Reggie Middleton

Reggie Middleton

Resident Contrarian Badass at BoomBustBlog (you can call me Editor-in-Chief)...

Disruptor-in-Chief at Veritaseum.com, where we're ushering the P2P Economy.

 

 It started in 2012 wiith the article "Deadbeat Carrier Creative Destruction In The Ongoing Mobile Computing Wars". That's when I warned that margins in the carrier space will collapse - just as they did in the cellular handset space, as new business models and the effect if Android start to ripple and reverbrate. My latest article in the series, "The Smallest & Liveliest Of The DeadBeat Carriers Successfully Launched Wireless WMDs" detailed how T-Mobile will throw the gauntlet down and turn the wireless industry on its head - at great risk not just to margins but entire business models. To wit:

There are 4 major national carriers in the US, basically two big ones two smaller ones. The smallest of the 4, T-Mobile, consistently get beat up - losing out on the right to subsidize the iPhone at a loss (like AT&T used to and Sprint still does) and basically losing subscribers. Then they decided to do something about it. They said, "Hey, let's stop being deadbeats!". By changing their pricing plans and eliminating subsidies and instead selling pure access to their virtual pipes (like a carrier is supposed to) combined with actual "real" financing of the hardware (at competitive rates, nonetheless) they essentially committed DeadBeat Carrier Blashphemy. The only issue was, it worked, to the chagrin of the competition - reference:

 Reggie Middleotns Carrier Cost ComparisonReggie Middleotns Carrier Cost Comparison

Reggie Middleotns Carrier Subsidy Cost ComparisonReggie Middleotns Carrier Subsidy Cost Comparison

  As a matter of fact, in Deadbeat Carriers Compete, aka #MarginCompression!!! (exactly ONE year ago), I prognosticated that T-Mobile will kick off a pricing war that will bring about the greatest savings to the wireless consumer it has seen since the birth of the industry. I even went so far as to include and online interactive spreadsheet for readers to analyze their own savings - or potential therefore.

Well, fast forward to today and we get to see if Reggie's thesis is still holding water. From the Street.com in How the Consumer Wins In the Wireless Wars:

Carriers are engaging in a price war in order to win market share, with T-Mobile's "uncarrier" plans really shaking things up. T-Mobile has been aggressively trying to grab market shares by eliminating consumer "pain points," specifically the issue of locking customers into two-year contracts. T-Mobile has been rolling out programs to entice customers to switch their carrier, with the latest three offerings announced in April, where the company under the "Simple Starter," "Tablet Freedom" and "Overage Freedom" - eliminated all domestic overage charges for consumers, even those on legacy plans. T-Mobile had announced in March 2013 its "Simple Choice" plan that offered no annual service contract and low out-of-pocket costs on smartphones.

The company must be doing something right, given its impressive first-quarter subscriber growth of 2.4 million total net customer additions for the three months, making it the "fastest growing wireless company in America," it said in its earnings release last week.

Both Verizon and AT&T are combating T-Mobile by touting payment agreements for customersthat require little to no down payment, more data, and fewer service charges when it comes to multiple phones or being able to pay for the device itself in installments as appealing features to switch over. (Check with your carrier to see the latest offers available.)

That said, it's easy for consumers to get confused by the growing array of options, but it's clear that for once, the consumer is winning since costs associated with smartphones are becoming more transparent and understandable. "This trend, combined with a wider selection of fully functional mid-range and low-end devices, should help win over the undecided consumers but also will shift the growth away from the high end," Kantar stated.

Between the first quarter of 2013 and the first quarter of this year, spending on smartphones on contracts dropped to $93 from $119, while pre-pay spending dropped to $148 from $187, Kantar said.

Now, the mainstream media and sell side analytical community is just a year (or two) late in realizing this, but better late then never, eh? Also from the Street.com we have Why T-Mobile Is Beating AT&T and Verizon:

 T-Mobile US shares were surging 8.1% to $31.67 following news that larger rival Sprint was prepping plans to propose a buyout of the carrier as its impressive subscriber growth for the first-quarter shows that consumers are digging its offerings.

T-Mobile, known for its "Un-carrier" initiatives, has been aggressively trying to grab market share by eliminating consumer "pain points," specifically the issue of locking customers into two-year contracts like Verizon , Sprint and AT&T . T-Mobile has been rolling out programs to entice customers to switch their carrier, with the latest three offerings announced in April, where the company under the "Simple Starter," "Tablet Freedom" and "Overage Freedom" - eliminated all domestic overage charges for consumers, even those on legacy plans. T-Mobile had announced in March 2013 its "Simple Choice" plan that offered no annual service contract and low out-of-pocket costs on smartphones.

The company must be doing something right, given its impressive first-quarter subscriber growth.

T-Mobile reported first-quarter earnings results earlier this morning in which it boasted 2.4 million total net customer additions for the three months, which included more than 1.8 million branded net customer additions, making it the "fastest growing wireless company in America," it said in its earnings release. T-Mobile ended the quarter with 49.1 million customers, it said. On the other hand, the company experienced "record low" churn of 1.5%, down 20 basis points from the fourth quarter and down 40 basis points from the year-earlier period.

...  T-Mobile actually posted a net loss of $151 million, or 19 cents a share, for the three months ending March 31, compared to a profit of $106 million, or 20 cents a share in the year-earlier quarter, according to its quarterly filing. However, revenue at the Bellevue, Wash.-based company rose 47% to $6.87 billion year over year. 

... Adjusted EBITDA came in at $1.1 billion, down 12.2% sequentially, which it attributed to increased equipment sales due to the "significant acceleration in customer growth and the success of its Un-carrier 4.0 - Contract Freedom offer." Adjusted EBITDA margin was 20% compared to 24% in the fourth quarter of 2013.<story_page_break>

... T-Mobile expects branded postpaid net additions between 2.8 million and 3.3 million for the full year and adjusted EBITDA to be in the range of $5.6 to $5.8 billion, it said.

Althouth T-Mobile may be hard pressed to replicate that pop in revenues and subscribers, I expect the trend to continue until and unless the other carriers match it in both pricing model and marketing efforts. I doubt they will do this until it is too late. They should, but they won't. That is unfortunate for thier investors for, as T-Mobile is the smallest of the top 4 national carriers, this is Verizon/ATT/Sprint's (in that order) fight to lose!

