I realise that you are a Lifer of few words, but I reckon that I am not the only one who would love to know: How do you assess all the different opportunities which you regularly mention? You appear to make business -based assessments similar to what people should do before buying shares, but what criteria do you use, and where do you get the info that allows you to check them?
Only if you have the time and inclination of course. But if we can all learn from you, we could soon form the consortium to buy Roland out :-)
I'm on my phone at the moment, so don't have access to the bookmarks on my laptop and I'm away from home for a few days but reddit has tons of information all worth reading.
It is a bloody great read, puts the whole crypto/blockchain thing into the wider context of the history of the Internet. Great education, which even I could understand.
And what a class act the New York Times still is...
Agreed - it was finally a balanced article which explained many of the issues clearly to a layperson - from my simple perspective it helped me understand the relevance of the coins when I had previously questioned why transactions couldn't just take place with regular currency.
However I'm still convinced regardless that the vast majority of the current coins in circulation will be worthless and the 'expected value' of a strategy which involves trading these coins will be highly negative (especially if you buy into my earlier 'insider/outsider' analogy).
Indeed the analogy with the 1990s internet bubble is quite telling given that the two biggest Internet winners which now dominate the industry (Google and Facebook) did not even exist at that time.
It is a bloody great read, puts the whole crypto/blockchain thing into the wider context of the history of the Internet. Great education, which even I could understand.
And what a class act the New York Times still is...
Agreed - it was finally a balanced article which explained many of the issues clearly to a layperson - from my simple perspective it helped me understand the relevance of the coins when I had previously questioned why transactions couldn't just take place with regular currency.
However I'm still convinced regardless that the vast majority of the current coins in circulation will be worthless and the 'expected value' of a strategy which involves trading these coins will be highly negative (especially if you buy into my earlier 'insider/outsider' analogy).
Indeed the analogy with the 1990s internet bubble is quite telling given that the two biggest Internet winners which now dominate the industry (Google and Facebook) did not even exist at that time.
Google did exist? So did amazon, eBay and yahoo. Yahoo in particular were burned pretty badly by the bubble in the end. But they are still titans in the world of the internet.
There’s a lot of rubbish coins out there (tron cough cough), you just need to do your research
The thing is the coins need to be worth something to incentivise people to administrate the network. The entire point of blockchain is that it’s decentralised accross many computers, how do you encourage people to take part? You reward them with coins/tokens, how do you make that a reward? You sell the coins at whatever price to make the coins worth that much.. that’s the point behind an ico.
Again, just wanted to say what a fantastic thread this is, and hope it continues like this for some years to come.
I am thinking of a 'career change' (maybe enforced) later this year, and looking at the idea of becoming a crypto day trader. Just an idea at the moment, but something that, by the time I get up to speed (2nd half of this year), may allow me to live where I want to live (which aint here !) - and also work from home to my hours. What do you guys think about that?
How much time a day on average roughly do you serious trading guys put into research?
Again, just wanted to say what a fantastic thread this is, and hope it continues like this for some years to come.
I am thinking of a 'career change' (maybe enforced) later this year, and looking at the idea of becoming a crypto day trader. Just an idea at the moment, but something that, by the time I get up to speed (2nd half of this year), may allow me to live where I want to live (which aint here !) - and also work from home to my hours. What do you guys think about that?
How much time a day on average roughly do you serious trading guys put into research?
Thank you to all contributors.
Have a back up career. I’m a big advocate for crypto, but the market is so unregulated and goes up and down as unpredictably as anything, that I’d say day trading crypto is literally gambling, holding crypto is high risk. That’s just my opinion. If you think you can spot a trend etc then feel free to do what you want
I am thinking of a 'career change' (maybe enforced) later this year, and looking at the idea of becoming a crypto day trader.
I believe you're a B.A at current is that right? Or at least you carry out some BA duties, which means you love a bit of research... That sounds like it'll come in handy.
All trader type roles appear to be high risk, but Crypto certainly does seem like it may well be a higher risk, fortunately it sounds like you could well have the opportunity to fall back on what you currently do should it fail.
I believe it's better to have tried and have failed to improve on your circumstances (and in turn learnt lessons), than to have never tried with regret. (This is why I am having my own little go at seeing if I can make a few quid and chucking in a bit of research in the evenings...)
I am thinking of a 'career change' (maybe enforced) later this year, and looking at the idea of becoming a crypto day trader.
