criptoRafa

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@AgricolasG @jose_basa Depende de dónde los compraras... Si se los compraste a un chino en la calle, no sabes si son falsos o no, pero no te los pueden embargar. Si los compras en una tienda fiable, el gobierno sabe que los tienes y te los puede embargar

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@PrinceOliver @theDustyLandis @JustLuai I already answered, with police work, just like in any normal country. There has been terrorism and kidnaping for many years in Ireland, Spain and many other countries, and none of them bombed civilians, they let the police solved it

[Caffè Satoshi @CaffeSatoshi]

Charles Schwab is a financial powerhouse that manages more than $12 trillion in client assets, making it one of the world's largest brokerage and wealth management firms.

A few days ago they released a paper stating the precise reason for how they are valuing Bitcoin and why they believe Bitcoin deserves a place in virtually any portfolio.

What makes this particularly noteworthy is that Schwab did not rely on narratives, hype, social media sentiment, or predictions about future adoption. Instead, they focused on something far more fundamental: the economics of Bitcoin production.

Their analysis highlights a concept that has been discussed for years within Bitcoin circles but is now increasingly entering mainstream finance:

The cost of mining a bitcoin.

Unlike traditional currencies, which can be created at the discretion of central banks, every new bitcoin requires a measurable expenditure of real-world resources. Massive amounts of electricity, specialized hardware, infrastructure, maintenance, and capital investment are consumed by a global network of miners competing to secure the Bitcoin network.

According to Schwab's research, this production cost creates a fundamental economic floor beneath Bitcoin's value.

While market prices can move significantly above or below this level in the short term, miners cannot indefinitely sell bitcoin at a loss without eventually shutting down operations. Over time, the economics of production exert a powerful influence on price.

This framework is familiar to investors in commodities such as gold, silver, copper, and oil.

The cost of extracting these resources from the ground has long been used as a benchmark for valuation. Schwab argues that Bitcoin can be analyzed in a similar manner.

The implication is profound.

For years, critics claimed that Bitcoin had no intrinsic value because it generates no cash flow and pays no dividend. Schwab's paper challenges that argument by pointing out that Bitcoin's value can be anchored to the measurable and recurring costs required to produce it.

In essence, Bitcoin is not merely digital code floating in cyberspace. It is a monetary asset backed by the continuous conversion of energy into scarcity.

This does not mean mining cost perfectly predicts market prices.

Bitcoin can and does trade far above its production cost during bull markets, just as gold often trades at multiples of its extraction cost. Investor demand, macroeconomic conditions, liquidity, and adoption trends all play important roles.

However, Schwab's research suggests that mining economics provide a rational framework for understanding Bitcoin's long-term value proposition.

Perhaps most importantly, the report reflects a broader shift taking place across Wall Street. The debate is no longer whether Bitcoin has value.

Increasingly, major financial institutions are debating how to measure that value.

When one of the world's largest wealth managers begins discussing Bitcoin through the lens of production costs and fundamental valuation models, it signals that Bitcoin is moving further away from the realm of speculation and deeper into the realm of a recognized financial asset.

That evolution may prove to be one of the most important developments in Bitcoin's history.

Charles Schwab’s research frames Bitcoin less as a purely speculative asset and more like a commodity, where its value is partly anchored in the cost of production. In their model, mining costs, driven by electricity, hardware, and network difficulty, create a “marginal production cost” that acts more like a long-term reference point than a strict price floor.

They estimate that inefficient Bitcoin production can sit roughly in the $90,000 to $100,000 range per BTC, depending on energy prices and mining conditions.

Schwab does not treat this as a guaranteed support level, but rather a zone around which Bitcoin tends to oscillate across market cycles, similar to how commodities move above and below extraction cost.

From that perspective, a Bitcoin price around $60,000 is not abnormal. It reflects typical cyclical stress where price temporarily trades below production cost during deleveraging phases.

Historically, these periods tend to reset mining economics, reduce supply pressure, and gradually pull price back toward the cost of production over time.

Chart shows Bitcoin price, efficient miner production, and inefficient miner production. (Copyright: Charles Schwabb).

Full article in first comment 👇

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@JayNisbett @GaryCardone A scientific theory is an explanation supported by extensive evidence, repeated testing, and successful predictions. I think you're mistaking it with a hypothesis

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@TomerShavit @Thomass24287361 @JustLuai Yes, in exchange of taking control of the US army

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@PrinceOliver @theDustyLandis @JustLuai Any normal country would have let the police to investigate, arrest and judge the suspects, starting with the people who funded them, even if they are in the government.

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@schieldprokop @MoneroWireHQ Mtgox, for example. And FTX. And Durham. Irish Sim swap. Pig butchering. And many more, is what all normal governments do

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@iJordanPA @mattunchi Lo mismo que cada 4 años, rebotillo en julio, bajada suave hasta fin de año y 3 años de subida hasta el siguiente hostión

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@13ret0nion @SimplyBitcoin @cameron Same problem as zcash, you can't audit the global suply

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@Bitcoinsearch @lunaticoin @OpenAI ¿En serio? Yo las pago con tarjetas cripto, hace un par de años que no uso ninguna otra

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@Inpunkcrypto En bitcoin pasó lo mismo, pero al ser transparente se detectó y se revertió... En las monedas privadas no hay manera de detectar estas cosas.

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@PastanagaCrypto Pasa lo mismo con XRP, no se sabe qué pasó las primeras dos semanas

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@seenfinity @PastanagaCrypto Yo lo llevaba, no me ha llegado al tp por un pelo... Bajo el stop y lo aguanto a ver si llega al objetivo

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@alberto_mera Llámame raro, pero a estos precios casi que prefiero comprar bitcoin

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@Himanshs018 @saylor @jimcramer He's a great floor indicator

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@mattunchi El que sí está funcionando como hedge contra bitcoin es TRX, sube cuando btc baja y baja cuando sube

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@mattunchi Desde que migraron de PoW a PoS no ha hecho más que caer contra BTC

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@eva04925 @cesarvidal Están con el genocidio sionista, que es mucho peor

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@Montesforever @cesarvidal ¿Inseguridad? Se nota que no viviste los 80, era imposible salir a la calle sin que te atracaran, ya lo veíamos como un peaje para ir al colegio, veíamos al kinki de turno y le pagábamos sin que tuviera ni que sacar la navaja. España ahora es tan segura como Japón o Emiratos

[criptoRafa @rcriptor]

@alexgonzalez_ge @cesarvidal La copia del MIGA