loss that is still worth making.
Thank you for explaining what expected value is. We all needed that.
Anyways, there is no possible way you can say with confidence that investing in Bitcoin at this stage has positive EV.
It's a high risk investment with an extremely low risk/reward ratio. You have approximately a 30% chance of making 10X your original investment. Any poker player would jump at the chance.
Haha I love it when bitcoiners quantify things like this. Please explain how someone has a 30% chance of making 10x their investment.
+1
I pulled the numbers out of my ass, but the principle still stands. Bitcoin has less than a 50/50 chance of reaching critical mass, but if it does, the return on investment will substantially more than double.
50% chance you say? That's like saying winning or losing a game is always equally probable, just because there are two possible outcomes.
Calling to reference expected value and poker play here is even dumber. Who's the say that the odds aren't <1% that we'll gain a 10% gain on our investment?
I invested some money in Bitcoin myself, but I'm just saying assigning expected values to such things isn't appropriate.
LESS THAN 50%. that's anywhere from 0.00000001% to 49.99999999%. A wide margin. It's not my fault you suck at reading comprehension.
Easy now, big guy.
I obviously made a reading-error, but that doesn't nullify the other points I made. You can't hide behind those with your caps lock and ad hominem.
I'm not assigning expected values. I already said that the numbers were just there to illustrate the principle of a bet with an expectation of loss that is still worth making.
In the next 2-5 years BTC will likely be higher than AAPL in $terms.
Even if BTCUSD remains at 14$...!
Because the upcoming major stock market crash will bring back AAPL to the teens (and I love the Apple brand, have nothing against them, but consumers will not have the $'s left in their purse or credit to affort those high margin Apple products).
Even if BTCUSD remains at 14$...!
Because the upcoming major stock market crash will bring back AAPL to the teens (and I love the Apple brand, have nothing against them, but consumers will not have the $'s left in their purse or credit to affort those high margin Apple products).
...and a new kind of fact-asserting crazy appears.
In the next 2-5 years BTC will likely be higher than AAPL in $terms.
Even if BTCUSD remains at 14$...!
Because the upcoming major stock market crash will bring back AAPL to the teens (and I love the Apple brand, have nothing against them, but consumers will not have the $'s left in their purse or credit to affort those high margin Apple products).
Even if BTCUSD remains at 14$...!
Because the upcoming major stock market crash will bring back AAPL to the teens (and I love the Apple brand, have nothing against them, but consumers will not have the $'s left in their purse or credit to affort those high margin Apple products).
um, think youre forgetting one thing....APPL is not riddled with crimes and criminal types.
Deepsea mining has to be 10x more costly than onshore extraction.
Mining difficulty is already priced in.
Price follows difficulty.
Thread successfully derailed.
Mining difficulty is already priced in.
Price follows difficulty.
Thread successfully derailed.
Gold miners do not set the price of gold as much as the price of gold determines the profits of miners.
Consumable energy (rather than spent energy) has a value equal to the value an organism sets for its life (infinite?). Only competition keeps oil prices down. Neither statement can be said about bitcoins.
Rare earth metal are the only thing remotely giving returns comparable to Bitcoin in the past year. Unfortunately for REM speculators, The Japanese just found a vast supply of said metals on the ocean seabed.
Deepsea mining has to be 10x more costly than onshore extraction.
Mining difficulty is already priced in.
Price follows difficulty.
Thread successfully derailed.
It's a high risk investment with an extremely low risk/reward ratio. You have approximately a 30% chance of making 10X your original investment. Any poker player would jump at the chance.
Haha I love it when bitcoiners quantify things like this. Please explain how someone has a 30% chance of making 10x their investment.
+1
I pulled the numbers out of my ass, but the principle still stands. Bitcoin has less than a 50/50 chance of reaching critical mass, but if it does, the return on investment will substantially more than double.
50% chance you say? That's like saying winning or losing a game is always equally probable, just because there are two possible outcomes.
Calling to reference expected value and poker play here is even dumber. Who's the say that the odds aren't <1% that we'll gain a 10% gain on our investment?
I invested some money in Bitcoin myself, but I'm just saying assigning expected values to such things isn't appropriate.
LESS THAN 50%. that's anywhere from 0.00000001% to 49.99999999%. A wide margin. It's not my fault you suck at reading comprehension.
Easy now, big guy.
I obviously made a reading-error, but that doesn't nullify the other points I made. You can't hide behind those with your caps lock and ad hominem.
Very similar to (shape wise): http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=aapl#chart1:symbol=aapl;range=2y;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined
10% vs 2200% growth per month? Only the slope of a tabletop to a wall would be more dissimilar (shape wise). It'd say that the graphs are more comparable to the treacherous slopes of OHIO vs the casual slopes of Mt EVEREST. Perhaps you didn't notice that the graph I presented had a logarithmic axis. Maybe this is more your style: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/chart.png?m=mtgoxUSD&t=S&r=300
Yeah i realised my post was a bit retarded but couldn't be arsed to change it. I know the axis are completely different. The point was that both lines skyrocketed. Meh.
Very similar to (shape wise): http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=aapl#chart1:symbol=aapl;range=2y;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined
10% vs 2200% growth per month? Only the slope of a tabletop to a wall would be more dissimilar (shape wise). It'd say that the graphs are more comparable to the treacherous slopes of OHIO vs the casual slopes of Mt EVEREST. If you didn't notice the logarithmic axis, perhaps this is more your style: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/chart.png?m=mtgoxUSD&t=S&r=300
Jump to: