Quote from: glub0x on November 21, 2013, 04:38:12 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 21, 2013, 01:02:42 PM

Quote from: glub0x on November 21, 2013, 12:58:16 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 21, 2013, 12:41:44 PM

Quote from: glub0x on November 21, 2013, 12:35:46 PM

So what back twitter? If everybody wants to sell their tweeter stock, what would be the value of a tweeter stock?

I wrote on page 1:

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 21, 2013, 05:31:23 AM

4. ... This is why ponzi schemes are so incredibly evil and dangerous. This is different from a stock, because a stock has intrinsic value to due earnings, profit, cash-on-hand, talent of management, talent of employees, contracts, etc..

Quote from: glub0x on November 21, 2013, 12:35:46 PM

Tweeter as more debt than asset then would the value be 0 as your exemple sugest? Clearly not. A tweeter bond would have NO value as if nobody sells, nobody buys!
Would tweeter stop to be if nobody was
Willing to buy a tweeter bond? No idea, maybe

Investors see value in their existing software. That have a huge codebase already.

Their huge userbase which can be marketed to, because Twitter is not decentralized. You can't market to Bitcoin users from the public ledger.

Etc..

No way for Bitcoin to generate an income. It must be a currency, else it has no intrinsic value.

Then we agree to disagree if you think investor invest in tweeter for any other reason than increasing or protecting their wealth.

I didn't disagree with that.

I said the value can't go to 0, because there is a significant intrinsic value backing it up.

If the estimates of its intrinsic value are too high, then the investors are wrong.

The Bitcoin investors are egregiously overestimating the intrinsic value of Bitcoin. The currency use is a very tiny fraction of the market cap, and can't increase as fast as the market cap is increasing.

Whereas Twitter has billion users I think, and can send display advertising to all of them to generate revenue. That is a significant intrinsic value, despite being in debt to develop that.

Yeah then i guess you over estimate the revenue you can get from advertising. I personnally think tweeter fits very well all your definition as the advertising stuff really look far over estimated to me. Now both tweeter stock and bitcoin have this speculative value in it. It s all about what it may do in the futur not what it does right now and this is very hard to estimate. May be that bitcoin will be used for some very surprising things later on...
So if one day investor realise that ads will never pay back tweeter will be in the position you think bitcoin will be when nobody will want to protect there monney/speculate/make cheap transaction anymore. To me one will happen and to you looks like it ll be the other one. Maybe none will and every body ll be happy.

You may be correct. Many dot.com stocks were clearly ponzi-pyramid schemes as there was nothing there (no intrinsic value) at all and they went poof and they collapsed and died forever. It was all smoke and mirrors. Ditto many junior mining companies. Perhaps ditto most PinkShits stocks (pink sheets, hehe).