The fact that KPMG did a press release to announce that they are holding an unspecified amount of Bitcoin on their balance Sheet that you will never see says it all really. It was a PR exercise. I can guarantee you that the Partners end of year bonus is not going to be impacted by the performance of Bitcoin.
"Comparing Bitcoin to Ponzi Schemes is unfair...
- Thread starter Brendan Burgess
- Start date
There seems to be very much a disconnect here. I provided my opinion, you provided yours - which I acknowledged even though I don't agree with it. You should concern yourself with how you form your own - I'll look after forming my own if its all the same to yourself.
Unless you've water-boarded the KPMG Canada team, there is no definitive answer here - that goes for your opinion just as much as mine. You say I don't have evidence when I've provided my interpretation based on the evidence that is available....just as you have produced your interpretation. You can only speculate as to whether this is a cynical marketing opportunity - you don't have any definitive proof of their motives.
Given the nature of services rendered, first of all it's implicit. Beyond that, the company spelt it out in the fourth paragraph of its PR - in which it outlined the processes that the organisation went through to facilitate putting BTC/ETH on its balance sheet.
I'm not sure how you've managed to misunderstand this a second time. You seem to be confused about what KPMG does. I'll say it again - in-house custody of digital assets was never going to be a part of this. The likes of KPMG - or any of their corporate clients for that matter - are not going to self-custody digital assets. They wouldn't dream of doing so in that world.
You've long bemoaned lengthy threads on this subject - so I'm confused as to why you feel the need to do so. People form their own opinions and we shouldn't be at all surprised if they differ.
I believe that you originally said that it was 'clickbait' - and so that charge falls at the door of Coindesk. Yet Coindesk has just reported the facts as were available to it. To not report on this would have been negligent on its part.
As regards you not seeing this as newsworthy, I acknowledge your view whilst disagreeing with it entirely.
That it doesn't need to doesn't mean that it shouldn't or wouldn't. If its serious about what its doing here - then it stands to reason that it would. It demonstrates that it has a corporate treasury capability when it comes to digital assets and that it likely has a template or playbook for clients in how to approach this task from the point of view of ESG, audits, general accountancy practices ( which has proven to be a difficulty for MicroStrategy in holding cryptoassets), taxation and custodial risk.
And even if you believe this to be cynical and purely marketing, it means that if this passes as best practice for Big 4 accounting firms these days, that in itself is interesting. It means that as they see it, there's very much a market for corporates holding bitcoin on their balance sheets. Otherwise, why would they even go there.
Last edited:
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 357
Are you looking at the list of institutional adopters though? Well I am at least.
In Oct 2020 I documented what the state at the time was from https://bitcointreasuries.org/ :
1.5 years later we're at 7.26% of the total supply :
| ETFs | 813,906 | $35,602,652,800 | 3.876% |
| Countries | 271,417 | $11,872,581,373 | 1.292% |
| Public Companies | 255,879 | $11,192,912,101 | 1.218% |
| Private Companies | 174,068 | $7,614,248,534 | 0.829% |
| Totals: | 1,525,372 | $66,724,286,130 | 7.264% |
Reminder that supply in circulation is currently at 90.25% of the eventual 21m and will increase by around 1.7% this year.
Last edited:
Best practice is not something any of the Big 4 can brag about in recent years or indeed for a long time. They actually make banks look competent and ethical. Especially as around that the same time KPMG Canada is making this press release, KPMG UK gets sued for £1.3 billion for failings
I never said it was cynical. I said it was PR. That doesn't mean it is cynical They didn't have to issue a press release. They are not a public company. The fact that they did means they wanted the world to know what they were doing. They didn't issue a statement saying how much they believed in Bitcoin as part of treasury management. They don't even tell us what their belief in Bitcoin equates to in monetary terms. Instead they tell us:
Having gone through this process ourselves now, we’re confident we can guide clients and prospective clients through the process of cryptoasset treasury allocation,” KPMG said in the email. “Our investment allows us to share our journey, our experiences, our challenges with them so that we can help them navigate the cryptoasset world.”
I agree with you completely. Notwithstanding that, KPMG are where they are - they are one of the 'Big 4' - and they have influence. You and I may point to their failings but the reality remains that they're very well placed and established in what they do.
