I swear guys

>intrinsic value

bitcoin is definetly a bubble. and it wil pop when it hits $1,000,000 but by then i already cashed out and bought an island to drive my lambos around on.

I don't know why you think you have the ability to predict the trajectory path of an unprecedented asset class

how much something costs to make isn't causal to how much it's worth.

sure, still haven't heard a decent argument for why bitcoin's intrinsic value is more than a hundred, let alone a thousand.

bitcoin is a bubble but not for the reasons he thinks
>intrinsic value based on mining costs per bitcoin
what a moron

because dude it's just like the tulips, want me to show you that tulips chart again

pretty sure its a bubble, thats pretty much the definition of asset inflation....
but "intrinsic value" loool, just goes to show you can be right for the wrong reasons

Are you fucking retarded?

A bitcoin will always be worth exactly as much as it costs to mine one, or more.

If you lost money mining it, then people wouldn't mine it.

This woman is amazing

t. illiterate

A lot of people seem to think that, because of the unprecedented asset class, they shouldn't be even a little bit cynical. That's all I am saying. It's hard to be confident one way or the other but people saying to HODL act with the same kind of confidence that Facebook normies or legacy media Jews do when they call Bitcoin a bubble.

>increasingly Nervous man says bitcoin is in a bubble for 324th time this year.

well, it wouldnt be a bubble if the market wasnt "irrational"
markets are self fulfilling. value is a psychological phenomenon, there's no "correct" price at any one time

>berg

Yeah I only hoard things that have intrinsic value like dollars.

people don't mean 'intrinsic' as in the adjective. 'intrinsic value' has it's own meaning when used in the context of investing.
the concept supposed to help determine if a security has become too expensive as an investment. but clearly nobody here cares about the price and just assumes bitcoin is going to moon forever, and if it crashes it's not going below where they bought it, for no reason they can articulate.

Nobody hoards dollars, m8
Kys

>value is a psychological phenomenon
A lot of people think that an item is worth something just because they put money into it. In the context of Bitcoin this is different than simply under or over valuing it. This unprecedented asset class, as another user called it, is a psychological dominion more prone to lunacy than sense. It's borderline metaphysical. So I think Bitcoin is very subjective.

My interpretation of Bitcoin is that it's basically just gambling at a dusty old slot machine that pays out more than it should because it's broken. One day the manager is going to come and take it away along with whatever money you had left in it. I don't really consider that an investment or even speculation.

All value is socially constructed.

sure there are economic and financial concepts but 80% are still bullshit. they only try to rationalise psychological behaviour with funny words.

>My interpretation of Bitcoin is that it's basically just gambling
bitcoin is closer to poker in that you winnings don't come from the house, they come from other players.
it looks like everybody is winning at the moment, but only a small percentage of people playing are going to be able to cash out with a profit.
remember "cashing out" means selling to someone who thinks the price is going to keep going out. so if there is a real bubble pop panic sell, most aren't going to be able to find a buyer at a price slightly below the pre pop price.

I mean BTC is a bubble

It's the general concept of crypto that isn't, that's staying for a long time

>bloom(((berg)))
fuck off

>juice solution

for conventional stocks most of that "psychological behavior" is from different interpretations of that chances a new venture will succeed.
a startup that only has one product in production and will go bankrupt if it fails will have huge variation in it's valuation.
intrinsic value of a large company like Apple is more strait forward. you can do that math do add up the value of it's assets and patents, yearly revenue, and the profits from their new product * chance of it's success and you'll get something close it's market cap.
if you think it's all bull crap and they're doing it wrong then you can make a lot of money by betting against their methods. but I'm sure your confidence doesn't go past rolling the dice and crossing your fingers.

If - and this is a big "if" - adoption of Bitcoin increases, as in shops etc accepting it, then the cashing out to USD part won't be as central. I mean, you can already buy cars and houses directly with BTC.

Just like how the value of gold is how much it costs to mine it

>add up all its assets and earnings and that should be close to its market cap
are you sure? sounds like bullshit.

think about it this way; the intrinsic value of a company is how much you could expect to profit if you bought the entire company outright and redirected all of the profits to yourself.
you wouldn't pay a million for a grocery store if you calculate the profits aren't going to make that much over so many years. just scale that up and divide between tens of thousands of investors.

>expect
if at any time the price of its stock is higher than its asset and earnings holdings, the difference is filled in by imagination.
this same principle can be applied itself to every asset the company owns, which are never liquidated at book value btw.
in other words, its all psychological, even the numbers in the books

is this some kinda false flag or are you really this stupid? bitcoin has no intrinsic value just like the bank note has no intrinsic it doesn't matter how much or how little it costs to make something, this maybe a consideration of the price but it is not an "intrinsic" value

I've obviously over simplified it. there are hundreds of reasons why two investors would come up with different valuations are both valid. try predicting the box office number for movies for example (assume you get a pre screen or something). the numbers aren't random and once you have a method you're going to do better than chance, your just not going to be right down to the cent 100% of the time.

