Quote from: Dump3er on Today at 08:10:15 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on May 22, 2023, 11:12:45 PM

Quote from: Frankolala on May 22, 2023, 04:55:59 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on May 22, 2023, 05:55:33 AM

Quote from: Merit.s on May 21, 2023, 10:46:44 PM

Quote from: bangjoe on May 21, 2023, 06:25:16 PM

Storing all assets in Bitcoin is a good decision (to be faster in a heart attack and higher stress) lol.
With a fluctuating market, it is certainly not a good option for financial health.

This is the worst financial strategy to store all your assets in bitcoin because when their is a drastic dump in price,it will look like your doom day has arrived. A very bad way of financial management.

Part of the rationale to diversify at least a little bit in terms of NOT holding all your wealth in one asset class.. especially one as volatile as bitcoin, even though surely there are some people who engage in such a practice.. which does not seem to be good financial management or even advisable absent some pretty special circumstances. such as perhaps if they were to have a pretty guaranteed cashflow that allows them to NOT have to be reliant upon the value of their investment in any kind of way... but even then, for sure, there does seem to be some value in any ability that any of us might retain to be able to continue to buy on the dip or to DCA during dipping times, rather than completely losing confidence because our investment might have had gone down greatly.. such as greater than 70% and stayed at such depressed levels for extended periods of time.. including potential uncertainties regarding if such asset might continue to drop in value further and for much longer periods, too.

Those who store all their asset in bitcoin will end up not being able to hold all their bitcoin for a very long time,they will only be able to hold little fraction of 20% after a long time, due to the fact that we will be faced with an unforeseen financial challenges and before you know it since this is there only assets they will have no any other option but to use from their portfolio to tackle the problem.

Sure.. but there is still a balance even if choosing when to start diversifying if at all. Of course, a very early investor might spend a lot of time in which s/he has no other investment except for bitcoin, so it does not make a lot of sense to diversify for the mere sake of diversifying - even though I do seem to understand and agree with your point that at minimum, there may well be a need for some cash reserves in order to be able to take advantage of likely ongoing and potentially severe BTC price fluctuations and surely one of the ONLY thing that might get closed to being guaranteed in bitcoin is that it is going to be volatile.. even if we might not know exactly in what direction such volatility might end up happening.

As you say the only guarantee we have is that Bitcoin will be volatile. But what can we conclude from that?

Well if you have pretty decent knowledge (and/or expectations) that the BTC price is inevitably (or nearly inevitably) going to be volatile, then you can attempt to prepare yourself financially and psychologically for that.. and surely the ways that people prepare themselves is likely going to be different, and surely some people do not even realize that bitcoin is likely going to continue to be volatile (and/or they don't engage in those kinds of financial/psychological preparations to actually prove that they understand the inevitability of BTC's ongoing volatility).

Quote from: Dump3er on Today at 08:10:15 AM

The only ones who don't have to care as much about where Bitcoin is going are the exchanges as they make their money on volume. Wouldn't it be a reasonable approach hen as part of a diversification strategy to also own shares in the infrastructure in addition to Bitcoin itself?

Personally, I don't believe that you are using good logic in terms of the extent to which share prices in something like an exchange would actually reflect the extent to which they are going to be profitable, and surely with any business that you buy shares, whether you are referring to exchanges or other things, there are going to be a lot of risks (and costs) regarding execution, so even if they might not be purposefully trying to cheat you out of profits, the investment thesis for shares in an exchange hardly seems to be as straight forward as you seem to want to make it out to be.

In other words, you don't even necessarily need to be greedy.

Bitcoin seems to be one of the best asymmetric bets that is available to a wide number of people, and holding the assets yourself gives you price exposure and also control, even though surely there is also likely to be some learning curve matters that people may well not be competent enough or spend enough time to make sure they learn how to hold their coins and to lessen various aspects of risks in holding your own coins and being your own bank... so yeah, holding your own coins has risks and responsibilities too and it's not exactly without some potential problems that might include getting duped into thinking that you are controlling your own keys when you are not recognizing some of the vulnerabilities, which seems to be one of the matters related to Ledger wallets in recent times that people are realizing that they had likely been putting way more faith into the security (or even the exclusivity of the private key ownership/knowledge about) of Ledger wallets than they might have deserved.

