US SEC accepts six spot bitcoin ETF proposals for review

deaddog said:
What did you do, move to El Salvador? :)
More...
Is that a racist fuck smile?

No, I moved my entire family to Asia. It's been FUCKING AWESOME, wished I did it right after I quit my job

Asia is 24/7, and safe (in the areas that are of higher class). First few days, jet lagged and I walked to a 24 hour McDonalds between hours of 12-3AM

Almost everyday I go out with my family (kids) and never once I felt unsafe, none of that bullshit, in Cali thugs wearing Covid masks walking and taking stuff from stores, Walmart, Target, retailers, apple stores, mall stores

In Cali, whenever I went out, always strapped but I leave in the car, and I still feel unsafe. Fucking shithole, living in a place over that has gone to hell, used to be a luxury apartment, over 3,500 USD/mo rent and twice, some thugs knocked on our door, one guy had a knife, man I got my gun with fully loaded magazines but do I fucking want to deal with the lawyer shits if I start unloading on these motherfuckers???

LIFE IS FUCKING AWESOME IN ASIA, and cost of living is very low and you get a lot of help. iykyk

-----

The invoice is in btc

--------

Yea, value of bitcoin is volatile in the short term, but over the long term, it's going up a lot

$100 of btc in 2013, now worth $30,000

100 USD in 2013 now worth 70 USD buying power. CAD USD is probably worse

------

and in the next 2 years, bitcoin will go to over $100k,$200k maybe even over $500k and all your fiat will be stable going down 10% ever year, BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
M.W. said:
You compare apples with oranges. If you single out bitcoin then I can name you dozens of stocks that performed better than bitcoin, 1y or YTD. If you speak of the entire crypto space then other asset classes performed way better than the entire crypto space 1y ago and YTD. Take your pick.

View attachment 319301
More...

You cannot fucking read and comprehend, you dumbshit

Goldman Sachs report states that Bitcoin is the best performing global asset

GOLDMAN SACHS

Is Apple or Tesla, or NVDA a global asset you moron?
 
johnarb said:
You cannot fucking read and comprehend, you dumbshit

Goldman Sachs report states that Bitcoin is the best performing global asset

GOLDMAN SACHS

Is Apple or Tesla, or NVDA a global asset you moron?
More...
do you have to use such a language.. just make you point and move on
 
Yes they certainly are. But how would you know.

johnarb said:
You cannot fucking read and comprehend, you dumbshit

Goldman Sachs report states that Bitcoin is the best performing global asset

GOLDMAN SACHS

Is Apple or Tesla, or NVDA a global asset you moron?
More...
 
johnarb said:
yea, that's about right. It also went up by same amount

Is that a lot for a 24 hour move? A purchase takes less than 1 minute to lock in all the prices
More...

I think I didn't explain what I meant by slippage very well. Let's take an example.

Using BRN for ease.

Let's assume 1 BTC = $1000, and there are only 1000 sats per BTC (I know it's 100 million, but this is for ease)

So each sat is a buck.

You have 1000 sats and the merchant has $1000 cash.

A merchant buys a product from a vendor for $50. He marks it up to $100 to you.

You buy that product for 100 sats.

You do this 9 more times.

Now the merchant has bought $500 worth of product from vendor and sold them to you for 1000 sats.

He's got $500 cash and 1000 sats (for a total of $1500).

So you have spent $1000 worth of sats on the products, and merchant has $500 cash and 1000 sats.

The next day, BTC drops 10%, so 1 BTC = $900.

So merchant's 1000 sats is worth $900

The merchant has $500 cash, and his 1000 sats are worth $900.

You want to return your 10 products back to the merchant.

A) If the merchant takes them back and refunds you the sats you spent, you'll get back 1000 sats worth only $900. The merchant has the $500 worth of product and his $500 cash but you now have -$100 on the whole transaction.

B.) If the merchant takes them back and has to (for some legal reason or whatever) refund you the USD value of the product in sats, the merchant would have to give you the 1000 sats he has (now worth only $900, plus buy another 11.11 sats from the market.) So the merchant has $500 worth of product but now has ~$400 in cash, while you have ~1100 sats. The merchant lost $100 on the transaction.

I know this is super simplistic and does not account for all the incidental shit in between, and I was going to even include the vendor dealing in sats also, and then the manufacturer, and the laborers etc, but I don't have the time to expound on that.

I hope you understand what I am getting at. Somewhere along the line the USD conversion is going to hit someone negatively and someone positively. It can't be an even exchange unless the entire supply chain is priced in BTC and based on nothing else.
 
Last edited:
That's the case with any currency that is not THE widely accepted form of payment in a domestic economy. I think everyone is aware of that.

Overnight said:
I think I didn't explain what I meant by slippage very well. Let's take an example.

Using BRN for ease.

Let's assume 1 BTC = $1000, and there are only 1000 sats per BTC (I know it's 100 million, but this is for ease)

So each sat is a buck.

You have 1000 sats and the merchant has $1000 cash.