I believe you're a B.A at current is that right? Or at least you carry out some BA duties, which means you love a bit of research... That sounds like it'll come in handy.
All trader type roles appear to be high risk, but Crypto certainly does seem like it may well be a higher risk, fortunately it sounds like you could well have the opportunity to fall back on what you currently do should it fail.
I believe it's better to have tried and have failed to improve on your circumstances (and in turn learnt lessons), than to have never tried with regret. (This is why I am having my own little go at seeing if I can make a few quid and chucking in a bit of research in the evenings...)
Crypto is always down in January. It’s cos of Chinese New Year and the Chinese taking out money to buy presents etc
It is a bloody great read, puts the whole crypto/blockchain thing into the wider context of the history of the Internet. Great education, which even I could understand.
And what a class act the New York Times still is...
Agreed - it was finally a balanced article which explained many of the issues clearly to a layperson - from my simple perspective it helped me understand the relevance of the coins when I had previously questioned why transactions couldn't just take place with regular currency.
However I'm still convinced regardless that the vast majority of the current coins in circulation will be worthless and the 'expected value' of a strategy which involves trading these coins will be highly negative (especially if you buy into my earlier 'insider/outsider' analogy).
Indeed the analogy with the 1990s internet bubble is quite telling given that the two biggest Internet winners which now dominate the industry (Google and Facebook) did not even exist at that time.
Google did exist? So did amazon, eBay and yahoo. Yahoo in particular were burned pretty badly by the bubble in the end. But they are still titans in the world of the internet.
There’s a lot of rubbish coins out there (tron cough cough), you just need to do your research
Getting a bit off-topic now but Google was founded in late-1998 and was thus an irrelevance during the 1995-1999 bubble (Nasdaq rose 440% over that five-year period) - its IPO was not until 2004.
Yahoo was a titan then but is an irrelevance now (no longer exists as a public company having sold its remaining operating businesses for a paltry $4bn - however they were smart enough to acquire a stake in AliBaba). I'd argue Amazon is not a pure internet business but a retailer and tech services company but either way I accept it was indeed caught up in the 1990s wave (stock went from $3 to $100 and back to $6!).
Anyhow my general point is that the ultimate winners in this game may not even exist yet and the investors who make great fortunes from it may not even be looking at the whole area yet. In the meantime a lot of money will be lost by people who haven't got a clue what they're doing.
I am thinking of a 'career change' (maybe enforced) later this year, and looking at the idea of becoming a crypto day trader.
I believe you're a B.A at current is that right? Or at least you carry out some BA duties, which means you love a bit of research... That sounds like it'll come in handy.
All trader type roles appear to be high risk, but Crypto certainly does seem like it may well be a higher risk, fortunately it sounds like you could well have the opportunity to fall back on what you currently do should it fail.
I believe it's better to have tried and have failed to improve on your circumstances (and in turn learnt lessons), than to have never tried with regret. (This is why I am having my own little go at seeing if I can make a few quid and chucking in a bit of research in the evenings...)
Cheers Dazz, I've fallen out of the Agile role that I had some 12 months ago and gone back into Technical dev work (simply a matter of a job came available), but my contract finishes in June, and there aint much else out there - but want to go back and live in Cape Town, where i'm planning to stay out of the IT world and try to do the hours I want to do from home and look after the kids. At the same time, i'll keep looking for any Agile CSM work just-in-case.
I realise that you are a Lifer of few words, but I reckon that I am not the only one who would love to know: How do you assess all the different opportunities which you regularly mention? You appear to make business -based assessments similar to what people should do before buying shares, but what criteria do you use, and where do you get the info that allows you to check them?
Only if you have the time and inclination of course. But if we can all learn from you, we could soon form the consortium to buy Roland out :-)
I'm on my phone at the moment, so don't have access to the bookmarks on my laptop and I'm away from home for a few days but reddit has tons of information all worth reading.
I guess that my point is about the type of information. If you think about buying shares, there is hard info out there, even for penny shares. And the info you seek is essentially similar whatever the size and type of business. I was just asking how @CAFCsayer evaluates those he decides to punt on, because it sure isn't based on the same robust info that you'd use to buy shares.
I took a look at his medicalchain thing, but for me at least I wasn't convinced because it seemed designed to read like a share prospectus, but didn't have any of the meat of such a document. I looked in vain for the hard evidence of an NHS trial, and didn't find that, although it was late in the evening and I may have missed it.