In addition, as revenue and subscriber rate increases subside, EBITDA may level off as the switching incentive costs amortize. This is not even considering what may happen if an entrepenurial and disruptive force (ex. Google Loon offshoots) appears on the scene.

For those who didn't get the memo, I've been toiling away in my lab creating the world's first "investment bank, securities brokerage, asset manager, money transfer agent" in-a-box that allows users to perform all of theses functions themselves on a ZeroTrust (meaning you don't need to trust or even know the other side of the transaction), peer to peer basis.

Well, it appears as quite a few of the big boys and heavy weights have a similar idea and are in the market to make acquisitions. Wouldn't it be ironic if UltraCoin (my iconic venture) was acquired before it gets its seed round???!!!  

 DSC08472

The Financial Times reports:

[Facebook] The social network is only weeks away from obtaining regulatory approval in Ireland for a service that would allow its users to store money on Facebook and use it to pay and exchange money with others, according to several people involved in the process. 

The authorisation from Ireland’s central bank to become an “e-money” institution would allow Facebook to issue units of stored monetary value that represent a claim against the company. This e-money would be valid throughout Europe via a process known as “passporting”.

Facebook has also discussed potential partnerships with at least three London start-ups that offer international money transfer services online and via smartphones: TransferWise, Moni Technologies and Azimo, according to three people involved in the discussions.

In the case of Azimo, Facebook offered to pay the company $10m to recruit one of its co-founders as a director of business development, according to people familiar with the situation.

 Yes, this space is heating up. It makes me feel good! You see, the Visas, Mastercards, Western Unions and Paypals of the world make a lot of money selling a relatively cheap services for a relatively large amount. BUT!!!! The Goldmans and JP Morgans of the world make much more money by selling very deep margined products and services for a lot more while paying a lot less to create them. It is here where UltraCoin has staked its ground. As the competition amongst the big boys starts to heat up, they will want to crawl up the food chain and I already have the ladder built! 

Ultracoin dektop

“Facebook wants to become a utility in the developing world, and remittances are a gateway drug to financial inclusion,” said a person familiar with the company’s strategy. Facebook recently passed 100m users in India, which is its largest national market outside the United States.

My last post on this topic illustrated how UltraCoin will operate in developing markets by allowing currency, stock and financial asset exposure trades of anywhere from $5 dollars to $5 million, as well as sending money to others for just a little more than nothing, as excerpted from "Hardware IS Dead" Thesis Has Now Torn Through All Handset Providers & Now Everyone Can Act On It:

I've created an infrastructure that significantly expands these investment markets by allowing anyone, anywhere with an Internet connection (of almost any speed) to participate in almost any of the world's public financial markets. Taking the subject matter of this article into consideration, we can short Samsung on its own home exchange of Korea for nearly any amount, from $10 million US down to $8 ...

The Family 2095-2097 - Copy

These same young investors can even hedge thier currency translation risk with a Korean Won US dollar forex pair, for 55 basis points!

manage currency risk in Ultracoin while using it to short Samsung

Armed with the information from simply reading my blog posts, your brothers from Haiti or Botstwana can now take short positions in these (margin)doomed hardware manufacturers - taking the other side of the trade from these big name financial institutions that don't seem to read my writings.

These are young brothers from Haiti who sat through an UltraCoin lesson...

 DSC08625DSC08627

 Back to the FT article:

 

It also comes as other internet groups – in particular, China’s Tencent and Alibaba – race to turn their sites into mobile payment platforms.

Google has reiterated its commitment to expanding its mobile payments and wallet products, which have yet to be widely adopted by consumers. It is registered in the UK to issue electronic money, in a process similar to the authorisation which Facebook is seeking in Ireland.

 

In 2013, the company  [Facebook] facilitated $2.1bn worth of transactions, almost exclusively from games, according to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Vodafone has acquired an e-money licence for the phone company to operate financial services in Europe.

“It’s great news that non-banks are challenging the traditional banking monopoly,” said Simon Deane-Johns, a UK-based lawyer and European payments expert at law firm Keystone Law.

 It will be interesting to see how the potential bidding contest will form as these companies compete to build the next generation financial infrastructure. I believe that I am very well positioned, as excerpted from yesterday's missive:

These are interesting times indeed. For those who are not aware of how far I've come in transforming the way value is traded across geo-political and socio-economic lines, I urge you to view the following video and/or peruse the embedded presentation below it.

 

 

Related BoomBustBlog research

called the Apple short before it became vogue! I called the Blackberry short beforethey became the industry whipping boy! I warned about Nokia and made clear that Samsung Will Be Ready To Do That Fruit Thing! How'd I know all of this? It's quite simple, I explained it all in 2012 - Smartphone Hardware Manufacturers Are Dead. Well, now the chickens continue to come home to roost, as per CNBC:

In order to deal with such pressures, Samsung appears to be pricing the Galaxy S5 lower than its predecessor S4, according to Kang, who has collected pre-order prices for the device from around the world.

"It reflects the trend of smart phone commoditization – Samsung will have to learn to create profits at a lower price point," Kang said.

Earlier this week, Samsung said it's on track to post its second straight quarter of profit decline, as slowing smartphone sales growth continued to weigh on earnings.

Samsung Electronics 1Q profit view just shy of estimates

The South Korean tech giant estimated that its January-March operating profit fell by 4.3 percent to 8.4 trillion won, slightly below an average forecast of 8.5 trillion won, according to Reuters.

I've created an infrastructure that significantly expands these investment markets by allowing anyone, anywhere with an Internet connection (of almost any speed) to participate in almost any of the world's public financial markets. Taking the subject matter of this article into consideration, we can short Samsung on its own home exchange of Korea for nearly any amount, from $10 million US down to $8 ...

The Family 2095-2097 - Copy

These same young investors can even hedge thier currency translation risk with a Korean Won US dollar forex pair, for 55 basis points!

manage currency risk in Ultracoin while using it to short Samsung

Armed with the information from simply reading my blog posts, your brothers from Haiti or Botstwana can now take short positions in these (margin)doomed hardware manufacturers - taking the other side of the trade from these big name financial institutions that don't seem to read my writings.

