> If it's a store of value or a stock, then you should be absolutely worried about how it's distributed. Because based on that, it looks a lot like a ponzi sche

> If it's a store of value or a stock, then you should be absolutely worried about how it's distributed. Because based on that, it looks a lot like a ponzi scheme to me. I don't follow this logic. A ponzi scheme requires new entrants to pay out the previous ones at a higher rate so as to generate promised returns. I'd expect this to spread out bitcoin ownership as previous whales ducked out while leaving the new entrants to holding the bag. A high level of BTC concentration, then, would seem to be a counter-argument to the claim it's a ponzi. What am I missing? (BTW, I also think the basic analysis is incorrect--a large reason why BTC is concentrated in a small number of addresses is because most people don't hold their own BTC, but rather allow an exchange to hold it for them)