But I am a cautious investor anyway, and am certainly not knocking anyone on this thread. On the contrary i am keen to learn. I've got some Vechain now, largely because I can explain to someone else what it could be used for in the real world that will make a difference - helping to cut out industrial theft, in the supply chain. My question mark remains about what real stake I have in Vechain, a token is not a share, but all in all, I think it's well worth a punt, with an amount I can afford to lose, as @kentaddick keeps saying.
I realise that you are a Lifer of few words, but I reckon that I am not the only one who would love to know: How do you assess all the different opportunities which you regularly mention? You appear to make business -based assessments similar to what people should do before buying shares, but what criteria do you use, and where do you get the info that allows you to check them?
Only if you have the time and inclination of course. But if we can all learn from you, we could soon form the consortium to buy Roland out :-)
I'm on my phone at the moment, so don't have access to the bookmarks on my laptop and I'm away from home for a few days but reddit has tons of information all worth reading.
I guess that my point is about the type of information. If you think about buying shares, there is hard info out there, even for penny shares. And the info you seek is essentially similar whatever the size and type of business. I was just asking how @CAFCsayer evaluates those he decides to punt on, because it sure isn't based on the same robust info that you'd use to buy shares.
I took a look at his medicalchain thing, but for me at least I wasn't convinced because it seemed designed to read like a share prospectus, but didn't have any of the meat of such a document. I looked in vain for the hard evidence of an NHS trial, and didn't find that, although it was late in the evening and I may have missed it.
But I am a cautious investor anyway, and am certainly not knocking anyone on this thread. On the contrary i am keen to learn. I've got some Vechain now, largely because I can explain to someone else what it could be used for in the real world that will make a difference - helping to cut out industrial theft, in the supply chain. My question mark remains about what real stake I have in Vechain, a token is not a share, but all in all, I think it's well worth a punt, with an amount I can afford to lose, as @kentaddick keeps saying.
The thing is the coins need to be worth something to incentivise people to administrate the network. The entire point of blockchain is that it’s decentralised accross many computers, how do you encourage people to take part? You reward them with coins/tokens, how do you make that a reward? You sell the coins at whatever price to make the coins worth that much.. that’s the point behind an ico.
Broadly agree but suggest the point of an ICO is the raising cash to fund the start up technology, and the higher the price you can make from the ICO the more cash for the start up team.
As the NYT article explains, no one pays for the TCP/IP protocols that sit behind every data transfer from every computer, it is free open source code no one owns. The academics and geeks who developed it haven't earned a bean. Similarly GPS technology it explains is not owned by anyone and you don't have to pay a license fee to use it, but we pay for applications that use GPS. The US military paid the cost of development of the GPS protocols and haven't been paid a bean. In fact, the US taxpayer paid for it and the US taxpayer has derived value by being able to buy SatNavs and have a location finder in their iphone. It would be the same if GPS had been crowd funded by GPS crypto tokens. There would be no intrinsic value in the coins, apart from the esoteric value representing the future value of everyone being able to buy a SatNav for their car and have a location finder in their iPhone. That's why I am struggling to see how the value of crypto currency representing capital paid to the blockchain developers in an ICO is monetised for the benefit of the donors who were given a receipt in the form of a crypto coin proving they had donated real money.
So the difference between free to use protocols as developed in the past, and how blockchain protocols are being developed now is that now the academics and geeks get paid instead of doing it for free. Has the original prospect of the crypto coins becoming currency as a store of value, akin to gold, to justify the donations quietly been receding without anyone noticing, because if it does not acquire currency status crypto tokens are worthless.
If it is not destined to replace fiat currency, the only "reward" to buyers of ICO coins, I can see, is the prospect of selling them for a profit. That's like saying "Hey I donated £50 to support the development of this crypto currency, this coin is my receipt, will you pay me £60 for it cos someone else will pay you £70 tomorrow because this technology will be free to use and one day will be really useful"
Holding crypto currency as a store of value, when i see it no different to a supermarket shopping receipt, doesn't compute in my head, but I will carry on trying to get it and wish I was bold enough to set aside rational thinking and become a crypto trader.
I am just crying out for someone to explain how I will get my money back for crypto coins if I do not want to trade them.
@The_President if you know any good developers and can get hold of some algorithms from some traders (forex etc) then you could look at Arbitrage trading.
I know of a few people doing it at the moment and they're skimming off a nice earner every month.
