I'm seeing a lot of $ETH commentary that doesn't account for key differences between staked and unstaked Ether w/ EIP1559.
This is a crucial mistake.
As I've said before... All of the $ETH will be staked. 👇
Simple Model: Assume 40% ETH is staked, 10% staking yield, and net 0 issuance (neither deflationary nor inflationary)
In this model, I'll pretend there are 100,000 total ETH in supply for easier numbers.
So 40,000 staked. Staking issuance is 10% on that, so 4,000 new issuance. I assumed net 0% inflation, so 4,000 ETH is also burned.
What happens next?
Stakers have to pay taxes on that issuance, but they're also the most long-term oriented $ETH investors. What % of their issuance would they restake?
I'll assume they re-stake 25% of issuance, aka 50% of after-tax issuance.
This leaves 75% of staking earnings for expenses.
Year 1: 100,000 ETH = 40,000 staked + 60,000 unstaked.
Year 2: 100,000 ETH = 41,000 staked + 59,000 unstaked.
Even *without overall supply deflation*, EIP1559/PoS deflates the supply of unstaked ETH.
Ok - why do I care?
All of the demand for DeFi, all of the fee burn, it's all funneled through the small vanishing unstaked ETH pool.
The more DeFi is used, the faster that pool shrinks.
If you value $ETH via DeFi, that's a valuation for the scarce supply of unstaked $ETH. Not total $ETH.
Valuing $ETH for its use in DeFi (the fee burn) and then dividing by the total staked+unstaked supply is like valuing oil based on its consumption and then dividing by the total amount of oil that exists underground.
For the #DeFi project to succeed, it must become an existential threat to traditional finance.
This is capitalism at its finest, and the war will be fought on many fronts.
I can't stop thinking that the @Visa - USDC announcement represents the first major battleground. 👇
Why would visa do this? Why now? The is not casual intrigue. For visa to settle with stable-coins they have to significantly invest in the crypto space.
Disclaimer on quality: this is stream of consciousness. I'm just riffing here haha
Predicting short-term price is speculative, but can be useful learning to get feedback on my feel for "the pulse" of the market and train 'market instincts'
@RyanWatkins_ inspired me to take a shot at this for $ETH as we break above $3k
I think I found something listening to @RealVision pod on the plane yesterday. I’ve been looking for a while for something with a discrete catalyst that occurs before the triple halving so I could raise some funds to buy more $ETH.
Listen to this episode. All uranium public equities combined are $20B market cap. That’s like 1/35 of $TSLA. Also supply has been 0, mines shut since Fukushima. France, Spain surprised by renewing contracts…there are forces at play. But more!
@malopez1975 tells @LynAldenContact that nuclear reactors are going to have to get new contract roughly end of Q2, early Q3. This is a concrete time frame - I paused, rewind like 4x to make sure I caught it.
I put everything I had into this piece. As a retail investor, I want to use this report to show how much I’ve learned about investing and share my current highest conviction idea. If I’m capable of writing institutional grade research - this is it.
I’ll drop a thread accompanied by a ~75 page PDF with my best attempt at an institutional grade investment case for $ETH to 150k.
Will follow it up in coming weeks with smaller, digestible ELI5 threads to spur discussion.
Warning! this is not your crypto investor’s $ETH thesis. I’m taking a different angle, tackling difficult concepts to present the most robust institutional grade case that I can.
For me this is my attempt to show all that I’ve self-taught on investing before I head to medical residency. I think you’ll really enjoy it!