Buying a stock/bond/asset comes with the intrinsic belief the value will increase. Being more specific, purchasing any speculative asset comes with the belief that the thing I am buying will increase in value relative to the thing I'm buying it.
The reverse is also true for selling a speculative asset.
Now that that is out of the way. Let's continue cherry picking as you've done and consider traders that specialize in short selling companies they deem as bad market actors. What do high profile short sellers do? They go on all sorts of media rants warning about companies/assets ect TO WARN PEOPLE AND INFORM THEM (legitimate or otherwise) for their own gain.
Cherry picking these ideas with respect to crypto is totally naive.
Some people use BTC to pay for VPNs, drugs, or simply to get cash out of their country. There was a lot of speculation that the big spike in BTC a few years back was the Saudi royalty trying to move cash out before MBS cracked down on them.
Suppose a company makes $100,000 per year and this is expected to continue. How much would you pay for it?
Now, suppose it makes $100,000 per year, but for some reason once you have it, no one will buy it off you. How much would you pay for it?
You'd pay less in the second case, but not that much less. The company has a value which it gives to you for having ownership of it.
Meanwhile, bitcoin produces....$0 per year for owning it. The only value is in sale at a higher price. You have to bet on appreciation.
This is something fundamental people often misunderstand about, say, stocks. The price is set by supply and demand for the stock, but the value is determined by the cashflows. Usually price and value move at least somewhat in sync. But if stock markets went insane and valued everything at $0 for some reason, you'd still want to own companies.
Unless the income-producing aspect of the business is dependent on you, there's always someone willing to buy something that produces money.
In such a world, the $100,000/yr business still has value to you. That was the point.
At the moment I rather see people buying stuff that they think other people might deem valuable in the future, e.g. motivation behind buying TSLA is similar to buying BTC.
A thought experiment to show the difference between price and value. Bitcoin currently has a price. No actual intrinsic value other than the hope of value in the future.
I don't think that whether it has this property (and value) is in question - the question is how much of BTC's price is fueled by that value.
Even if this company owns the whole world at the end, is it worth even $1?
If I get non-voting shares that do not pay dividends, then these aren't shares, they're just useless scraps of paper. If the only utility I can get from them is being able to point out that I "technically" own the entire world, it is indeed useless.
Maybe I'm willing to pay a dollar for it but certainly not two.
Given the huge amounts of money that investors will invest in companies that make negative money every year, I think this is (perhaps unfortunately) not at all true in the real world.
When you buy (e.g.) real estate you can get value out of it without thinking about selling it for a profit later. Especially if it's your primary residence.
Same with most vehicles: they depreciate over time, but there is utilitarian value in the asset. Unless it's Steve McQueen's Mustang or something.
Not every "asset" is about ROI.
Real estate, and the various loans and derivatives, all eventually end up at real, productive assets that you might want to own.
Stocks and the various index funds and derivatives, all eventually end up with ownership of a company. A company which, if profitable, can pay dividends back to the owners.
I'd argue that it's a much rarer class of investment vehicle which is purely speculative.
*In the tech hysteria, it's easy to forget that this is where the fundamental value comes from.
And that's why short-selling is so important.
Orthodox economics is severely underrated.
Oh, and bitcoin got a decent short-selling facility with the futures trading a while back.
(No clue why you are getting downvoted.)
Ie. Can "on paper" millionaires realise that wealth if they choose to?
If you have a lot more BTC to sell than could comfortably move on exchanges, auctions are the way to go. Sometimes the feds seize large amounts of BTC and auction them off in large blocks, and they not only sell but they go for above then-current exchange rates.
There many small fish trading with a small ($500k-$1m) capital on a 3-5x leverage. They can do some days 5-10m of volume in usd.
You can easily offload 10M USD worth over 10-20 minutes without having a big effect on the overall market.
It has been years since I looked but that wasn’t available when I did. It would be a positive sign for the maturity of the market.
Snapshot of live book depth at time of posting: https://imgur.com/a/rhi7ZKL
Taken from here, look for "view exchange": https://pro.coinbase.com/trade/BTC-USD
Speaking as someone who watched a buddy go through this process it took him ~2 days to get his limit increased to the millions for a wire transfer.
Crypto is an unregulated wild west, so these OTC desks typically don't have BD licenses, might do prop trading and be the counterparty to your transaction and take your position on their books (and then try to unload it themselves at a profit), or might match trades with their own customer lists. It's typically a pretty low-tech operation running on chat rooms.
I've worked with a few of those firms.
CMC reports around $37B in global BTC volume right now, but the real figure is probably $2.5 - 3B, and of that it's fragmented in different fiat currencies with different restrictions on where those exchanges are able to send money. So while it's certainly not nothing and it's better than years ago, it's like a quarter of the average daily volume of shares in a single company like Apple.
If you could somehow unload massive amounts of BTC without affecting the market it would be arbitraged away almost instantly.
People who suggest that it is possible to unload BTC without impacting the market don’t understand finance at all. Not understanding finance, economics, math, computer science, politics and monetary theory is par for course for most BTC supporters.
This is why it's a scam.
Agreed.
But sometimes true believers don't need a lot of motivation. What motivates Rust or Arch Linux people to talk up their favorite technology 24/7?
If you can talk up BTC/blockchain in some public place such that someone notable agrees it's useful - Wales qualifies - the crypto press would go nuts. "Wikipedia founder looking into blockchain!!" - anything to get it back in the press/public consciousness. If you can get it up just 10%, that's on paper $100k.
For thousands of people, this is their motivation. Talking up bitcoin is literally their full time job.