 DSC08625DSC08627

These are kids that I taught UltraCoin to during my trip to Haiti a couple of weeks ago. Before you assume, the kids are actually quite bright and adept at math, and yes - kdis can easily trade with UltraCoin. My kids have been doing it for months!
thumb Slide16

My UltraCoin project will nearly double the available potential investors able to profit from these markets. By making the ability to participate in multi-asset class prices moves bi-directionally (that's right,  long and short) I will be increase the liquidity of said markets by almost 2 billion people, as per McKinsey:

  • 2.5 billion adults, just over half of the world’s adult population, do not use formal financial services to save or borrow.
  • 2.2 billion of the unserved adults live in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East.
  • Of the 1.2 billion adults who use formal financial services in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, at least two-thirds, a little more than 800 million, live on less than $5 per day (purchasing power parity adjusted).
  • Regulatory and policy environments, as well as the actions of individual financial services providers, affect usage levels in a way that is, to a large extent, independent of countries’ socioeconomic and demographic characteristics.

I just had the pleasure of meeting this young lady from Botswana who's trying to spearhead Bitcoin adoption in her country. I've made friends and I'm going to supply her with the means to have the whole country trading a whole variety (UltraCoin can trade more than 10,000 tickers - stocks, bonds, options, futures, indices) of financial assets very soon. 

I'll leave it up to you to determine who'll win those trades. These are interesting times indeed. For those who are not aware of how far I've come in transforming the way value is traded across geo-political and socio-economic lines, I urge you to view the following video and/or peruse the embedded presentation below it.

 

Samsung Follows Footsteps Of Apple, HTC, Nokia - Wasn't ...

Sep 6, 2013 - Smartphone Hardware Manufacturers Are DeadNov 29, 2012 - Two and a ... BoomBustBlog Mar 7, 2013 - applecutsabreandriod3d Two and a ...

Sep 27, 2013 - Here I go again – Hardware is Dead & Samsung Agrees Featured ... raw fundamentals and margins, let's look at the newest crop of hardware.

Jan 25, 2013 - A Glimpse of the BoomBustBlog Internal Discussion Concerning the Fate of Apple - This ... So, you ask, "How is it that hardware is dead?" Well.
 

Nov 29, 2012 - Two and a half years ago I declared in my mobile computing wars series that Google would commoditized the mobile computing space, thereby ...

Dec 10, 2012 - Last week I told the world that hardwarevendors are DEAD! At least the fat margin business modelhardware vendors (like those whose name rhymes with Snapple). ... Related BoomBustBlog Subscription-only Research:.

 

The Turkish government has exercised its censorship chops in banning Twitter in an attempt to quell distribution of anti-government recordings, and in the process has materially popularized the service, to wit: Forbes - Streisand Effect Takes Hold As Turkey Bans Twitter

In an attempt to halt widespread allegations of corruption, Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has shuttered Twitter – but so ineffectively that the number of tweets sent in the country has remained unaffected.

Last night, Erdogan announced that, following a court order, Twitter was now disabled in the country. “We’ll eradicate Twitter,” he said. “I don’t care what the international community says. Everyone will witness the power of the Turkish Republic.”

The Washington Post reports,Turkey bans Twitter — and Twitter explodes.
Of course, the Islamic leaning Aljazeera.com‎ says "Twitter users ridicule Turkey ban".
Leaked recordings shared on Twitter include one in which Erdogan allegedly instructs his son to dispose of cash [AP]

Turkish and global social media users have mocked moves by Turkey's government to restrict access to Twitter.

The hashtags #TwitterisblockedinTurkey and #Turkey blockedTwitter became the top trending topics globally on Friday, just hours after the Turkish government imposed the ban.

The number of tweets from Turkey reportedly rose by 138 percent as savvy Internet users, including the country's president Abdullah Gul, found it easy to circumvent the shutdown.

"The whole world is laughing at you #ErdoganBlockedTwitter," users tweeted, as dozens of images mocking the ban - including one showing Twitter birds covering Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's head in droppings - were shared on the platform.

Another popular tweet shared a poster of the prime minister on a Barack Obama campaign poster with the message, "Yes, we ban".

Erdogan on Thursday night promised to "root out" and wipe out" the social media platform after users published claims of corruption against him.

Leaked recordings shared and linked on Twitter include one in which Erdogan allegedly instructs his son to dispose of large amounts of cash from a residence amid a police corruption probe.

One method of ridicule was to go around the the blocking if the Twitter domain name by using Google's DNS (Domain Name Server) services which allowed anxious and potential Twitter users to find the Twitter website through Google's machinations. So, what does the Turkish government do? They blocked Twitter at the IP level and then went so far as to bank Google's DNS. This means that Turkey is attempting to block out a portion of the Internet, to wit: Turkey Blocks Google DNS as Erdogan Defends Twitter Action 
 
Now here comes a quick education for the old fogey-type folk that declare Bitcoin is a bubble, ponzi scheme currency with no intrinsic value. If you recall my many videos that declare the value of Bitcoin is in the protocol, and not the unit of account that everyone is calling a currency, then you may realize that the Bitcoin technology can literally take the Turkish government down. 
(go to time market 1:10 in the video for the explanation)
Those that know the Bitcoin protocol well know that it is an ideal method of overcoming centralized control in regards to value transfer. Well, it's easily assumable that website data access is value transfer as well. If anybody in Turkey is reading this, then email me and I'll show you how to step around even Erdogan's Google DNS ban using the Bitcoin derivative known as Namecoin - A peer-to-peer, censorship resistant, alternative DNS root and data storage technology. Using that "tulip" technology with "no intrinsic value", Namecoin facilitates cryptographically secure decentralized name and data storage.
 