Quote from: Dump3er on Today at 08:10:15 AM

I know that centralized exchanges are not the optimal investments as some of them are prone to collapse even when nobody saw it coming, but I am not only referring to centralized exchanges. When there are decentralized solutions that have some integrated DAO function where people can acquire shares by holding a token in the DAO, wouldn't that also have a diversifying effect against Bitcoin's volatility? Whether it goes up or down, the share and the total $ value in volume would count and as a shareholder you would benefit from volatility no matter which way it goes.

What do you think about that?

You have to make those kinds of calculations for yourself.

Sometimes you might well end up taking a perfectly profitable investment (such as bitcoin) and then cause it to become less profitable (or adding more unnecessary risk) because you are greedy or you believe the the amount of the likely return of the underlying (bitcoin in this case) is not enough for you.

By the way.. in 2017, I was having some forum interactions (and it may well have had been another forum) with some shitcoiners who were proclaiming that shitcoins were better than bitcoin because bitcoin does not have the ability to go up as much, and largely between 2015 and 2017, bitcoin had gone up 78x (
from $250-ish to $19,666-ish), so it seems difficult to argue that there was some kind of "need" to be in something else.. something more profitable... but people (shitcoin pumpers) are nearly always making those kinds of dumbass arguments.. and some people get tricked out of their bitcoins and into inferior investment based on those kinds of considerations.. .and surely you can do what you like while it seems to me that bitcoin is already a great ass investment, so the extent to which you need to try to make more might be questionable.. even though perhaps it is a position-size question rather than any kind of absolute answer regarding if you have to choose one over the other, if you come to some conclusion that you want to some price exposure to some kind of an investment that relates to bitcoin.. but is not the bitcoin token itself.

Quote from: Dump3er on Today at 08:10:15 AM

When Bitcoin goes down and trading volume goes up, an exchange like Binance might be suffering from devaluation of their Bitcoin reserves, but they probably have a diversification strategy and convert enough of their revenue into "stable" currencies like fiat or USDT. I often think that all these exchange owners care more about volatility than about Bitcoin's price going up. Owning a part of the more solid infrastructure has been like owning a gold mine over the last decade (if the exchange was managed well and didn't go bankrupt).

You seem to be really getting into this topic, which is largely irrelevant to this thread.. or maybe it is a kind of side topic that you might want to pursue in some other thread or to find a thread that is more related to that topic...

It's not good to get too far away from the topic of the thread, unless kind of a incidental consideration.. members (and even admin of the forum) likely prefer that we at least try to stay on topic and not to deviate very much... even if some deviation may well be tolerated.. but it seems that in good faith, we should at least try to stay somewhat closer to being on topic.

Quote from: Dump3er on Today at 08:10:15 AM

Unless the industry collapses disappears, in my opinion it could be a good hedge to own both Bitcoin and the infrastructure facilitating trade and transactions. I know that the options to own a share in the infrastructure are not as manyfold and sometimes carry their own risk, for example when you buy BNB hoping that the burning will go on forever, ignoring the risk that even Binance could collapse as FTX has proven that nothing is impossible.

Yes.. you are pointing out some of the issues that may well not be worth making your own investment more complicated than it needs to be, but sure no problem.. people get distracted into all kinds of stuff that causes them to spin their wheels rather than appreciating a good thing when they see it (i.e. investing directly into bitcoin.. and trying to stay focused on the prize rather than easily getting distracted.. but hey, whatever, you do you.. maybe you will strike it richie while many of us bitcoiners are all crying that we "ONLY have bitcoin"... Cry

).. hopefully you do not lure too many bitcoiners out of their BTC investment and into inferior distraction-based products. Tongue