Monitoring the Crypto Bubble

Where do you think we are in the crypto bubble?

  • Total voters
    146
15. Rewards

Gamification rewards users with tokens that can be exchanged for goods/services or more valuable tokens. From a Coingecko email I received:

Gamification involves the incorporation of traditional gaming elements into non-gaming activities. Such features include achievements, skills, and competition to reward user behavior. We have seen this trend develop as humans go more digital, coupled with the increasing popularity of video games. An array of different products have leveraged this approach, including banking self-help apps, and marketing campaigns - this is unsurprising since studies on gamification show a direct link between increased motivation and higher levels of engagement. However, the customer adoption/retention rate is potentially game-changing when you add blockchain technology into the mix - it allows the distribution of digital assets with financial value directly to users instead of things like vouchers or discounts.
Click to expand...

Move 2 earn:

M2E may be a new term, but it is not a new concept. Exercise has been gamified for years. Nintendo popularized movement-based mobile app games through Pokémon GO. They have recently launched a suite of fitness games with their Nintendo Switch console that even have dedicated fitness controllers (e.g., Exercise Ring). If we go further back, we also had the Wii console, pushing forward games like Wii Sports. One could even consider sports a form of M2E since professional players make money from it through sponsorship, winning tournaments, etc. Playing sports professionally, though, is probably beyond most of us. But M2E now allows you to earn financial rewards for being active.

The innate characteristic of becoming more healthy is not just attractive to users who may need a 'gamification push' but also other businesses that benefit from a more physically active society. An example of this is AIA Vitality, a health program created by the insurance company AIA. Under this program, members may accumulate points from various activities, including collecting steps. Points can be used to redeem rewards like food or shopping vouchers. Notably, reaching certain tiers can even be used to reduce insurance premiums.
Click to expand...

 
heartastack said:
What's significant about 21k?
Click to expand...


https://www.fxstreet.com/news/micro...e-bankruptcy-on-bitcoin-collapse-202205121133:


Now, onto BTC's relation to Microstrategy. In the last earnings call on May 3, CFO Phong Le said in response to a question: "As far as where Bitcoin needs to fall, we took out the loan at a 25% LTV, the margin call occurs 50% LTV. So essentially, Bitcoin needs to cut in half or around $21,000 before we'd have a margin call. That said, before it gets to 50%, we could contribute more Bitcoin to the collateral package, so it never gets there."

This is where the obsession with $21k for MSTR stock comes from. Right now, though, MSTR does have more Bitcoin it can pony up to the loan, so the immediate margin call is not the problem. What is a problem is the domino effect. Microstrategy has never made a secret of the fact that it is a leveraged Bitcoin play. For now, it appears to have plenty of reserve assets on the hook if needed for extra collateral. On the same conference call, the CFO stated also said, "The remaining approximately 115,100 Bitcoins are held at the MacroStrategy subsidiary. Of the MacroStrategy of Bitcoins, approximately 19,500 Bitcoins are pledges collateral toward the Bitcoin-backed term loan and over 95,600 Bitcoins remain unpledged and unencumbered."
Click to expand...

I'm more curious as to why the member wants to bankrupt Micro Strategy in the first place?
 
mmm....shiney! said:
^ the point you're making eludes me.
Click to expand...

PoBl.gif
 
Last edited:
Ipv6Ready said:
I have no beef with MicroStrategy but wallstreetbets might run with it, than can buy btc cheaper
Click to expand...

That makes more sense than the other explanation on offer.

Tough ask though, especially when they've got around 4.5x as many assets not encumbered
 
Last edited:
I enjoy watching conglomerates crash and burn when they over-leverage themselves and take on considerable risk on the back of a speculative markets. Big money playing with fire and going up in smoke! It's enjoyable because it's predictable.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
Obviously MSTR don't share your view on the probability of the outcome.
Click to expand...

I don't think Michael Saylor and I share any views. This is especially true when he says things like this:
"Bitcoin is better than gold. To call it digital gold is an understatement. It really is the hardest money in the history of the world."

He sounds like the Mike Maloney of Crypto.

Beyond Bitcoins volatility and speculative nature, how much interest would people really have in Bitcoin? Sure, it has some features as you've outlined previously but what does it really have to offer beyond what our current systems can already provide? What gap does Bitcoin specifically fill? I mean, Bitcoin has significant limitations in how many transactions can take place per second. Bitcoin has established itself on the back of speculative opportunity. Without volatility and a favourable climate, Bitcoin would only see ongoing interest from diehard fans and no-coiners jumping onboard thinking they'll get rich. If you took away the speculative element of Bitcoin, the capital inflows would trickle down to a small stream of hopefuls. Bitcoin doesn't produce anything of Benefit that is solely reliant on it's existence. The technology and infrastructure may be a result of it's inception, but it doesn't need Bitcoin to exist or to add benefit.

