pull down to refresh

If a company is cash-flow-negative, holding real money is probably the best thing they can do. If they can issue shares to do so, isn't that the smartest possible thing?!

no, shutting down is the best thing they can do. Stop destroying capital

Real economics doesn't stop applying just because, like, we've got bitcoin now

Would you consider it "destroying capital" for an individual to take out the maximum loan possible to buy a huge house during times of extremely low interest rates?

I see it as a very similar concept. If a company has the ability to issue shares in order to buy Bitcoin, they should, even if they are cash-flow negative. It's the broken system that even allows such a thing to happen.

Shit, as long as we're living in a fiat-denominated world, I'm not sure that I even acknowledge the concept of "destroying capital" as a real thing. It's all manipulated. Winners and losers are chosen arbitrarily. There is no such thing as "capital" in such a system at all.

So what's wrong with a company taking advantage of such a broken system?

"Real economics" already stopped being relevant the second we allowed a central bank into the U.S.

reply

Nope. Not even remotely similar.

Or, put in that analogy: would it be a good idea to do that, if dude has been out of work for two years and is rolling over credit cards?

reply

deleted by author

reply

I don't think anyone has formulated a "knee-jerk negative reaction" to using credit. What are you talking about?

No, the company should shut down and return the resources they're in possession of to others who can wield them better. That's the drag.

reply

deleted by author