The thing is the coins need to be worth something to incentivise people to administrate the network. The entire point of blockchain is that it’s decentralised accross many computers, how do you encourage people to take part? You reward them with coins/tokens, how do you make that a reward? You sell the coins at whatever price to make the coins worth that much.. that’s the point behind an ico.
Broadly agree but suggest the point of an ICO is the raising cash to fund the start up technology, and the higher the price you can make from the ICO the more cash for the start up team.
As the NYT article explains, no one pays for the TCP/IP protocols that sit behind every data transfer from every computer, it is free open source code no one owns. The academics and geeks who developed it haven't earned a bean. Similarly GPS technology it explains is not owned by anyone and you don't have to pay a license fee to use it, but we pay for applications that use GPS. The US military paid the cost of development of the GPS protocols and haven't been paid a bean. In fact, the US taxpayer paid for it and the US taxpayer has derived value by being able to buy SatNavs and have a location finder in their iphone. It would be the same if GPS had been crowd funded by GPS crypto tokens. There would be no intrinsic value in the coins, apart from the esoteric value representing the future value of everyone being able to buy a SatNav for their car and have a location finder in their iPhone. That's why I am struggling to see how the value of crypto currency representing capital paid to the blockchain developers in an ICO is monetised for the benefit of the donors who were given a receipt in the form of a crypto coin proving they had donated real money.
So the difference between free to use protocols as developed in the past, and how blockchain protocols are being developed now is that now the academics and geeks get paid instead of doing it for free. Has the original prospect of the crypto coins becoming currency as a store of value, akin to gold, to justify the donations quietly been receding without anyone noticing, because if it does not acquire currency status crypto tokens are worthless.
If it is not destined to replace fiat currency, the only "reward" to buyers of ICO coins, I can see, is the prospect of selling them for a profit. That's like saying "Hey I donated £50 to support the development of this crypto currency, this coin is my receipt, will you pay me £60 for it cos someone else will pay you £70 tomorrow because this technology will be free to use and one day will be really useful"
Holding crypto currency as a store of value, when i see it no different to a supermarket shopping receipt, doesn't compute in my head, but I will carry on trying to get it and wish I was bold enough to set aside rational thinking and become a crypto trader.
I am just crying out for someone to explain how I will get my money back for crypto coins if I do not want to trade them.
I’d agree that - currently there is little real world use for crypto. But say you needed to buy a crypto to use the blockchain, so you want to upload data to a decentralised database, you would buy the crypto on the market to “spend” to use the network. So, you’re spending Fiat to use a decentralised database. A bit like buying credits to use a website etc. Although because of the decentralised nature of blockchain, the tokens can fluctuate in price through demand. Think of that like buying petrol for your car. You’re paying Fiat to buy fuel. That fuel then powers your car. The price of that fuel can fluctuate, but what your car needs to run doesn’t change.
I have read this entire thread which is fascinating and confusing in equal measures and I'm still not totally convinced of the answer to the fundamental question......
Using made up numbers and scenarios:
If I convert £500 'normal' money into Bitcoin today and then use that bitcoin to buy as much Vechain at $10 as I can get. And then overnight Vechain doubled to $20, could I effectively pull out £1,000 in 'normal money' (gross of conversion charges possibly) back out via Bitcoin tomorrow?
If the answer is a clear yes, then I might start having a play with small numbers.
I have read this entire thread which is fascinating and confusing in equal measures and I'm still not totally convinced of the answer to the fundamental question......
Using made up numbers and scenarios:
If I convert £500 'normal' money into Bitcoin today and then use that bitcoin to buy as much Vechain at $10 as I can get. And then overnight Vechain doubled to $20, could I effectively pull out £1,000 in 'normal money' (gross of conversion charges possibly) back out via Bitcoin tomorrow?
If the answer is a clear yes, then I might start having a play with small numbers.
I have read this entire thread which is fascinating and confusing in equal measures and I'm still not totally convinced of the answer to the fundamental question......
Using made up numbers and scenarios:
If I convert £500 'normal' money into Bitcoin today and then use that bitcoin to buy as much Vechain at $10 as I can get. And then overnight Vechain doubled to $20, could I effectively pull out £1,000 in 'normal money' (gross of conversion charges possibly) back out via Bitcoin tomorrow?
If the answer is a clear yes, then I might start having a play with small numbers.
Yes. You might lose a small amount in “transaction fees” especially in getting crypto to fiat. That’s how those Fiat to crypto exchanges make their money.
