92 sats \ 6 replies \ @Coinsreporter 18 Sep \ parent \ on: How many territories are set for life? alter_native
I agree. There should be one.
I feel like it's a very low time preference investment. I can see it though.
reply
I work under the premise that 3M sats are going to offer a significant amount of purchasing power in the coming decades. Those 3M sats may buy you a small house a decade from now. What happens if SN grows along with bitcoin and territories become profitable (you aren't getting rich but you are profitable and making a nice side income or a modest income from SN) then Saylor comes along and tells k00b he wants to buy SN for 5 Billion sats. k00b sells, buys himself a ranch and Saylor takes over. Saylor says it doesn't make sense for territory owners to capture all this value it should go to the company and territory owners are shit outta luck.
Not saying it is going to happen and if there were some protections or if the bitcoin price cut in half from here I would consider it and just replace the bitcoin I spent for it.
reply
That's a risk I am willing to take. I don't think @k00b would do that. Right now it's really only 1 or 2 typical mortgage payments in fiat terms. And I am earning more passively every month. And I just want to have the territory because I like it. That is how I would look at it. Yeah, there is risk but it's no different than me buying solar panels and miners. I think it will be great passive income.
reply
Whatever makes sense for you. I just laid out my logic. Doesn't mean I am making the right decision. Maybe SN will remove the monthly option at some point and then I will kick myself for not paying 3M sats when Bitcoin was 30k and instead paying 3M sats when Bitcoin is 300k.
reply
There is no right and wrong. Just different perspectives and approaches. I know my idea isn't for everyone.
reply
No comments 🤐
reply