Bitcoin going nowhere

Stocks A to Z
21

Serious question. Does Tesla not buy it’s batteries from Panasonic?

I thought it was a bit more like a joint venture.
Panasonic was a supplier, but they also invested in Tesla as part of the deal.
Headlines appear to suggest that they invested $30m and sold last year at about $3.6bn.
I guess the marginal profit on the batteries didn’t ultimately matter that much.

But Panasonic is not a sole supplier.
It seems they also buy from CATL and LG Energy, and are ramping up their own in house production.

Jim

6 Likes
22

It’s even being mentioned that Tesla is going to start using BYD batteries.

BYD said to have secured Tesla’s battery order for 204,000 vehicles per year

https://cnevpost.com/2022/02/12/byd-said-to-have-secured-tes…

1 Like
23

It seems they also buy from CATL and LG Energy, and are ramping up their own in house production.

And they are now buying blade batteries from BYD!

24

Using as many CPU’s/GPU’s as possible at full throttle for nothing else than to mine cryptocurrencies?
I can’t think of anything more perverse.

I can. Using giant trucks and scoop loaders and filling them up with diesel fuel every few hours so they can dig up dirt to run through a trommel, which also takes large amounts of diesel to keep it rotating - then pulling out a specific metal and heating it up with gas or oil and forming it into bars, and then using more energy transporting it by truck or by air…

…so it can be taken to vaults which are built underground in other cities so it can be stored back below the ground level and never moved again, and that’s how the economy works. Because: gold

12 Likes
25

Serious question. Does Tesla not buy it’s batteries from Panasonic?

Elon has publicly stated multiple time that he is willing to buy ALL the product that ANY battery manufacturer can make (Panasonic, CATL, BYD, LG).
Tesla has also created their own battery (4680 cells) that is superior to anything out and has just started manufacturing but it will take several years to reach full capacity production.
GigaTexas will be the largest battery production factory on earth 1-2 years.

Tesla cannot launch several of its products Semi, Cybertruck, Roadster, Optimus without this battery production ramping.
Tesla Model-3, Y, S, X, Powerwall, Megapack is severely constrained as well.

6 min video (Cyber Rodeo, Giga Texas opening): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6WPn9YzKeY

5 Likes
26

<<Using as many CPU’s/GPU’s as possible at full throttle for nothing else than to mine cryptocurrencies?
I can’t think of anything more perverse.

The blockchain algorithm for bitcoin is designed purposely to be very computation costly in a decentralized network where anyone in the world can join, such that any entity wanting to commit fraud would need to spend huge amount of computation resources to overrun the whole network. If in the future bitcoin is legitimately recognized by governments, the bitcoin network could be restricted to a few brokerage firms and the computation load could be greatly reduced.

27

…so it can be taken to vaults which are built underground in other cities so it can be stored back below the ground level and never moved again, and that’s how the economy works. Because: gold

Point well taken, but actually most gold finds a use: Mostly jewelry, some in dentistry, electronics, reflective coating in outer space, etc. Only a small percentage sits in vaults.

I’ve yet to have a tooth capped in bitcoin! Gold has actual value.

1 Like
28

It lets you spot Webvan reasoning when it comes back, as it does from time to time

Webvan is a right concept, they even executed okay, just ahead of its time. Those who diss these failures have no idea about how capitalism works. All great success are build on previous failures. Those who don’t fail are those who don’t try anything. May be “sociapath” billionaires, who don’t try anything new, and don’t want young people to be creative, chart uncharted waters, discover new boundaries. For them the mid-west village is the world. LOL

1 Like
29

I respect the opinions of “sages of this board” more than I do the drooling mobs who trade in Bitcoin.

Yeah sure, the same “drooling mob” adjective was used for Amazon, Apple’s of the world at some point. I am pretty sure you will come around and praise the value of Bitcoin and swear on its altar the moment it is owned by, sorry, legitimized by WEB and Berky.

2 Likes
30

kingran…

You just wrote “the value of Bitcoin.” What is that value please?

Then all of us who are in awe of your investment brilliance will know what to do.

5 Likes
31

You just wrote “the value of Bitcoin.” What is that value please?