According toWikipedia: Namecoin (sign: ℕ; code: NMC) is a cryptocurrency which also acts as an alternative, decentralizedDNS, which would avoid domain namecensorship by making a new top level domain outside of ICANN control, and in turn, make internet censorship much more difficult, as well as reduce outages.[3][4][1][2][5][6][7][8]
Now, we all know that Krugman and Roubini and all of the not so technologically inclined macro economists may not believe that Bitcoin, et. al. has any intrinsic value, but if somebody like me led a "Coin" revolt in Turkey, do you think Erdogan would believe the economists or me in regards to the intrinsic value of this technology.
If you think Namecoin can be disruptive to the status quo, you aint't seen nothin' yet. Wait until the launch of UltraCoin, when those little Haitain kids in shacks out trade the Goldman prop desk on that BTC/AU pair trade.
That's right, I'm teaching 3rd world children how to trade using cryptocurrency derivatives and plain old fashioned derivatives. I'm comfortable pitting them against the names that the developed world worships, as long as its using this new tech. Let's see how they fair...
I just love the smell of creative disruption in the air. These pics were taken after some training sessions in Port au Prince, Haiti this weekend.
20140322 124403
DSC08625DSC08627
Read more...
 

On or about February 23rd, 2014, Mt. Gox (on of the larger bitcoin exchanges) collapsed. The MSM (mainstream media) had a field day...

kapre

LA times on btc

yhoo on btc

I warned everybody that the fall of Mt. Gox was simply a poorly managed small business getting its just dues. To correlate the fortunes of Mt. Gox with the fortunes of the Bitcoin ecosystem is akin correlating the fortune of the World Wide Web with that of Pets.com or Alta Vista in the 1990s. Sounds silly doesn't it? Well, fast forward 3 weeks from the Gox'd experience and this is what we find... BTC volatilityThe week after the media frenzy regarding Mt. Gox started to fade, the price of BTC (bitcoins) started a dramatic phase of price stabilization. This apparent price stabilization was verified by the very dramatic drop in standard deviation.

If we drill down to the weeks in question, we find... BTC volatility1

This price stabilization has occurred even before the wide scale adoption of UltraCoin. 

As always, I'm looking for:

  1. financial capital
  2. intellectual capital
  3. developers, management and sales/marketing expertise.

If you have any of this in abundance, hit me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

thumb Slide7

Let's quote some of the last lines of my last article on Bitcoin: "Witness the drivel that comes out of the the analyst's reports (and yes, I thoroughly ridiculed each one):

  1. Theres' Something Fishy In The House Of Morgan, Pt. 2: Bitcoin Fear, Envy & Loathing
  2. Does the Mainstream Media Assist Wall Street In Hypocritical Hypothesis For Fear Of The Next Paradigm Shift?"

You see, first JP Morgan threw baseless fear tactics, then Citibank jumped into the fray. Well, guess whose next? Goldman Sachs, of course. Everybody's favorite fair game player. As excerpted from Business Insider today:

"Dominic Wilson and Jose Ursua of the firm's markets research division are first up. They argue that Bitcoin fails to meet both basic criteria of a viable currency: while there remains an outside chance for widespread acceptance as a medium of exchange, as a stable source of value, it has so far failed. That undermines the premise that Bitcoin could serve as a way of short-circuiting exchange rates in inflation-prone countries."

 And Reggie, Chief of Bullshit Patrol & Related Crimes Division chimes in with a Google search on promintent "failed" currency processors:

Bitpay user growth google searchcoinbase user growth google search

But wait a minute! Goldman's business business is growing at a fraction of this pace, and actually negative in some areas. So, if Bitcoin as a currency and payment system is a failure, what the hell is Goldmam? Of course, Business Insider goes on to report...

For most users what matters is not the comparison with other currencies, but a comparison with the volatility of the currency that they hold (dollars in the US for instance) in terms of the things that they need to buy. The volatility of consumer prices (in dollars) has been even lower than FX rates, even if measured over a period including the 1970s. Put simply, if you hold cash today in most developed countries, you know within a few percentage points what you will be able to buy with it a day, a week or a year from now.  

This is Bullshit! Say it to the more mathematically challenged, my bonus hungry friends. Let's run the math using theusinflationcalculator.com:

Dollar as a store of value

As you can see, if you measure things from the '70s as the esteemed, erstwhile Wall Street aficiaondo from Goldman recommended, then you would have less than 17% of your buying power left. Yes, bitcoin is volatile, but its volatility stems from the price going up and down, while the USD has primarily just went down. You know that saying about the frog in the slowly heated boiling pot of water, right?

In addition, both of the largest Bitcoin payment processors absorb the exchange rate volatility for their customers, or did the best of breed Goldman analysts somehow overlook this pertinent fact?

 

Eliminate the bitcoin volatility risk with BitPay's guaranteed exchange rates. ... Import your BitPay sales into QuickBooks, to report and reconcile your bitcoin  ...

 

In addition, there are cutting edge products being introduced by tall, handsome, charsimatic and highly intelligent entrepeneurs who have a long track record of out gunning Goldman et. al. that allow anyone to hedge Bitcoin volatlity against any prominent fiat currency.

Back to those Goldman guys...

Wilson and Ursua include this graph showing volatility of Bitcoin versus the Argentine peso, the yen, the euro, the pound, and U.S. inflation. It's not even close. 

bitcoin volaitlity

But wait a minute! If the largest payment processors absorb the volatility and market risk of their customers, then Goldman must assuredly be referring to the currencies above from an investment perspective, no?

Yes! Bitcoin is truly volatile, indeed, but the guy at Goldman are cheating, hoping that the rest of us don't know our finance and/or basic common sense. You see, they are looking at just one side of the equation - the side that favors fiat currencies and disfavors bitcoin. You see, risk is the price of reward. For every reward you seek, you pay a price in risk. The goal, as a smart investor, is to pay little risk for much reward. Goldman is trying to make it appear as if you are paying nothing but risk for bitcoin and getting little reward in return. Let's see how that pans out when someone who knows what they're doing chimes in. From the BoomBustBlogresearch report File Icon Digital Currencies' Risks, Rewards & Returns - An Into Into Bitcoin Investing For Longer Term Horizons:

Bitcoin risk adjusted returns

You see, with high volatility (aka, risk), it's hard to earn your cost of capital, not to menton surpass it. Isn't that right, employess of Goldman Sachs? Let me jog your collective memories, as excerpted from the BoomBustBlog post on When the Patina Fades… The Rise and Fall of Goldman Sachs???