I have read this entire thread which is fascinating and confusing in equal measures and I'm still not totally convinced of the answer to the fundamental question......
Using made up numbers and scenarios:
If I convert £500 'normal' money into Bitcoin today and then use that bitcoin to buy as much Vechain at $10 as I can get. And then overnight Vechain doubled to $20, could I effectively pull out £1,000 in 'normal money' (gross of conversion charges possibly) back out via Bitcoin tomorrow?
If the answer is a clear yes, then I might start having a play with small numbers.
A very clear yes.
Although it could drop to $5, or 0.
Enough of us on this thread have made enough money to show it's possible though.
The transfer back to your bank takes a while, however, 14 days iirc if it’s a sepa transfer
But the 'transfer back' rate is fixed in at that point I assume?
Have many of you made significant short term gains in real money? Or is the value usually in the long term success (i.e. Bitcoin now vs 10 years ago)
Iirc you can transfer instantly to a Fiat “wallet” from bitcoin, it’s the transfer from there takes time. So unless the pound undergoes hyperinflation then you should be good.
Bitcoin only just came into existence about 10 years ago and was pennies for 1, now it’s worth about £7,000 for 1 bitcoin. The guys who came up with the concept didn’t per say make money selling bitcoin, but they got a huge amount of bitcoin that’s worth millions. The mysterious founder of bitcoin, so called satoshi nakamoto is rumoured to hold 51% of all bitcoin in existence. Literally worth billions. Ironically he/she/entity can’t ever cash all them out at once. No exchange would have the capital and it would simultaneously crash the market to make them worthless.
I have read this entire thread which is fascinating and confusing in equal measures and I'm still not totally convinced of the answer to the fundamental question......
Using made up numbers and scenarios:
If I convert £500 'normal' money into Bitcoin today and then use that bitcoin to buy as much Vechain at $10 as I can get. And then overnight Vechain doubled to $20, could I effectively pull out £1,000 in 'normal money' (gross of conversion charges possibly) back out via Bitcoin tomorrow?
If the answer is a clear yes, then I might start having a play with small numbers.
Yes, if Bitcoin value is still the same. If Vechain doubles and bitcoin halves in value (won't happen, but just for ease of translation) then you will be returning your £500 minus fees. On the flip-side if Bitcoin 1.5x's its value in the same time it takes Vechain to double in value, you will pull out £1500 from your £500 once fully out with cash.
Because you have to purchase these tokens through the form of Bitcoin, you always hold more than a vested interest in Bitcoins value. It's your base. (I'm pretty sure this is right - someone please correct me if this is wrong - I am not invested into any Crypto)
Comments
Tried reading about medicalchain.. but its one I just dont get.
However I'm still convinced regardless that the vast majority of the current coins in circulation will be worthless and the 'expected value' of a strategy which involves trading these coins will be highly negative (especially if you buy into my earlier 'insider/outsider' analogy).
Indeed the analogy with the 1990s internet bubble is quite telling given that the two biggest Internet winners which now dominate the industry (Google and Facebook) did not even exist at that time.
There’s a lot of rubbish coins out there (tron cough cough), you just need to do your research
I am thinking of a 'career change' (maybe enforced) later this year, and looking at the idea of becoming a crypto day trader. Just an idea at the moment, but something that, by the time I get up to speed (2nd half of this year), may allow me to live where I want to live (which aint here !) - and also work from home to my hours.
What do you guys think about that?
How much time a day on average roughly do you serious trading guys put into research?
Thank you to all contributors.
All trader type roles appear to be high risk, but Crypto certainly does seem like it may well be a higher risk, fortunately it sounds like you could well have the opportunity to fall back on what you currently do should it fail.
I believe it's better to have tried and have failed to improve on your circumstances (and in turn learnt lessons), than to have never tried with regret. (This is why I am having my own little go at seeing if I can make a few quid and chucking in a bit of research in the evenings...)
Swapping the £35 a week I spend in Starbucks into this which I'm comfortable with. Just a bit of fun.
Yahoo was a titan then but is an irrelevance now (no longer exists as a public company having sold its remaining operating businesses for a paltry $4bn - however they were smart enough to acquire a stake in AliBaba). I'd argue Amazon is not a pure internet business but a retailer and tech services company but either way I accept it was indeed caught up in the 1990s wave (stock went from $3 to $100 and back to $6!).
