Topic: US Marshalls auction...what time will results/winner be announced today? - page 4. (Read 5018 times)

I totally argued that point with him.  It's lost in the haystack of the quoted empty words that are between my words.  See if you can find them

Get to know this word and its meaning.  Perfect way to identify trolls and shills

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or in an empty way.

My god man, will you shut the hell up? You've been baiting this guy for two pages now. Enough. He gave you his opinion in a clear enough manner. Stop being a whinny bitch about the fact that he has placed a different value on BTC at this juncture in the game. Both of you are long term holders (as am I)... we will see in 2017 what the price is in 2017 and we will see in 2025 what the price is in 2025.

SMH

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

Agree to disagree, The mother of cop-outs.  No I asked you a very simple question and you send me links to a bunch of posts you made, and then you append that with a novel of bad arguments that smell like FUD which are all well known and easily countered.  Right, like I'm going to waste my time going in circles trying to figure out what you think you meant by "velocity" and why Bitcoin isn't undervalued. If you can't summarize the answer to the question in a few sentences or a couple short paragraphs then you don't have one.

"Kill Debate with Lots and Lots of Words that will Exhaust the Debater."  That's what your responses feel like.  Especially that last big one.  Try simplifying your arguments.  It will be much more clear and concise and people will take you more seriously

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

and

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

"If you want to go back and read posts from long ago that show the work a little more:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8298674
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8626991
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7725333  --this one is good because there is a link to the Honest Node article that, as I recall, a lot of people ran with.  I'm pretty sure that article discusses the velocity issue."

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

"There are political considerations and entrenched powers that have vested interest in their fiat currencies."

There will be a battle between centralized elitists and an exponentially growing decentralized peer-to-peer network.  It would be easier for them to stop peer-to-peer file sharing then it would be for them to stop bitcoin.  If they can't keep Piratebay down for good, they don't have a chance of stopping Bitcoin.

"there COULD be blockchain-related solutions that are NOT bitcoin"

yes, there will be lots of them.  There's already thousands of crypto-currencies out there now thanks to Bitcoin being open-source.  Yet Bitcoin still is top dog by Billions and Billions of dollars.  The hashrate of the network is more powerful then all the world's supercomputers combined.  Bitcoin rising 3 Million Percent from $0.001 to $350+ (jn less than 6 years) is a monumental achievement.  And it speaks volumes of its resistance to attack.  Look at BitcoinObituaries.com for the 78+ times the mainstream media has pronounced Bitcoin dead, yet Bitcoin keeps on growing.

" Honestly, in the last 18-24 months, I haven't seen any new developments that have impacted my model."

You're treating the subject of technological development as something that's required for Bitcoin to succeed.  It's absolutely not.  Other than the Block Reward issue which the network has known about since the early days (something that was artificially set and will sort itself out organically), all Bitcoin needs is a free market of entrepreneurs willing to design new apps and new ways to interface easier with the Bitcoin Protocol.  And that happens every single day.  

Well, evaluating PRICE is pretty easy.  It's not subjective at all.  The market tells you every single minute what the PRICE is.  As for VALUE, though, yes, I think every method is pretty subjective.  Not just mine, but any method anybody is using.  Again, this ain't like stock in an operating business where there are underlying earnings, GAAP book value, or anything else on which one could objectively base fundamental analysis.  There are no real industry group comparables to compare, as there are with stocks.  I know only enough to tell you that I don't KNOW anything.  In my opinion, it is unknowable.    


Yes, you are right.  The market cap of bitcoin is just a drop in the bucket.  And right now, bitcoin is also just a drop in the bucket in terms of global usage and adoption.  Should it increase by virtue of its technological superiority?  Probably...if the world operated strictly on merit.  But the world doesn't work that way, unfortunately.  There are political considerations and entrenched powers that have vested interest in their fiat currencies.  These are BIG problems that you point out, I agree.  But a universe might well exist in which bitcoin is not the only answer, not the chosen answer among possible answers (many of which are still as of yet unknown or uninvented), even a universe in which the problems simply are not solved due to lack of political will.  


