Quote from: OROBTC on May 13, 2017, 01:33:06 AM

...

r0ach

Well, I myself found Bitcoin to be interesting enough to take a punt. For me, BTC is really more of an "opportunistic speculation", particularly that there is a low probability it will go to zero, but a reasonable chance it could go way higher.

Nice back & forth with steve. I ALWAYS like talking with experts, even if their views might be wrong. Perspective.

Even if Armstrong winds up being very wrong on predictions (and his record is not that good IMO), I very much value his views.

Perspective. And he does take a long view, something few others do.

But, I ain't payin' nothin' for his research.

i think along the same lines. For anyone around since before the first $1000 spike, Bitcoin has had a very asymmetric risk - defined downside, massive upside potential. It has clear utility and even if it does not eventually fulfill other functions of money, it is well worth the risk. it is highly likely it will never be the new gold standard, but rather more possible that increased adoption leads to a much higher price in the medium term.

This is why I don't understand the vitriol by Roach et al that is so dogmatic on fundamentals, suppression of metals etc etc.

As for MA, take out his ECm & talk of super computers and his overall thesis on the collapse of government is quite common. Many macro guys have similar theories, just packaged differently. But to be fair, MA has been saying it a lot longer.