You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Charts don't lie: Bitcoin is in a bubble.
Bitcoin is certainly not a bubble. To say "it's gone up fast therefore it must be a bubble" is hugely simplistic. And wrong.
An asset bubble has characteristics. Bitcoin hardly meets any of these.
I actually posted about this today.
https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@farq/why-bitcoin-is-not-in-a-bubble
Interesting, I'll take a look at your article, to be fair I was trying to be controversial with this post, I am open to being called out on my reasoning
At what price did you get in @farq, if you don't mind me asking?
My first purchase was at around US$400 but I've purchased more since then at up to around $4000
Yep, I got in at $700 and I've sold half of it already, letting the rest ride. I've read your article btw, interesting take on the situation, especially the part regarding at the lending/borrowing environment surrounding the asset to evaluate the existence of a bubble.
@farq looks like Bitcoin was in a bubble after all ;)
not at all. Only to the fickle. My opinion hasn't changed one bit.
New ATH will come this year.
@farq Have you been holding through all of this?
Hey @farq, I was browsing through my old content and stumbled on your post... you still think Bitcoin wasn't in a bubble?
Yep.
...even though we've gone from 20k to $6k ?
the fact that we're even at $6k precludes it from being a bubble. A bubble means the asset is basically dead and worthless/close to $0.
We will still see a new ATH at some stage, if not this year, then next.
I don't think that's true at all mate, there's plenty of examples of bubbles where the market cap of a particular kind of asset deflated rapidly but didn't lose all of its value> real estate bubble, dot.com bubble, Bitcoin bubble of 2014. However when an asset goes parabolic, gets mainstream foaming at the mouth then lose 70% of its value, that to me is a bubble, maybe not in the grand scheme of things and future new highs might dwarf 20k one day but it's certainly exhibited a bubble behavior.
and all of those markets "bubbles" have surpassed their values prior to the bursting of the so called bubbles, which means they were not bubbles at all... (Though there are whole towns in the US that have been abandoned. )
you can say that to you is a bubble, but that doesn't make you correct.
The fact that you include 2014 bitcoin when it peaked at $1000.. 3 years years later it's appreciated 2500% before correcting again....
If history repeats itself, we'll get to $125k within another 3 years..
As I posted way back then - a "bubble" has a very specific definition - and it's often misused.
Just think about the term.. "Bubble". By it's very definition, when you a bubble bursts, there's nothing left...
We might have to agree to disagree then @farq, the way I see it is that Bitcoin has had several bubbles along the way, the primary long-term trend is certainly bullish but it's been overvalued a few times and each time was a bubble.
I don't think either of us is "correct" per se, we just have different criteria to evaluate what is a bubble and what is not.
Cheers
well I believe my criteria is more closely aligned to what the word is actually supposed to mean.