Those so-called idiots outnumber your VCs and they are risk averse.
Anyone who is risk adverse would have a portfolio of something like 25% physical cash, 25% metals, 25% land/rental properties,
25% btc.LOL no.
BTC is like a 1000-1 (or more, possibly much more) shot on becoming a world reserve currency, perhaps overlaid with some value as a medium of exchange for dark(-ish) markets (and I guess for altcoin speculation too, as long as that survives).
There is nothing risk-averse investing about that, though a much smaller weighting might be consistent for diversification, and indeed given the potential upside of BTC a smaller weight will still produce very nice returns in the good case.
This is not say that 25% BTC is a terrible idea (I have less, but not a whole lot less, but then again I'm not so risk-averse), just that it isn't risk averse.
Likewise for alts.
My statement was made with the assumption someone had equivalent crypto knowledge as myself and knew how to operate things like a stop loss. Much of that risk just disappears unless you're imagining a scenario where the underlying cryptography fails, or quantum computer comes out of the blue and rewrites entire chain. I wasn't really talking about 90 year old women buying BTC. As for admitting, as Smooth, you have less than 25% in BTC, you disgrace village...very dishonorable.