Then we're not that far apart in our thinking. As I outlined from the get go, I think this isn't so much interesting in terms of the sum value of digital assets KPMG Canada has put on its balance sheet ( I've speculated that there's every possibility that it's not all that significant in $ terms ). It's interesting because its gone to the time and effort of going through the process and it seems like it's with a view towards providing support services to corporates that it expects to present with the objective of putting bitcoin on their balance sheets. It wouldn't waste a second on it unless it could see the potential.
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,055
Tecate, I can't be bothered going to your level of commitment and detail in decomposing my responses into the above, for what is a non story in my opinion. You rightly point out the facts in that article don't prove your view and they don't disprove it either.
I'm just applying logical sense to come to the conclusion this is really a non story in the adoption of BTC, so much so I didn't even notice in on COindesk.
I guess you'll probably post the BlackRock story as your next evidence.
For expediency and efficiency, I don't think that letting me know to what extent you want to engage on the subject or otherwise is in any way useful or relevant to the actual discussion.
Correction. I pointed out that we both expressed opinions - and that I respected yours even though it's quite clear you don't respect mine. I also pointed out that the conclusions that you have reached are in no way definitive and grounded in absolute fact ( which is what you seem to be forcing here ).
No. Initially, you stated your opinion - and you provided what to your mind is the rationale for that opinion - just as I have done. In the manner in which you've gone on from there, you're forcing your opinion. You'll excuse me if I take the opportunity to reference this exchange in the future - should you complain about lengthy/protracted discussions as you have done in the past.
So you've stated on several occasions (having initially accused Coindesk of publishing clickbait). I acknowledged your opinion/view at the outset and respectfully disagreed with it. I'd appreciate it if you'd respect my view rather than trying to force the issue.
My understanding is that so long as its on topic and relevant to the overall discussion, I'm free to post my thoughts ( and as you well know, I've already raised the relevance of the world's largest asset manager enabling bitcoin trading on its platform for its clients). Might I suggest that if your energies were concentrated on the actual topic at hand rather than my alleged personal failings, it may well be for the benefit of all discussion participants.
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
I'm confused. @tecate is of course an arch cultist. But @Dublinbay12 certainly shares the faith. Yet they seem to be embroiled in a heated debate over the meaning of the Blessed Trinity.
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,055
I believe Tecate doesn't understand how I can understand Bitcoin yet be critical. In his view your either in his camp 100% or naysayer. There's no room for critical analysis and reflection that leads to a less than a positive analysis for Bitcoin i.e. it's just easier to say you're a naysayer and change the topic.
I like the crypto market, there's lots of interesting projects to get involved in that weren't available a few years ago. I don't really have strong opinions anymore bitcoin replacing fiat currency, I still buy my Guinness with cash.
But I do enjoy the odd back and forth on the topic.
Last edited:
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,055
Ok for the sake of peace...I'm wrong you're right.
I see once again we have posts with commentary on the individual and not on the subject.
I haven't seen anyone express an opinion here that bitcoin was or is going to replace fiat currency over the course of the past 5 years.
Incorrect. You made a big fat claim about being impartial - there's no such thing - everybody comes to the table with their own unique biases - whether consciously or otherwise.
Incorrect. You've said that you're positive on bitcoin but there's hardly anything that you've posted that reflects that. That leaves the Duke in higher standing and that's saying something seeing as I took him off my Crimbo Card list in 2017.
I haven't seen anyone express an opinion here that bitcoin was or is going to replace fiat currency over the course of the past 5 years.
Perhaps this is symptomatic of the problem. *Maybe* it's not a case of someone being right or wrong or 'winning'. As per the recent example, it's a case of an exchange of views. It's completely unrealistic to expect everyone to share the same view.
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,055
I see once again you've successfully managed to change the topic to he said she said.
I'll leave it again saying that article regarding KPMG was a non story in my opinion.
I should have known better than attempt any debate on the topic of crypto on this forum.
Have a great weekend.
And I see that once again you're obsessed with personal commentary rather than discuss the actual topic.
Thank you for that. I tend to affix various weightings to opinions expressed. Yours I've placed in the methane-filled balloon category. The Duke's is much better regarded ;-)
That would require you going five minutes without resorting to personal commentary. That's a choice - totally up to yourself.
On Bitcoin Beach? Kind of guaranteed! Hasta Luego.