GS return on equity has declined substantially due to deleverage and is only marginally higher than its current cost of capital. With ROE down to c12% from c20% during pre-crisis levels, there is no way a stock with high beta as GS could justify adequate returns to cover the inherent risk. For GS to trade back at 200 it has to increase its leverage back to pre-crisis levels to assume ROE of 20%. And for that GS has to either increase its leverage back to 25x. With curbs on banks leverage this seems highly unlikely. Without any increase in leverage and ROE, the stock would only marginally cover returns to shareholders given that ROE is c12%. Even based on consensus estimates the stock should trade at about where it is trading right now, leaving no upside potential. Using BoomBustBlog estimates, the valuation drops considerably since we take into consideration a decrease in trading revenue or an increase in the cost of funding in combination with a limitation of leverage due to the impending global regulation coming down the pike.

gs_roe.jpg

 

 Now that we see how hard it is to truly produce Alpha, I query thee... What do you think would happen if a financial maverick, an out of the box thinker who's different from all of those other guys, got a seed round of funding for the most disruptive product to hit the finance world since the printing press? What if that seed round was for $8 million dollars, with a preferred A series coming right behind it? What would such a cash flush company do, being one of the most cash flush Bitcoin companies in the world? Hmmmnnn!!!

Speakin' of Goldman Sachs...

I anticipate being in the market very soon for (I'm not thier yet, but hopefully very soon):

CTO - Chief Technology Officer

COO - Chief Opertating Officer

General Counsel

CMO - Chief Marketing Officer 

CFO - Chief Financial Officer

As well as skilled Java and Blockchain developers.

Hit me via reggie at ultra-coin.com if you have an interest in coming on board.

With all of the brouhaha over Bitcoin and the downright irresponsible reporting by the mass media, I've decided to reveal the progress of my "UltraCoin: The Future of Money!!!" venture. What you see in the next few paragraphs should elucidate even the most blinded to the prospects and potential of the Bitcoin protocol and why I've always said that the price of the actual cryptocurrency is absolutely irrelevant (much as the price of AOL was highly irrelevant to the prospects of the Internet in 1993).

 thumb Slide1

 I know I said the MSM has simply butchered accurate coverage of Bitcoin, but this piece in Fortune Magazine was right on the money: 

 "[UltraCoin] is a shot directly across the bow of the financial industry. Still in early development, BTC Swap is planned to facilitate a variety of what Middleton calls "Zero-Trust Digital Contracts," which recreate financial functions in software code by matching offered and desired transactions between parties without the need for intermediary institutions. Because these contracts are automated, instantaneous, and executed with assets already represented in the Bitcoin blockchain, Middleton says they eliminate counterparty risk while also subtracting conventional banking and brokerage fees.

The most immediate function Middleton envisions for his system is for hedging bitcoin against existing national currencies. With bitcoin's valuation still showing huge volatility, Middleton claims the availability of distributed hedging will both ensure the value of bitcoin for individuals holding the asset and provide systemic stability. (Given persistent skepticism, there should be plenty of takers to short bitcoin against the dollar.) And the entire system relies on decentralization for its security and integrity: "My contracts are peer-to-peer," says Middleton. "If you hack my servers, there's nothing to get."

Find it hard to believe? Even children can do it...

thumb Slide16

So, how does this work? Well, let's start from the beginning.

thumb Slide2

The vast majority of the world does their spending out of a wallet like this, or using currency-like instruments such as these (both physical and digital) contained in the wallet. The problem is all of these devices are "dumb" and rely on central authority figures (government, servers, banks, etc.). So...

Along comes Bitcoin with its decentralized currency that solves many of these issues. Bitcoin is also kept in wallets, like these...

thumb Slide3

These Bitcoin wallets give you considerably more freedom with your money, sending it faster, cheaper and with more privacy than the conventional wallet above. Of course, the typical Bitcoin wallet hasn't even scratched the surface of what's possible with this new technology. As a matter of fact, the tech is so over-encompassing and transformative that the mass media and even much of the specialized media simply CANNOT wrap their minds around what's about to happen to the worlds of money, finance and investment!

I've taken a radical step with this tech that makes even the newest Bitcoin wallets look old hat in comparison. What makes UltraCoin different from everything else?

thumb Slide7

So, what is UltraCoin?

thumb Slide8

Unlike Bitcoin wallets, it allows you to literally take control of both your money and gain exposure to financial assets such as stocks, bonds, forex, options, futures, oil, gas, commodities and precious metals. 

thumb Slide10

You can even design your own "smart contracts" directly within the wallet itself.

thumb Slide11thumb Slide12thumb Slide13thumb Slide15

This stuff above is a pretty big difference from... this, eh?

thumb Slide2

And that's how we come round robin back to that first graphic with my kids trading currency exposures.

thumb Slide16

Of course, Wall Street is fearful. Why shouldn't they be? If the public realized the extent of the middleman markup they pack into otherwise low value-add services and product margin, there would be a mass revolt. When you create these products and services on a peer to peer basis, it's extremely hard to overcharge to the extent a recent MBA recipient with little to no real world experience can recieve 7 or 8 digit compensation. Don't believe me and my proclamations of fear? Witness the drivel that comes out of the the analyst's reports:

Theres' Something Fishy In The House Of Morgan, Pt. 2: Bitcoin Fear, Envy & Loathing

Does the Mainstream Media Assist Wall Street In Hypocritical Hypothesis For Fear Of The Next Paradigm Shift?

I'm looking for:

  1. Financial Capital
  2. Intellectual Capital
  3. Active and prolific traders to help beta test my wallets. 

If you are or know of any of the above, hit me up with a link to your LinkedIn and/or Wikipedia profile via reggie AT ultra-coin.com. You can also join me to trade live Bitcoin and currency exposures at 40 Broad Street, Friday at 6 pm if you wish. Equities, Silver and Gold exposures will be available next week and possibly by Friday as well. 

Citibank

About two weeks ago I answered what was at the time one of the most amateurish reports coming out of the bit money center banks in some time in Theres' Something Fishy In The House Of Morgan, Pt. 2: Bitcoin Fear, Envy & Loathing. Well, it appears that there's a contest for the hypocritical hypothesis and Citibank intends to go for the gold, likely toppling JP Morgan's lead. In a nutshell, we have a gaggle of US based banks that have exhibited horrendous risk management, business judgement and trading/investment acumen nearly topple the global financial system, demand (as in ransom money) trillions of dollars of welfare (which they recieved and are still recieving) from the US taxpayer, and still pay out billions of dollars in bonuses and salaried compensation - all the while the US dollar is still safe and sound as the worlds deepest, most liquid currency market not to mention still being the world's reserve currency.