Again, great points.  I don't disagree with any of it.  But in my opinion (only an opinion, and I'm not trying to convince you that you should share mine) these are things of QUALITATIVE value.  How one chooses to assign QUANTITATIVE value are, quite simply, necessarily going to be subjective at this point when it comes to bitcoin.  

Banks pay me good money to take QUALITATIVE aspects of a business, things like customer concentration, supply chain diversity, key management stability, reputation, etc... and translate those QUANTITATIVELY into things like enterprise goodwill or personal goodwill.  In the case of an operational business, though, there is a hook.  There are historical cash flows, and we hope to have some visibility of future cash flows.  I'm absolutely not shy about translating qualitative value into quantitative, in general.  With bitcoin, I don't believe it can be done as of November 2015 with any meaningful degree of confidence.

You make great points above, but how would you assign quantitative value to those points?  I've explained, not in great depth, in some of the posts above how I assign the value that I've assigned.  I basically look at bitcoin as a currency--examine both use and also as a store-of-value.  I've estimated adoption rates in certain areas, looked at what kind of money supply that would require, and calculated bitcoin's value through the lens of money supply.  I'd also admit that it's basically for my personal use, for my personal investment/speculation goals, for my strategy.  It fits in with what I hope to accomplish.  Your goals and your strategy for investment may be different.  I'm 47, almost 48, and if you are younger (or older) I'd hope and suspect your goals are not the same as mine.  I don't need to get a 1000x return or even a 100x return or even a 10x return to think an investment is worthwhile at this point in my life.  

One more important point.  Looking at these qualitative items you correctly pointed out:
--open source
--decentralized
--owes allegiance to no borders
--transmit instantaneously
--no middle man

You're describing bitcoin.  But REALLY you are describing the blockchain ledger.  In other words, there COULD be blockchain-related solutions that are NOT bitcoin.  I think it is worth noting that there are several companies out there building blockchain platforms that are NOT bitcoin. Most of these aren't related to currencies, but more along the lines of registries. Bitcoin doesn't have exclusive domain to those items you listed.  Bitcoin DOES have some limitations, as I pointed out earlier, in the area of block size and ability to to handle quantity of transactions (what is it...like 7 per second, max, right now?).  If bitcoin had some financial claim on everybody who developed open ledger registries, that would be great, but to my knowledge, that doesn't exist.  

Other solutions could come along that are just as disruptive to bitcoin as bitcoin is to fiat.  For this reason, when I discount my perception of future back to a present value, I use a pretty high cap rate.  That, in my view, recognizes the risk of other potential as-of-yet unknown solutions that scale past bitcoin's limitations in terms of transactions.  My GUESS is that those solutions may be based on open ledger registries, or a blockchain-like technology.  But bitcoin won't "own" them just by virtue of them using a similar concept.  

Look, I LOVE bitcoin.  It's so far beyond genius that I can't imagine how Satoshi conceived it, if Satoshi is even just one person.  It's AMAZING.  And frankly, at a potential rate of return of 40% annually over the next 5 years, bitcoin is a worthwhile speculation to make, in my opinion.  I'm not going to dump my entire investment portfolio into it.  I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value.  Honestly, in the last 18-24 months, I haven't seen any new developments that have impacted my model.  

I understand that there are people who see a much higher upside than I do.  They might be right.  If bitcoin does better than I think it will, I'm fine with that.  I'll participate to the upside and be happy about it.  I won't be crying about not buying more, because I'm also pretty sure that I'll be able to follow my overall plan, regardless of what bitcoin does.  

In my opinion we are at about that dip you see late 2012.

We might see up to 3 large spikes in a row.

$3000~5000 for the first, dropping down to $1500~1750 ish
$15000~25000 ish for the second, dropping down to $4000~6000ish
and in case of a 3rd, $30,000~50000 ish dropping down to $16000~20000 ish.


note this whole process might take a year or so to complete.

Maybe I was just thinking of Silk Road coin winners, on the other hand they may enjoy being part of high society, but they will always have their roots of coming from a drug filled world

(I can just imagine the coin taint XD)

I think Mr Draper has said he's not taking part. As for the coins themselves they have a new life to look forward to in high society with that grade a seal of government approval. I hope they don't get bullied.

