Twitter | Search | |
Chris Burniske
Partner , a venture firm working to decentralize data, wealth, and power; Co-author of 📔; formerly led crypto
12,121
Tweets
758
Following
113,028
Followers
Tweets
Chris Burniske 50m
Engagement / following has slowed for (most) everyone, because crypto is “trending” far less now. Social buzz follows the cycles of the market (for now).
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske 52m
Tag at the end if you’d like to tag (I don’t mind, some do), but don’t lead off the 1st tweet with tags - also, there’s a diff in starting a tweet with @ and .@ which I would look up. Lastly, tagging is most effective when you’re directly referencing what another has said
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske retweeted
Noelle 6h
We spend so much time worrying about crypto valuation models, that we overlook the evolution of the models themselves - we don't see the forest because of all the trees - sketches a potential path for the models (some of which he's instrumental in creating)... /1
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske 9h
I’ve carried the nagging paranoia all day and night since that I still smell like the river 🙊
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske 16h
Replying to @cburniske
Didn’t realize we caught the, “It’s not a hoverboard” moment on video 😂 (gotta wait til the end)
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske 18h
When ⁦⁩ is e-foiling in the East River and spectators onshore are asking if there’s a hoverboard in the water, I’m reminded the future is already here.
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 19
Thank you for the analysis, matt. Unsolicited advice would be to not tag everyone to start your opening tweet though, as it becomes a cognitive load that any viewer of your 1st tweet must get through & imo the people you tag in such an “upfront way” are less likely to retweet
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 18
Replying to @ZeMariaMacedo
Some cryptoassets (like bitcoin or other pure PoW based), will be similar to gold in their (attempted) valuation. Others will be much closer to DCFs, though with some notable exceptions/additions to how equities are valued. Will share more in a piece soon
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske retweeted
José Maria Macedo Jan 18
Replying to @cburniske
3) As Mark C Taylor said when explaining the death of God (which he compared to the abolition of the gold standard): "Gold is a sign which denies its status as a sign in order to ground the value of other signs".
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @Cynicalbananman
Thanks for the thoughts, I enjoyed them 🤓
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @cburniske
Good further thought, somewhat to this end, here:
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @cburniske
Should add a caveat here. A better model may come about later and still “win” if it is clearly superior (per the math) to the point that it is able to overcome the “bending of the numbers advantage” that the prior theory has.
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @AFDudley0 @ali01
Ah, yes, and they are manipulating us... so our behavior / data is dependent! Then the feedback loop... Scary 🤮
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @cryptoislife003
Amazon is a great example of a company that started to shake up how people value stocks in the modern era, replacing a focus on earnings / FCF with all eyes on revenue / ROIC. Same general model, but wildly different focus on values and sensitivity to different inputs.
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @cryptoislife003
You can always use FCF, but the market ends up gravitating towards different things that matter for different equities, and so when earnings come out people will focus on what happened to the "value" that matters for a specific stock w/in their model.
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @cburniske
It's not to say DCFs have been displaced, but the way a DCF is used to value an equity has become massively heterogenous and changed siginificantly with time.
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @tim_bansemer
Question: does reality follow our future projection? --> not always The more people believe in the model the more likely it will become true? --> yes, if the model has merit to begin with.
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske retweeted
Tor Bair Jan 17
Replying to @cburniske
Thus my prediction is: the winning theory will be the one that is at the efficient frontier of being most predictive and most attractive to large holders of deployable capital.
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @TorBair
oh yikes 😬
Reply Retweet Like
Chris Burniske Jan 17
Replying to @cburniske
Oops, not done - a model that gets to mental mass may be displaced if a gross error is revealed, or if underlying values shift. For the latter, look at how DCFs for equities have gone through many contortions, depending on if earnings, or EBITDA, or sales, or ______ are valued.
Reply Retweet Like