I fully agree with Michael Saylor about dumping the gold and buying Bitcoin. Gold used to be a good medium as a reserve storage but only when Bitcoin wasn't there, however now Bitcoin is here and it's way better than gold as reserve storage option.
It doesn't hold any weight and it's totally virtual in nature, and that's more than enough to make it a better option than gold or any such physical matter. Gold won't lose its value we all know because it's also unique when it comes to physical things but of course Bitcoin is better than it.
Topic: Michael Saylor tells US to Dump Gold and Buy Bitcoin - page 2. (Read 359 times)
Despite that Bitcoin is a digital Gold of our generation but I doubt if it will replace, both will continue to exist for people to diversify as they say variety is the spice of life. Gold has its physical value whereas Bitcoin don't, we use gold in the production of so many things, so the value and demand continue to be there, What they can do is to include Bitcoin into their treasures most likely in the coming future officially make Bitcoin a superior store of value, that is having more reseerve into Bitcoin.
I don't think anyone who can think for themselves would take him serious on this one, it is not possible for gold to go to zero, neither is it possible for everyone who owns gold to sell it. Gold is a proven store of value and it retains its value in the worst times, bitcoin is more volatile and can accrue more ROI for its investors, but it is more risky than gold, and people who do not like to bear so much risk would buy gold over bitcoin.
Bitcoin is not a replacement but an alternative. I just see this like how central banks and some governments in the world disliked bitcoin in past. Gold can continue to exist while bitcoin adoption also continues. I like Michael Saylor but I see what he said about selling of gold and buying of bitcoin to be biased. Gold is an asset that no one should badmouth. I prefer bitcoin but I can not badmouth gold. Michael Saylor should not become like Peter Sheriff.
You are right, no one should badmouth gold, Criticize gold doesn't mean that Bitcoin will develop or won't develop, Bitcoin has its nature that no one can stop, Bitcoin can have value than other coins or gold but that doesn't stop people from having interest on them, Criticize gold will make some people think negative about Bitcoin, the reason why I said that is because it's not what another person is thinking you are thinking, everybody has their option to choose what he or she will invest in.
I prefer Bitcoin to any other investment but criticism of gold doesn't sound good, Michael Saylor may see Bitcoin as something that will have more value than any other investment but he should not say that, he is trying to discourage people from what they are doing and that is not a good thing, Bitcoin will remain Bitcoin while the other investment will also remain the same as their own.
The suggestion only good for retailers since they don't have a lot money, unlike multi millionaires who have at least $100 Million, such huge amount should need to diversify their investment and don't be too greedy. Hence I choose to invest in high volatility assets since I'm not yet have a lot of money.
This is very basic. When you are managing big capital, you will prioritize what is safest in your opinion. Of course it is not only opinion, but must be from in-depth analysis before you decide to store your capital in what assets.Before discussing about governments, I think we can use an example in this market. With a big investor, with big capital, Bitcoin is best choice, and maybe the next will be Ethereum, and that investor will have very little interest in meme tokens and shit coins. With small investor, there is more interest in betting on shitcoins, with hope to get rich quick.
Now, about governments, they can not bet their national treasury in something is risky. Bitcoin is promising but it's more risky than their own national currency. At least it's how they see that result in their decision to avoid Bitcoin.
The suggestion only good for retailers since they don't have a lot money, unlike multi millionaires who have at least $100 Million, such huge amount should need to diversify their investment and don't be too greedy. Hence I choose to invest in high volatility assets since I'm not yet have a lot of money.
However, Bitcoin price is keep hovering at $98K, so most people not take his opinion seriously.
However, Bitcoin price is keep hovering at $98K, so most people not take his opinion seriously.
All i can say concerning making a decision in-between gold and bitcoin is that, bitcoin is more profitable and decentralized than gold, we can have the higher portion of our investment on bitcoin, while we also put in some amount of money on gold as well, because we need to make use of a particular strategy like the investment diversification for more profitability opportunities, we cant afford to have all our eggs on the same basket, both bitcoin and gold are a good recommendation for an investment.
Having a diversified portfolio is important. Saylor should know this basic information. Bitcoin is not the only financial asset in the world.
Thats true. Gold is also as limited as it could be as its a naturally occuring substance where we can get through limited places. Imagine theres no place to mine those gold in the world after how many years. It could also as limited like bitcoin, so if you are an investor of gold dont be swayed by the idea. Bitcoin is good but we are talking about other product investment asset which has served as economic level too. 