Bitcoins ongoing adoption and interest is completely dependent on continued speculative investment support. Claiming it's "the hardest money in the World" is ignorant. It could easily be pushed aside to make way for something bigger, better and more functional + practical. That's the risk it poses. It's not "needed". The world would still move along and function perfectly fine without it's existence. Except now a serious crash could pose significant risks to some over-leveraged companies like MSTR and supporting financial institutions. It would be a necessary cleansing IMO.
 
STKR said:
I don't think Michael Saylor and I share any views.
Click to expand...

There's nothing predictable about leveraging, it works at times, at others it doesn't.

I don't necessarily share Saylor's views entirely, but to suggest that a crash and burn is predictable ignores market demand and the value that BTC adds. I'm not particularly interested in the gold v BTC debate so you won't get me defending his comments around any comparison to gold.

STKR said:
what does it really have to offer beyond what our current systems can already provide? What gap does Bitcoin specifically fill?
Click to expand...

snip

STKR said:
Bitcoin doesn't produce anything of Benefit that is solely reliant on it's existence. The technology and infrastructure may be a result of it's inception, but it doesn't need Bitcoin to exist or to add benefit.
Click to expand...

The Whitepaper sets out the problem that BTC seeks to solve.

We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network.
Click to expand...

https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

The infrastructure also requires the use of BTC as the incentive for maintaining the P2P network.

STKR said:
Bitcoins ongoing adoption and interest is completely dependent on continued speculative investment support.
Click to expand...

Apart from the fact that that claim can be levelled at any asset class, ongoing adoption and interest is continuing at a pleasing pace:

https://lightning.network

Proposed in a white paper in 2016, the Lightning Network (LN) is a layer-2 solution built on top of Bitcoin. LN was created in response to scalability issues with Bitcoin, namely the speed and cost of Bitcoin transactions.
Click to expand...

Taproot:

KEY TAKEAWAYS
  • Taproot, Bitcoin's latest upgrade, is its most significant one in four years.
  • The Taproot upgrade batches multiple signatures and transactions together, making it easier and faster to verify transactions on Bitcoin's network.
  • It also scrambles transactions with single and multiple signatures together and makes it more difficult to identify transaction inputs on Bitcoin's blockchain.
  • Taproot could help scale the number of transactions occurring on Bitcoin's network.
Click to expand...

https://www.investopedia.com/bitcoin-taproot-upgrade-5210039

Stacks (STX):

What Is Stacks (STX)?
Stacks is a layer-1 blockchain solution that is designed to bring smart contracts and decentralized applications (DApps) to Bitcoin (BTC). These smart contracts are brought to Bitcoin without changing any of the features that make it so powerful — including its security and stability.
Click to expand...

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/stacks/
 
Last edited:
STKR said:
I don't think Michael Saylor and I share any views. This is especially true when he says things like this:
"Bitcoin is better than gold. To call it digital gold is an understatement. It really is the hardest money in the history of the world."

He sounds like the Mike Maloney of Crypto.

Beyond Bitcoins volatility and speculative nature, how much interest would people really have in Bitcoin? Sure, it has some features as you've outlined previously but what does it really have to offer beyond what our current systems can already provide? What gap does Bitcoin specifically fill? I mean, Bitcoin has significant limitations in how many transactions can take place per second. Bitcoin has established itself on the back of speculative opportunity. Without volatility and a favourable climate, Bitcoin would only see ongoing interest from diehard fans and no-coiners jumping onboard thinking they'll get rich. If you took away the speculative element of Bitcoin, the capital inflows would trickle down to a small stream of hopefuls. Bitcoin doesn't produce anything of Benefit that is solely reliant on it's existence. The technology and infrastructure may be a result of it's inception, but it doesn't need Bitcoin to exist or to add benefit.

Bitcoins ongoing adoption and interest is completely dependent on continued speculative investment support. Claiming it's "the hardest money in the World" is ignorant. It could easily be pushed aside to make way for something bigger, better and more functional + practical. That's the risk it poses. It's not "needed". The world would still move along and function perfectly fine without it's existence. Except now a serious crash could pose significant risks to some over-leveraged companies like MSTR and supporting financial institutions. It would be a necessary cleansing IMO.
Click to expand...
Well said.
But pro corners will easily refute that with.
"You clearly don't understand the technology "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top