1/ Economists and traditional valuation experts claim that for most anything to be *valued* it must have cash flows.
2/ These experts then go on to say currencies can't be valued, they can only be *priced.*
3/ So then the "fundamental value" of stocks and other cash producing assets is based on currencies that have no fundamental value? Logic seems fragile at best, like building a castle with air.
4/ Of course, this debate comes up frequently around #crypto valuations. People addicted to their cash flows have a hard time seeing how a new asset class can have new fundamental value, without seeing the flaws in their own thinking.
5/ For our entire history, humans have decided how to value things. Valuation methods continue to evolve for stocks and many other assets, why shouldn't new ones be born for #crypto?
6/ What frustrates me is the lack of dexterity in thought, or willingness to venture, and adherence to cash flows (an idea humans created) as the all-knowing indicator of value.
7/ #Cryptoassets are based on open data layers, providing us more transparency into the flow & use of these assets than any before. #Blockchains were built for this.
8/ With near perfect data around #cryptoassets, it's just a matter of time before the right formulas & approaches are derived that will far exceed the analogies we currently employ be drawing from learnings around physical currencies and commodities.
9/ Call me young & dumb, but in the coming decades people will win Nobel Prizes for new valuation methods around the *fundamentals* of #crypto, a reminder that humans are the sole creator of the illusions of value around them.
10/ Thanks @jmonegro and many others for helping me think through aspects of this. Sorry cash flow addicts, I think many of you are brilliant but just can't see the buildings you grew up in from the inside out.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