Last edited:
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 357
Are you in El Salvador tecate?
Last edited:
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 357
Nice, I'd be curious to hear your take on how the bitcoin situation is going there
It's chugging along nicely. So prior to getting here, I had been in contact with folk that had been spending time here and was tuned in to commentary on how it was progressing. For anyone that has spent any time in Latam, they know that online systems/forms/apps, etc. are usually broken, unstable & dysfunctional here. So when Bukele made that announcement in Miami last year and went at this at breakneck speed, I was concerned. Consequently, there have been issues with Chivo - the government-based bitcoin wallet/app - but under the circumstances not as bad as I expected. For the most part, those issues have involved identity fraud and stuff of that nature. However, there have also been issues with confirmation of transactions. The backend of the app is centralised - so however its coded under the hood is not in order.
Naturally, the vast majority of transactions here are Chivo to Chivo. It's centralised and so I imagine those transactions are being handled in a centralised manner. For the most part, it means very fast transactions with the problematic exceptions I mentioned above. For a foreigner rocking up with a lightning wallet, the app is not as accommodating. At this early stage, your average Salvadoreano is familiar with Chivo and nothing else. The assumption is made that everyone is paying with Chivo - and when that's explained further, they're not aware of the difference between a main net payment and a LN payment. The option is there to accept LN on Chivo - but it's very badly designed/placed and it doesn't confirm instantaneously (like a normal LN transaction would between normal, decentralised LN wallets). Oftentimes, they're putting my transactions through on main net - which is not ideal from the point of view of transaction time/cost.
Having said all of that, the government is aware that they have some work to do. As of last week, they announced that they're now collaborating with a new development co. (AlphaPoint) and specific refererence was made to LN payments as being key to work they'll be doing to bring the wallet up to scratch. Beyond that, they're adding another 1500 Chivo ATMs. You'll recall that their main motivation in doing this was to get all of the expat remittance money (which accounts for a large tranche of GDP) back to Salvador without Western Union's fat margin being sliced off. That's a win for both the people and the government itself (given how significant this remittance $ is - to the country - proportionately ).
In terms of acceptance, most mom n pop places don't accept bitcoin. It's a case of some do and some don't. I always ask - and some accommodate and some don't. With regard to the large multinationals (the likes of Wendy's, McDonald's, KFC, etc.), they all accept bitcoin. McDonald's in particular have that down pat with instantaneous LN payment via their self service screens. I think it's a great opportunity for multinational retail to trial bitcoin payments. They'll have that ip/knowledge should they decide to roll it out in other markets.
Groceries I'm buying with BTC. The supermarket nearest to me has dedicated aisles for bitcoin payment and promotional audio announcements reminding shoppers of the option to pay via Chivo/BTC.
In hindsight, rather than give people $30 of free bitcoin, Bukele should have had an educational aspect to this - and given that free money on completion of mini tutorials via the app - so that people learn some bitcoin basics. The Bitcoin Beach project has taken this approach with its app. It's also started to map out locations that are accepting bitcoin and have integrated that within its app.
This has been my experience in San Salvador - I won't be on the coast until sometime tomorrow.
As regards the general perception of how this has unfolded for the locals, those that I've talked to about it so far believe that its something different and with an economy that has been nailed to the floor perennially, they're open to a new approach and like the idea that El Sal is getting positive press for a change.
There are a few different angles that this is being approached from. The remittance angle, day to day payments, inward spend via crypto-related tourism, inward investment from crypto-related entrepreneurs and of course, more recently we've had the development of the bitcoin bond - which I believe will launch next month.
All told, I think they're doing ok in terms of roll-out and adoption (given this is a developing LATAM nation).
Last edited:
Just to reaffirm the most logical position here.
Cryptocurrency is/are most likely a pump and dump scam. There is no underlying intrinsic value. No dividend and no rent.
It is a classic example of the greater fool theory in that “value” is only derived if you can find someone willing to pay more that you.
Everything else is just mindless speculation.
Cryptocurrency is/are most likely a pump and dump scam. There is no underlying intrinsic value. No dividend and no rent.
It is a classic example of the greater fool theory in that “value” is only derived if you can find someone willing to pay more that you.
Everything else is just mindless speculation.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
That your 'report' couldn't come up with ONE redeeming characteristic where bitcoin is concerned isn't in any way credible Marc.