>intrinsic berg

>two investors with different valuations are both valid
youve basically proven my point that value is entirely psychological. this isnt to say there arent underlying factors, psychology has factors. but to say any of these things are "intrinsic" is just making yourself sound cool

Is the value of a roof over your head socially constructed? What about food?
Surely, you'd have to give me that point that a house and food has intrinsic value.

I'd say the intrinsic value of the bitcoin, is it's relatively widespread usage (compared to other crypto) and as a method of anonymous payments.

I don't know how they got to 1000 it seems to be a flat out guess. I personally think it's less at like 200 dollars. All else is speculation.

Ill socially construct my penis in your vagina m8

(((Bloomberg)))

Is /pol/ EVER wrong?

>youve basically proven my point that value is entirely psychological.
you're just confused as to what those words mean at this point.

>but to say any of these things are "intrinsic" is just making yourself sound cool
it's an common term in an academic field. if you don't like it because it sounds cool, that's just an inferiority complex or something.

>food and houses have intrinsic value
okay, this is where it becomes a semantic argument.
marx had a phrase "use value" which is basically what i think youre describing, which he contrasted with "exchange value" or market price.
his main conclusion was that land (and probably people) was the only thing with intrinsic use value because of quit rent.
in this sense i agree with his definitions, but you cant put a price on value in exchange terms, it just doesnt work
essentially "use value" only applies at the moment you use it. so food only has use value the momeny you eat it and never any other time

>its a common term in academics
academics come up with bullshit all the time, what im saying is that its bullshit made to sound cool

>marx
well that explains a lot.
so basically "the system is evil and everybody is brainwashed but me because I'm special"

>muh marx wrote it so its bad
if you dont want to have an economic discussion fuck off

sure Marx had some legitimate contributions to society and academics, but so did Freud. neither of their theories hold water anymore, their just historical figures.

>bedy eyed jew tells bad goyim not to take hold of their financial sovreignty

>t's an common term in an academic field.
elsewhere.org/journal/pomo/

thats totally wrong.
freuds theories on the subconscious are still around and widely accepted today. without freud you wouldnt even think you had one.
marx just built on the theories of smith and ricardo that came before him, who were trying to find a solution to assigning true value to things.
market price is not any indication of how useful an object is. you have useless shit like baseball cards going for thousands of dollars while running water is pennies per gallon.
if youre trying to say something has intrinsic use value, then quoting its price on the marketplace doesnt prove its "basic" usefulness

>freuds theories on the subconscious are still around and widely accepted today. without freud you wouldnt even think you had one.
Incoming "no he didn't read more" without mentioning a specific writer.

>freuds theories on the subconscious are still around and widely accepted today. without freud you wouldnt even think you had one.
yeah, he popularized the idea of a subconscious, but he had no idea how it worked. again, historical.

>In finance, intrinsic value refers to the value of a company, stock, currency or product determined through fundamental analysis without reference to its market value.
so you read marx without reading even the wiki page of contemporary economics. you have no frame of reference of what's right or wrong. you're just going by the first idea you exposed yourself to.
well, marx's idea were compelling enough to incite millions of people to put themselves under authoritative and oppressive regimes. so it's good at doing that.

>intrinsic value refers to the value of a company, stock, currency or product determined through fundamental analysis without reference to its market value
yea just the market value of its components

>he had no idea how it worked
How does it work?

youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8dPuuaLjXtPNZwz5_o_5uirJ8gQXnhEO

youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8dPuuaLjXtOPRKzVLY0jJY-uHOH9KVU6

Do you think a shirt is worth as much as it costs to manufacture? Or a car?

I'v read the complete works of Jung and Freud and taken shitloads of psychedelics. I know quite a lot about conscious and unconscious thoughts. I love how you are avoiding the question because all you know is that Freud was wrong.

Intrinsic value is profit once all expenses have been taken out. It's the value of the Enterprise itself

You should read the Mirror of Production by Baudrillard. It expands on the idea you are discussing. Its written as a critique of Marxism by a Marxist but the author later turned away from Marxism.

Yes, in fact, majority of the time.

/pol/ makes bad arguments and hyperbolizes points, but they are not, in principle, "wrong". The demarcation between scales like liberty/security or hierarchy/equality are differences in worldview, and worldviews are not 'wrong', they are only 'different'. That is, if you want to buy into the 'we are all special and diversity of thought is a strength' talking points.
Someone wants to open up borders, another wants to close them. They have different priorities and worldviews, but they are not 'wrong' or 'right'.

...

Social constructs are a social construct. Stop oppressing me!

saved

>bloomBERG

If I make a boat in the most expensive way I can figure out how to do, is the boat worth that much? Will the market buy it for at least that much? Or would they rather buy a superior both manufactured in a cheaper way?

Think a little.