A merchant buys a product from a vendor for $50. He marks it up to $100 to you.

You buy that product for 100 sats.

You do this 9 more times.

Now the merchant has bought $500 worth of product from vendor and sold them to you for 1000 sats.

He's got $500 cash and 1000 sats (for a total of $1500).

So you have spent $1000 worth of sats on the products, and merchant has $500 cash and 1000 sats.

The next day, BTC drops 10%, so 1 BTC = $900.

So merchant's 1000 sats is worth $900

The merchant has $500 cash, and his 1000 sats are worth $900.

You want to return your 10 products back to the merchant.

A) If the merchant takes them back and refunds you the sats you spent, you'll get back 1000 sats worth only $900. The merchant has the $500 worth of product and his $500 cash but you now have -$100 on the whole transaction.

B.) If the merchant takes them back and has to (for some legal reason or whatever) refund you the USD value of the product in sats, the merchant would have to give you the 1000 sats he has (now worth only $900, plus buy another 11.11 sats from the market.) So the merchant has $500 worth of product but now has ~$400 in cash, while you have ~1100 sats. The merchant lost $100 on the transaction.

I know this is super simplistic and does not account for all the incidental shit in between, and I was going to even include the vendor dealing in sats also, and then the manufacturer, and the laborers etc, but I don't have the time to expound on that.

I hope you understand what I am getting at. Somewhere along the line the USD conversion is going to hit someone negatively and someone positively. It can't be an even exchange unless the entire supply chain is priced in BTC and based on nothing else.
More...
 
M.W. said:
Yes they certainly are. But how would you know.
More...

You a fucking liar now?

Are you claiming that AAPL is traded on every local markets of every country in the world and regular citizens can purchase every single US stock at El Salvador, Turkey, Lebanon, Argentina, Brazil, India???

Just like gold,, huh? or perhaps like bitcoin?

If you really believe that, why don't you contact GOLDMAN SACHS and tell them their report is wrong, you hot shit dumb fuck. Go ahead, and let us know how it works out
 
M.W. said:
That's the case with any currency that is not THE widely accepted form of payment in a domestic economy. I think everyone is aware of that.
More...


Again the point is being missed by the audience methinks. It's the SPEED at which the slippage can occur.
 
Overnight said:
I think I didn't explain what I meant by slippage very well. Let's take an example.

Using BRN for ease.

Let's assume 1 BTC = $1000, and there are only 1000 sats per BTC (I know it's 100 million, but this is for ease)

So each sat is a buck.

You have 1000 sats and the merchant has $1000 cash.

A merchant buys a product from a vendor for $50. He marks it up to $100 to you.

You buy that product for 100 sats.

You do this 9 more times.

Now the merchant has bought $500 worth of product from vendor and sold them to you for 1000 sats.

He's got $500 cash and 1000 sats (for a total of $1500).

So you have spent $1000 worth of sats on the products, and merchant has $500 cash and 1000 sats.

The next day, BTC drops 10%, so 1 BTC = $900.

So merchant's 1000 sats is worth $900

The merchant has $500 cash, and his 1000 sats are worth $900.

You want to return your 10 products back to the merchant.

A) If the merchant takes them back and refunds you the sats you spent, you'll get back 1000 sats worth only $900. The merchant has the $500 worth of product and his $500 cash but you now have -$100 on the whole transaction.

B.) If the merchant takes them back and has to (for some legal reason or whatever) refund you the USD value of the product in sats, the merchant would have to give you the 1000 sats he has (now worth only $900, plus buy another 11.11 sats from the market.) So the merchant has $500 worth of product but now has ~$400 in cash, while you have ~1100 sats. The merchant lost $100 on the transaction.

I know this is super simplistic and does not account for all the incidental shit in between, and I was going to even include the vendor dealing in sats also, and then the manufacturer, and the laborers etc, but I don't have the time to expound on that.

I hope you understand what I am getting at. Somewhere along the line the USD conversion is going to hit someone negatively and someone positively. It can't be an even exchange unless the entire supply chain is priced in BTC and based on nothing else.
More...

There's too many items in the mix, but let me see if I can separate the major ones

Let's go with TradingView, you purchase $200 annual subscription and Bitpay will give you an invoice in sats, let's say 200 sats, for easy math

After your bitcoin payment has settled, Bitpay will send $198 to TradingView 100 bp is their fee (vs traditional cc of about 200-300 bp)

If at some point, you want to cancel and get a partial refund, TradingView will send you $ in prorated amount

This is the same as NewEgg, that will give you refunds in $ on returned products purchased with bitcoin

TradingView and NewEgg do not receive and keep bitcoins so they have no price risk exposure

Bitpay and all other payment processors do take bitcoin price volatility risks and they seem to be very good at hedging in the 24/7 bitcoin markets. Strike (Jack Mallers) has mentioned this on a couple of interviews I've watched

On some occasion that a vendor does keep the bitcoins, then they will be subject to price volatility risk. Overstock comes to mind
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top