You are viewing a single comment's thread:
When it comes to revenue, Amazon is much ahead. Even the company's net income is higher than miners annual revenue.
Of course, this doesn't mean that it isn't impressive how much Bitcoin has grown, just means we have to shift attention to other metrics for measuring growth. Right now the asset's revenue to miners is less than 1% of its market cap and it's even more concerning that the majority of this revenue comes from block subsidy.
As an investor, it seems like a good bet, given recent exposure and sentiments, but as an industry, there's concerns.
Your reply is upvoted by @topcomment; a manual curation service that rewards meaningful and engaging comments.
More Info - Support us! - Reports - Discord Channel
All valid points and I agree that Amazon is a monster company and it can evolve so much from here. In the same time also Bitcoin can and as a store of value probably it will eat from the markets as much as it can.
Bitcoin will perform well as an asset for sure, with institutional interest increasing with each day, it's to be expected.
I'm only worried for how the network itself will evolve given that with significant supply of the asset being controlled by institutions, transaction volumes will definitely be abstracted away to off-chain systems.
This will hurt miners revenue in the long term and that can't be good. We could still be a decade away from that happening, but still is worrisome.
Unless we can lure the masses to embrace self custody (will be hard considering Bitcoin's design limitations), TradFi's liquidity control will knock miners off, significantly reducing the cost to attack Bitcoin, essentially making it easier to centralize.
Right now, I'm yet to find data that can disprove this.