That’s not a wise move imo. It doesn’t have to be one or another either. I like Mike but if he really said that he was very stupid. The US can print money and buy as many bitcoins as they want. Why sell gold? If the US gov is smart, they won’t listen to Saylor. I mean It would be good if they bought btc but they don’t have to sell their gold necessarily.
Having a diversified portfolio is important. Saylor should know this basic information. Bitcoin is not the only financial asset in the world.
Having a diversified portfolio is important. Saylor should know this basic information. Bitcoin is not the only financial asset in the world.
So Gold is past tense, Bitcoin is the present and future tense.
The manner in which the landscape is evolving in the financial world can be fascinating. Bitcoin have shown a lot of potentials in the this market and the impact it is creating on the financial market is remarkable. Gold have been in existence as a store of value long before the existence of Bitcoin but it doesn't mean it should continue, it is likely to get replaced by bitcoin or another suitable replacement asides bitcoin may come up, or even if it is bitcoin, not yet I think, because it has to pass through the stage of general acceptance.Michael Saylor and Mike Novogratz may already be thinking in that line, but not everyone yet.
I came across this news today that Microstrategy has purchased new 21550 BTC worth $2.1Billion.
~snip~
~snip~
Not so long ago he bought BTC worth over $10 billion, and I don't see why this news led you to open a topic in B&H considering that there are several similar topics in other boards? Besides, Saylor has dived into BTC so deeply that he can't say anything else except that everyone should sell everything they have and invest in BTC.
Billionaire Mike Novogratz, despite himself being a gold investor, has also predicted that Bitcoin could eventually surpass the yellow metal by market cap.
Does anyone still listen to the man who was so "smart" as to promote one of the biggest scams in cryptocurrency history?
So Gold is past tense, Bitcoin is the present and future tense
Not as easy as some think - because such changes do not happen overnight, and I would dare say that this one (if it happens) will last several dozen years. Gold is something that has had its value for millennia, not to mention its use in various industries.
Why do we need to have the mentality that Bitcoin must kick out the other Gold, Fiat etc? Why can't they all co-exist if they are doing well in their own right? This is what causes conflict because you feel yours is better than the other and so you do all you can to demarket the other. This doesn't make anyone who do it better than Peter Schiff. I can own gold and own Bitcoin too, it is my choice. Bitcoin will do fine without gold and so will gold do without Bitcoin. We just have to keep playing our part in the global adoption of Bitcoin.
Bitcoin don't need to kick out gold to become the number one investment asset in the world, it is already gaining massive recognition and adoption. Bitcoin and gold can coexist, nothing stops any individual, institutions or countries to have both in their reserves or choose to hold only one of them. Gold have built a solid reputation over the ages and I doubt that any other reputable assets like Bitcoin can push it aside. I can understand Michael Saylor's strong believe in Bitcoin, that it will surpass every other valuable assets but that can not mean that gold can be pushed aside. hero member
Activity: 462
Merit: 767
Instant cryptocurrency exchange with own reserves!
Bitcoin and Gold are completely different assets and comparing them doesn't make any sense to me.
Bro, people comparing them in terms of investment assets. Bitcoin was created to be your own money, it is one kind of asset. But due to its nature, slowly it is turned into an investment asset like Gold. The difference is, Bitcoin is not physical and you could lose it if you do not store your data safely. But if you compare Gold with Bitcoin just as an investment asset, then Bitcoin is way ahead of Gold.
The only negative side is, that Bitcoin is too volatile. But you could take it positively as well. Due to this nature, you have a chance to gain more within a short time period as well. One should invest in Bitcoin knowing all these facts, otherwise, they could ignore and go forward with their gold.
Gold has very long history and gold market is bigger than Bitcoin market. At national level, it is hard for a government to dump their gold reserve and convert it to bitcoin. At individual or company level, it is more easily to do this reserve switch because if you fail, it will be an individual or company failure and won't affect too many people.
I love bitcoin but governments will not simply look at Microstrategy portfolio, El Salvador portfolio, Bhutan portfolio and take similar action. Small countries can do it first, but it is harder and more challenging for big nations doing this. It requires dominant agreement of their national Congress too. It is not easy.
I love bitcoin but governments will not simply look at Microstrategy portfolio, El Salvador portfolio, Bhutan portfolio and take similar action. Small countries can do it first, but it is harder and more challenging for big nations doing this. It requires dominant agreement of their national Congress too. It is not easy.