Anyhow my general point is that the ultimate winners in this game may not even exist yet and the investors who make great fortunes from it may not even be looking at the whole area yet. In the meantime a lot of money will be lost by people who haven't got a clue what they're doing.
I've fallen out of the Agile role that I had some 12 months ago and gone back into Technical dev work (simply a matter of a job came available), but my contract finishes in June, and there aint much else out there - but want to go back and live in Cape Town, where i'm planning to stay out of the IT world and try to do the hours I want to do from home and look after the kids. At the same time, i'll keep looking for any Agile CSM work just-in-case.
I took a look at his medicalchain thing, but for me at least I wasn't convinced because it seemed designed to read like a share prospectus, but didn't have any of the meat of such a document. I looked in vain for the hard evidence of an NHS trial, and didn't find that, although it was late in the evening and I may have missed it.
But I am a cautious investor anyway, and am certainly not knocking anyone on this thread. On the contrary i am keen to learn. I've got some Vechain now, largely because I can explain to someone else what it could be used for in the real world that will make a difference - helping to cut out industrial theft, in the supply chain. My question mark remains about what real stake I have in Vechain, a token is not a share, but all in all, I think it's well worth a punt, with an amount I can afford to lose, as @kentaddick keeps saying.
As the NYT article explains, no one pays for the TCP/IP protocols that sit behind every data transfer from every computer, it is free open source code no one owns. The academics and geeks who developed it haven't earned a bean. Similarly GPS technology it explains is not owned by anyone and you don't have to pay a license fee to use it, but we pay for applications that use GPS. The US military paid the cost of development of the GPS protocols and haven't been paid a bean. In fact, the US taxpayer paid for it and the US taxpayer has derived value by being able to buy SatNavs and have a location finder in their iphone. It would be the same if GPS had been crowd funded by GPS crypto tokens. There would be no intrinsic value in the coins, apart from the esoteric value representing the future value of everyone being able to buy a SatNav for their car and have a location finder in their iPhone. That's why I am struggling to see how the value of crypto currency representing capital paid to the blockchain developers in an ICO is monetised for the benefit of the donors who were given a receipt in the form of a crypto coin proving they had donated real money.
So the difference between free to use protocols as developed in the past, and how blockchain protocols are being developed now is that now the academics and geeks get paid instead of doing it for free. Has the original prospect of the crypto coins becoming currency as a store of value, akin to gold, to justify the donations quietly been receding without anyone noticing, because if it does not acquire currency status crypto tokens are worthless.
If it is not destined to replace fiat currency, the only "reward" to buyers of ICO coins, I can see, is the prospect of selling them for a profit. That's like saying "Hey I donated £50 to support the development of this crypto currency, this coin is my receipt, will you pay me £60 for it cos someone else will pay you £70 tomorrow because this technology will be free to use and one day will be really useful"
Holding crypto currency as a store of value, when i see it no different to a supermarket shopping receipt, doesn't compute in my head, but I will carry on trying to get it and wish I was bold enough to set aside rational thinking and become a crypto trader.
I am just crying out for someone to explain how I will get my money back for crypto coins if I do not want to trade them.
I know of a few people doing it at the moment and they're skimming off a nice earner every month.
Using made up numbers and scenarios:
If I convert £500 'normal' money into Bitcoin today and then use that bitcoin to buy as much Vechain at $10 as I can get. And then overnight Vechain doubled to $20, could I effectively pull out £1,000 in 'normal money' (gross of conversion charges possibly) back out via Bitcoin tomorrow?
If the answer is a clear yes, then I might start having a play with small numbers.
Although it could drop to $5, or 0.
Enough of us on this thread have made enough money to show it's possible though.
Have many of you made significant short term gains in real money? Or is the value usually in the long term success (i.e. Bitcoin now vs 10 years ago)
Bitcoin only just came into existence about 10 years ago and was pennies for 1, now it’s worth about £7,000 for 1 bitcoin. The guys who came up with the concept didn’t per say make money selling bitcoin, but they got a huge amount of bitcoin that’s worth millions. The mysterious founder of bitcoin, so called satoshi nakamoto is rumoured to hold 51% of all bitcoin in existence. Literally worth billions. Ironically he/she/entity can’t ever cash all them out at once. No exchange would have the capital and it would simultaneously crash the market to make them worthless.
Because you have to purchase these tokens through the form of Bitcoin, you always hold more than a vested interest in Bitcoins value. It's your base. (I'm pretty sure this is right - someone please correct me if this is wrong - I am not invested into any Crypto)