Now, a much, much, much smaller Bitcoin exchange fails after flashing obvious warning signs for months and does not require bailing out by the tax payer or the Federal Reserve (how can I emphasize how big a plus this is for Bitcoin), and bitcoin dips in price for a single evening - rebounding nigh immediately! Citibank and JP Morgan's incompetence threw the entire world into a near depression - and that's with globally collaborative ZIRP, trillion's of dollars of bailouts and the clandestive changing of accounting rules and the morphing if simple  math to make it look like the insolvent were really not so.

Re: Mt. Gox failure -  Would Mt. Gox still be in business today, like JPM and Citi if the Federal Reserve dropped rates to a negative level, FASB authorized the changing of accounting standards to minimize Gox's liabilities and no one at the exchange was held liable for what appeared to be outright fraud, as claimed by the SEC? would there be analysts in Mt. Gox writing silly papers overflowing with hypocritical hypothesis about how XYZ the dollar was dead because a US bank went bust? Probably!

Remember, I turned JP Morgan's alleged research upside down in Theres' Something Fishy In The House Of Morgan, Pt. 2: Bitcoin Fear, Envy & Loathing, to wit:

I've worked hard to establish a strong reputation - not only in terms of competence but in terms of integrity. For those who don't know of me, you canview my media apearances and calls as well as my Wikipedia page. You see, my mommy and daddy raised me to appreciate both aspects of success - not only one. With that in mind I'd like to address the recent report from JP Morgan slamming Bitcoin. Just so most know my viewpoint, the typical Bitcoin enthusiast and entrepeneur is primarily technologist leaning, thus may or may not see all of the aspects of the financial side of this new... "thing". In addition, and because of that, the financial guys often get away with some outrageous bullshit that they'd never even try under different circumstances. Let's apply this perspective to JPM's latest FX strategic outlook report, "The Audacity of Bitcoin". I will refute this report, point by point, and in the process make the managing director whose name is on the report look downright ignorant and uneducated. This is not a personal attack or an attempt at sleight (hey, he may be a downright stand-up guy), I am simply calling it as I see it.

Before we get to the report though, I want to address the foolishness of following these "reports" from the big name brand money center banks.

Mainstream media entities such as the Wall Street Journal and Business Insider take the conflicted interest ridden drivel from these investment banks as actual legitimate analysis and actually base their reporting on it. That really gives me pause! Now on to addressing what Citibank claims as espoused through Business Insider, and I quote:

In a new note, Citi currency strategist — and the bank's defacto Bitcoin analyst — Steven Englander basically asks: What's the point of Bitcoin now?

Many of his comments echo our take in the week leading up to Gox's shutdown about how huge a setback this was not only for mainstream Bitcoin adoption, but also for the central tenets that got Bitcoin off the ground in the first place.

But for Englander, the technical glitch that hit not only Gox but other exchanges "seems to have been known for years without the Bitcoin developers instituting a complete fix,"... "So one question is whether the decentralized structure, which is the attraction to many, makes it too cumbersome to enact essential fixes."

"Bitcoin transactions [were] thought to be impregnable and turned out not to be," said Englander. "Earlier security questions had centered around everything except the possibility that there might be a fraudulent transactions record. The imperviousness to fraud was one the big attractions of Bitcoin and the surprise exploitation of a known defect is a setback. Now it looks like just another payments system that has to worry about fraud."

Where am I to start with this? Long story short, this is plain old simple ignorance! Bitcoin is open source software. That is why you get it for free! It's not as if the core Bitcoin development team ran a company and Mt. Gox bought a commercial software package from them with a warranty and represenations. Mt. Gox relied on an open sourced code base and refused to both contribute back to the community and even keep abreast of what was going on in the community. The end result? A problem that was recognized and solved 3 years ago went unseen by Mt. Gox until they were bled of hundreds of million of dollars worth of bitcoin.  JPM acts as if it is the open source communty's responsibility to instruct Mt. Gox on how to write and maintain software when in actuality it was Mt. Gox's responsibility to give back to and monitor the open source community!!! Notice how entities that were paying attention and playing by the open source communities rules were unscathed by this so-called "defect". If I say there is a hole in the ground and I send out a report that there is a hole in the ground, but you don't read that report and continue to walk until you fall into the hole - all the while knowing you gained access to the ground for free, are you going to blame the ground for being imperfect or yourself for ignoring the community that gave you free access when the warned you about the hole and even gave you instructions on how to avoid the hole?

"Bitcoin's market cap on paper by far exceeds that of the competition and that are many Bitcoin holders heavily invested in Bitcoin, so it has a first mover advantage. However as a store of value, its only value is reputational, and recent developments have shaken that reputation."

Go to 1:25 in this video for an answer to the statement above...

 

Business insider goes on to warn of the following risk: "That big banks themselves co-opt the still-relevant technological developments embedded in Bitcoin and junk all the bad parts". Actually, the banks will implement bad parts and junk all the good parts. You see, this is all relative. In general, what's good for you and me is generally bad for the banks, and vice versa. Why do Citibank and JP Morgan harp on the pitfalls of decentralization? It's because the banks are the guys with the centralized servers!!! If you eliminate the need for centralized servers you eliminate the need for banks! 

Why harp on the dangers of peer to peer? Because bank branches will disappear in a heartbeat, as will centralized exchanges and the ability to pack in massive fees and charges unbenknownst to the client, the same fees and charges that fund those oh so many decimillionaire annual bonuses. It means a paycut for Wall Street and Wall Street is known to be vociferous in its attempts to avoid paycuts.

Reference UltraCoin: The Future of Money!!! for a long list of reasons why the banks fear and loathe Bitcoin, and by extension, UltraCoin!

Citibank

About two weeks ago I answered what was at the time one of the most amateurish reports coming out of the bit money center banks in some time in Theres' Something Fishy In The House Of Morgan, Pt. 2: Bitcoin Fear, Envy & Loathing. Well, it appears that there's a contest for the hypocritical hypothesis and Citibank intends to go for the gold, likely toppling JP Morgan's lead. In a nutshell, we have a gaggle of US based banks that have exhibited horrendous risk management, business judgement and trading/investment acumen nearly topple the global financial system, demand (as in ransom money) trillions of dollars of welfare (which they recieved and are still recieving) from the US taxpayer, and still pay out billions of dollars in bonuses and salaried compensation - all the while the US dollar is still safe and sound as the worlds deepest, most liquid currency market not to mention still being the world's reserve currency.