Well I assume Tim Draper may want more coins, the rest of the interested parties we will know more of after the auction is completed.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/05/us-usa-bitcoin-auction-idUSKCN0SU28Q20151105

The U.S. Marshals Service said a six-hour online auction it held for about 44,341 bitcoins worth more than $17.2 million drew 11 registered bidders and 30 bids.

No further details will be released until the bitcoins have been transferred to any winners, which could occur by Monday, said Lynzey Donahue, a Marshals Service spokeswoman.

RIP Silk Road Coins

Right!  Exactly right.

Well, I understand that there are differences, but I'm trying to approach bitcoin the way of the Benjamin Graham school.  Graham, if you're not familiar with him, Graham taught Warren Buffet about investing.  In the stock market, you are actually buying a piece of ownership in a company.  Graham would analyze the company to understand the fundamental value--looking at things like earnings and growth to determine fundamental value.  If you think IBM is worth (VALUE) $80 per share, but the market says (PRICE) it's worth $70 per share, you buy.  If the market says it's worth $90, you sell what you have because you get $90 for something you think is worth $80.  

Among other things, one of my professional pursuits is business valuation.  Banks hire me to put a value on small, closely-held businesses.  So my approach to bitcoin is certainly not impartial, but rather it is formed by my (professional) lens on the universe.  I could be totally wrong about it.  I find it impossible to put a current price on the fundamentals of bitcoin, so I've chosen to reach out 5 years to determine the 2020 value.  There really ARE no current fundamentals.  It can't really be valued, in my view.  So to get a value, I look at what I think will happen in 2020, what bitcoins role will be in payments and remittances, what portion of the total global M0 and M1 money supply that would be.  Again, my projections are lower than what you'd normally see, because I think EVERYBODY ELSE (pretty conceited, I know) has mistakenly evaluated velocity.  I think bitcoin is probably worth $2500 in 2019-2020 based on the role I see it taking on.  Then I discount it back based on cap rates close to 40%, which reflects significant risk of failure.  Why?  I think BLOCKCHAIN is here to stay.  I'm NOT sure that bitcoin is the ultimate manifestation of the blockchain.  There are issues with block size, transaction times, etc... that represent enough risk for me to imply a high cap rate.  

That all gets me to my current "value".  It's totally subjective.  Like I say, I'm not trying to convince anybody else.  Barring more clarity on adoption and development, this time next year, I'd say it might be closer to $600-630 (value, not necessarily price).  Then, using my own subjective value, I make decisions about whether or not I think the price is telling me to sell or telling me to buy.  

I will tell you...I have rarely sold.  I continue to think the market undervalues bitcoin.  But I don't think it undervalues it quite as much as you think it does.  Could it be worth $1mm?  Sure, but I'd have to a lot more development of the technology and a lot more of a trend towards adoption (in the areas I see likely adoption).  My fundamental VALUE is subject to change every day based on new information.  I would also say that right now the market opinion of value (price) comes pretty close to matching my opinion of underlying value.  So I'll sit on what I've got and wait!

I hear you.  Not totally following you though.  For me, Bitcoin's value is probably a million dollars.  But I digress.  Once we put a dollar sign in front of it, we're talking about price, which is what it's "worth" at any given moment to someone else.

I think that is credible analysis on your part.  You may well be correct.

You're looking much harder at price than I do.  I try to look at value, note differences between price/value, and then act on those differences as I perceive them.  I'm also not THAT interested in trading, far more in HODLing.  So I'm ONLY looking to act when I see what I perceive as extremes.  My last buys were in August at $215 and $230 and my last sell was this week at $475. 

So $280 is simply a 33.3% discount to my perception of current value.  That's where it came from.  Nothing magical about it at all.  If we don't hit that, I won't be a buyer.  For now.  Which is cool with me.  I don't trade on my entire stash, anyway.  But eventually, my perception of the current discounted value may increase or the price may decrease enough to flash my signal.