Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 170 posts

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#101

Post by chii »

tinco wrote: post #75
ptsneves wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stock market has other mechanism of value creation, one of them that the company distributes dividends which is money outside the stock market. Companies also use it to fund themselves to grow. It is not a zero sum game. Crypto currency is a zero sum game and i think this is what OP was implyining.

I'd be totally with you until 2 years ago. Now I'm not so certain. Can you truly look at TSLA and say that there's value creation behind that valuation? Or GME? And frankly, the dollar? And if it's not the case for these pathetic cases, what does that say about the rest? BTW I'm not arguing the dollar is worthless, especially not when compared to crypto, obviously the dollar has a lot more use than Bitcoin. But look…

> Can you truly look at TSLA and say that there's value creation behind that valuation?

the value of TSLA hasn't been created yet - the event is still in the future. The current price is based on the expectation (by many people) that their value creation in the future will occur.

As for GME - the short squeeze certainly did create value. It's like charging someone dying of thirst in the desert for water. But as soon as those people got _some_ water, you can no longer charge the same high price. Thus GME's rise and fall is rational.

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#102

Post by [deleted] »

Hendrikto wrote: post #64
nly wrote: post #21

It's interesting how the transfer of wealth to a Goldman Sachs executive via cryptocurrency invokes a feeling of mild jealousy and amusement, whereas the transfer of wealth to 'bankers', just like him, just doing their damn jobs and providing a service , invokes revilement in the eyes of the general public. I do think the psychological (is that the word I'm looking for?) aspects of the frothy financial climate drivin…

> ultimately none of these cryptocurrencies are any more useful than they were in 2019 If you really think this, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Don‘t base your opinion on DOGE. There are plenty of cryptocureencies with actual use cases that provide value. I think it‘s pretty clear why you are convincing yourself of the opposite though: > having considered putting a tiny % of my portfolio in t…

[deleted]

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#103

Post by TrackerFF »

Hendrikto wrote: post #45
lottin wrote: post #24

No wealth was created or destroyed in the making of these millions, the millions simply changed hands. Think about that before purchasing a cryptocurrency. You're basically handing your money to an earlier "investor" in the hopes that a future "investor" will hand a greater amount to you. This is all there is to it.

> This is all there is to it. Then you very obviously never actually learned about the topic. To the people downvoting this: * smart contracts * decentralized exchanges * decentralized finance (lending, investing, etc) * instant borderless value transfer All of it trustless, permissionless, uncensorable, resilient, not controlled by a centralized entity, mathematically provable. But keep telling yourself it has no va…

Let's be real here, only a negligible amount of buyers today purchase cryptocurrencies because they believe in the tech - for the majority, it boils down to making a quick buck.

The tech does indeed have valuable applications, but that doesn't take away the fact that we're in a mania.

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#104

Post by chii »

pizza wrote: post #53
ptsneves wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stock market has other mechanism of value creation, one of them that the company distributes dividends which is money outside the stock market. Companies also use it to fund themselves to grow. It is not a zero sum game. Crypto currency is a zero sum game and i think this is what OP was implyining.

Seems like any currency conversion or speculation of any kind is a zero sum game then. But ostensibly if it's spent like any currency it's not zero sum

> Seems like any currency conversion or speculation of any kind is a zero sum game then

it's not really zero sum - this sort of speculation creates liquidity. This liquidity allows people who want to use the underlying asset in some other way to have a buyer (or seller) on the other end of the transaction.

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#105

Post by klodolph »

tinco wrote: post #75
ptsneves wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stock market has other mechanism of value creation, one of them that the company distributes dividends which is money outside the stock market. Companies also use it to fund themselves to grow. It is not a zero sum game. Crypto currency is a zero sum game and i think this is what OP was implyining.