Now, a much, much, much smaller Bitcoin exchange fails after flashing obvious warning signs for months and does not require bailing out by the tax payer or the Federal Reserve (how can I emphasize how big a plus this is for Bitcoin), and bitcoin dips in price for a single evening - rebounding nigh immediately! Citibank and JP Morgan's incompetence through the entire world into a near depression - and that's with globally collaborative ZIRP, trillion's of dollars of bailouts and the clandestive changing of accounting rules and the morphing if simple  math to make it look like the insolvent were really not so.

Re: Mt. Gox failure -  Would Mt. Gox still be in business today, like JPM and Citi if the Federal Reserve dropped rates to a negative level, FASB authorized the changing of accounting standards to minimize Gox's liabilities and no one at the exchange was held liable for what appeared to be outright fraud, as claimed by the SEC? would there be analysts in Mt. Gox writing silly papers overflowing with hypocritical hypothesis about how XYZ the dollar was dead because a US bank went bust? Probably!

Remember, I turned JP Morgan's alleged research upside down in Theres' Something Fishy In The House Of Morgan, Pt. 2: Bitcoin Fear, Envy & Loathing, to wit:

I've worked hard to establish a strong reputation - not only in terms of competence but in terms of integrity. For those who don't know of me, you canview my media apearances and calls as well as my Wikipedia page. You see, my mommy and daddy raised me to appreciate both aspects of success - not only one. With that in mind I'd like to address the recent report from JP Morgan slamming Bitcoin. Just so most know my viewpoint, the typical Bitcoin enthusiast and entrepeneur is primarily technologist leaning, thus may or may not see all of the aspects of the financial side of this new... "thing". In addition, and because of that, the financial guys often get away with some outrageous bullshit that they'd never even try under different circumstances. Let's apply this perspective to JPM's latest FX strategic outlook report, "The Audacity of Bitcoin". I will refute this report, point by point, and in the process make the managing director whose name is on the report look downright ignorant and uneducated. This is not a personal attack or an attempt at sleight (hey, he may be a downright stand-up guy), I am simply calling it as I see it.

Before we get to the report though, I want to address the foolishness of following these "reports" from the big name brand money center banks.

Mainstream media entities such as the Wall Street Journal and Business Insider take the conflicted interest ridden drivel from these investment banks as actual legitimate analysis and actually base their reporting on it. That really gives me pause! Now on to addressing what Citibank claims as espoused through Business Insider, and I quote:

In a new note, Citi currency strategist — and the bank's defacto Bitcoin analyst — Steven Englander basically asks: What's the point of Bitcoin now?

Many of his comments echo our take in the week leading up to Gox's shutdown about how huge a setback this was not only for mainstream Bitcoin adoption, but also for the central tenets that got Bitcoin off the ground in the first place.

But for Englander, the technical glitch that hit not only Gox but other exchanges "seems to have been known for years without the Bitcoin developers instituting a complete fix,"... "So one question is whether the decentralized structure, which is the attraction to many, makes it too cumbersome to enact essential fixes."

"Bitcoin transactions [were] thought to be impregnable and turned out not to be," said Englander. "Earlier security questions had centered around everything except the possibility that there might be a fraudulent transactions record. The imperviousness to fraud was one the big attractions of Bitcoin and the surprise exploitation of a known defect is a setback. Now it looks like just another payments system that has to worry about fraud."

Where am I to start with this? Long story short, this is plain old simple ignorance! Bitcoin is open source software. That is why you get it for free! It's not as if the core Bitcoin development team ran a company and Mt. Gox bought a commercial software package from them with a warranty and represenations. Mt. Gox relied on an open sourced code base and refused to both contribute back to the community and even keep abreast of what was going on in the community. The end result? A problem that was recognized and solved 3 years ago went unseen by Mt. Gox until they were bled of hundreds of million of dollars worth of bitcoin.  JPM acts as if it is the open source communty's responsibility to instruct Mt. Gox on how to write and maintain software when in actuality it was Mt. Gox's responsibility to give back to and monitor the open source community!!! Notice how entities that were paying attention and playing by the open source communities rules were unscathed by this so-called "defect". If I say there is a hole in the ground and I send out a report that there is a hole in the ground, but you don't read that report and continue to walk until you fall into the hole - all the while knowing you gained access to the ground for free, are you going to blame the ground for being imperfect or yourself for ignoring the community that gave you free access when the warned you about the hole and even gave you instructions on how to avoid the hole?

"Bitcoin's market cap on paper by far exceeds that of the competition and that are many Bitcoin holders heavily invested in Bitcoin, so it has a first mover advantage. However as a store of value, its only value is reputational, and recent developments have shaken that reputation."

Go to 1:25 in this video for an answer to the statement above...

 

Business insider goes on to warn of the following risk: "That big banks themselves co-opt the still-relevant technological developments embedded in Bitcoin and junk all the bad parts". Actually, the banks will implement bad parts and junk all the good parts. You see, this is all relative. In general, what's good for you and me is generally bad for the banks, and vice versa. Why do Citibank and JP Morgan harp on the pitfalls of decentralization? It's because the banks are the guys with the centralized servers!!! If you eliminate the need for centralized servers you eliminate the need for banks! 

Why harp on the dangers of peer to peer? Because bank branches will disappear in a heartbeat, as will centralized exchanges and the ability to pack in massive fees and charges unbenknownst to the client, the same fees and charges that fund those oh so many decimillionaire annual bonuses. It means a paycut for Wall Street and Wall Street is known to be vociferous in its attempts to avoid paycuts.

Reference UltraCoin: The Future of Money!!! for a long list of reasons why the banks fear and loathe Bitcoin, and by extension, UltraCoin!

