It reminds me of the initial dot-com bubble, where anybody who asked questions was also painted as not getting it. Ditto the mortgage bubble, come to think of it.
Then when the inevitable crash comes, nobody apologizes. It's either "who could have known" or just moving on to the next grift and never saying another word.
Seems to be a general pattern when there is an economic or policy “bubble” and big players in an organization or sector are holding the bag.
Everyone who holds cryptocurrency is holding Tether’s bag of poo. No they are not even the majority of money in cryptocurrency, but they are enough to prop up the price a lot given that it’s a fairly thin market. They are also structured so as to make it very easy to use their funny money to manipulate cryptocurrency price.
Their joker CEO sounds like a cutout and fall guy.
Or they recognize you can't time the market, and see upside despite a nearly-inevitable tether crash? If investors had been waiting for tether to crash they would have missed the run from $1k - $30+k, and I don't think you can claim with a straight face that was all tether manipulation. Again, can't time the market.
Anyway, it’s easy to make a circular argument of “people buy it because they are fools, and they are fools because they buy it.” You’ll be right whether it goes up or down so there’s not much of a debate to be had..
The trouble is, it doesn't actually have another one, not a practical one.
If you are actually unaware, and not just arguing in bad faith, most development right now is happening on Ethereum and DeFi apps running on Ethereum. You can get collateralized loans, there are decentralized prediction markets, stuff like that.
And yes, more development is always happening. Success is always in the future. Never mind that M-Pesa and Venmo and Android and Tesla all started around the same time. Uber and Lyft and Twitch and TikTok all launched years later. They all have actual success. None of them are hammers blundering around in search of a nail. None of them have to keep blowing smoke about the incredible future ahead.
But in the same way that Bitcoin is making no difference today in the real-world payment markets, none of that development is making a difference today in their equivalent markets. Colateralized loans, if they work, are 0% of the total colateralized loan market. Prediction markets have existed for more than 20 years. Adding "decentralized" doesn't make them better. Most of that "innovation" is in the category of dancing bears: the impressive part is not that the bear dances well, just that it's a bear doing the dancing.
But since you can't name a purpose, I'll just tell you: The actual current purpose of the whole circus is to enable assorted grifts. When Bitcoin got popular, that's what drove it: people seeking unearned wealth, and the people preying on the suckers with money to lose. That has kept snowballing, grift upon grift and with massive effort to create more suckers to keep the grifts going just a little longer.
Are there reasonable people caught up in this? Sure. As Madoff showed, many of the people involve on both sides of a Ponzi scheme are perfectly sincere believers. But neither their belief nor their sincerity changes the underlying truth: there is no value being created. Nobody can admit that, of course, so they just claim that the value creation is just down the road if only you hodl and believe hard enough.
Prediction markets have probably existed for thousands of years, but this is where we disagree. Decentralization is a fundamental improvement to a betting market, because there is no longer a counterparty who is incentivized to cheat you when you win, or incentivized to take on so much risk that they cannot pay you back if they lose.
> Colateralized loans, if they work, are 0% of the total colateralized loan market.
You sure about that? There's nearly $100B locked in DeFi, although admittedly that's more than just collateralized loans.
You can disagree with that but the snarkyness of "you can't name a purpose" isn't necessary, I've named multiple. It's easy to find cases where a company took much longer to become successful that Uber and Lyft and ended up doing much better than both. I don't find that argument very compelling do you?
I think folks on either extreme of "cryptocurrency is going to eat the world" and "cryptocurrency is literally a trillion dollar scam" should really try to second guess themselves a bit. I think emotions get in the way a bit.
Everyone who holds Tether is holding Tether’s bag. If you don’t own tether, this doesn’t directly affect you. Most of the people I know don’t own (and have never owned) Tether.
Tether (or a substitute stablecoin) is currently a requirement for lots of the Wall Street investment in cryptocurrencies. If it turns to poo, lots of that Wall Street investment does too and it creates huge liquidity/ volume issues.
A Tether crash would take down a lot of stuff.
After all, tether is 3% of total market cap, I think it's fair to say the effect if they disappeared tomorrow would be a bit bigger than that in an emotional market, might see a 40% dip or so but after that greed would make a recovery pretty fast and then grind to all time highs like allways. my five cents.
edit: As the Dothraki slaves would say it, tether has pretty scummy people behind it, it is known. but that's ok.
Your basic theory here is that bubbles always keep going up, even if sometimes they go down. But that's not how bubbles work. Tulip bulbs did not "grind to all time highs like allways". Neither did Beanie Babies. They both fell back to something approximating their use value. But what's the use value of some numbers on another person's computer? Approximately zero.
The 55 years old/70 year old thing could have some legitimacy, kinda. Banks like to be seen as being very old, implying stability. There is a popular regional bank where I live that was established in the 1970s. But this bank says that it is more than 150 years old. Why? It turns out that it bought out a bank that was founded around 1860. Since that bank is now part of them, they reason, they have a history that goes back that far. Sketchy if you ask me, but apparently legal. (?) If Deltec bought an older bank, then maybe they are using the same justification.
A bank that had a 33 year old "Deputy CEO" who gave interviews from his gaming rig.
Who claimed to have graduated from HEC Lausanne in Switzerland with a Masters in Science when he was 15...
and then immediately get a job as Professor of Finance at a Lebanese university...
while dividing his time between running funds in Switzerland and oh ... Jacksonville Florida (actually, that last part is the most believable), where he worked for himself, managing a fund that he couldn't even spell correctly on his own LinkedIn profile (Independance[sic] Weath[sic] Management).
Of course, the last interview he gave, the bank removed him from their website within hours once the ridicule started piling on. When people started questioning that, they very quickly re-added him. And then removed the site entirely. And put up a WordPress template website with completely non functional links and buttons a few days later.
I keep waiting for Yakety Sax to start playing, but to the true believers, it never does, and apparently all us nay-sayers are just neanderthal and don't see "the vision".