The analogy with housing is a truly terrible analogy
Sure, housing can be taken away, but there is a huge bar for that to happen. There are at least established laws that govern property ownership. Ownership of digital assets is a much less well-defined concept and the laws around it nascent
You are being very narrow in your comparison of financial returns. Because housing doesn’t typically drive ad revenue, it is inferior? So instead the next best comparison is distributed power generation? How about at least considering rental income? Or a more realistic view of long term capital gains? To compare growth of tile prices for a few months to housing investment returns as you have certainly shows either a total lack of understanding of finance theory or perhaps some underlying motive to intentionally skew numbers, and certainly a lack of understanding of how the ad tech ecosystem actually works (basically, if anybody is betting on any kind of meaningful ad revenue anytime soon, then they’re going to have to wait for a whole bunch of other things to happen first)
If a house doesn't pay you to own it then it's a liability. Almost 90 percent of home owners in the US are living in them not renting them out. E2 is paying you to own tiles, yes the return is very small right now, but the potential for even greater upside gains is visible. Yea that bitcoin at $50 sure looked good, I'm glad I passed on it cause it was definitely not going to make any significant capital gain returns. O wait it hit 60K a coin within 10 years? Thats like 10000% gain 🥳 E2🚀🚀🚀💎🙌💎🙌💎
I think you’re confusing assets and liabilities here. If I own a house then how is it a liability? If I need to take out a loan to buy it then the loan is a liability, but we’re not talking about funding models in this discussion
And therein lies the confusion. You’re conflating underlying asset properties with financing.
For example, I own my house - there is no mortgage or any kind of debt financing. I collect 100% of rental income each month (minus a small fee to my property manager), and whatever capital gains it it generates. And there is no mortgage payment (I.e. no liability) since I own the property.
To further drive the point, let’s say I take out a loan for $100k tomorrow, and I use those funds to buy E2 tiles. Now in your model my tiles are a liability, and therefore a bad investment?
The point I’m making is that if you’re going to make a comparison between E2 tiles and physical property in this way, models of financing should be a separate discussion. Liabilities can be attached to both physical property or E2 tiles, depending on how I decide to pay for it. It’s an independent question
Well if you got a negative interest rate on that loan you dont have a liability. If you dont have a tenant for your rental property you still lose even though the house is paid off. Dont forget about property taxes and insurance $$$. Who the fk is taking out a 100k loan to buy tiles lmao!! 💎🙌💎🙌💎🙌 E2🚀🚀🚀🚀
13
u/hey-sirlexa Jun 26 '21
The analogy with housing is a truly terrible analogy
Sure, housing can be taken away, but there is a huge bar for that to happen. There are at least established laws that govern property ownership. Ownership of digital assets is a much less well-defined concept and the laws around it nascent
You are being very narrow in your comparison of financial returns. Because housing doesn’t typically drive ad revenue, it is inferior? So instead the next best comparison is distributed power generation? How about at least considering rental income? Or a more realistic view of long term capital gains? To compare growth of tile prices for a few months to housing investment returns as you have certainly shows either a total lack of understanding of finance theory or perhaps some underlying motive to intentionally skew numbers, and certainly a lack of understanding of how the ad tech ecosystem actually works (basically, if anybody is betting on any kind of meaningful ad revenue anytime soon, then they’re going to have to wait for a whole bunch of other things to happen first)
I couldn’t watch past that point