Citibank

About two weeks ago I answered what was at the time one of the most amateurish reports coming out of the bit money center banks in some time in Theres' Something Fishy In The House Of Morgan, Pt. 2: Bitcoin Fear, Envy & Loathing. Well, it appears that there's a contest for the hypocritical hypothesis and Citibank intends to go for the gold, likely toppling JP Morgan's lead. In a nutshell, we have a gaggle of US based banks that have exhibited horrendous risk management, business judgement and trading/investment acumen nearly topple the global financial system, demand (as in ransom money) trillions of dollars of welfare (which they recieved and are still recieving) from the US taxpayer, and still pay out billions of dollars in bonuses and salaried compensation - all the while the US dollar is still safe and sound as the worlds deepest, most liquid currency market not to mention still being the world's reserve currency.

Now, a much, much, much smaller Bitcoin exchange fails after flashing obvious warning signs for months and does not require bailing out by the tax payer or the Federal Reserve (how can I emphasize how big a plus this is for Bitcoin), and bitcoin dips in price for a single evening - rebounding nigh immediately! Citibank and JP Morgan's incompetence through the entire world into a near depression - and that's with globally collaborative ZIRP, trillion's of dollars of bailouts and the clandestive changing of accounting rules and the morphing if simple  math to make it look like the insolvent were really not so.

Re: Mt. Gox failure -  Would Mt. Gox still be in business today, like JPM and Citi if the Federal Reserve dropped rates to a negative level, FASB authorized the changing of accounting standards to minimize Gox's liabilities and no one at the exchange was held liable for what appeared to be outright fraud, as claimed by the SEC? would there be analysts in Mt. Gox writing silly papers overflowing with hypocritical hypothesis about how XYZ the dollar was dead because a US bank went bust? Probably!

Remember, I turned JP Morgan's alleged research upside down in Theres' Something Fishy In The House Of Morgan, Pt. 2: Bitcoin Fear, Envy & Loathing, to wit:

I've worked hard to establish a strong reputation - not only in terms of competence but in terms of integrity. For those who don't know of me, you canview my media apearances and calls as well as my Wikipedia page. You see, my mommy and daddy raised me to appreciate both aspects of success - not only one. With that in mind I'd like to address the recent report from JP Morgan slamming Bitcoin. Just so most know my viewpoint, the typical Bitcoin enthusiast and entrepeneur is primarily technologist leaning, thus may or may not see all of the aspects of the financial side of this new... "thing". In addition, and because of that, the financial guys often get away with some outrageous bullshit that they'd never even try under different circumstances. Let's apply this perspective to JPM's latest FX strategic outlook report, "The Audacity of Bitcoin". I will refute this report, point by point, and in the process make the managing director whose name is on the report look downright ignorant and uneducated. This is not a personal attack or an attempt at sleight (hey, he may be a downright stand-up guy), I am simply calling it as I see it.

Before we get to the report though, I want to address the foolishness of following these "reports" from the big name brand money center banks.

Mainstream media entities such as the Wall Street Journal and Business Insider take the conflicted interest ridden drivel from these investment banks as actual legitimate analysis and actually base their reporting on it. That really gives me pause! Now on to addressing what Citibank claims as espoused through Business Insider, and I quote:

In a new note, Citi currency strategist — and the bank's defacto Bitcoin analyst — Steven Englander basically asks: What's the point of Bitcoin now?

Many of his comments echo our take in the week leading up to Gox's shutdown about how huge a setback this was not only for mainstream Bitcoin adoption, but also for the central tenets that got Bitcoin off the ground in the first place.

But for Englander, the technical glitch that hit not only Gox but other exchanges "seems to have been known for years without the Bitcoin developers instituting a complete fix,"... "So one question is whether the decentralized structure, which is the attraction to many, makes it too cumbersome to enact essential fixes."

"Bitcoin transactions [were] thought to be impregnable and turned out not to be," said Englander. "Earlier security questions had centered around everything except the possibility that there might be a fraudulent transactions record. The imperviousness to fraud was one the big attractions of Bitcoin and the surprise exploitation of a known defect is a setback. Now it looks like just another payments system that has to worry about fraud."

Where am I to start with this? Long story short, this is plain old simple ignorance! Bitcoin is open source software. That is why you get it for free! It's not as if the core Bitcoin development team ran a company and Mt. Gox bought a commercial software package from them with a warranty and represenations. Mt. Gox relied on an open sourced code base and refused to both contribute back to the community and even keep abreast of what was going on in the community. The end result? A problem that was recognized and solved 3 years ago went unseen by Mt. Gox until they were bled of hundreds of million of dollars worth of bitcoin.  JPM acts as if it is the open source communty's responsibility to instruct Mt. Gox on how to write and maintain software when in actuality it was Mt. Gox's responsibility to give back to and monitor the open source community!!! Notice how entities that were paying attention and playing by the open source communities rules were unscathed by this so-called "defect". If I say there is a hole in the ground and I send out a report that there is a hole in the ground, but you don't read that report and continue to walk until you fall into the hole - all the while knowing you gained access to the ground for free, are you going to blame the ground for being imperfect or yourself for ignoring the community that gave you free access when the warned you about the hole and even gave you instructions on how to avoid the hole?

"Bitcoin's market cap on paper by far exceeds that of the competition and that are many Bitcoin holders heavily invested in Bitcoin, so it has a first mover advantage. However as a store of value, its only value is reputational, and recent developments have shaken that reputation."

Go to 1:25 in this video for an answer to the statement above...

 

Business insider goes on to warn of the following risk: "That big banks themselves co-opt the still-relevant technological developments embedded in Bitcoin and junk all the bad parts". Actually, the banks will implement bad parts and junk all the good parts. You see, this is all relative. In general, what's good for you and me is generally bad for the banks, and vice versa. Why do Citibank and JP Morgan harp on the pitfalls of decentralization? It's because the banks are the guys with the centralized servers!!! If you eliminate the need for centralized servers you eliminate the need for banks! 

Why harp on the dangers of peer to peer? Because bank branches will disappear in a heartbeat, as will centralized exchanges and the ability to pack in massive fees and charges unbenknownst to the client, the same fees and charges that fund those oh so many decimillionaire annual bonuses. It means a paycut for Wall Street and Wall Street is known to be vociferous in its attempts to avoid paycuts.

Reference UltraCoin: The Future of Money!!! for a long list of reasons why the banks fear and loathe Bitcoin, and by extension, UltraCoin!