Discussion Board (Corporates)
 Board
Write new posting
Read old postings (archive)
Read your postings
Last 50 Postings | Last 100 Postings
02-06-26 spal
| I think we often talk politics disguised as economics. Capitalists and cronies are often indistinguishable. That makes sense to me, but I can see how that might offend. |
|
02-06-26 hann
02-06-26 savo
hann... FWIW.. i think things are moving very fast in veni
Having waited 8 years for Trump's U turn...why not wait a bit longer until a license is given to start restructuring talks
---
This is a valid point. I think Robinson is right also we have a higher floor now than before
I am leaning towards waiting. Thanks.
|
|
02-06-26 savo
spal... under capitalism ... some people get richer while other people get poorer.
In crony capitalism... some people get richer because other get poorer.
Negative rates can only happen under crony capitalism. That is why the Fed or the ECB exist.
|
|
02-06-26 savo
hann... FWIW.. i think things are moving very fast in veni
Having waited 8 years for Trump's U turn...why not wait a bit longer until a license is given to start restructuring talks.
a 50% haircut on total claim...an exit yield of 6 to 7% like most Latam... plus some oil warrants means a price of 100% to say the least. |
|
02-06-26 hann
https://navnoorbawa.substack.com/p/how-hedge-funds-made-30-in-the-first
interesting detailed discussion of recoveries but 2nd hand.
Altana Credit Opportunities (Lee Robinson, CIO)
Entry: 2020 at ~6 cents (Bloomberg reported initial purchases at 6.25 cents; fund launch dedicated 100% to Venezuela)
January 2026: ~30% gain in the first few trading days of 2026 (Bloomberg reported)
Fund demonstrated high volatility through default period, with strong gains following October 2023 sanctions relief
Robinson’s conviction derived from prior asymmetric successes: 2008 subprime short, 2014 digital currency fund (+3,600% since inception per firm disclosure), and experience at Tudor Capital under Paul Tudor Jones.
----
Talking his book here:
Risk Framework: Why Post-Catalyst Entry Improved
Robinson’s counterintuitive insight:
“These bonds are probably a better buy today at 40 [cents] than they were at 30 two business days ago.”
Asymmetry logic:
At 30 cents pre-arrest: Downside to 15 cents on political failure = -50%
At 40 cents post-arrest: Downside to 30 cents (new floor after regime change) = -25%
Upside unchanged: 60–80 cents target in both cases
Result: Risk-adjusted expected value improved because downside floor rose faster than price.
---
Sell all, sell some or hold? Am now at cost, maybe a small profit if u include interest earned.
All i know is when I ask whether to sell or not price goes up. So i am asking again...
IMHO current prices imply higher expected recoveries. But all depends on how Donald feels about it.
Since US may strike iran, talks failed, that's another dimension |
|
02-06-26 spal
"the problem is that while that makes you richer."
===
That does not sound like a problem then. Indeed the same can be said of a capitalist system in total.
And poor consumers, consuming ... by hook or by crook ... is a feature, not a bug. |
|
02-06-26 savo
carib...negative real rates produced more investments, not less. with negative real rates the less prosperous section of the population tends to save and invest in their own home, because cheap mortgage rates allow that, and many other just consumed, rather than invest. But that consumption allowed companies that invested to find customers.
1) if negative real rates are good for the economy.. let's make them 100% negative... or 1000% negative.. or give every household its own printing press...
As an anecdote ..that is what peronism is all about.
2) with negative real rates some people buy a house..yes... but houses become more and more unaffordable making it impossible for younger generations to buy or even rent. If the government wants people to buy a home the job is to make them more affordable ...not less... and more affordable means cheaper... not more expensive. Again... Cantillon.
|
|
02-06-26 savo
carib...As an "entrepreneur", I very much liked negative real rates,
of course you do... that is the equivalent of Trump sending putting checks in the mail...
the problem is that while that makes you richer... it makes the rest of the European population poorer.
from AI:
"The Cantillon Effect, named after 18th-century economist Richard Cantillon, states that an increase in the money supply does not impact the economy uniformly, but rather benefits those closest to the source of new money (banks, government, large corporations) who spend it before inflation drives up prices. It causes wealth inequality, as initial recipients buy assets cheaply, while later recipients face higher costs of living."
|
|
02-06-26 victor
savo, now back to 65k.
somebody is buying this stuff.
|
|
02-06-26 spal
| Yes Carib ... luckily the "average person" is the average person. |
|
02-06-26 spal
Austria is not famous for producing a great form of capitalism, by the way.
Lol.
And yes Carib - good to see alignment here. I have to admit that calling the US economy bluntly "consumption driven" or more mildly "consumer driven" does somehow feel like sleight of hand, notwithstanding that it is totally correct. But here we are. |
|
02-06-26 carib
PS: real economic and investment decisions are in practice greatly influenced by human psychology, which, as Kahneman scientifically and empirically proved, is far from being entirely rational.
Kahneman and Krugman did not get Nobel prizes because they were good looking or powerful.
So, the average person, which statistically is the relevant Joe, does not really feel a 2% yearly average inflation (which incudes some prices going down and slightly more going up), but if you ask him to get a 2% salary cut.. he is likely to go on strike.
|
|
02-06-26 carib
Spal: in my opinion, your reasoning is correct, because in practice that is how the economy works.
Moving back to a micro example: I have been "saving" since age 5.
initially, I "saved" coins, because at 5 I had no bank account.
Later on, when the saved amounts became significant, and interest rates were high at the time, I started placing the savings in bonds, and re-investing the interest.
Further later on, I started investing the "savings" in developing real estate and in energy producing plants.
As an "entrepreneur", I very much liked negative real rates, because they allowed me to borrow cheaply, much increasing the profitability of investments.
Profits were again re-invested coupled with cheap borrowing, etc etc.
Bottom line: negative real rates produced more investments, not less. with negative real rates the less prosperous section of the population tends to save and invest in their own home, because cheap mortgage rates allow that, and many other just consumed, rather than invest. But that consumption allowed companies that invested to find customers.
So, from a micro to a macro level, the logic works.
Sorry for the austrians. Austria is not famous for producing a great form of capitalism, by the way. |
|
02-06-26 victor
| from 60k to 63k in just a few minutes |
|
02-06-26 spal
| Nasdaq and anything with momentum going to get smashed tomorrow. |
|
02-06-26 spal
IREN ... former bitcoin miner trying to swing towards AI compute support ... utterly massacred in a/h trading.
There will be blood.
Gold and silver contuinuing to correct. |
|
02-06-26 victor
|
02-06-26 spal
Circle is squared as follows:
The disagreement you are circling is not really Keynesian vs Austrian. It is a confusion between microeconomic truths (which Austrians emphasize correctly) and macroeconomic mechanics (which exist whether one likes aggregates or not).
1. Aggregates are not ideology — they are accounting
Austrians often reject “aggregates” as fictitious. But aggregates are not claims about intentions or welfare; they are mechanical sums of individual actions. Aggreggating Savo is adding up across a class.
When millions of individuals decide to consume, save, invest, or lend, the cumulative outcome has consequences that cannot be understood by inspecting any single individual alone.
It would be otherwise incompehensible.
Saying “there is no national saving” is like saying “there is no river, only molecules of water.” True philosophically, useless analytically. Capital markets, balance sheets, and production chains operate at scale. Ignoring that does not make them disappear.
Like it or not Savo ... the US is an immensely rich country. Note this is not the same ... not the same ... as having a lot of poor or unrich people.
2. Consumption is not the policy lever — income is
No serious argument claims that “creating consumption” creates prosperity. Printing money and mailing checks does not generate real wealth unless productive capacity already exists. On that point, an Austrian critique is correct.
Where it goes wrong is confusing validation with creation.
Investment creates productive capacity only if it is profitable. Profitability requires demand. Consumption does not create capital, but it validates capital investment after the fact.
Without demand, savings pile up uselessly and investment collapses. This is not Keynesian ideology — it is observable reality in every deflationary episode.
3. Saving does not need to be universal to fund investment
The core Austrian claim — that prosperity requires saving and capital accumulation — is correct.
The false leap is assuming most individuals must save.
This Savo is utterly incorrect.
In the US:
The top ~20% of households generate ~80–85% of net financial saving
* Corporations retain earnings at scale
* Pension funds, insurers, and endowments intermediate savings
* The US absorbs foreign savings via capital markets
Meanwhile, the bottom ~60% of households save little or nothing, yet the system functions — and has for 70 years.
This is not a flaw; it is structural specialization.
Capital formation depends on concentrated saving, not universal thrift.
4. Prosperity of individuals is not a precondition for system function
Another error is smuggling in a moral assumption: that an economy requires broad individual prosperity to function.
It does not.
An economy can:
* Produce
* Accumulate capital
* Innovate
* Grow GDP
while a large share of the population remains financially fragile. This is not desirable, but it is empirically true. The US economy is not designed to make everyone prosperous; it is designed to allocate labor, capital, and risk efficiently.
This is how capitalism works. The rest is for socialist pamphlets and discussions at Fabian retreats.
5. How the US actually saves
The claim that the US “no longer saves” is false.
* Household net worth ≈ $180+ trillion**
* Corporate retained earnings remain high
* US capital markets are the deepest in the world
* The country absorbs global savings because it offers:
* Rule of law
* Liquid markets
* Scalable returns
This is saving — just not evenly distributed or primarily in bank deposits, which Austrians often overemphasize.
6. Interest rates, repression, and reserve currency
Artificially suppressing real rates can distort capital allocation — agreed. But “capital accumulation stops” is demonstrably false in the US case. What happens instead is capital reallocation:
* Away from low-return projects
* Toward scalable, intangible, and financial assets
Reserve currency status matters, but it does not replace domestic saving. It channels global saving into US capital markets, amplifying what already exists.
Bottom line
* Individuals save or do not save — true
* Investment requires saving — true
* But saving does not need to be universal - IMPORTANT.
* Consumption does not create capital, but it enables capital to earn returns
* The US economy works because saving, investment, and consumption are distributed across different agents.
This is not Keynesianism.
It is how a large, mature, financialized economy actually operates.
|
|
02-05-26 savo
spal...it is very difficult to square this conversation... as it portraits the usual disagreements between keynesians and austrians.
aggregates... for example... are a Keynesian fabrication... Austrians like myself do not believe in aggregates. We simply believe in individual decisions and what is good for the individual, something that the individual knows more than anybody else.
Consumption is not under discussion... if there would be no consumption there would be no humans. Humans consume always. The question is do they save?
The issue is that creating consumption is very simple... just print money and send checks by mail. If prosperity would depend on the capacity of the post office to deliver checks, all countries would be rich.
It sounds funny but that is what the US has been doing since the dot coms.
Prosperity depends on investment and investment depends on savings at the individual level..there is no national level... individuals save or do not save. Savings depend on the willigness of people to postpone consumption and build capital.
The US became the first economy in the world because it used to save... invest and create capital...which multiplied production... income and then consumption.
Growth depends on consumption on the basis that income has been created through capital investment.
But people will not be willing to postpone consumption unless interest rates are real positive and give people the possibility to consume more in the future in real terms. Otherwise it will consume all now and not save.
The moment the fed represses rates... capital accumulation stops. In the US it has been less evident because they absorb the rest of the world's savings thru reserve currency status.
|
|
02-05-26 spal
Instead of 60% / 20% ... which is I think a gentler picture - providing the dynamic (as discussed below) holds then this can work with a 80 /10 / 10 split etc ... the split at some point drives only the politics. |
|
02-05-26 spal
A common objection to a “consumption-led” economy is that it confuses cause and effect: people must save first, investment follows, and only then can production and consumption rise. At the level of an individual household, that logic is correct. A dollar cannot be both consumed and saved at the same time. At the level of an entire economy, however, that framing is incomplete and misleading.
The U.S. economy works through division of roles across households, not through every household behaving the same way.
Roughly the bottom 60% of households save little or nothing on net. They consume most of their income and account for approximately half of total household consumption. This group supplies the demand that keeps firms producing, hiring, and investing. Without their spending, revenue collapses and investment becomes irrational.
At the other end, the top 20% of households generate about 80–85% of net financial saving. They hold the majority of equities, bonds, private credit, and business ownership. This group supplies the capital that finances investment.
Between them sits an upper-middle group that both consumes heavily and saves modestly, often over the life cycle rather than year-by-year.
Consumption creates GDP because GDP measures flows, not balance sheets. When households spend, firms receive revenue. That revenue pays wages and generates profits. Those profits are then retained, reinvested, or intermediated by capital markets.
Even households that save nothing still indirectly contribute to investment because their spending becomes corporate saving.
Crucially, investment in the U.S. is not funded by mass household thrift.
It is funded by concentrated saving, corporate retained earnings, pension and insurance assets, and foreign capital.
Low-wealth consumers are therefore not a flaw in the system; they are the demand engine that makes saving and investment productive.
In short, consumption drives output, saving finances capital formation, and the two do not need to occur within the same households or at the same time. A consumption-led economy functions precisely because these roles are distributed. |
|
02-05-26 spal
At the individual level, savings clearly matter. A household must save to invest.
But at the aggregate level, the order reverses.
Income comes first, and income is generated by spending.
National income accounting is unambiguous:
Income = Consumption + Saving
If there is no spending, there is no income — and therefore no saving.
Roughly 68% of GDP is consumption, and that demand is what validates investment. Firms do not build factories, develop software, or fund R&D because savers exist in the abstract. They invest because they expect customers.
Consumption is what turns capital spending into productive capital rather than idle capacity.
This is why the U.S. can simultaneously be consumption-led and capital-rich.
U.S. household wealth is about $188 trillion**, consisting mostly of equities, businesses, real estate, and pensions. That wealth is not “unused savings.” It is the accumulated result of past investment that was made profitable by consumer demand. Homes exist because people consume housing services. Corporations are valuable because people buy their products. Stock market wealth reflects expected future consumption.
Savings matter — but mainly as a buffer and allocator, not as the spark. In the U.S. system, strong consumption stabilizes cash flows, which supports investment, which creates wealth, which then supports future consumption.
Break consumption, and investment collapses regardless of how much people want to save.
So yes: production is hard, investment is essential, and savings play a role.
But consumption is what creates GDP, and without it, neither savings nor capital formation can grow in the aggregate.
====
This is how it works. And no other way.
|
|
02-05-26 spal
I don't think so. As the word is "consumer" (meaning household led") versus command or government allocated.
Consumer led is not the same as consumption led. |
|
02-05-26 savo
spal...
Consumption is not a sign of stagnation or freeloading; it is the primary transmission mechanism through which production, investment, and innovation are coordinated.
***
this guy also got it backwards.. like Krugman... the wheel starts with people that save... that money can be invested and multiply production
in other words... if people would consume everything that they make.. there would not be savings and there would not be investment... capital goods would not be created and production would not grow.
it is easy to consume.... what is difficult is to produce staff that people want... that requires savings and investment.
Keynesianism is so ingrained in modern thinking that people stop understanding how the economy works.
regarding currency reserve status... i agree with the guy... the US economy will not disappear... it simply allows americans to live beyond their means... including the military. |
|
02-05-26 panasonic
BTC 63,500 and falling.
Something already blew in pieces, exit door on such assets is none when you can't find bids. |
|
02-05-26 spal
| Bitcoin ... death roll coming for someone ... |
|
02-05-26 spal
Exited gold positions.
Holding Copper. |
|
02-05-26 spal
| Momentum stocks being slaughtered. |
|
02-05-26 carib
US employers cut more jobs in January than any start to a year since 2009 as several fresh reports suggested the labour market was in a worse state than Federal Reserve policymakers had thought.
Job cuts last month jumped to 108,435, employment services company Challenger, Gray & Christmas said on Thursday, more than any January since the global financial crisis.
|
|
02-05-26 spal
Could the U.S. Remain a Healthy, Consumer-Led Economy Without Reserve-Currency Status?
Yes. The U.S. could remain a healthy, consumer-led economy without reserve-currency status, though it would operate under tighter constraints and with fewer distortions. Reserve status amplifies the U.S. consumption model; it does not create it.
The dollar’s reserve role provides three real benefits: cheaper borrowing, tolerance for persistent trade deficits, and crisis-time capital inflows. These advantages make consumption easier to sustain at scale by suppressing interest rates and import prices. However, they are financial conveniences, not the underlying drivers of demand.
Consumption is fundamentally driven by employment, wages, household balance sheets, credit availability, and confidence in domestic institutions. None of these require reserve-currency status. The U.S. consumes because it generates high income through services, technology, IP, healthcare, finance, and logistics — not because foreigners hold Treasuries.
If the U.S. lost reserve status, the adjustment would be meaningful but not catastrophic. Interest rates would rise, the dollar would weaken, imports would become more expensive, and trade deficits would narrow. Consumption would shift toward domestic goods and services, credit growth would slow, and fiscal discipline would matter more. This represents rebalancing, not collapse.
Other advanced economies — including the UK, Canada, and Australia — remain consumer-led without issuing the world’s reserve currency. They grow more cyclically and with less external subsidy, but they function.
The U.S. is uniquely well positioned to adapt due to deep capital markets, flexible labor, strong institutions, and a massive internal market.
Historically, the U.S. was consumer-driven even before full dollar dominance.
The true risk is political, not economic: failing to adjust policy as external privileges fade. Managed competently, a post-reserve U.S. economy would still be consumer-led — just less artificially supported and more domestically anchored.
Reserve currency status turbocharges consumption. It is not the engine.
|
|
02-05-26 spal
Why a “Consumer Economy” Is Not a Weak or Non-Productive Economy
The claim that the U.S. economy is “weak” because it is consumption-driven misunderstands how modern, high-income economies function. Consumption is not a sign of stagnation or freeloading; it is the primary transmission mechanism through which production, investment, and innovation are coordinated.
The distinction here would be therefore who drives the economic decisions ... e.g. Consumers or the state for instance in a command or a military economy or in a state led socialist system (e.g. a 5 year plan).
As of late 2025, consumer spending accounts for roughly 68% of U.S. GDP, a share that has been remarkably stable for decades. That fact alone does not imply fragility. It reflects the structure of a mature economy where value creation increasingly occurs in services, technology, healthcare, education, and intellectual property rather than low-margin manufacturing.
Recent data reinforce this point. Real personal consumption expenditures grew about 2.5% annualized in Q4 2025, with monthly real PCE running near 0.3% late in the year. Retail sales rose roughly 3.3% year-over-year in November 2025, supporting production across autos, electronics, logistics, and services. Far from hollowing out output, consumer demand continues to pull production forward.
The idea that consumption is “frivolous” also collapses under inspection of what Americans consume. Roughly 65% of PCE is services, including healthcare, housing services, education, software, financial services, and professional services. These are productivity-enhancing sectors that build human capital, raise efficiency, and support innovation. This is not an economy of "lattes and imports”; it is an economy monetizing knowledge, scale, and networks.
The lesson here is actually where the spending goes - as above.
On production, the U.S. remains one of the largest and most sophisticated producers in the world. Nominal GDP reached roughly $30.6 trillion in 2025, with services representing about 80% of output.
80% services ... but what else would you expect. This is called a post-Industrial economy. This makes total sense.
The U.S. exports high-value goods, services, and intellectual property totaling more than $3 trillion annually, including software, aerospace, pharmaceuticals, energy services, and advanced manufacturing.
"A trade deficit in low-cost goods reflects comparative advantage, not economic decay"
Macro indicators support this resilience. Full-year GDP growth in 2025 was about 2.3%, with Q3 growth near 4.4% annualized, outperforming many export-dependent economies facing global slowdowns. Unemployment stood around 4.4% in January 2026, wage growth ran near 3.8% in 2025, and inflation cooled to roughly 2.7%, allowing real incomes to stabilize.
Household balance sheets remain strong, with net worth near $182 trillion and debt service around 9.5% of income, historically low.
182 trillion - this even includes Schpal's contribution ...
Confidence has softened—Conference Board readings near the mid-80s and Michigan sentiment in the mid-50s reflect policy uncertainty—but “soft confidence” has not translated into collapsing demand or production. Manufacturing PMIs around 51–52 suggest modest expansion, not contraction.
Finally, inequality remains a challenge (Gini ~0.42), but overall well-being remains high, with HDI around 0.94, placing the U.S. among the world’s most developed economies.
Bottom line: Consumption is not economic dead weight.
It is the "engine" that coordinates investment, production, and innovation in a high-value economy. Strip it away, and production stalls. Keep it healthy, and the system continues to compound—even amid global volatility.
====
And though the dogs may bark ... the caravan moves on ...
|
|
02-05-26 savo
desperate psycho wants elections soon, the longer Delcy stays... the more difficult it will be to beat her:
WASHINGTON, Feb 5 (Reuters) - Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado said she believed elections could be held in her country later this year, speaking to Politico in an interview released on Thursday.
"We believe that a real transferring process with manual voting … could be done in nine to 10 months," Machado said. "But, well, that depends when you start." |
|
02-05-26 panasonic
|
02-05-26 spal
Spal, zero no way! at $1 we colores can buy Saylor's position and start colores crypto fund.
===
Ok - sounds good - as long as you agree to be the new front man.
;)) |
|
02-05-26 savo
so silver is coming down because some chinese bloke is selling what he does not have... wait for the moment he needs to buy it back.
Bloomberg) -- A billionaire Chinese trader who made his name riding gold’s record-breaking rally has turned his sights to silver’s breakneck surge, with a bet on the metal’s collapse now worth almost $300 million.
Bian Ximing, who avoids the limelight and spends much of his time in Gibraltar, has made nearly $3 billion from bullish bets on Shanghai Futures Exchange gold contracts since early 2022. He has now built the bourse’s largest net short position in silver, according to Bloomberg analysis of exchange data and people with knowledge of his investments. They asked not to be named as the information is not public.
Bian’s big short comes with significant risk, and he has been forced to liquidate some positions at a loss in a volatile silver market. But he now holds a short that stands at about 450 tons of silver, or 30,000 contracts — so the metal’s sharp drop since last week has resulted in a paper gain of about 2 billion yuan ($288 million).
Including previous losses, Bian stands to make a net profit of around 1 billion yuan, based on his position and prices at the end of Tuesday. Silver is again sliding in Thursday trade and has tumbled more than 16% — almost certainly significantly increasing Bian’s proceeds.
Bian Is Betting on Silver's DropThe billionaire has built the largest net short position on the Shanghai exchangeNet short positions on silver
Bian, through his brokerage Zhongcai Futures Co., began ramping up silver shorts in the final week of January, according to exchange data. SHFE does not detail the identity of individual investors behind brokerage accounts, but the people said Bian’s own bets — and products he directly manages for a small number of clients — make up the bulk of the company’s precious metals positions.
Bian and Zhongcai Futures did not respond to emails seeking comment.
Exchange data showed Zhongcai’s silver short position surged to about 18,000 lots on Jan. 28. It climbed further to about 28,000 lots on Jan. 30, when the metal in Shanghai reached an all-time high.
China’s Big Short
Bian’s bet comes as weeks of dramatic price swings are beginning to prompt market watchers to rethink their single approach to precious metals. While many institutional investors continue to view gold as a hedge against interest-rate shifts, central-bank buying and global uncertainty, silver’s surge is increasingly seen as an industrial rally pushed higher largely by speculative positioning — not economic and other fundamental factors.
Bian gained notoriety in China’s futures markets for aggressively bullish bets on gold that began nearly four years ago. He is one of a handful of larger-than-life characters that have dominated commodities trading since the economic boom began more than two decades ago. Unlike many of his peers, he has stood out for his seclusion — and for the loyal following his musings on investment philosophy have garnered online.
From August last year, he built a long position in silver that generated more than 1.3 billion yuan in profit, according to calculations based on exchange data.
In November, however, he began shifting his position, attempting to call the top of the rally with tentative moves that occasionally left him on the losing side of trades. From last week, however, Bian held his short position with conviction, spreading his exposure across longer-dated contracts and holding it through upward price swings.
The sharp selloff has, for now, rewarded his strategy. |
|
02-05-26 carib
|
02-05-26 panasonic
| Spal, zero no way! at $1 we colores can buy Saylor's position and start colores crypto fund. |
|
02-05-26 spal
Richard Farr, chief market strategist and partner at Pivotus Partners, has issued a stark prediction for Bitcoin (BTC-USD), setting a price target of zero for the cryptocurrency.
“Our BTC price target is 0.0. That’s not just for shock factor. It’s where the math takes us,” the strategist said, noting that Bitcoin (BTC-USD) has failed to function as a dollar hedge and instead operates as “a speculative instrument correlated to the Nasdaq.”
According to Farr, the cryptocurrency faces insurmountable obstacles in gaining institutional adoption or serving as a legitimate medium of exchange.
“No serious central bank will ever own something where Michael Saylor controls the float,” he said on X, referring to the Strategy (MSTR) executive who has accumulated massive bitcoin holdings.
The strategist also criticized Bitcoin’s environmental impact, stating that miners “are bleeding cash” while the network remains “horribly inefficient as a transaction processor and wastes tremendous amounts of energy.”
Farr’s assessment aligns with warnings from Michael Burry, the investor known for predicting the 2008 financial crisis, who cautioned that falling Bitcoin (BTC-USD) prices could trigger a self-reinforcing “death spiral.”
Burry noted that Bitcoin, down more than 40% from its October peak, is now “exposed as a completely speculative asset” that does not qualify as a debasement hedge like gold (XAUUSD:CUR) or silver (XAGUSD:CUR). “Sickening scenarios have now come within reach,” the investor wrote in a Substack post.
|
|
02-05-26 victor
|
02-05-26 spal
| PT - keep as posted on you shorts ... s'il vous plaît |
|
02-05-26 patient-trader
| Victor, I am short Tesla because they looked very weak. Google is very much on vogue because they have the best AI model currently. I think we see a big shift in sentiment over the next months, possibly a market crash. Now, one can play the market from the short side much safer because the bubble has been pricked. What I am looking for are weak volatile companies which can be shorted cheaply and who will be clobbered anyway. I wouldn't short Google now. |
|
02-05-26 carib
| In a nutshell: creditors like high rates with no default. debtors like to deflate debt with negative rates. the US is a large debtor. |
|
02-05-26 carib
Savo: I would also like a world with strong currencies and positive interest rates. I just do not see the USA doing this, and I have to deal with the circumstances we get.
Deleveraging rarely causes stronger growth. Midterms are in nine months. |
|
02-05-26 spal
| Panas - yes some of the bitcoin miners must be ready to blow up. |
|
02-05-26 panasonic
| Spal, it will get even more interesting when a few private capital firms blow in pieces. |
|
02-05-26 spal
Assessment of Acute Financial Stress
Strategy is not in immediate distress but faces growing risks if Bitcoin remains below $76,000 for an extended period or drops further.
Low Risk of Forced Liquidation: All 713k BTC is unencumbered, with no covenants triggering sales. CEO Phong Le stated sales would only occur under "extreme stress" if market cap falls below BTC value.
Break-Even Threshold: Bitcoin needs to stay above $76,000 for breakeven; below $60,000, liabilities could exceed BTC value, turning equity negative and complicating refinancing.
External Factors: Potential $2.8–$9 billion in forced selling from MSCI index exclusion (decision Jan 15, 2026) could add pressure. Broader crypto selloffs (e.g., via ETFs) amplify volatility. However, Strategy's software revenue (~$500 million annually) provides some diversification, though it's dwarfed by BTC exposure.
Proximity to Stress: Moderate—reserves cover 2+ years, and flexibility exists, but a sustained BTC drop to $60,000–$65,000 (pushing losses to $6–$8 billion) could force sales or bankruptcy risks if debt refinancing fails.
Strategy's model is resilient short-term but vulnerable to prolonged bear markets.
No signs of acute stress yet, but monitoring BTC price and capital access is key.
....
Below 60K on a sustained basis and he is in trouble.
|
|
02-05-26 victor
savo, spal
a few years ago, when btc had a big drop, saylor didnt go broke.
so why should he go broke now? what is different this time?
|
|
02-05-26 spal
| Savo I am with you on Saylor - I want this to go down harder than Enron. It is a fraud of bigger proportions. |
|
02-05-26 spal
| Bitcoin ... doom loop is close |
|
02-05-26 spal
ARMN
ARIS MNG CORP
Adding at these levels and dips. Gold miner in Colombia. Very good management and promotors. Just approved for NYSE uplisting. |
|
02-05-26 spal
CRS - trying to find upward momentum in this market. Fortress USA position.
DHT - moving up - tanker rates strong - outlook holding. |
|
02-05-26 panasonic
| MSTR unsecured prefs will send a few private capital firms to a very cold reality. |
|
02-05-26 panasonic
PT, the bull side for Googl, they can finance all their AI needs using cash flow, all others need to get in substantial debt.
Imho Google will eat them alive.
Aaple sided with their archi-enemy Google for a reason, just my 2 cents. |
|
02-05-26 spal
Bitcoin USD Price (BTC-USD)
69,850.77
(-6.92%) |
|
02-05-26 spal
| PT - good prediction on AI / Google and interesting comment. |
|
02-05-26 savo
carib.. i think you got it backwards... in a world of real positive rates people will be willing to save more... not less... and when there are more savings there are more investments and the standard of living goes up not down.
In a financial repressed world people save less and consume more... produce less and imports more... hence the BoT deficits.
The US .. the typical example... does not produce what it consumes... has a bot deficit... pays with freely printed dollars... achieves a standard of living beyond its means... the moment the USD stops being the reserve currency the US will have to consume less... save more... invest more and produce more...which will be good for the US and the rest of the world. |
|
02-05-26 carib
The convincing argument against targeting 0% inflation was made by Krugman: inflation is an average, and and an average of 0% necessarily implies some prices decreasing and some increasing, which is normal, but also some salaries increasing and some decreasing.Now, it is clearly much easier to have some salaries decreasing in real terms but not in absolute figures, for self evident reasons. Likewise, it is easier to have real negative rates that nominal negative rates, again self evident.
a 2% average inflation is perhaps a bar the average human brain fails to feel as significant, in real life.
|
|
02-05-26 carib
Savo: firstly, we live and invest in the existing economy, not in the one we wished to have.
Second, I suppose that in a very deleveraged economy incomes and employment would be lower, together with some real estate prices.
Not really a good place to move to.
But anyway, it does not depend on us.The reality is US inflation is around 3% and EU inflation around 2%,and the incentive to save and lend money at real rates which are close to zero after tax is very modest.
Not so in Brasil, where after tax rates are about 12%, and inflation is 5. |
|
02-05-26 pillz
What happens in the scenario where written options are not exercised and you only get the premium? 'In that case, the capital gains tax does not apply', it reads.
|
|
02-05-26 pillz
| it is for the new 10% tax on profit, soo, I will not need to pay it :) |
|
02-05-26 pillz
| Wat gebeurt er in het scenario waarin geschreven opties niet worden uitgeoefend en u alleen de premie krijgt? ‘In dat geval is de meerwaardebelasting niet van toepassing', luidt het. |
|
02-05-26 pillz
| One billionaire Chinese trader who’s betting against silver is sitting on a $300 million paper gain. |
|
02-05-26 pillz
|
02-05-26 victor
| pt, are you betting on this scenario? |
|
02-05-26 patient-trader
Googles announcement that they spent significantly more than the market expects confirms that they are not an advertising company with juicy margins anymore but some sort of utility which does not produce water or electricity but AI.
Google will be a boring stock trading at much lower multiples.
Before the Dotcom bust, the "Internet" was hot stuff. After Dotcom the Internet was just a commodity used by others to build a business.
The same will happen with AI. It will be just a commodity. And Google will become a sort of Cisco. IMVHO
|
|
02-05-26 spal
Burry warned that additional declines could quickly pressure the balance sheets of major holders, spark forced selling across the crypto ecosystem, and lead to broad value destruction.
“Sickening scenarios have now come within reach,” Burry wrote. Should Bitcoin fall another 10%, Strategy Inc., the world’s largest corporate crypto treasury, would be billions in the red and “find capital markets essentially closed.” Additional drops, he said, would push Bitcoin miners toward bankruptcy.
Burry added that "there is no organic use case reason for Bitcoin to slow or stop its descent," and that the token's adoption by corporate treasuries and new crypto-linked spot exchange-traded funds is not enough to buoy its price indefinitely. |
|
02-05-26 spal
| Bitcoin falling in after hours trading now $71,860 |
|
02-05-26 savo
carib.. i did buy furniture over time... and my last rental was unfurnished.
the point I am trying to make is that everybody expects some inflation... and loans devalue with it while home appreciate with it... hence people want a mortgage to buy a house.
I think this is very bad for society... and younger generations have to share the place where they live.
In a hard money economy... home prices would not increase and those who save can obtain real positive interest and eventually hae the money for a downpayment.
|
|
|