Today it is $43,180.60

Your inability to accept that or why it is that I valued is entirely different. Like I said, I don’t understand the value of art, that doesn’t mean it has no value.

3 Likes
32

I think value investors need to accept that gold has value, even though it can’t be measured with intrinsic value. It’s an odd concept and I would never invest in it myself. If gold has value, why not bitcoin?

33

I think value investors need to accept that gold has value, even though it can’t be measured with intrinsic value.
It’s an odd concept and I would never invest in it myself. If gold has value, why not bitcoin?

Things you can put your money into fall into two different categories.
Static capital assets, and investment assets.

Static capital assets like gold, bitcoin, and Beanie Babies have no income and can never support paying out a coupon.
Their market price is determined entirely by supply and demand.
It isn’t zero, and it can be a really big number, but it has nothing to do with investment value.

Purely financial investments have a true intrinsic value: the present value of all coupons that could be paid out, including any final liquidation value.
Importantly, their prices are determined by the the current consensus estimate of that number, plus or minus short term squiggles due to swings in fashionability.

So, there is no conflict if you remember to think of which category each thing is in.
Gold has substantial “static capital asset” value, but zero “purely financial investment” value.

Why is the distinction important?

Bitcoin and gold and diamonds have no intrinsic value in the investment sense, as they can never have the ability to pay a coupon.
But they do have substantial market value in the static capital asset sense.
With a smaller population of people wanting to hold it at any given price, the price will fall and stay at the new lower level.
Beanie Babies.

Investment assets with an intrinsic value aren’t like that.
With a smaller population of people wanting to hold it at any given price, the price will fall briefly and rebound (weakly) towards the consensus intrinsic value estimate.
The market price for a sack full of $1 bills will always hover around the number of bills in the sack, no matter how many or how few people are bidding on it.
Plus, of course, the natural expectation of an earning asset is that its real price will rise over time as it earns (minus coupons paid along the way) with or without rising demand.

So, to your question:
If gold has value, why not bitcoin?
Absolutely no reason. They’re in the same static capital goods category.
Neither one can ever have any intrinsic value in the investment sense, but as long as there is a marginal demand from people willing and able to pay the current price, the market price will hold up.
And, of course, the reverse.
The price can never rise due to rising intrinsic value over time as can happen with an investment asset:
price increases can come only from rising marginal demand relative to supply. More new fans.

Jim

45 Likes
34

Static capital assets, and investment assets.

It is all same. Some people call themselves investors and tell others as “speculators” traders etc. The truth is both are putting money expecting to make more money.

What good is a factory? It is just static asset. Someone has to produce things and someone has to buy the things produced in it to make money.

Why a red colored, sugar water is of any value? Because people consume it, when they stop it, the color, name, the factories to produce it all meaningless.

People want to feel superior and more importantly look down on things they don’t understand. All these value investor, growth investor, trader, speculator, static asset, liquid asset, yada yada all are delusional.

For those claiming the sack of $1 bills value is same, just have to take one good look at what happened Russian currency. How quickly it lost value. A 16 sigma event. No way it can happen. The currency lost value. Bitcoin didn’t.

Go figure.

2 Likes
35

I’ve gotten quie enamored with the psychology and methodology of Saul’s board, particularly Saul himself, as to price/growth and/or…or maybe not “value” but profitability seems pretty much not acceptable. So it seems because the stocks in his portfolio have lately recorded significant losses that Cloudstrike’s gains during the same time aren’t much of a welcome discussion, and neither is their profitability. The reason seems to be somewhat managment’s both focus on the past and their sandbagging the future.

So it seems here we have a “value” focus that doesn’t allow financial value discussion as value is simply price and or…again or maybe not sales growth…but mostly managment forecasts of future growth. Thus the focus for this type of investing is primarily post quarter investor relations presentations and these better be euphoric or else all living hell will break loose on the Saul’s investment model.

