1/6 Great to see large macro investors like @TimmerFidelity increasingly look at as an emerging asset class 👏

Jurrien's analysis presented in his 🧵 is also interesting, although I have some doubts about the demand-based model that he presents in it

Some thoughts 👇
RT @TimmerFidelity
It was four months ago that I first wrote about bitcoin, and a lot has happened (and a lot has been learned) since then. So here is a ref…

2/6 In his 🧵, @TimmerFidelity observes that the growth of addresses worth ≥$1 follows a similar growth curve to that of mobile phone use

Based on the assumption that the number of addresses worth ≥$1 is thus a proxy for demand, a valuation model is presented

3/6 While interesting, I think @TimmerFidelity's assumption that the number of addresses worth ≥$1 is an appropriate proxy for demand is flawed, and potentially causes an underestimation of the true demand for

I'll make three arguments:

4/6 First, you can have large demand without a necessarily seeing a large uptick in address growth

For example; we've seen ~12k outflows from large exchanges over the past few months, often in 1 address

Important: Not all addresses represent the same amount of demand


5/6 Second, by looking at addresses holding ≥$1, dust addresses that hold less BTC than is needed to transact are increasingly included, as fees are trending upwards (in fiat terms) over time

As a result of this trend, aggregating demand in addresses will also increase

6/6 Finally, one address can represent many entities

Based on these numbers, ~15 exchanges hold ~13.3% of the supply; representing millions of entities

Source: twitter.com/n3ocortex/status/1

TL;DR: much more nuances apply to addresses than to mobile phone subscriptions
RT @n3ocortex
"2% of accounts control 95% of all "


BTC ownership is much less concentrat…

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Bitcoin Mastodon

Bitcoin Maston Instance