I believe in the narrative that Bitcoin is the new gold, but please note that Bitcoin is a fairly volatile asset with its price increases and decreases, so we must be wise to determine our investment path. And, i also believe that Bitcoin will pass the gold marketcap, but i think it still takes a long time. So i think it is a wise if we don't rush to decide to put all the eggs in one basket, it is good to separate the existence of our assets, be it in gold or Bitcoin. For Bitcoin, i have full confidence that it will pass the gold marketcap on long term terms, and that is the thing that needs to be realized to determine our attitude towards investment.
I see that advice as a self centered advice because Saylor has already accumulated large quantity of bitcoin and if others do what he said, it will favor him the more and those having gold will use their asset that they have kept for so long to buy bitcoin for him to make more profits. Let Saylor leave those who invested in gold because gold is the first safe haven asset that has being in existence for long and is guaranteed. Gold became a reserve before bitcoin, you can diversify instead of selling all.
His suggestion is rather insane, there are reasons why government have all kinds of assets or goods on their treasury.
And it's worth to mention many kinds of electronic device or component use gold.
Gold has been around for such a long time it is not only impossible to convince almost everybody to sell it but it is extremely dumb to think it is a good idea. Sure, Bitcoin is great. But Gold has its own advantages and use too. It is being vastly used in industry. Which means it is impossible for Gold to drop to zero like he says, even if everybody sold it.
And it's worth to mention many kinds of electronic device or component use gold.
This is a very dumb plan.
Gold has been around for such a long time it is not only impossible to convince almost everybody to sell it but it is extremely dumb to think it is a good idea. Sure, Bitcoin is great. But Gold has its own advantages and use too. It is being vastly used in industry. Which means it is impossible for Gold to drop to zero like he says, even if everybody sold it.
Bitcoin offers a volatility Gold never has. If you ask me, it is much less safer than Gold in the event of a catastrophe or the likes. And even today, Bitcoin is still an experiment. None of us knows if it is here to stay forever, while Gold definitely is. Why the hell would I sell an Asset that provided Safety for so long in exchange for a Cryptocurrency that has only been around for a little over a decade?
Gold has been around for such a long time it is not only impossible to convince almost everybody to sell it but it is extremely dumb to think it is a good idea. Sure, Bitcoin is great. But Gold has its own advantages and use too. It is being vastly used in industry. Which means it is impossible for Gold to drop to zero like he says, even if everybody sold it.
Bitcoin offers a volatility Gold never has. If you ask me, it is much less safer than Gold in the event of a catastrophe or the likes. And even today, Bitcoin is still an experiment. None of us knows if it is here to stay forever, while Gold definitely is. Why the hell would I sell an Asset that provided Safety for so long in exchange for a Cryptocurrency that has only been around for a little over a decade?
Why do we need to have the mentality that Bitcoin must kick out the other Gold, Fiat etc? Why can't they all co-exist if they are doing well in their own right? This is what causes conflict because you feel yours is better than the other and so you do all you can to demarket the other. This doesn't make anyone who do it better than Peter Schiff. I can own gold and own Bitcoin too, it is my choice. Bitcoin will do fine without gold and so will gold do without Bitcoin. We just have to keep playing our part in the global adoption of Bitcoin.
It seems like this is better, so both are trustworthy. It's interesting but crazy enough for the system of government and the banks within the country. Because in a few decades I have observed that the state will choose economic policies with a definite value, meaning that the future with its value tends not to fluctuate and tends to just rise. Logically, the state is reluctant to lose and the problem is that the state is unable to control and this makes them think that Bitcoin endangers the economy of the country and the world. I feel happy if Saylor's proposal is accepted, but I don't think it will happen anytime soon.
While we are with him for his advocacy to tell people to buy and hold Bitcoin. We cannot remove the fact that everyone is free to choose the assets that they want to invest. There's nothing to worry about Bitcoin because it's set as a deflationary currency and it makes it even scarcer in the coming years so its value will continue to rise. It's him and he's influential so he can tell what he wants to say and it's a plus marketing for Bitcoin. We have to appreciate what he does and put his money from his pocket to his mouth and say that he's really into it. I won't be surprised if other economists or financial experts tell him that he is becoming emotional just because BTC reached $100k and new ATHs.
Jump to: