deathbomber wrote: » I had circa 200k lend back in the day, decided to offload all other than 10k into substratum (at a loss), worst decision, not because i sold but i listened to some moron on youtube, think datadash or boxing- always do your own research, shillrrs will kill you
banie01 wrote: » That's me sold out of chainlink now and apart from a little XLM and BTC back to almost all cash positions. The hope I have is that the cycle persists, that the drop comes and I buy back in. Regardless, profit is profit
deathbomber wrote: » Dot??? It's well on it's way to being the next ethereum, parachain is the future:pac: momentum building. Circulating suppy is more but if eth accelerates, dot will follow. Could be a $500 mark by year end.
Str8outtaWuhan wrote: » Does Link have legs in its current run or is 18/19 where people think it will start to be cashed out? I have a monkey in it since OCT @10 quid so not worried about losing the stake but was hoping enough for a holiday in August.
deathbomber wrote: » Who datadash or boxing? Never knew they gave talks, nothing more than professional shillers lining their pockets
stockshares wrote: » When I started he was prominent on YouTube and I remember him shilling Substratum. Around the same time he gave a Talk in Limerick as part of a tour he was doing. I think he got sponsored by Substratum at one stage . Anyway he bull****ted his way though the talk. He said little of any consequence in over an hour of talking. I think theres a video of it on Boards or if not there it's on his website .
stockshares wrote: » Yes not all lenders are centralised but depending on what your holding it might not matter as the value could plummet and your collateral could get taken.
grindle wrote: » I have a lot of DOT myself so don't think I'm just being a total ETH-hound here, but every calamitous f up that made people question Ethereum was due to Gavin Wood (Polkadot creator), from The DAO to two separate Parity hacks later on. BTC maxis already view Ethereum's development as too fast but it was Gavin Wood's greater inclination to "move fast and break things", ignoring a bug presuming it wouldn't be found which cemented the risk onto the main chain. Which makes me wonder when it'll happen with Polkadot. Three calamitous f ups in less than five years makes me presume it will happen, but I bought DOT as a hedge that he may have learned from his lessons. Maybe I haven't learned from mine.
tech wrote: » Whats alot of DOT?
deathbomber wrote: » My prediction may be a bit early but it will achieve it unless there is a calamitous f up
maninasia wrote: » With decentralised platform such as AAVE you don't hand over your keys.
BrandonBay86 wrote: » Any time I say not your keys not your coins with relation to defi nobody wants to hear about it. It literally goes against what Bitcoin & other cryptos stand for.
Bob24 wrote: » It depends on the scenario. But I don’t think the most likely scenario is one whereby it is like flicking a switch: one second everyone fully trusts and accepts USDT, and the next second all market participants are adamant they don’t want it no matter what (even at a discount). IMO the most likely scenario is a slightly more gradual one whereby trust starts to erode due to negative information, but is not completely wiped out (either because there still is some hope Tether will be OK, because some people are not aware yet, or because some gateways from USDT to USD are still functioning ... all of which give arbitrage opportunities). I am not saying it would take months to play out (maybe hours, days, or weeks depending on how the situation evolves), but IMO it is likely not to happen instantly. And during the transition there would be price adjustments based on the chances for the situation to recover or to dump discounted USDTs to another party.
makeorbrake wrote: » This is an issue all of its own. The return with all of these crypto lenders looks very attractive but when you look at the counterparty risk you're taking on, it's a poor relative return. Caitlin Long has been warning about this for a couple of years already. In November, crypto lender Cred filed for bankruptcy. Most likely anyone who had deposited with it won't be getting any of their crypto back. These guys are instituting rehypothecation/fractional reserve lending practices. That makes a mockery of the 21 million BTC hard cap. Furthermore, the practice is likely to leave depositors high and dry as these lenders get caught out as the BTC price moves upwards.
mdmix wrote: » What really concerns me is whether crypto lenders may be over exposed as they generally offer loans in tether. Could this cause a run on Celsius, blockfi or other lenders where customers rush to pull their assets out?
deathbomber wrote: » Possibly, but each event is taxable, regardless when "cashing out", if audited, they will go through them all, can get messy. Obviously if you only have a few transactions, all good, - the more you do, the messier it gets
cnocbui wrote: » Some other countries allow trading accounts where tax only applies to withdrawls from the account. Ireland is not one of them. Every chargeable event is CGT liable, including on-exchange conversions between different coins.
Mellor wrote: » ggg Why would his profits be eaten annoy more than if he did it in one trade? ie Buying 5 @900 and selling at 1080 is +900 Buying 5 @900 and micro-trading until you can buy 6 @900 is also +900. And you haven’t actually made any capital gains until you cash out in some form.
Dohnjoe wrote: » Which would put it's market cap at almost 450 bn, or over 3x Eth's current market cap, yeah I'm not so sure. Also, every other coin is the "next Ethereum".
deathbomber wrote: » Nightmare for your tax return though, profits will be eaten unless you intend on not declaring of course