I'd be totally with you until 2 years ago. Now I'm not so certain. Can you truly look at TSLA and say that there's value creation behind that valuation? Or GME? And frankly, the dollar? And if it's not the case for these pathetic cases, what does that say about the rest? BTW I'm not arguing the dollar is worthless, especially not when compared to crypto, obviously the dollar has a lot more use than Bitcoin. But look…

> And if it's not the case for these pathetic cases, what does that say about the rest?

There’s an old joke that starts with a guy taking a train through Scotland. He sees a black sheep out the window and says, “Ah, Scottish sheep are black. How interesting!”

The price of a stock is part market insanity and part value. The proportion varies.

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#106

Post by klodolph »

DocTomoe wrote: post #99
joosters wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Value is created by the company making profits. How it uses those profits, whether by paying out dividends, buying back stock, or investing in the business, is mostly irrelevant to the value creation part.

So, given that dividends are priced in to the value estimation by investors - which we have established is completely disconnected from actual value - and priced out once paid... it turns out that for exchanges, value is not very relevant?

> … which we have established is completely disconnected from actual value …

This part is false. The price of a stock is not completely disconnected from actual value.

The money for the dividends has to come from somewhere. If you own AAPL, the dividends are funded Apple’s business activities. If you think that Apple’s business is a dead end, you would sell off your AAPL stock and move your money somewhere else.

Dividends are also only a small part of the picture.

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#107

Post by chii »

baby wrote: post #74
lottin wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How is that different than in the stock market? Stock holders own the underlying business and businesses do create wealth—all the inputs that are used in making a product are worth less that the product itself.

How do businesses create wealth?

by using labour, and capital (plant and equipment usually) to generate something that didn't exist before, that other people would pay more for than the cost of inputs.

That's how _all_ wealth gets created. Even under communism (where the difference is that under communism, the capital is provided, and owned by the state, rather than privately owned).

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#108

Post by arc-in-space »

baby wrote: post #74
lottin wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How is that different than in the stock market? Stock holders own the underlying business and businesses do create wealth—all the inputs that are used in making a product are worth less that the product itself.

How do businesses create wealth?

Why is "the inputs that are used in making a product are worth less that the product itself" an unsatisfying answer?

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#109

Post by chii »

reader_mode wrote: post #36
nly wrote: post #21

It's interesting how the transfer of wealth to a Goldman Sachs executive via cryptocurrency invokes a feeling of mild jealousy and amusement, whereas the transfer of wealth to 'bankers', just like him, just doing their damn jobs and providing a service , invokes revilement in the eyes of the general public. I do think the psychological (is that the word I'm looking for?) aspects of the frothy financial climate drivin…

Crypto could easily be the largest pyramid scheme in history, I have zero interest in participating even if returns were guaranteed - that's not how I want to make money, I see no value being created in these "investments". Recent developments on the stock market kind of killed the market idealism for me. I don't know what's a better alternative, but from where I'm standing the financial system is rewarding wasteful…

> Recent developments on the stock market kind of killed the market idealism for me

why? It's doing the exact thing that it was intended to do - price the value of public companies.

Re: Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin

#110

Post by nly »

rawtxapp wrote: post #38
SwimSwimHungry wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over 10 years in and it's still "early days" for crypto? When do you think this entire thing is considered mature? I'm very much a crypto skeptic, mostly because I see a lot more harm than good that comes out of the space (ransomware enablement, horrendous waste of energy on PoW coins, egoists that make up the majority of the community, etc)

I mean internet has changed very significantly in the last 30 years, or even in the last 5 years. Personally, I will say it's mature enough when Bitcoin is the world reserve currency (crazy, I know!) and defi fulfills majority if not all of my financial transactions/operations, etc. I look at ransomware as a positive, finally a forcing function for companies to take security seriously. Energy, it's pushing us towards…

> I mean internet has changed very significantly in the last 30 years, or even in the last 5 years.

Has it?

I think the biggest inflection point in the last 15 years has been the prevalence of smart phones and mobile connectivity, otherwise most of what we do on the Internet today was already happening in the 90s, it's just more prevalent now.

Post reply on HN