So again, and I’m not sure this is much of a sustainable model…but of course many will argue that it is…the investment model on the Saul’s board that determines whether you should be in his stocks (those stocks that he lists repeatedly that are acceptable to promote) is 1) pulse raising forecasts and 2) price going parabolic at sometime, maybe in the past but at some point that can be accessed to post “my results back then were”…

…although the business itself has never made money and we have rising inflation that maybe makes possible, or not, profits in the far future that likely may be of less value? For me it is a reach but…

So my grasp of all this leads me to think that during periods of more demand than supply, when people can join together in ever growing groups, then prices of non earning “stuff” can go up at such a rate that complex intelligent human beings have huge social connection needs, crazy basic instincts to chase what is running, and a

2 Likes
36

I’ve gotten quie enamored with the psychology and methodology of Saul’s board, particularly Saul himself, as to price/growth and/or…or maybe not, “value” (something you are not allowed to discuss)— but profitable holdings discussions seems pretty much, actually absolutely, not acceptable. So it seems because the stocks in his portfolio have lately recorded significant losses that Cloudstrike’s gains during the same time aren’t much of a welcome discussion, and neither is profitability. The reason stated, but I’m doubtful it is genuine, seems to be somewhat managment’s focus on the past and their sandbagging the future.

So it seems here we have a buy/sell stock focus that doesn’t allow financial value discussion as methodology, that to buy/sell is simply price movement (today or in the past) and or…again or maybe not sales growth…but mostly managment forecasts of future sales (but not profits) growth. Thus the focus for this type of investing is primarily post quarter investor relations presentations — and these better be euphoric or else all living hell will break loose on the Saul’s discussions. Posters get slung off the board, and sometimes kicked off MF entirely (those likes evidently are value to MF), for discussion outside the box.

So again, and I’m not sure this is much of a sustainable model…but of course many will argue that it is…the investment model on the Saul’s board that determines whether you should be in his stocks (those stocks that he lists repeatedly that are acceptable to promote…that also change in dramatic fashion) is 1) pulse raising management forecasts; and 2) price going parabolic at sometime, maybe in the past, but at some point that can be accessed such as to post “my results back then were”…

…although the business itself has never made money and we have rising inflation that maybe makes possible, or maybe/probably not, profits in the far future that likely may be of less value? For me it is a reach but…

So my grasp of all this leads me to think that during periods of more demand than supply, when people can join together in ever growing groups, then prices of non earning “stuff” can go up at such a rate that complex intelligent human beings default to all kinds of basic instincts. We have huge social connection desires, crazy basic instincts to chase what is running, and a competitive envy that makes us post things like past resuts that have absolutely nothing to do with reality or the future.

Anyway the likes seem to be trending down. When something is valued on supply/demand? Well, I’d focus on the likes as much as euphoric management forecasts and/or parabolic (today or yesterday) stock prices.

Well, at least that’s my view.

2 Likes
37

First post accidental pre-finish delivery.

38

If gold has value, why not bitcoin?
Absolutely no reason. …

Sign of the times:
I just got an ad for crypto-backed loan from an apparently reputable FCA-regulated UK mortgage broker.
“six, seven and eight figure finance” “wherever you are based and wherever you want to use the funds”

Jim

1 Like
39

<<Sign of the times:
I just got an ad for crypto-backed loan from an apparently reputable FCA-regulated UK mortgage broker.
“six, seven and eight figure finance” “wherever you are based and wherever you want to use the funds”

That’s how bitcoin injects money into the economy, not much different from QE. And it’s a problem that academics and governments need to have a serious discussion: should it be allowed and what’re the consequences?

2 Likes
40

<<Sign of the times:
I just got an ad for crypto-backed loan…
…
That’s how bitcoin injects money into the economy, not much different from QE.

No doubt—though in reality, ANY loan does that.
It’s the creation of the loan that matters, not the item used as security.

Whenever world creates more “assets” against which entities will lend faster than it creates actual value from goods and services, it is likely to be stimulative.
That’s why housing bubbles are so pernicious. Banks never seem to learn that house prices can be cyclical.
They don’t see the pool of “assets” rising faster than the size of the underlying reality.

Besides, there’s a saying that every decent bubble involves someone creating a new kind of “money”.
So in that sense it’s nothing new.

I thought the best “bon mot” was from John Oliver:
Cryptocurrency: Everything you don’t understand about money, combined with everything you don’t understand about computers.

Jim

26 Likes